On 21 Feb 2024 21:46:06 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>You guys to realize that the bulk of these examples are, at least
>>peripherally, related to (if not part of) Christianity, right?
>
>I think Jesus would disagree with this. At least with regards to the
>Scientologists and Reverend Ike's Church of Mammon.

Jesus would disagree with a /lot/ of things his followers do and
believe.

That's the point being made when the statement that some Christians
are behaving in what is traditionally considered an un-Christian
manner.

But Jesus disagreement with his followers applies a lot more broadly.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 23:03:13 +0000, Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 21/02/2024 16:37, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On 21 Feb 2024 15:02:30 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>>
>>> Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
>>>>>> What is the most recent established religion?
>>>>>
>>>>> Probably Scientology.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure I'd consider that an "established religion".
>>>
>>> It may not be as well-established as it was a few years ago, but it stil
>>> has total assets of something like 1.75 billion dollars. This puts it at
>>> about the value of Bose or Guitar Center but still well below Ford Motor
>>> or IBM.
>>>
>>> Now, whether it is a religion is a reasonable debate. The Germans do not
>>> believe that it is.
>>>
>>>> The followers of the angel moron i might qualify.
>>>
>>> Total assets exceeding $100 billion. Bigger by far than Home Depot,
>>> nearly as big as IBM. Five times the size of US Steel.
>>
>> Since the First Church of Trump has not yet been founded, never mind
>> established, how about Chritian Nationalism?
>>
>> You guys to realize that the bulk of these examples are, at least
>> peripherally, related to (if not part of) Christianity, right?
>>
>> For all we know, something newer has been established in other
>> contexts.
>
>To drag this back to science fiction,
>Arthur C. Clarke offered "Chrislam" in
>this 1993 novel.
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hammer_of_God_(Clarke_novel)>
>
>Is that link quoted all right?
>
>They indoctrinate using VR and
>"brain computer interface" technology.
>I read this as bad, more so than Wikipedia
>does. Wikipedia is neutral.
>
>It's 2109. A big binary asteroid is a year
>away from s colossal argument with Earth,
>and extremist Chrislamists are on the
>side of the asteroid.

IIRC, what I remember from /Dune/ being called the "Orange Catholic
Bible" included /all/ the sacred books, suggesting a very ...
universal ... religion.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 23:16:49 +0100, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

>
>
>On Wed, 21 Feb 2024, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
>> On 20/02/2024 18:40, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 20 Feb 2024, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 12:10:11 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
>>>> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/19/2024 9:17 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>> <snippo>
>>>>>> So, yes, some atheists do act together and some of those acts are the
>>>>>> sort of thing religions do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Eh.  *waggles hand*  Social expression of grief.  I wouldn't call that a
>>>>> religious function.  Didn't someone elsewhere in this thread post about
>>>>> confusing religion and culture?
>>>>
>>>> And where do you think religion came from? The Monolith?
>>>>
>>>> Religion developed, in part, to celebrate births, coming-of-age (which
>>>> is a lot more significant when child mortality rates are high), and
>>>> marriage, and to console the grieving.
>>>>
>>>> Religion is a natural outgrowth of human nature. It has been with us
>>>> for a long long time, and it will be with us for a long long time to
>>>> come.
>>>>
>>>> It is possible to stamp out a particular form of religion from a
>>>> particular area. But you will shortly find a religion of some sort
>>>> forming right under your nose. But not if you insist that the
>>>> practices are "cultural" rather than "religious".
>>>>
>>>
>>> What is the most recent established religion?
>>
>> According to Terry Pratchett's _Small Gods_,
>> religions start little, and grow. And between
>> the start and the later stages of development,
>> they may change beyond recognition. Ask Om.
>>
>> Strictly the words "established religion"
>> mean one that a nation-state is married to.
>> But I assume you meant the newest religion
>> which is taken seriously by some people who
>> aren't mentally ill. I'm not saying that
>> religious people are mentally ill, but that
>> being mentally ill and worshipping your cat,
>> for instance, also isn't the behaviour that
>> you want to discuss.
>>
>> Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are well
>> on the way at least to reforming their
>> national religions with themselves at
>> the centre.
>
>To me Trump and Putin is not religion. It's nationalism. Ideology can very
>well fill the shoes of religion for some people, but I hesitate to lump
>the two together.
>
>In my opinion, for it to become religion I think two things would be
>needed:
>
>1. That they die.
>2. Some kind of miracles attributed to them.

After they die, the miracle stories will appear soon enough.

