Spirituality of Others

many people are doing a lot.. i feel very spirit filled for their efforts and successes.. revives a faith for me...

Back to what Griffe posted....I do understand where you are coming from Griffe. I don't feel as though anyone has the right to push themselves on others. And likewise, i don't feel anyone has the right to say you are flat out wrong for feeling or believing the way you do.

Spirituality is a very personal thing to experience. One we all have in one form or another. And we all have the right to think and feel however we choose.

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
alexandra_k said:
Um... To be clearer by overseas aid I meant giving food and water to the starving people. If people are equally entitled to our moral concern then surely we should do something?????

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">Alexandra

That's what I meant as well - food and water. I was also referring to religious symbols. It can trigger centuries of generational PTSD at the hands of crusaders and everyone else that used God as their weapon to infiltrate their homeland. It triggers the fear, anger and resentment. It's not your fault.

Let's say you were near starvation and couldn't provide for yourself. You have two options. Take food from:

A) an unknown Middle Eastern man who traveled far and wide to give you food. He's wearing Muslim religious symbols and clothing and carrying his book.

B) an unknown white man who traveled far and wide to give you food. He's wearing a T-shirt, blue jeans, and a cowboy hat and boots. He's only carrying food.

Would you trust the man of God for your survival or would you trust the cowboy - and why?

'many people'.

Singer was talking about not what 'many people' do (indeed, it is some tiny percentage that actually do personally send foreign aid). He was talking abotu what YOU AS AN INDIVIDUAL DO.

You see... You could think of there being a line. The line signifies basic needs being met. That is food and clean drinking water and adequate shelter from the elements. I won't complicate things with talking about treatment for generalized anxiety disorder but lets throw treatment for conditions such as HIV into the mix as well.

Now... Most people will say that 'everyone is equal in the sense that everyone is equally deserving of getting their basic needs met'. Now quite a lot of people don't really believe this. They believe that it is possible for an individual to forefit that right (a pedophile or a murderer or a rapist or someone of a particular race or whatever). But if you do believe that the children, at least are equally deserving of getting their basic needs met...

Then in practice...

Aren't we morally obliged to send everything we have that places us over that basic standard of living to other people who are under it. And really... aren't we morally obliged to send everything we have that places us over that threshold up until the point that EVERYONE is on the threshold?

Doesn't that just logically follow from the belief that everyone is equally deserving of getting their basic needs met? How can you justify people in mansions, people buying clothes they do not need, people buying coffee, people buying CD's and books when there are people in the world who don't have clean drinking water or enough food to survive on?

Singer doesn't (of course) tell people they should give everything that they have that places them over the threshold. But he is attempting to get people to send about 5 or 10 percent of their income (can't quite remember which). Part of his argument strategy is to argue for the stronger claim (really we should send everything that places us over). The stronger claim does indeed seem justified if you accept that people are equally deserving of getting their basic needs met. It simply follows from that that it is injust that you have more while others don't have their basic needs met. He does of course realize that people aren't going to do that. So he requests something lesser.

The ethics of persuasion... There is a name for that psychological technique...
And note that this is a hypothetical: IF you believe that you and a child (lets say person under 16 to try and make this seem as obvious as possible) are equal in the sense of being equally deserving of getting basic needs met (such as for food and clean drinking water... THEN (on the grounds of consistency) you would think that the morally right thing to do about kids starving would be to send everything that places you over the line (as opposed to on it) up until the point that you are either on the line or until nobody (who is equally deserving to you) is under it.

If you don't believe that people really are equal in the relevant sense then you can opt out with consistency.

If you believe what happens in the actual world doesn't matter because they will get 70 virgins in heaven or whatever... Then I guess that helps one accept injustices in this lifetime. Why do something when God can sort it out later? Does belief in God sorting it out later encourage one to act ethically (ie to do something) or not? Maybe religion and ethics can come apart too... Tolerance... Equality... Responsibility...

hmm... i am referring to spirituality of people having kind hearts and good intention... you are talking of religion?

I'm talking about how there are different conceptions of what spirituality is.

Though to tell you the honest truth I wish I could delete my posts on this thread from (and including) this post on:

>Um... To be clearer by overseas aid I meant giving food and water to the starving people. If people are equally entitled to our moral concern then surely we should do something?????

well.. im of the belief that everything happens for a reason Alexandra...

i think wishing well for thirsty and hungry people is acceptable in the forum?

i may have missed something previously, if so, i apologize..

