Religion

10 hours ago by hoohoohoot to c/anarchism

Do you guys think that voluntary religions have place in our lives if we were to live as anarchists?

Skyline969 9 points 10 hours ago

Isn’t the point of anarchism to not be controlled? Genuine question.

path: 0 24385107, hotness: undefined, score: 9, children: 3

volore 5 points 9 hours ago

I feel like this question strongly depends on the religion -- I could see an anarchist believing in Buddhism or something of that nature quite easily, but I'd have a hard time trying to figure out a so-called anarchist that devoutly followed one of the Abrahamic religions. That would seem more than a bit peculiar, to me.

save

path: 0 24385107 24385267, hotness: undefined, score: 5, children: 0

Eldritch 3 points 8 hours ago

Consent, if you consent to live by certain rules and restrictions. That's your bag, and it's fine. The moment you decide that you must force others to participate is the moment it becomes an issue.

save

path: 0 24385107 24386426, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0

Telorand 3 points 9 hours ago

Folk religions aren't necessarily controlling, for example, so I don't see why religions as a general concept need to be excluded.

We can get down to the details about certain varieties that promote power structures and prop up systemic inequalities, but religion ≠ authoritarian

save

path: 0 24385107 24385453, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0

TootSweet 8 points 9 hours ago

Who's gonna ban it? The government?

Anarchists should fight against all oppression, including religious oppression. But any religion, spiritual community, or other related sort of thing, if they aren't oppressing anyone (and I figure "not oppressing anyone" is basically what you meant when you stuck "voluntary" in your post body), why TF would you go and make it your business what they do?

Beyond that, one could argue that without being able to oppress people, religions would die out over time as people wake up to what they really are. To the extent that that happens, great. But I do think there's something deep in humans that has spiritual sort of leanings. Whether what remains once oppressive religions are gone will qualify as a "religion" or be more of a set of secular spiritual practices or some such really depends more on your definition of "religion" than anything else.

save

path: 0 24385418, hotness: undefined, score: 8, children: 0

PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S 3 points 9 hours ago

Yes.

My suggestion is that it would be easier for you to reject religion and any other beliefs without evidence to back it up, but I support religious freedom and diversity of thought in general. And if you reject my suggestion, that's the end of the discussion, no big deal, won't bring it up again.

As long as there's no oppression and it's being done in a way that does not create hierarchies, I got no beef with people doing religious stuff (or any other stuff).

save

path: 0 24385788, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0

A404 3 points 8 hours ago

As long as they remain non-hierarchical why not?

save

path: 0 24386290, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0

OwOarchist 2 points 9 hours ago

Ideally, it would be phased out as better education and critical thinking (and lack of enforced childhood indoctrination) make it unpopular.

save

path: 0 24385157, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

bacon_pdp 2 points 8 hours ago

It is fine as a voluntary choice. The problem is only really with Death cults.