>Absent that, it's just an ideology.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On 2/21/2024 11:07 PM, Mike Spencer wrote:
> D <nospam@example.net> writes:
>
>> Hence _established_. What is established? I would say enough followers to
>> be taken seriously by the local government.
>
> As in antidisestablishmentarianism. Q.v, q.g

I think that's the first time I've seen a situation arise organically
where that word can be used appropriately .

pt

On 2/22/2024 8:39 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 23:16:49 +0100, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>
>>> On 20/02/2024 18:40, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 20 Feb 2024, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 12:10:11 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
>>>>> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/19/2024 9:17 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>>> <snippo>
>>>>>>> So, yes, some atheists do act together and some of those acts are the
>>>>>>> sort of thing religions do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Eh.  *waggles hand*  Social expression of grief.  I wouldn't call that a
>>>>>> religious function.  Didn't someone elsewhere in this thread post about
>>>>>> confusing religion and culture?
>>>>>
>>>>> And where do you think religion came from? The Monolith?
>>>>>
>>>>> Religion developed, in part, to celebrate births, coming-of-age (which
>>>>> is a lot more significant when child mortality rates are high), and
>>>>> marriage, and to console the grieving.
>>>>>
>>>>> Religion is a natural outgrowth of human nature. It has been with us
>>>>> for a long long time, and it will be with us for a long long time to
>>>>> come.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is possible to stamp out a particular form of religion from a
>>>>> particular area. But you will shortly find a religion of some sort
>>>>> forming right under your nose. But not if you insist that the
>>>>> practices are "cultural" rather than "religious".
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is the most recent established religion?
>>>
>>> According to Terry Pratchett's _Small Gods_,
>>> religions start little, and grow. And between
>>> the start and the later stages of development,
>>> they may change beyond recognition. Ask Om.
>>>
>>> Strictly the words "established religion"
>>> mean one that a nation-state is married to.
>>> But I assume you meant the newest religion
>>> which is taken seriously by some people who
>>> aren't mentally ill. I'm not saying that
>>> religious people are mentally ill, but that
>>> being mentally ill and worshipping your cat,
>>> for instance, also isn't the behaviour that
>>> you want to discuss.
>>>
>>> Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are well
>>> on the way at least to reforming their
>>> national religions with themselves at
>>> the centre.
>>
>> To me Trump and Putin is not religion. It's nationalism. Ideology can very
>> well fill the shoes of religion for some people, but I hesitate to lump
>> the two together.
>>
>> In my opinion, for it to become religion I think two things would be
>> needed:
>>
>> 1. That they die.
>> 2. Some kind of miracles attributed to them.
>
> After they die, the miracle stories will appear soon enough.
>
Well, I'm sure that if Trump gets elected to President again some bills
that can't get thru Congress currently will "miraculously" arrive on his
desk to sign.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

Gary R. Schmidt <grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:
>>
>Do you know that Aceh province in Indonesia is under sharia Law?
>Not a good place to be different.

Sort of, yes. In the sense that Brooklyn is under Halakah.

>And some of the other recent changes to Indonesian Law - such as it is -
>are pushing the Rainbow <Insert currency of your choice> well away.

Sadly this is true, although it should be pointed out that lots of the
folks promoting that stuff are Christian too. And even some Buddhists.

>> And many of the things that people talk about as cultural evils of
>> "Christianity" do not exist in many majority-Christian countries too.
>>
>We're more in the "retail" stage of christian atrocities, these days.

Dunno, Hawaii is still reeling from the missionary influence, and plenty
of folks in Canada are discovering some of the things the Catholic Church
did in the 20th century were not so savory there.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Fri, 22 Feb 2024, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Gary R. Schmidt <grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:
>>>
>> Do you know that Aceh province in Indonesia is under sharia Law?
>> Not a good place to be different.
>
> Sort of, yes. In the sense that Brooklyn is under Halakah.
>
>> And some of the other recent changes to Indonesian Law - such as it is -
>> are pushing the Rainbow <Insert currency of your choice> well away.
>
> Sadly this is true, although it should be pointed out that lots of the
> folks promoting that stuff are Christian too. And even some Buddhists.
>
>>> And many of the things that people talk about as cultural evils of
>>> "Christianity" do not exist in many majority-Christian countries too.
>>>
>> We're more in the "retail" stage of christian atrocities, these days.
>
> Dunno, Hawaii is still reeling from the missionary influence, and plenty
> of folks in Canada are discovering some of the things the Catholic Church
> did in the 20th century were not so savory there.
> --scott

I'd like to add here that when it comes to the catholic church and sexual
abuse I don't think the connection is between the religion and the act. I
think the position of the priest in society is what attracts men who have
the tendency for that behaviour.

Best regards,
Daniel

In article <ur8mno$gdf$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>Gary R. Schmidt <grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>Do you know that Aceh province in Indonesia is under sharia Law?
>>Not a good place to be different.
>
>Sort of, yes. In the sense that Brooklyn is under Halakah.
>
>>And some of the other recent changes to Indonesian Law - such as it is -
>>are pushing the Rainbow <Insert currency of your choice> well away.
>
>Sadly this is true, although it should be pointed out that lots of the
>folks promoting that stuff are Christian too. And even some Buddhists.
>
>>> And many of the things that people talk about as cultural evils of
>>> "Christianity" do not exist in many majority-Christian countries too.
>>>
>>We're more in the "retail" stage of christian atrocities, these days.
>
>Dunno, Hawaii is still reeling from the missionary influence, and plenty
>of folks in Canada are discovering some of the things the Catholic Church
>did in the 20th century were not so savory there.

That's true in the sense that at given moment people discover established
fact but the various church child molesting scandals--including but
not limited to the Catholic Church--broke decades ago.

