Swinging: Right or wrong?

[John99]

well you can believe what you want. tbh, i know a woman who was not raised with any religion at all and she certainly is no swinger.

 

[codanblad]

Surely it can't be this bad...

there needn't be any evil intentions behind it, for whatever reason no sex til marriage is implemented, the results are lucrative and conducive to additional conversions. churches with more money and followers is more likely to expand. survival of the fittest, a church with sex rules is better suited to the environment.

 

[John99]

No idea. I'm drunk. Just spent a few minutes trying to figure out what post I was replying to, then gave up.

Carry on.

ha ha...

 

[codanblad]

well you can believe what you want. tbh, i know a woman who was not raised with any religion at all and she certainly is no swinger.

i thought every culture was more or less shaped by religion, how could she escape that? religion would have affected her through channels other than readings from a bible.

 

[John99]

you do realize that religion is made up of people?

 

[scott3x]

How are we defining religion? I think the best definition is a set of beliefs. In which case, everyone has one. However, not all beliefs are rational.

 

[Oli]

How are we defining religion?

What's wrong with the actual definition?

I think the best definition is a set of beliefs. In which case, everyone has one. However, not all beliefs are rational.

There's one irrational belief for a start.
Everyone has a religion?

 

[visceral_instinct]

It's not wrong if both parties are ok with it.

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

It's not for anyone else to say if it's right or wrong.
If you don't like it, don't do it.

 

[Orleander]

well you can believe what you want. Tbh, i know a woman who was not raised with any religion at all and she certainly is no swinger.

lol.

 

[Roman]

Definitely wrong. Immoral. Purpose of relationship should be love between the two.

Just because you can't get any doesn't make it wrong that other people do.

 

[Trippy]

I hate to be pedantic, and I have no idea if anybody has pointed this out already (and frankly if the first page of "You're a dirty ho" "No you" "No you" is anything to go by, I'm unlikely to find the time to check) but on of the options in the poll is spelt incorrectly.

It should be "Each to their own" not "Each to they're own" because "Each to they are own" simply doesn't make any sense.

 

[justwonderingjoe]

Holy cow Batman.....let me pour another glass of red wine and say.. to each their own.
but for me... anyone comes near my guy and she's dead meat. that's all.

 

[scott3x]

How are we defining religion?

What's wrong with the actual definition?

You really think there's only one? I'll give you what I think of as the ideal one: a set of beliefs.

Since I believe that most if not all people have beliefs, that would pretty much everyone has a religion. I'd rather call it beliefs though as the term 'religion' is rather tainted in my view. There are many other definitions of religion ofcourse.

I think the best definition is a set of beliefs. In which case, everyone has one. However, not all beliefs are rational.

There's one irrational belief for a start.
Everyone has a religion?

Again, it all depends on how you define the term. I think it's clear that you define it in such a way as to exclude yourself from having one. But you do believe things, don't you?

 

[Oli]

You really think there's only one?

The dictionary definition? :shrug:

I'll give you what I think of as the ideal one: a set of beliefs.

You've stated that.
Now explain what beliefs an atheist has: that could qualify as a religion.
A set of beliefs that guide the life.

Since I believe that most if not all people have beliefs, that would pretty much everyone has a religion.

That's your belief.

Again, it all depends on how you define the term. I think it's clear that you define it in such a way as to exclude yourself from having one. But you do believe things, don't you?

Believe things?
Such as?
And most especially what beliefs do I have (could I have) that guide my life.
Does a belief that, say, the sun will rise tomorrow constitute part of a religious set of beliefs?

 

[scott3x]

You really think there's only one?

The dictionary definition?

Even in the same dictionary, you can find multiple definitions. Take thefreedictionary.com, for example:
1.a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.


I go for number 3, only I'd do away with the 'spiritual leader' part.

I'll give you what I think of as the ideal one: a set of beliefs.

You've stated that.
Now explain what beliefs an atheist has: that could qualify as a religion.
A set of beliefs that guide the life.

Whatever beliefs they have. You have beliefs don't you?

Since I believe that most if not all people have beliefs, that would pretty much everyone has a religion.

That's your belief.

It logically follows from my definition of religion. I have a strong feeling that you don't define religion the same way I do though.

Again, it all depends on how you define the term. I think it's clear that you define it in such a way as to exclude yourself from having one. But you do believe things, don't you?

Believe things?
Such as?

Whatever. I'm not asking you to specify what you believe, I'm just asking if you believe in -something-.

And most especially what beliefs do I have (could I have) that guide my life. Does a belief that, say, the sun will rise tomorrow constitute part of a religious set of beliefs?

By my definition yes, but I think I see what you're getting at. I admit it, I don't really like the term 'religion'. If someone were to ask me if I were religious, I'd say no. But if people insist on using it, I prefer to define it my way .

 

[Oli]

Even in the same dictionary, you can find multiple definitions. Take thefreedictionary.com, for example:
1.a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
I go for number 3, only I'd do away with the 'spiritual leader' part.

Hmm, and it's STILL the dictionary definition, isn't it?

Whatever beliefs they have. You have beliefs don't you?

That was my question.
I don't know, so I asked what beliefs I could have to see if anything sprang to mind.

It logically follows from my definition of religion. I have a strong feeling that you don't define religion the same way I do though.

A strong feeling?
Like the number of times I've asked what's wrong with dictionary?

Whatever. I'm not asking you to specify what you believe, I'm just asking if you believe in -something-.

Not that I'm aware of.

By my definition yes, but I think I see what you're getting at. I admit it, I don't really like the term 'religion'. If someone were to ask me if I were religious, I'd say no. But if people insist on using it, I prefer to define it my way .

