Religion as a Mental Illness

[DaveC]

How did this thread turn into a discussion on homosexuality?

 

[pax]

Don't you know, Dave? We can't have a thread about anything in FYM without it coming around to abortion or homosexuality.



Let's go back to the Bar!

 

[pax]

Seriously...

I think this could be a good and provocative topic to discuss, but it's obviously, in the space of four pages, gone far, far afield. I'd like to see actual debate on the connection (if there is one) between mental illness and religious experience. Without, if it's at all possible, the gross and unfair generalizations made by BOTH sides here. Most gays are not snobby, neurotic, overdecorating gentrifiers, not are most conservative Christians insane or cruel.

I'm stating the obvious, I know, but apparently it needs to be stated.

Thanks.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Seriously...

Most gays are not snobby, neurotic, overdecorating gentrifiers, not are most conservative Christians insane or cruel.

I'm stating the obvious, I know, but apparently it needs to be stated.

Thanks.

I even stated as much myself. I said specifically that it was a particular group and that I didn't think all gays were that way.

melon, on the other hand, appears to paint all conservative Christians with the same brush. And that's what I've finally got upset about it and brought up "Flag Wars".

 

[BonosSaint]

I'm not gay nor am I religious nor am I a resident of the USA so I'm not overly interested in the gay versus USA brand of Christianity argument. I can understand the, umm, "grief" (for want of a much stronger word) but......

regardless of alterior motives this thread raised a topic of which I have no knowledge. And as my posts here are about me! me! me!

I would like to continue the original discussion.

I can understand that people might view the original post to imply that religious people are fruitcakes and nonreligious people are depressed basketcases but I would still like to discuss this issue further.

Please

And yeah, like someone said, why the lack of happy art?

Love your drama queen figure, Beli. First time in this thread I laughed.

So why do you think most great art is about pain, lost love, disenchantment or isolation (beyond the chemical balance thing)? I read a quote once where all happiness is alike, but
pain is individual. Perhaps because so few people question the source of their happiness and so many people question the source of their pain.

Sorry to take this thread beyond your original scope, Melon. But your source did reference Dostoevsky who was a wonderful writer. And there is as much theory or more on the "insanity" of artists. And many of us are grateful for that "insanity."

Part of it, I think, is that we are so conditioned to repress our pain that it must come out somewhere, hence the poetry we write and other art we create when we are in young angst and
in older angst. Art is the release that frees repressed pain and the release that conjures up the visions lying in our subconscious.

 

[echo0001]

This is partly my (very coy) response to society who, very earnestly and generally unintentionally, reduces sexuality to gross and unflattering banalities.

And this is my own response to that: reducing religion to gross and unflattering banalities. Science certainly has a very convincing explanation for why "prophets" have existed, and it's very curious how their "spiritual experiences" echo a very real epileptic disorder.


Melon

I read insulting and ignorant comments on sexuality in this forum on a regular basis, whereas equally insulting and ignorant racist, anti-Semitic, or misogynist comments would be closed instantly. Then when I've requested such threads to be closed on the basis of ending such a double standard, I'm told to "lighten up." Knowing full well that I can't get my point across by writing racist or anti-Semitic threads, I thought I'd reduce religion to the same level that sexuality is reduced to here: as a "curiosity" devoid of all happiness and reduced to a misunderstood psychosis.

Originally posted by pax Seriously...

I think this could be a good and provocative topic to discuss, but it's obviously, in the space of four pages, gone far, far afield.

It's kinda gone right where Melon intended, I think...

 

[pax]

Now that I think about it, actually, I suspect you may be right.

 

[echo0001]

Love your drama queen figure, Beli. First time in this thread I laughed.

So why do you think most great art is about pain, lost love, disenchantment or isolation (beyond the chemical balance thing)? I read a quote once where all happiness is alike, but
pain is individual. Perhaps because so few people question the source of their happiness and so many people question the source of their pain.

Sorry to take this thread beyond your original scope, Melon. But your source did reference Dostoevsky who was a wonderful writer. And there is as much theory or more on the "insanity" of artists. And many of us are grateful for that "insanity."