--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On 2/23/2024 4:54 AM, D wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2024, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
>> Gary R. Schmidt <grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>> Do you know that Aceh province in Indonesia is under sharia Law?
>>> Not a good place to be different.
>>
>> Sort of, yes.  In the sense that Brooklyn is under Halakah.
>>
>>> And some of the other recent changes to Indonesian Law - such as it is -
>>> are pushing the Rainbow <Insert currency of your choice> well away.
>>
>> Sadly this is true, although it should be pointed out that lots of the
>> folks promoting that stuff are Christian too.  And even some Buddhists.
>>
>>>> And many of the things that people talk about as cultural evils of
>>>> "Christianity" do not exist in many majority-Christian countries too.
>>>>
>>> We're more in the "retail" stage of christian atrocities, these days.
>>
>> Dunno, Hawaii is still reeling from the missionary influence, and plenty
>> of folks in Canada are discovering some of the things the Catholic Church
>> did in the 20th century were not so savory there.
>> --scott
>
> I'd like to add here that when it comes to the catholic church and
> sexual abuse I don't think the connection is between the religion and
> the act. I think the position of the priest in society is what attracts
> men who have the tendency for that behaviour.

If you're a young man in a deeply Catholic culture, and you find that
you're not attracted to women, joining the priesthood is a way to
avoid dating and marriage which is socially acceptable.

pt

On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 10:55:06 -0500, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 2/23/2024 4:54 AM, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 22 Feb 2024, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>
>>> Gary R. Schmidt <grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>> Do you know that Aceh province in Indonesia is under sharia Law?
>>>> Not a good place to be different.
>>>
>>> Sort of, yes.  In the sense that Brooklyn is under Halakah.
>>>
>>>> And some of the other recent changes to Indonesian Law - such as it is -
>>>> are pushing the Rainbow <Insert currency of your choice> well away.
>>>
>>> Sadly this is true, although it should be pointed out that lots of the
>>> folks promoting that stuff are Christian too.  And even some Buddhists.
>>>
>>>>> And many of the things that people talk about as cultural evils of
>>>>> "Christianity" do not exist in many majority-Christian countries too.
>>>>>
>>>> We're more in the "retail" stage of christian atrocities, these days.
>>>
>>> Dunno, Hawaii is still reeling from the missionary influence, and plenty
>>> of folks in Canada are discovering some of the things the Catholic Church
>>> did in the 20th century were not so savory there.
>>> --scott
>>
>> I'd like to add here that when it comes to the catholic church and
>> sexual abuse I don't think the connection is between the religion and
>> the act. I think the position of the priest in society is what attracts
>> men who have the tendency for that behaviour.
>
>If you're a young man in a deeply Catholic culture, and you find that
>you're not attracted to women, joining the priesthood is a way to
>avoid dating and marriage which is socially acceptable.

Oh, so you are still pushing the "pederasts are all homosexuals"
mantra?

Didn't work when tried in the late 90s, doesn't work today. Most
pederasts are hetero, simply because most people are hetero.

But keep on living in your alternate reality.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 10:40:35 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>On 2/22/2024 8:39 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 23:16:49 +0100, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 20/02/2024 18:40, D wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 20 Feb 2024, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 12:10:11 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
>>>>>> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/19/2024 9:17 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>>>> <snippo>
>>>>>>>> So, yes, some atheists do act together and some of those acts are the
>>>>>>>> sort of thing religions do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Eh.  *waggles hand*  Social expression of grief.  I wouldn't call that a
>>>>>>> religious function.  Didn't someone elsewhere in this thread post about
>>>>>>> confusing religion and culture?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And where do you think religion came from? The Monolith?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Religion developed, in part, to celebrate births, coming-of-age (which
>>>>>> is a lot more significant when child mortality rates are high), and
>>>>>> marriage, and to console the grieving.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Religion is a natural outgrowth of human nature. It has been with us
>>>>>> for a long long time, and it will be with us for a long long time to
>>>>>> come.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is possible to stamp out a particular form of religion from a
>>>>>> particular area. But you will shortly find a religion of some sort
>>>>>> forming right under your nose. But not if you insist that the
>>>>>> practices are "cultural" rather than "religious".
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the most recent established religion?
>>>>
>>>> According to Terry Pratchett's _Small Gods_,
>>>> religions start little, and grow. And between
>>>> the start and the later stages of development,
>>>> they may change beyond recognition. Ask Om.
>>>>
>>>> Strictly the words "established religion"
>>>> mean one that a nation-state is married to.
>>>> But I assume you meant the newest religion
>>>> which is taken seriously by some people who
>>>> aren't mentally ill. I'm not saying that
>>>> religious people are mentally ill, but that
>>>> being mentally ill and worshipping your cat,
>>>> for instance, also isn't the behaviour that
>>>> you want to discuss.
>>>>
>>>> Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are well
>>>> on the way at least to reforming their
>>>> national religions with themselves at
>>>> the centre.
>>>
>>> To me Trump and Putin is not religion. It's nationalism. Ideology can very
>>> well fill the shoes of religion for some people, but I hesitate to lump
>>> the two together.
>>>
>>> In my opinion, for it to become religion I think two things would be
>>> needed:
>>>
>>> 1. That they die.
>>> 2. Some kind of miracles attributed to them.
>>
>> After they die, the miracle stories will appear soon enough.
>>
>Well, I'm sure that if Trump gets elected to President again some bills
>that can't get thru Congress currently will "miraculously" arrive on his
>desk to sign.

