Date: |
Tue, 26 Sep 2000 23:39:44 -0400 |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:37:51 -0700, Ken Stuart <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
>If you have a problem with Christianity, you should say that, but, for the
>245098235045th time, "Christianity" and "modern religions" are NOT
equivalent.
>
I don't have a problem with individuals who are christian or whatever.
My
mother, grandmother, and younger brother are devout christians; I am
not.
Whatever works for everyone else is fine by me.
>
>PS It does not help those who are dismayed at any religious discussion to
add a
>"food connection", because no one seems to be willing to spend enough time
>researching religion to be able to make a true statement (instead of
>characterizing "religion" as what is said by the Bible Thumper down the
street).
>
There is a food connection! For the sake of simplicity, I am talking
about
agricultural societies in which religion is a major part. The
religion has
always been shaped by the methods of food acquisition and the mindset
and
attitudes that agriculture imparts to that society's world view.
I am trying (apparently not very well) to point out that some (not
all)
"civilized" cultures have coveted the lands of native peoples and/or
believed that the natives should be converted to that culture's
religion
"for their own good". The culture will use force and/or religion to
get
the land. This has happened repeatedly throughout the last 6,000+
years.
Religion ties in by justifying the use of force or converting the
natives
or a combination of both. This is an undeniable fact for many
cultures
(especially christian cultures) but not all.
Many times well-meaning "missionaries" do not realize that they are
doing
the work of the culture: acquiring more land to grow more crops. They
work
hard to convert the natives, teach them to grow their own food, and
allow
the government to take over the rest of the land. I have a problem
with
the culture (and therefore the religion that reinforces the culture),
not
the individuals per se.
Ben Franklin once said that "rum should be regarded as an agent of
Providence to extirpate these savages [indians] in order to make room
for
the cultivators of the earth." A sentiment shared by the vast
majority of
American colonists at the time.
Brad
|
|
|