Part of it, I think, is that we are so conditioned to repress our pain that it must come out somewhere, hence the poetry we write and other art we create when we are in young angst and
in older angst. Art is the release that frees repressed pain and the release that conjures up the visions lying in our subconscious.

It's never occurred to me that we are "conditioned to repress our pain"; I'll have to think about that.

Perhaps we are also conditioned, to some extent, to express pain in creative ways (instead of simply braining somebody with a brick)?

 

[beli]

Part of it, I think, is that we are so conditioned to repress our pain that it must come out somewhere, hence the poetry we write and other art we create when we are in young angst and
in older angst. Art is the release that frees repressed pain and the release that conjures up the visions lying in our subconscious.

Perhaps thats it. Its certainly socially acceptable to be happy as a lark but the expectation is that an upset person is to leave the room. The answer to the "How are you?" question is expected to be "fine" regardless of the individuals actual state at the time. Perhaps that is the purpose of art, to allow the artist to release some of the less socially acceptable emotions.

There is a Peter Gabriel quote, I don't have it to hand, but its basically when people are upset listening to happy music will only irritate. Joy is not what a miserable person wants to hear. The upset person wants to wallow along with some not so chirpy music. Or something to that effect. My apologies to Mr Gabriel.

PS I'm rambling.

 

[BonosSaint]

I think too it is the reason for our appreciation of art. We keep so much inside, so much secret because there is no outlet for it. Art allows us the recognition of ourselves that reality often denies us.

 

[BonosSaint]

Actually, you started a pretty interesting topic here, Melon.
Mania, creativity, religious fervor, visions, dreams. Are they all chemical imbalances, mental illness, or the connection to the right side of our brain that are there in all of us if our brain connectors connect? Does the chemical balance change naturally when going from alpha state to beta and vice versa.

And since the alpha state is more aligned with the subconscious, does the chicken come before the egg. Does a higher connection with your subconscious release the chemical or does the chemical make you more vulnerable to your subconscious or can it work both ways?

Interesting the difference between works of art created while using cocaine and opium (Coleridge).

 

[beli]

Does the lack of serotonin increase the likelihood of not being religious? Or does not being religious decrease serotonin?

And the same goes for religion and dopamine.

Apologies if I have asked something really daft but I have little understanding of these amino acids thingies.

 

[Irvine511]

Melon and Irvine, do you think the homosexual community is free of discriminatory behavior? If you do, watch the PBS documentary "Flag Wars" sometime. The basic synopsis is that affluent snobby homosexuals set their sights on taking over and "revitalizing" a poor minority neighborhood in Columbus, Ohio. When I say "revitalizing", I'm not talking about revitalizing for the sake of the people who live there; I'm talking about "revitalizing" by using strong arm tactics to try to force these minority people out of the homes they'd lived in for decades. The strong arm tactics included, but weren't limited to, pressuring city council to enforce extreme codes. One man was fined repeatedly for having a little sign hanging in from his porch that was carved in "African-Relief" style, while across the street, his neighbors proudly flew their Gay pride flag with no legal problems whatsoever. The head of this movement to force the poor people from their homes, a lesbian realtor named Nina, was a particular b**** who treated the poor people like absolute crap, and even referred to one lady who was dying of cirrhosis of the liver as an "idiot" for refusing to sell.

This documentary was intense, and very very sad. Watch it if ypu get a chance.

And don't bother telling me "Well, that kind of thing happens to gays, also", because as you know, 2 wrongs don't make a right, especially considering the fact that the victims in this case, poverty-stricken African Americans and Hispanics, have never had enough clout or financial resources to do something like that to any group of people.

And I know that some people who read this, will think that by mentioning this incident that I am being "homophobic", or even in the words of one particular person "fanning the flames of hatred", but really, I just wanted to present some of the gay community's discriminatory sins, as some of the homosexuals on this forum never hesitate to present the discriminatory sins of the "self-proclaimed" Christian community.

you said it yourself: two wrongs don't make a right.

also: who cares? what does this have to do with anything? you've proved that certain gay people are no better or no worse than anyone else? is this supposed to be a revelation? why can't you make a point without stooping to degredate a culture? is it because you have no argument other than "gay people aren't perfect"?