Given the record of the last Trump administration, with a Congress
firmly under Republican control and the current state of the
Republican Party -- I would say that /nothing/ will reach his desk at
all, unless the Dems control both houses.

And by "control" I mean /control/, No pissant 51-49 split in the
Senate, with one or two or the 51 wobbly. No split so close in the
House that the only way to elect a Speaker with solid support would be
to pick a Democrat that most Democrats (and the few remaining sane
Republicans) will vote for.

And in that case, bills may reach his desk, but he won't like them.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

In article <uracgn$34t$1@reader1.panix.com>,
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <ur8mno$gdf$1@panix2.panix.com>,
>Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>>Gary R. Schmidt <grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>Do you know that Aceh province in Indonesia is under sharia Law?
>>>Not a good place to be different.
>>
>>Sort of, yes. In the sense that Brooklyn is under Halakah.
>>
>>>And some of the other recent changes to Indonesian Law - such as it is -
>>>are pushing the Rainbow <Insert currency of your choice> well away.
>>
>>Sadly this is true, although it should be pointed out that lots of the
>>folks promoting that stuff are Christian too. And even some Buddhists.
>>
>>>> And many of the things that people talk about as cultural evils of
>>>> "Christianity" do not exist in many majority-Christian countries too.
>>>>
>>>We're more in the "retail" stage of christian atrocities, these days.
>>
>>Dunno, Hawaii is still reeling from the missionary influence, and plenty
>>of folks in Canada are discovering some of the things the Catholic Church
>>did in the 20th century were not so savory there.
>
>That's true in the sense that at given moment people discover established
>fact but the various church child molesting scandals--including but
>not limited to the Catholic Church--broke decades ago.

I wasn't thinking about the molestations, I was thinking about the attempts
to convert indigenous people going so horribly wrong.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

In article <urau10$a9j$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <uracgn$34t$1@reader1.panix.com>,
>James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:
>>In article <ur8mno$gdf$1@panix2.panix.com>,
>>Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>>>Gary R. Schmidt <grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>Do you know that Aceh province in Indonesia is under sharia Law?
>>>>Not a good place to be different.
>>>
>>>Sort of, yes. In the sense that Brooklyn is under Halakah.
>>>
>>>>And some of the other recent changes to Indonesian Law - such as it is -
>>>>are pushing the Rainbow <Insert currency of your choice> well away.
>>>
>>>Sadly this is true, although it should be pointed out that lots of the
>>>folks promoting that stuff are Christian too. And even some Buddhists.
>>>
>>>>> And many of the things that people talk about as cultural evils of
>>>>> "Christianity" do not exist in many majority-Christian countries too.
>>>>>
>>>>We're more in the "retail" stage of christian atrocities, these days.
>>>
>>>Dunno, Hawaii is still reeling from the missionary influence, and plenty
>>>of folks in Canada are discovering some of the things the Catholic Church
>>>did in the 20th century were not so savory there.
>>
>>That's true in the sense that at given moment people discover established
>>fact but the various church child molesting scandals--including but
>>not limited to the Catholic Church--broke decades ago.
>
>I wasn't thinking about the molestations, I was thinking about the attempts
>to convert indigenous people going so horribly wrong.

Molestation is a key part of the residential school system, as well as
excess death rates. All part of what one senior Canadian functionary
called the final solution to the native issue.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 21:55:57 +0100, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

>> A lot of things that people think of as religion are actually culture, as
>> witnessed by Christian missionaries making people put clothes on. Jesus
>> didn't care much about clothing, but New Englanders sure did. Much of the
>> complaints that westerners have about Islam is not in fact about anything
>> to do with Islam but about the culture of some peoples who have adopted
>> Islam.
>
>Interesting thought. Where do you draw the lines between culture and
>religion? Are they possible to separate or are they always a mix by the
>fact that religion exists within communities?

I should have thought of this much sooner:

And many of the "cutural" practices religious practices left over from
an earlier religion. The earlier religion may have been replaced, but
some of its practices may well live on for quite a long time.

A very brief check on "throwing salt over the left shoulder" records a
variety of alleged purposes (blinding the Devil, atoning for spilling
that valuable resource, salt) and trace it back to France or even to
Rome. And "Roman Salt God" brought up the heading "Unidentified Salt
God Emerges from Ancient Bulgarian Cult Site". The Roman gods, of
course, have long since disappeared as deities ... but may live on in
many European (and so American) cultural practices.

This does not rule out the possibility that some cultural practices
are not remnants of former religions, of course, but does suggest that
the influence of religion is both deeper and more widespread than some
here appear to be inclined to admit.

--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 09:17:59 -0800, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

>And yet, in another usenet group a couple decades ago, I found
>atheists arranging funerals.
>
>Which is a function of religion.

Which is why these days they're usually called "memorial services" or
just "memorials".

