Is religion elitest by deffinition?

[heidler1]

elitism

elitism or élitism (i-l?tiz´?m, a-l?-) noun

1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
2. a. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class. b. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.

Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition Copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products N.V., further reproduction and distribution restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.

[Rabrrrrrr]

1. Not at all. Not even close.

I'm not even sure why the question would be asked.

[heidler1]

3. How about?

2. a. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class. b. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.

They did change the pledge of allegence to "UNDER GOD". And they keep trying to put the TEN COMMANDMENTS in public buildings.

[Rabrrrrrr]

4. Who is "they"? You really have a sad definition of "religion".

Your word use is quite faulty. You go from "is religion by definition elitist?" to "Is a certain segment of a small branch of protestant Christianity in America at a certain time and place by definition elitist?".

Do you see how silly it is to take one specific example of one specific religion located in one place and time, and broadbrush it out to all religion over all time, including any theoretical religion?

The word "Religion" does not mean "World War II era American Rightwing Caucasian Protestant Christianity".

[heidler1]

8. I'm sure that most Christians favor "Under God" in the pledge.

Being the majority they got their way. Even though the founding fathers tried to keep this from happening. The Christian majority skirted the Constitution and did it anyway. Basically the same is true with the placement of the Ten Commandments.

I've never met a Christian who wants to stop this from happening. Recently a man in California in court tried to restore the original pledge and of course ran into a Christian brick wall.

As a Christian you should try to avoid insults.

[Rabrrrrrr]

10. So let me restate - you aren't asking about "religion" at all.

You aren't asking if religion is by definition elitist, you are asking if a certain part of American Christianity is by definition elitist.

I'm an American Christian who wants "Under God" taken out. I also don't want the Ten Commandments placed in public places, unless as a matter of historical record and placed along with other ancient forms of law.

And nowhere did I insult you.

[okasha]

14. "They" in this case

were the Congress of the United States, who inserted "under God" supposedly to differentiate the US from the "Godless commies" and score some political points with the electorate. The original pledge, minus "under God," was written by a minister, by the way.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

2. All groups are elitist

because we all believe we are right. Now, the concept of deserving favored treatment, I don't see. I mean, some folks in some religions might think that way. And some don't.

But you know we here at DU are elitist because we KNOW we are intellectually and morally superior, right? RIGHT?

I mean that's what the memo said.

T-Grannie

[varkam]

21. I tend to agree with you, TG

At least to an extent. I'm a psych grad, so I tend to see the world through Freudian colored lenses. But in Social Psych, they talk about in-group solidarity and out-group hostility. Groups tend to be bound together by a shared set of beliefs, values, customs or goals - thus providing them with a sense of solidarity. That set of shared characteristics necissarily creates friction when that group is confronted with another, easily distinguishable group (e.g. Christans and atheists). Although I think many religious leaders tend to use that out-group hostility to their advantage, milking it for all it's worth. They say things about other groups (such as atheists, muslims, etc), because they know people who are already members of the in-group (e.g. Christians) will likely accept the statements - thus facilitating in-group solidarity / commonality and excacerbating out-group hostility.

I don't mean to pick on Xtians here, like you said, elitism can be extended to any group.

[trotsky]

5. I will refer to a quote from the recent Raw Story essay

that many religionists agreed with.

Secondly, in a nation comprised predominantly of those who believe in some sort of supreme being, our success as a movement depends on disavowing the atheist extremist as a legitimate voice of the left.

A group (believers) deserves favored treatment (i.e., their voices being heard) by virtue of their perceived superiority (see the rest of the article), as in intellect, social status ("...a nation comprised predominantly..."), or financial resources.

Hmmm.

I realize that a lot of theists really aren't elitist, but the reaction to various issues brought up that concern atheists (like the pledge, or "In God We Trust" on currency, or the Utah highway crosses) generally tends toward one of arrogant dismissal. Almost elitist, in a way.

[One Honest Guy]

6. depends what you mean by religion ?

[heidler1]

9. IMO all religions have this elitist tendency. Muslim a little more so than

Christianity.

The different sects in both religions are only different in their dogma. They all want their own way at all costs.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

12. Interesting that you would say this

I agree that certain fundamentalist sects in Islam are very narrow and want everyone to follow their interpretation of things. But they are, by no means, every Muslim in the world. What do you know of the various Sufi orders? I am curious, because in the nearly two decades I've been associating with Sufis, I've never met one group who "want their own way at all costs." If this were so, wouldn't it be impossible for a person to belong to more than one Sufi Order? Wouldn't it be impossible for one to be a Sufi initiate and yet be, say, an ordained Episcopal priest, a Uniterian minister, or a pipe carrier in the Lakota tradition? Yet I could cite names and introduce you to fellows who are intiated Sufis and also follow these other traditions.