 

[80sU2isBest]

It's kinda gone right where Melon intended, I think...

Not with me, it hasn't. What Melon intended was to get Christians upset about the original topic, Religion As A Mental Illness. That didn't upset me greatly, because I give no creedence whatsoever to the idea. What I responded to was his incessant painting of conservative Christians as prejudicial jerks.

 

[beli]

And since the alpha state is more aligned with the subconscious

Please explain. Pretend I'm an accountant and don't know anything about this topic.

 

[80sU2isBest]

you said it yourself: two wrongs don't make a right.

also: who cares? what does this have to do with anything? you've proved that certain gay people are no better or no worse than anyone else? is this supposed to be a revelation? why can't you make a point without stooping to degredate a culture? is it because you have no argument other than "gay people aren't perfect"?

What culture did I degredate, Irvine? If I had said that I think that the entire homosexual culture is like those in the PBS documentary, that would be degredating a culture. Did you miss the times I said that I don't think that all gays are like that and that the reason I posted this was because I was tired of you and melon always slamming on conservative Christians, painting us all with the brush of prejudice? As I said before, I wanted to show that homosexuals can be guilty of prejudice also; no one would know it if they only listened to you two.

But you see that's the difference, right there. I didn't paint all homosexuals with a brush, just thoat particular group involved in the "Flag Wars" injustice. But you and Melon are constantly, and I do mean constantly painting all conservative Christians with the brush of prejudice.

 

[echo0001]

Not with me, it hasn't. What Melon intended was to get Christians upset about the original topic, Religion As A Mental Illness. That didn't upset me greatly, because I give no creedence whatsoever to the idea. What I responded to was his incessant painting of conservative Christians as prejudicial jerks.

And?

You think other people don't get upset when all gays are painted as preverted, youth recruiting, threat-to-traditional-values freaks trying to destroy ... I don't know what they are supposed to be destroying this week but I'm sure it will be a social catastrophe of apocolytic proportions in the minds of some, who will more than likely include a certain number of conservative Christians.

I think somewhere earlier in this thread I dropped the phrase "fighting fire with fire". I believe Melon was trying to make a point about devaluing people. If you are not one of the people prone to the behavior outlined in the previous paragraph, I don't think you really need to be upset here.

But then again, it's your right to get hot under the collar if you like; I only hope that you consider walking in someone else shoes, trying to understand what they are doing and why.

I understand why Melon posted this thread; I've already stated my doubts that this would get results re. the double standard....

 

[80sU2isBest]

And?

You think other people don't get upset when all gays are painted as preverted, youth recruiting, threat-to-traditional-values freaks trying to destroy ... I don't know what they are supposed to be destroying this week but I'm sure it will be a social catastrophe of apocolytic proportions in the minds of some, who will more than likely include a certain number of conservative Christians.

I think somewhere earlier in this thread I dropped the phrase "fighting fire with fire". I believe Melon was trying to make a point about devaluing people. If you are not one of the people prone to the behavior outlined in the previous paragraph, I don't think you really need to be upset here.

But then again, it's your right to get hot under the collar if you like; I only hope that you consider walking in someone else shoes, trying to understand what they are doing and why.

I understand why Melon posted this thread; I've already stated my doubts that this would get results re. the double standard....

You miss my point, entirely echo - entirely.

I brought up Flag Wars not as a response to the original point of this thread, but as a response to something he said later in the thread and the many many times he has lumped all conservative Christians in the "prejudiced" group.

I have always been much more respectful of homosexuals than melon and Irvine have been of conservative Christians. I have said that I thought homosexuality was wrong, and that's it. They go off on rants about how evil and prejudiced conservative Christianity is and are often very insulting about it. If you can find times that I called homosexuals prejudicial, backwoods, hateful, evil demons from hell, please feel free to post it here. Don't bother looking; I never have. But that's the kind of thing they love to throw out there about conservative Christians. Meanwhile, people are jumping on my back for discussing one particular group of homosexuals.