I remember two years ago when my wife died I did NOT want my brother
as a pallbearer because my wife and him had been on bad terms but was
happy to have his son doing so since he likie all the other
pallbearers were under 35 - and they didn't have to go very far just
from the chapel to the hearse parked outside. (While I walked behind
and my brother led the other folks who mostly just went back to their
cars - some going to the cemetery some not)

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 19:55:05 -0500, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

>It varies. When Christianity was spreading in the Roman Empire, it
>remained separate from the government.
>
>Islam, OTOH, replaced the local culture and rulers, and regards
>a Muslim theocracy the right and natural state.
>
Christianity took about 300 years to have a Christian emperor while
Mohammed conquered the early Arab tribes and expanded from there.

On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 08:48:58 -0800, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

>Perhaps you should try to rephrase it to take into account the fact
>that Christianity, by taking over and replacing the Roman Empire in
>the West, shaped the European cultures for quite a long time.=20

So did Islam in Spain.

We in the west often forget that Columbus was NOT the most important
thing to happen in Spain in 1492...

Muslims also gave Spain the inquisition which they re-made into
something much worse. The Muslim inquisition was mostly about
"conversos" (Jews who 'converted" to Islam but retained secretly
Jewish practices at home. Taught the Spanish a few of their favorite
interrogation techniques too!)

On 22 Feb 2024 23:52:24 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>Dunno, Hawaii is still reeling from the missionary influence, and plenty
>of folks in Canada are discovering some of the things the Catholic Church
>did in the 20th century were not so savory there.

Well sort of. What's been "found" in Canada are the results of ground
radars that MAY be human remains though no actual bones (except
unmarked graves in known cemetary locations) have been found though
mock funerals have been made in some places.

20th century in this case mostly refers to 1880-1940 which were
supposedly intended to convert children of hunter-gatherer native
people to farmers and other agriculturalists and fishermen.

We have one of those schools in our commujnity which was built
adjacent to a native community which morphed into a reservation. The
only human remains found there were in the small graveyard that was
part of the convent next door to the school they ran. This school is
now a much larger Catholic high school which when they expanded it 2-3
years ago the construction crews were given the exact location of the
nuns' graveyard and told to build anywhere on the site except there.

https://www.facebook.com/stanorthvan/

The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 08:48:58 -0800, Paul S Person
> <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps you should try to rephrase it to take into account the fact
>> that Christianity, by taking over and replacing the Roman Empire in
>> the West, shaped the European cultures for quite a long time.=20
>
> So did Islam in Spain.
>
> We in the west often forget that Columbus was NOT the most important
> thing to happen in Spain in 1492...
>
> Muslims also gave Spain the inquisition which they re-made into
> something much worse. The Muslim inquisition was mostly about
> "conversos" (Jews who 'converted" to Islam but retained secretly
> Jewish practices at home. Taught the Spanish a few of their favorite
> interrogation techniques too!)

As far as I know this is entirely false.

The papal and episcopal inquisitions go back to 1200. A papal decree
gave absolution to those who used torture in this work. There is no
trace of a Muslim origin in this.

In various Muslim-ruled societies Christians pretended to convert to
avoid the various fiscal and legal penalties applied to non-Muslims.
Mostly they were successful in this, though after a few generations the
conversions often became sincere.

It would not be surprising if a few Jewish people did the same. But
I've never read of it. Nor of any "Muslim inquisition" to deal with it.
If there was one it was notably unsuccessful at finding false Muslims
while the Spanish Inquisition was remarkably successful in its task.

In a particularly violent anti-Semitic wave in the late 1300s, many
Spanish Jews converted to Christianity - this was regarded as unusual as
previous pogroms had not had this effect.

These were known as conversos, (a Spanish word, not an Arabic one) and
as you might expect, many of the conversions were not sincere (though
some very much were). The Spanish requested a special inquisition to
deal with this "problem". But its remit included all forms of "heresy".

One of their principal torture techniques was waterboarding, and there
is as far as I can tell no evidence of this being used in the Muslim
period. The other, the strappado, may go back farther, but again there
is no evidence that it originated in the Islamic world. The first
reference I can find is of Christians using it on a fellow Christian.

William Hyde

On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 15:24:25 -0500, William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com>
wrote:

>> Muslims also gave Spain the inquisition which they re-made into
>> something much worse. The Muslim inquisition was mostly about
>> "conversos" (Jews who 'converted" to Islam but retained secretly
>> Jewish practices at home. Taught the Spanish a few of their favorite
>> interrogation techniques too!)
>
>As far as I know this is entirely false.
>
>The papal and episcopal inquisitions go back to 1200. A papal decree
>gave absolution to those who used torture in this work. There is no
>trace of a Muslim origin in this.
>
I'm well aware Spain was not the first Inquisition. I'm suggesting the
Spanish inquisitors (which I'm NOT using as a euphemism simply the
inquisitors that were Spanish) learned a few things from their
previous overlords. Again Muslim 'inquisitors' were mostly interested
in Jewish "conversos" (those who claimed to be Muslims but were doing
Jewish rituals at home)

>In various Muslim-ruled societies Christians pretended to convert to
>avoid the various fiscal and legal penalties applied to non-Muslims.
>Mostly they were successful in this, though after a few generations the
>conversions often became sincere.
>
>It would not be surprising if a few Jewish people did the same. But
>I've never read of it. Nor of any "Muslim inquisition" to deal with it.
> If there was one it was notably unsuccessful at finding false Muslims
>while the Spanish Inquisition was remarkably successful in its task.
>
>In a particularly violent anti-Semitic wave in the late 1300s, many
>Spanish Jews converted to Christianity - this was regarded as unusual as
>previous pogroms had not had this effect.