I do not know your experience with estoteric/mystical schools in the various religions, but I would be interested in knowing which particular mystical school "want their own way at all costs."

I'll end with what the Dalai Lama told a group of visiting Sufis:

In Sufism, everything is. In Buddhism, nothing is. Same thing, no difference.

[Finder]

7. Religion is the opiate of the masses...

common sense and logic for the rest of us.lol

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

13. You may be right

if that is your path, and you are content and happy with it, then that's great! It obviously is working for you!

[Proud_Democratt]

15. I always enjoy this quote by Marx

I have found it to be true also!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

11. Some may be

But to broadbrush all religions, or even sects within a religion, would be incorrect. The Sufi poet Rumi once wrote a poem that could be loosely translated like this:

Come, come, whoever you are, even though you've broken your vows a hundred times, come, come, again.

I would say that Christian churches like Unity and UU wouldn't fit the definition, either. And many Eastern schools aren't interested in anything but individual spiritual enlightenment.

[heidler1]

16. I did not mean to offend. Actually IMO this tendency is human nature

and I over stated "The different sects in both religions are only different in their dogma. They all want their own way at all costs." The all costs is too inclusive. Thank you for pointing it out to me. However religion does cause people to get very stubborn about right and wrong.

[bluesbassman]

18. Only by people who don't really understand their religion.

I find that the people who are most stubborn and rigid in their beliefs, are those that only use the "Cliff Notes". Many religions cherry pick certain passages from their teachings as a means to indoctrinate and thus exercise control over their followers. But most religions have, at their foundation, the concept that we are all connected on a spiritual level, and therefore our goal should be to treat each other with the same love and respect we should have for ourselves. The problem is that people tend to focus on the various and inevitable negative actions of others, and use the specific admonishments for those actions found in their teachings to punish or denigrate their fellow man.

[Goblinmonger]

25. UU ain't Christian

Certainly part of the roots are there (Unitarians), but UU does not assume a belief in the divinity of Jesus. You can believe that if you want, but it isn't part of the dogma. I don't think there is dogma in UU.

[beam me up scottie]

17. Christians around here

(where I live, not on DU) think that they are morally superior to non-christians.

And they don't try to hide it.

I'm not even sure many of them are aware of it.

But non-christians are VERY aware of it.


When talking about someone she doesn't like, my next door neighbor inevitably trots out the "You can tell he's not a christian".
:mad:

[bluesbassman]

19. Oh, they're aware of it...

They just don't know why they think that way. One of favorite passages of Jesus' is when He says that you should "judge not, lest you be judged in the same manner", and the companion to that is " don't attempt to remove the speck from your brother's eye until you have removed the log from your own". I think it's laziness really. They profess to be Christians, but they only get their theology from some preacher or TV evangelist, and never bother to search out the the real meaning of their "religion" for themselves.

Sorry you get subjected to that kind of hypocrisy, it frustrates me too.

[beam me up scottie]

20. Hey, thanks.

I grew up with liberal catholics, I know you're not all like that.

This neighbor, a single black mother who can't ever seem to make ends meet, voted for bushco last time because her preacher told her to.

The reason?

Gay marriage, of course.

Yeah, they've got their priorities straight.



I feel like smacking the snot out of her when she picks and chooses who deserves to be a christian, but then I'd just be living up to her expectations.

Can't let her know that I'm the evil atheist she's been warned about. :evilgrin:

[nemo137]

22. Calvinism and its Puritan offshoots are

Assuming for a moment that we're veering towards a discussion of Christianity, I'd have to say that Calvinism and its offspring are definitely elitest. Most other branches of Christianity tend to be, especially in the case of the evangelical movements without a significant Calvinist influence, fairly non-elitest.

[manic expression]

23. Of course not n/t

[Brentos]

24. The sad truth

The sad truth is that many Christians do believe this, when in fact, the opposite is true. God chose his people (and later Jesus) to be separate from the others in actions. They were to use their time/talents/treasures to help those less fortunate. They were to not follow in the customs of the pagans, but devote themselves to a godly life. In fact, life should be tougher for the true Christian (or Jew) as they have Law given to them that they must try to follow that the pagans do not. Along with being a blessing, following God is a burden where instead of following your own free-will (which is your option) you should be choosing to follow God's will and feed the poor, clothe the naked, visit the prisoner, etc.