Quite frankly, I'm a little sick and tired of it.

 

[melon]

Not with me, it hasn't. What Melon intended was to get Christians upset about the original topic, Religion As A Mental Illness. That didn't upset me greatly, because I give no creedence whatsoever to the idea. What I responded to was his incessant painting of conservative Christians as prejudicial jerks.

Individual conservative Christians may not be jerks, but look at the institutions they have created and the hatred they have sown in government!

"Big bad homosexuals" have no power to hurt Christianity. Period. It's constitutionally protected. However, "big bad Christianity" can and does on a regular basis try to eradicate homosexuality. Isn't that their main goal in life these days? No wonder I have no respect for it anymore.

Melon

 

[80sU2isBest]

I'm bowing out now. Honestly, I'm too upset about this conversation (I know what you're thinking: "80s hides his anger so well"). When you get as upset as I am right now, it's best to step aside and cool off. It's obvious that this will only get worse and worse as it goes.

 

[melon]

Sorry to take this thread beyond your original scope, Melon. But your source did reference Dostoevsky who was a wonderful writer. And there is as much theory or more on the "insanity" of artists. And many of us are grateful for that "insanity."

And I know that "insanity" all too well. There were many years where I was not well, mentally, and while I cannot say that I went as far as having daytime hallucinations, I had enough dreams in those years to write a book. On top of it, after taking a personality test years ago, I fit the personality profile of a "Healer Idealist," which is the personality type thought to exist with "prophets," etc.

As such, I've always felt in tune with the spiritual side of things. Maybe someday, I'll write that book after all.

Melon

 

[echo0001]

You miss my point, entirely echo - entirely.

I brought up Flag Wars not as a response to the original point of this thread, but as a response to something he said later in the thread and the many many times he has lumped all conservative Christians in the "prejudiced" group.

I have always been much more respectful of homosexuals than melon and Irvine have been of conservative Christians. I have said that I thought homosexuality was wrong, and that's it. They go off on rants about how evil and prejudiced conservative Christianity is and are often very insulting about it. If you can find times that I called homosexuals prejudicial, backwoods, hateful, evil demons from hell, please feel free to post it here. Don't bother looking; I never have. But that's the kind of thing they love to throw out there about conservative Christians. Meanwhile, people are jumping on my back for discussing one particular group of homosexuals.

Quite frankly, I'm a little sick and tired of it.

It's hard to feel all warm and fuzzy, or particularly objective, about a group when, generally, the institutions supported by that group, by and large, condemn an entire strata of society, attacking them on nearly every front, in every format, accusing them constantly. When one is condemned oneself, it's very hard to hold one's tongue.

If you are not one of the people prone to the behavior outlined in the previous paragraph, I don't think you really need to be upset here.

Okay, so you don't treat people that way.

As for the Flag Wars, yeah, it's a bunch of people getting stupid; people, unfortunately, have a tendancy to do stupid s--- Nobody ever said that gays, or even gays in a particular community, should be immune from criticism. I am not saying that you were wrong to post that; I wouldn't attack you for posting that.

But I would like you to consider the crap that Melon and Irvine have to deal with all the time....I don't agree with every little thing they say about cCs, but I try to keep in mind the way some cCs behave, and the way that certain Christian institutions and leaders treat gays.

Can't we all just get along?

 

[beli]

Oh INFP? I'm an INTJ - the thinker and CEO.

 

[Irvine511]

i'll only offer these two thoughts, because i don't know where else to put them, and this particular thread seems to be where a consistent FYM dynamic has once again reared it's head.

1. it is impossible to have any sort of political discussion without stereotyping and generalizing. we can tack as many disclaimers as we want, but at the end of the day, politics is about masses of people. politics requires the individual to think as a member of a group, since the political apparatus can only serve the needs of groups, not specific individuals. thus, it should behoove everyone to know that whenever we speak of "Conservative Christians" who whatever group, we of course do not mean ALL of them. and it is the weakest possible argument to resort to a kind of, "wah, you're stereotyping me" claim when you can point to specific, measured pieces of legislation, combined with broader social action and awareness campaigns, aimed at persecuting one specific group. we can say that not all Texans are homophobic, but when the Texas State Congress wants to enact legislation that would prevent gay people from adopting, we are rightly able to call Texas politicians homophobic. i don't think all individual Catholics are homophobic, but the way the Catholic Church throws its weight around is clearly homophobic. we need to say this because dialogue and discourse are impossible without such organization of information.