>These were known as conversos, (a Spanish word, not an Arabic one) and
>as you might expect, many of the conversions were not sincere (though
>some very much were). The Spanish requested a special inquisition to
>deal with this "problem". But its remit included all forms of "heresy".

Which as I stated were something the Muslim rulers of Spain also cared
about.

>One of their principal torture techniques was waterboarding, and there
>is as far as I can tell no evidence of this being used in the Muslim
>period. The other, the strappado, may go back farther, but again there
>is no evidence that it originated in the Islamic world. The first
>reference I can find is of Christians using it on a fellow Christian.

I have no doubt in the ability of Europeans to "improve" on Muslim
techniques.

On Mon, 04 Mar 2024 11:06:23 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
wrote:

>On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 09:17:59 -0800, Paul S Person
><psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>
>>And yet, in another usenet group a couple decades ago, I found
>>atheists arranging funerals.
>>
>>Which is a function of religion.
>
>Which is why these days they're usually called "memorial services" or
>just "memorials".

I'm not sure what the point here is. The post I refer to clearly said
"atheist funeral" (IIRC). When I look up "memorial service meaning" on
Bing I get:

"a ceremony of religious worship to commemorate the life of a person,
typically someone who has recently died:"

although other uses may exist. My point was that those atheists were
engaging in a traditional /religious/ function. One way to define
something is by its /functions/.

For "memorials", Bing brings a variety of /things/, some apparently
intended to hold cremains, others simply to remember the deceased. Not
to mention the headstones/gravstones and funeral/cremation services
offered.

But language changes over time, and it may well be that "memorials"
is, in some contexts, short for "memorial services".

>I remember two years ago when my wife died I did NOT want my brother
>as a pallbearer because my wife and him had been on bad terms but was
>happy to have his son doing so since he likie all the other
>pallbearers were under 35 - and they didn't have to go very far just
>from the chapel to the hearse parked outside. (While I walked behind
>and my brother led the other folks who mostly just went back to their
>cars - some going to the cemetery some not)
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>On Mon, 04 Mar 2024 11:06:23 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 09:17:59 -0800, Paul S Person
>><psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>And yet, in another usenet group a couple decades ago, I found
>>>atheists arranging funerals.
>>>
>>>Which is a function of religion.
>>
>>Which is why these days they're usually called "memorial services" or
>>just "memorials".
>
>I'm not sure what the point here is. The post I refer to clearly said
>"atheist funeral" (IIRC). When I look up "memorial service meaning" on
>Bing I get:
>
>"a ceremony of religious worship to commemorate the life of a person,
>typically someone who has recently died:"

Logical fallacy. Ceremonies to remember the dead predate religion.

The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 15:24:25 -0500, William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Muslims also gave Spain the inquisition which they re-made into
>>> something much worse. The Muslim inquisition was mostly about
>>> "conversos" (Jews who 'converted" to Islam but retained secretly
>>> Jewish practices at home. Taught the Spanish a few of their favorite
>>> interrogation techniques too!)
>>
>> As far as I know this is entirely false.
>>
>> The papal and episcopal inquisitions go back to 1200. A papal decree
>> gave absolution to those who used torture in this work. There is no
>> trace of a Muslim origin in this.
>>
> I'm well aware Spain was not the first Inquisition. I'm suggesting the
> Spanish inquisitors (which I'm NOT using as a euphemism simply the
> inquisitors that were Spanish) learned a few things from their
> previous overlords.

There is no evidence of a Muslim inquisition in Spain, and the tortures
used in the Spanish inquisition are not Muslim in origin.

But I have found one point where you may be right:

Things got much worse for the Jews, and Christians, once the Berber
dynasties took over about 1100. Pogroms occurred, and while Jews had
earlier fled Christian kingdoms to refuge in Muslim Spain, now some went
the other way, or to more tolerant Muslim lands.

The problem of false conversions first occurred when a more extreme
Berber ruler took over Spain around 1200 and forced conversions of
Christians and Jews. Everybody knew that many if not most of these
conversions were insincere, but I have seen zero evidence that the
Muslims started any sort of inquisition to find out who was or was not
sincere. Shutting down the churches and synagogues and confiscating
their wealth may have been the real aim.

However, they did require Jews to wear distinctive clothing, yellow in
colour, which reminds me of the special garment, the sanbenito,which the
Spanish inquisition forced convicted "heretics" to wear on Sundays and
some other occasions. So there is that connection.

This period lasted a generation until a sane ruler took over, so it
ended 260 years before the SI got rolling.

Again Muslim 'inquisitors' were mostly interested
> in Jewish "conversos" (those who claimed to be Muslims but were doing
> Jewish rituals at home)

The term "converso" is a Spanish one, applied to Jews who converted to
Christianity. I have never seen it used to describe Jews who converted
to Islam (falsely or not) and the Muslims would not use a Spanish word
for this.

And why would their main efforts not be applied to the far larger number
of insincere converts from Christianity?