Hey. You are fine. I was just lamenting my having raved on such that I'm confusing myself even ;-)

I guess what I was trying to express... Was that the way we go about expressing what we believe can be something that can be well or poorly done - no matter what it is that you ultimately believe.

Goes for ethics
and religion
and spirituality
and atheism
and goldbachs conjecture
and whatever.

I guess I was trying to come to a middle-way understanding (as Rap was urging me to do). But really... Getting a bit garbled methinks.

Hope you have a lovely day.

I think we have kind of hijacked Griffe's thread here. We seem to have gone a long way off from the original post. Though I am rather enjoying this ongoing discussion, I think this needs to be seperate and on it's own thread.

But then again, I may just be lost, lol. That too, is entirely possible.

best wishes to all,
recluse1

They have completely run over and bashed religion and people who are religious. It isn't fair to pigeonhole people who have faith by insisting that all of us cram our beliefs down everybody's throats. That is not true. I'm tired of not being heard. I believe what I believe, and I am allowed to believe what I believe, and to believe that it is true. That doesn't mean that I want to force anyone else to believe it. I can hold my beliefs firmly as truth and still allow others choice and agency.

If you witness something that nobody is likely to believe, and you continue to believe it anyway, even though nobody believes your story, and you won't give up and change your story, does that mean that you are forcing your beliefs on everybody else? No. They would be the ones trying to get you to change.

(((((((((((Rapunzel))))))))))))

I know exactly how you feel on that sweetie. Believe me, I do. And i totally agree with what you are saying. That is what i tried to say in my earliest post on this thread. But i think you said it very well in yours. Thank you!

Rapunzel,

I think you will find that alot of people feel that way. You might want to look in General at altonwoods thread titled "did ya ever". I see that many of us are of that sentiment actually.

blessings,
recluse1

Thanks recluse. I read that too.

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
Griffe said:
Why do people feel the need to press their spirituality and how they practice the concept on others?

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Maybe it's because something has worked for them and because it worked so well, they want everybody to know it and exactly how it worked.

With me, I don't understand how anyone can live with depression and not take anti-depression meds. They work for me, and for a while, I "pushed" the idea of taking anti-depressants. For me to not take them, is like not breathing. It's a necessity. Does that make any sense to you, Griffe? I hope so.

Oh, so very true! I stand with you on this 100%, Rap!

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
Rapunzel said:
They have completely run over and bashed religion and people who are religious. It isn't fair to pigeonhole people who have faith by insisting that all of us cram our beliefs down everybody's throats. That is not true. I'm tired of not being heard. I believe what I believe, and I am allowed to believe what I believe, and to believe that it is true. That doesn't mean that I want to force anyone else to believe it. I can hold my beliefs firmly as truth and still allow others choice and agency.

If you witness something that nobody is likely to believe, and you continue to believe it anyway, even though nobody believes your story, and you won't give up and change your story, does that mean that you are forcing your beliefs on everybody else? No. They would be the ones trying to get you to change.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

AMEN!!!!

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
Lenny said:
In my experience, once arrogance (ego/fear) gets attached to any idea,,,it's full potential cannot be realized.

It is the acceptance of possibility,,the imagining of so, that opens all doors,,even those that have yet to be created.

Lenny

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">.

Rap and SeptemberMorn

Who is "they?" If you're referring to my posts and question to alexandra, I'm not trying to bash religion. I'm only trying to explain why so many others feel threatened by religion due to historical trauma.

I have people come to my door too. Most times, it's difficult for me to get out of bed and struggle to the door. I'm thrilled when it's a friend coming over to visit. I'm irritated when it's someone handing out religious literature. Even if they showed up with food in their hands, I wouldn't trust them to care about me as much as my friends care about me because I get the impression they are just out to sell their "product."

Did you see my question to Alexandra? Which would you choose: a) the man of God or b) the cowboy?

Um, Griffe - where'd you go? Shall we continue rambling or do you want to put and end to this thread?

(((((((KathyM))))))) I do not think that this is directed towards you.

Edit to send a hug

Sadly, this thread has gone a long way from the original poster's question, and has been closed.

DocJohn