2. there's a huge difference between 80s getting upset at being stereotyped, and people like Melon and myself who have to live with the consequences of stereotypes about gay people that are alive and well, as well as, and most importantly, people who think that it is okay to treat gay people differently because they have a questionable biblical interpretation of what they believe God might have said about gay people. in a modern liberal democracy, theological arguments cannot form the basis of social policy. i find it laughable when some Christians feel they are persecuted in the US because they don't see their values reflected perfectly by popular culture (i.e., complaining about the casual use of "goddammit" or "jesus christ!" in common conversation) and think this is tantamount to the real, measured discrimination gay people have to endur every day. i've never whined about being stereotyped; i've decried when stereotypes form the basis of amending the Constituttion of the United States, banning books from libraries in Alabama, preventing gay people from adopting in Texas and Florida, being able to fire people on the basis of sexual orientation, being unable to serve in armed forces, and the unavailability of legal recognition for a commited, adult relationship.

 

[ZeroDude]

^
Amen to that everyone can be stereotyped, no matter how hard I find it to empathise with any side of many arguements I believe we can all live in peace and accept each other as human beings, welcome to compassionate humanism

However after reading many of the discussions here they in my experience as an observer no matter what the topic they always end up in a series of highly elaborate, discretely veiled shit slinging matches, especially in threads with religious discussion that always carry conotations about homosexuality, all I want to point out is saying that religion is a mental illness is really as offensive to some as saying homosexulaity is a genetic defect, neither of which are what I've stated imo. God is man, man is God, man is the devil, we see things in our fellow man that are not of a definite nature, I capitalise the first letter of god due to the line of thought that I follow, if all man at some stage in the grand conscience of humankind believes in a higher being and this thought becomes institutionalised then God exists, the devil to me is a manifestation of all of mans misgivings, morality as it stands is vague as it should be, black and white do not exist there is only grey, we all need to pack our things and put them in the same suitcase for this is life we all need to be one.

One last thing remember we know nothing, the truth is uncertain and the truth is a different thing all together aethism, religion et al all have the same fate as I'm concerned to be condemned as utter bollocks when we die though we will find out or cease to exist, all that is certain for my life remains the certainity of that chance.

 

[BonosSaint]

 

[melon]

all I want to point out is saying that religion is a mental illness is really as offensive to some as saying homosexulaity is a genetic defect

Congratulations! You've figured out why I wrote this thread to begin with.

So the next time some religious fanatic wants to make some half-assed comment about homosexuality, I'll be able to refer them to this thread.

Melon

 

[ZeroDude]

Congratulations! You've figured out why I wrote this thread to begin with.

So the next time some religious fanatic wants to make some half-assed comment about homosexuality, I'll be able to refer them to this thread.

Melon

Here I was thinking that you were just as bad as those fanatics as you put it, smart move, disarming your enemy so to speak but still residing in my post is all I want for us all, peace and love naive as that may be, we can all work towards it together.

 

[melon]

I've been swimming in the realm of academic discourse for so long that I no longer know what I really believe, if that's possible. I just know how to take a position--any position--and argue my case. I guess I should have become a defense lawyer?

Melon

 

[ZeroDude]

I've been swimming in the realm of academic discourse for so long that I no longer know what I really believe, if that's possible. I just know how to take a position--any position--and argue my case. I guess I should have become a defense lawyer?

Melon

Ah you see, it is difficult to completely remove oneself from preconceptions, misconceptions and trying to adapt to looking at everything without your views being diluted by personal opinion,

P.S. you'd make a great defense lawyer The work you've done here proves that you'd only be open for attack by the most shrewd and creative thinkers