So "any" belief would qualify as religion?
Hmm, I believe I need a pint after that.
Which isn't actually a belief, but never mind.

 

[scott3x]

Even in the same dictionary, you can find multiple definitions. Take thefreedictionary.com, for example:
1.a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
I go for number 3, only I'd do away with the 'spiritual leader' part.

Hmm, and it's STILL the dictionary definition, isn't it?

Ok, I grant that my definition gets rid of what I view to be extraneous . We'll take definition#3 in its entirety then. To do so, we must define spirtuality. From Wikipedia:

Spirituality, in a narrow sense, concerns itself with matters of the spirit, a concept closely tied to religious belief and faith, a transcendent reality, or one or more deities. Spiritual matters are thus those matters regarding humankind's ultimate nature and meaning, not only as material biological organisms, but as beings with a unique relationship to that which is perceived to be beyond the bodily senses, time and the material world. Spirituality in this sense implies the mind-body dichotomy, which indicates a separation between the body and soul. But spirituality may also be about the development of the individual's inner life through specific practices.​

Clearly, I'm going for the last bolded sentence there. And if specific practices are introspection, reading, conversing online or playing World of Warcraft, hey, they're specific practices, aren't they ?

And seriously, why does it have to be just -one- spiritual teacher? Why can't we have several? I'm sure that many would include family, friends, musicians or actors to be people they believe have taught them something quite important. Heck, if you do some introspection, I think you could figure out some things just by analyzing your own situation.

Whatever beliefs they have. You have beliefs don't you?

That was my question.
I don't know, so I asked what beliefs I could have to see if anything sprang to mind.

I don't know, that science has discovered some interesting things, say. Or that the sun will rise tomorrow.

It logically follows from my definition of religion. I have a strong feeling that you don't define religion the same way I do though.

A strong feeling?
Like the number of times I've asked what's wrong with dictionary?

Look, maybe you don't deal with people who feel that they're religious in some sense. I sometimes do however, and I'd like to be able to define it in such a way that, when in their company, I can nod and say that I, too, consider myself to be religious, and perhaps tell them how I define religion to some extent. And when I'm with people who abhor the term, I can say that I, too, am not religious. You just have to know your audience.

Whatever. I'm not asking you to specify what you believe, I'm just asking if you believe in -something-.

Not that I'm aware of.

You don't think the sun will rise tomorrow? That you were born from a woman? Things like this?

By my definition yes, but I think I see what you're getting at. I admit it, I don't really like the term 'religion'. If someone were to ask me if I were religious, I'd say no. But if people insist on using it, I prefer to define it my way .

So "any" belief would qualify as religion?
Hmm, I believe I need a pint after that.
Which isn't actually a belief, but never mind.

I would prefer to define religion that way. It just seems to make more sense then to say "well, if you believe such and such, -then- you're religious, but if not then you're not." I know that most people define religion rather narrowly and this is why I personally prefere not to get to mixed up in such things. I've spoken to Jehova's witnesses and mormons; but I don't just listen to what they have to say; I've challenged them, bringing up themes such as the da vinci code and one of the books it was based on, Holy Blood, Holy Grail. The Jehova's witnesses actually have something that's right concerning this, that the trinity was created at the council of nicea. But while they admit to that, they don't like looking at the greater implication, that the same emperor created the council that in essence elected what would and wouldn't be included in the bible. They treat the bible as if it was God's word even as they criticize the man who was responsible for its creation. Anyway, I even leant my 'holy blood, holy grail' to one jehova's witness, but I dont think he read it (it was in english and his mother tongue was spanish, as I was living in Mexico at the time). I later spoke to another Jehova's witness, who was an american, but he didn't even want to take it home.

Back in Canada, I spoke to some mormons; I told them about the online movie Zeitgeist, but they said that they weren't allowed access to the internet . Still, it was ok talking with them a bit. I think that I saw one of them with a girlfriend recently; I'm happy for him.

 

[Oli]

But spirituality may also be about the development of the individual's inner life through specific practices.[/INDENT]
Clearly, I'm going for the last bolded sentence there. And if specific practices are introspection, reading, conversing online or playing World of Warcraft, hey, they're specific practices, aren't they ?

They're specific practices.
Do they have any concern with "development of the individual's inner life" or are they merely diversions?

And seriously, why does it have to be just -one- spiritual teacher? Why can't we have several? I'm sure that many would find musicians or actors to be people they believe have taught them something quite important.

Spiritually or musically/ thespian-wise?

I don't know, that science has discovered some interesting things, say. Or that the sun will rise tomorrow.

If science has discovered something new then belief isn't required, any more than belief in my chair required.
And as for the sun rising tomorrow, I don't believe it, I assume it.

Look, maybe you don't deal with people who feel that they're religious in some sense. I sometimes do however, and I'd like to be able to define it in such a way that, when in their company, I can nod and say that I, too, consider myself to be religious, and perhaps tell them how I define religion to some extent. And when I'm with people who abhor the term, I can say that I, too, am not religious. You just have to know your audience.

Um, duplicity?
In the company of religious people I inform them I do not and cannot share their belief.

You don't think the sun will rise tomorrow?

I think it will (actually it just has...) but belief is not required.

That you were born from a woman?

It's a working hypothesis.
It fits observed pehomena.
Belief is not required.

Things like this?

I'm an engineer: I don't need belief.
If it works it works, if it doesn't I junk it and find something that does.

 

[scott3x]

Hey Oli, I decided that I had to move my response to your post as I think we've been off topic here for a while; I moved it over to the religion forum, here:
Defining religion