I do know of some Christians who falsely converted under Turkish rule -
they got more heat from Christian churches than from the Muslims, who
frankly didn't care though in theory a false conversion was (and in some
places still is) punishable by death.

>
>> In various Muslim-ruled societies Christians pretended to convert to
>> avoid the various fiscal and legal penalties applied to non-Muslims.
>> Mostly they were successful in this, though after a few generations the
>> conversions often became sincere.
>>
>> It would not be surprising if a few Jewish people did the same. But
>> I've never read of it. Nor of any "Muslim inquisition" to deal with it.
>> If there was one it was notably unsuccessful at finding false Muslims
>> while the Spanish Inquisition was remarkably successful in its task.
>>
>> In a particularly violent anti-Semitic wave in the late 1300s, many
>> Spanish Jews converted to Christianity - this was regarded as unusual as
>> previous pogroms had not had this effect.
>
>> These were known as conversos, (a Spanish word, not an Arabic one) and
>> as you might expect, many of the conversions were not sincere (though
>> some very much were). The Spanish requested a special inquisition to
>> deal with this "problem". But its remit included all forms of "heresy".
>
> Which as I stated were something the Muslim rulers of Spain also cared
> about.

You stated it. But I've seen no evidence either from you or from my
reading of history. They don't appear to have cared enough to do much
of anything except make Jewish "converts" wear embarrassing clothing.
And that didn't last long.

As opposed to their treatment of Muslim schismatics, which could be
severe. Not a lot of Shia Muslims in Spain.

>
>> One of their principal torture techniques was waterboarding, and there
>> is as far as I can tell no evidence of this being used in the Muslim
>> period. The other, the strappado, may go back farther, but again there
>> is no evidence that it originated in the Islamic world. The first
>> reference I can find is of Christians using it on a fellow Christian.
>
> I have no doubt in the ability of Europeans to "improve" on Muslim
> techniques.

Irrelevant. There is absolutely zero evidence that these techniques
were learned from Muslims.

I hold no brief for the Muslim rulers of Spain, who were imperialists
with a religious agenda which, at best, imposed serious restrictions on
the rights of non-Muslims (which was no change for the Jews, as their
rights were severely restricted under Christian rule once the Visigoths
converted to Catholicism - as Arians they had been rather tolerant).

And as stated above the persecution of other religions became much
worse, terrible indeed, when more extreme Muslims from North Africa took
over some time in the eleventh century. Even other Muslims suffered
under these rulers.

But the Spanish inquisition was an entirely Christian concept, taking no
inspiration - except for humiliating clothing, perhaps - from any
Islamic predecessor. They figured it out all by themselves, and worked
with an efficiency which would have been admirable, if it were in a
decent cause. Except for the corruption, of course.

I did a little internet searching on these claims and now my YouTube
offerings are packed with right-wing videos. Coincidence?
I think not!

William Hyde

On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 19:21:20 -0500, William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com>
wrote:

>The Horny Goat wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 15:24:25 -0500, William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Muslims also gave Spain the inquisition which they re-made into
>>>> something much worse. The Muslim inquisition was mostly about
>>>> "conversos" (Jews who 'converted" to Islam but retained secretly
>>>> Jewish practices at home. Taught the Spanish a few of their favorite
>>>> interrogation techniques too!)
>>>
>>> As far as I know this is entirely false.
>>>
>>> The papal and episcopal inquisitions go back to 1200. A papal decree
>>> gave absolution to those who used torture in this work. There is no
>>> trace of a Muslim origin in this.
>>>
>> I'm well aware Spain was not the first Inquisition. I'm suggesting the
>> Spanish inquisitors (which I'm NOT using as a euphemism simply the
>> inquisitors that were Spanish) learned a few things from their
>> previous overlords.
>
>There is no evidence of a Muslim inquisition in Spain, and the tortures
>used in the Spanish inquisition are not Muslim in origin.
>
>But I have found one point where you may be right:
>
>Things got much worse for the Jews, and Christians, once the Berber
>dynasties took over about 1100. Pogroms occurred, and while Jews had
>earlier fled Christian kingdoms to refuge in Muslim Spain, now some went
>the other way, or to more tolerant Muslim lands.
>
>The problem of false conversions first occurred when a more extreme
>Berber ruler took over Spain around 1200 and forced conversions of
>Christians and Jews. Everybody knew that many if not most of these
>conversions were insincere, but I have seen zero evidence that the
>Muslims started any sort of inquisition to find out who was or was not
>sincere. Shutting down the churches and synagogues and confiscating
>their wealth may have been the real aim.
>
>However, they did require Jews to wear distinctive clothing, yellow in
>colour, which reminds me of the special garment, the sanbenito,which the
>Spanish inquisition forced convicted "heretics" to wear on Sundays and
>some other occasions. So there is that connection.
>
>This period lasted a generation until a sane ruler took over, so it
>ended 260 years before the SI got rolling.
>
>
> Again Muslim 'inquisitors' were mostly interested
>> in Jewish "conversos" (those who claimed to be Muslims but were doing
>> Jewish rituals at home)
>
>The term "converso" is a Spanish one, applied to Jews who converted to
>Christianity. I have never seen it used to describe Jews who converted
>to Islam (falsely or not) and the Muslims would not use a Spanish word
>for this.
>
>And why would their main efforts not be applied to the far larger number
>of insincere converts from Christianity?
>
>
>I do know of some Christians who falsely converted under Turkish rule -
>they got more heat from Christian churches than from the Muslims, who
>frankly didn't care though in theory a false conversion was (and in some
>places still is) punishable by death.
>
>
>>
>>> In various Muslim-ruled societies Christians pretended to convert to
>>> avoid the various fiscal and legal penalties applied to non-Muslims.
>>> Mostly they were successful in this, though after a few generations the
>>> conversions often became sincere.
>>>
>>> It would not be surprising if a few Jewish people did the same. But
>>> I've never read of it. Nor of any "Muslim inquisition" to deal with it.
>>> If there was one it was notably unsuccessful at finding false Muslims
>>> while the Spanish Inquisition was remarkably successful in its task.
>>>
>>> In a particularly violent anti-Semitic wave in the late 1300s, many
>>> Spanish Jews converted to Christianity - this was regarded as unusual as
>>> previous pogroms had not had this effect.
>>
>>> These were known as conversos, (a Spanish word, not an Arabic one) and
>>> as you might expect, many of the conversions were not sincere (though
>>> some very much were). The Spanish requested a special inquisition to
>>> deal with this "problem". But its remit included all forms of "heresy".
>>
>> Which as I stated were something the Muslim rulers of Spain also cared
>> about.
>
>
>You stated it. But I've seen no evidence either from you or from my
>reading of history. They don't appear to have cared enough to do much
>of anything except make Jewish "converts" wear embarrassing clothing.
>And that didn't last long.
>
>As opposed to their treatment of Muslim schismatics, which could be
>severe. Not a lot of Shia Muslims in Spain.
>
>>
>>> One of their principal torture techniques was waterboarding, and there
>>> is as far as I can tell no evidence of this being used in the Muslim
>>> period. The other, the strappado, may go back farther, but again there
>>> is no evidence that it originated in the Islamic world. The first
>>> reference I can find is of Christians using it on a fellow Christian.
>>
>> I have no doubt in the ability of Europeans to "improve" on Muslim
>> techniques.
>
>Irrelevant. There is absolutely zero evidence that these techniques
>were learned from Muslims.
>
>
>I hold no brief for the Muslim rulers of Spain, who were imperialists
>with a religious agenda which, at best, imposed serious restrictions on
>the rights of non-Muslims (which was no change for the Jews, as their
>rights were severely restricted under Christian rule once the Visigoths
>converted to Catholicism - as Arians they had been rather tolerant).
>
>And as stated above the persecution of other religions became much
>worse, terrible indeed, when more extreme Muslims from North Africa took
>over some time in the eleventh century. Even other Muslims suffered
>under these rulers.
>
>But the Spanish inquisition was an entirely Christian concept, taking no
>inspiration - except for humiliating clothing, perhaps - from any
>Islamic predecessor. They figured it out all by themselves, and worked
>with an efficiency which would have been admirable, if it were in a
>decent cause. Except for the corruption, of course.
>
>
>I did a little internet searching on these claims and now my YouTube
>offerings are packed with right-wing videos. Coincidence?
>I think not!

I recently went onto one of those contractor-consolidating web sites
and copped to being interested in a new roof (the old one being nearly
25 years old and our roof guy saying it should be replaced soon), and
now all those pesky geiger-counter ads (from a recent discussion here
that included a link to Amazon for -- guess what?) and chess sets
(another recent discussion here) have been replaced by -- roofing
companies. Which, since I don't recall mentioning this here before,
rather lets this group off the hook, as it were, for now, anyway.

Still, there is a bright side to this clear surveillance-society
behavior: it is unfocused and so unlikely to be governmental. No, it
is simply Capitalism reduced to petty Hucksterism.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On Tue, 05 Mar 2024 18:13:20 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

>Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>>On Mon, 04 Mar 2024 11:06:23 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 09:17:59 -0800, Paul S Person
>>><psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>And yet, in another usenet group a couple decades ago, I found
>>>>atheists arranging funerals.
>>>>
>>>>Which is a function of religion.
>>>
>>>Which is why these days they're usually called "memorial services" or
>>>just "memorials".
>>
>>I'm not sure what the point here is. The post I refer to clearly said
>>"atheist funeral" (IIRC). When I look up "memorial service meaning" on
>>Bing I get:
>>
>>"a ceremony of religious worship to commemorate the life of a person,
>>typically someone who has recently died:"
>
>Logical fallacy. Ceremonies to remember the dead predate religion.

Actually, they may well have been the genesis of religion.

But perhaps you are under the delusion that only organized religion is
religion. Or you meant to say "predate organized religion", which I
would not object to as it seems reasonable.

Of course, if you've found out for sure, that would change things.
Doing so would, of course, require this simple two-step procedure:

1. Invent time travel.
2. Go back and see.

(The first step is, of course, a doozy.)

Otherwise, asserting that funerals predate religion must be classified
as a Religious Belief. It is, after all, clearly about religion, and
clearly just a belief unless you have taken the steps indicated.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"