OSC claimed that fans sited "Jedi" as their religion. I'm an Urban Legend addict and I'm pretty sure this was debunked.
Posted by OSTY (Member # 1480) on :
there is a newer belief of Jedi style Christianity where they compare the Christian life style with the Jedi beliefs. And I would not be suprised at all to see some overboard fans out there somewhere thinking that they could worship as a true Jedi.
Posted by Orson Scott Card (Member # 209) on :
If it was debunked, then I was sucked in by reading about it in reputable sources. What's the source on the debunking?
Posted by OSTY (Member # 1480) on :
I would call Snopes bookmark-worthy for any skeptic, or even anyone at all.
Obviously, we don't have cause to question everything we hear, especially if we get it from a trusted source. But if you're ever a little skeptical, it's almost guaranteed Snopes will have it on file.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
What is this OSC star wars post that the first post refers to?
Posted by Don Domande (Member # 8287) on :
IIRC, he didn't refer to it becoming a state-recognized religion as much as he said that some were marking their religion as, "Jedi." Whether or not marking it on a census would make it a state-recognized religion is separate from the issue of whether some actually DO mark it as such.
But that is coming from my memory of his column - and my memory is increasingly resembling a vegetable strainer lately.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I'm sure he was presenting it as a humorous aside as opposed to evidence that civilization is coming to an end.
I fell for that story that someone was really opening a Hogwarts.
So, have we really come to the point that everything you read in the paper must be checked against snopes? And who is watching the watchmen?
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
The Jedi, of course.
Posted by ShadowPuppet (Member # 8239) on :
by the way
I felt I should make an announcement about a school for children
a 'battle school' if you will orbiting in outer space
so as to teach young children how to win wars against invasions from very large mutant alien ants
thank you
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
Well, whenever I hear something wild, I do tend to check it against Snopes. Often, it turns out to be either true, or at least not known to be untrue. But when it is a hoax, I like to know it.
Still, I agree with Don. I'm quite sure that there are people who say their religion is Jedi. There's an actual group that goes by the same name as Mike Smith's religion in Stranger In A Strange Land, and I can't count the number of times that I've seen people use the salutation "Share Water" online.
There is no idea so wacked out that some people won't glom onto it.
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
Jedi has about as much legitimacy as Scientology, and that's recognised as a religion. Trying to follow some jedi code would also probably be less traumatic than scientology.
Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
Possibly. Remeber that the Jedi world is the one in which light has corporeal form. Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
That said, I'd do Jedi before Scientology, myself. *motions towards username* In case you were unsure.
Posted by Darth Ender (Member # 7694) on :
We stopped the Jedi. The Sith are the ones you need to start a religion to
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
We had a thread on this a while back. In case people are interested.
Posted by 0range7Penguin (Member # 7337) on :
The next step? Invent Lightsabers!
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
Hey, post links. It's so much easier on your readers!
quote:More than 70,000 people in Australia have declared that they are followers of the Jedi faith, the religion created by the Star Wars films.
A recent census found that one in 270 respondents - or 0.37% of the population - say they believe in "the force", an energy field that gives Jedi Knights like Luke Skywalker their power in the films.
What Snopes debunks is that marking your religion as Jedi on a UK or Australian census will force the government to recognize Jedi as a religion.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
quote:I'd do Jedi
I know that you didn't mean it that way, but....
Whatever.
Posted by LarvalBean (Member # 8764) on :
It would be very interesting if there are people who have actually adopted the Jedi beliefs as an actual religion. The Force as described in Star Wars is clearly not real, but many elements of the Jedi belief seem to come from Taoism and Tai Chi (the concept of Chi is actually very similar to the Force). In that sense, I suppose one could view "Jedism" as a Westernized version of the Chinese religion.
Of course, there is no "Tai Chi Council" or "Tai Chi Temple", and blindly following the codes of the Jedi as they are written in Star Wars may not be the best idea in the world, since they were never designed as an actual practicable religion.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Thanks for finally posting the link, WillB.
Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
quote: quote: I'd do Jedi ********************* I know that you didn't mean it that way
Question your assumptions. Nothing is certain in this world. Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
Oh, I have no doubt that what I said was true, but I think you didn't mean to say that. I imagine it was a, how do you say...Freudian slip.
A very Freudian slip, given your username Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by ricree101: Jedi has about as much legitimacy as Scientology, and that's recognised as a religion. Trying to follow some jedi code would also probably be less traumatic than scientology.
Well now, this is interesting. Suppose I had said the same thing, but substituted Christianity, Judaism, or LDS for Scientology. Would people have jumped all over me for disrespect? I think they would. But it's ok to be disrespectful of a religion that nobody here holds?
Posted by dantesparadigm (Member # 8756) on :
The difference between scientology and one of the major religions is that the major religions are religions. Perhaps it'd be more disserving of respect if it offered guidlines for living life in a way as to make you a good person and to help others instead of just serving as an excuse for Tom Cruise to get passionate.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
The difference between Catholicism and one of the major religions is that the major religions are religions. Perhaps it would be more deserving of respect if it offered guidelines for living life in a such way as to make you a good person and to help others instead of just serving as an excuse for priests to get passionate with altar boys.
So tell me, which religions offer guidelines for the good life that were not known by, say, the pagan Greeks?
Posted by dantesparadigm (Member # 8756) on :
You can certainly delve into any religion and find serious flaws, especially when you start making literal translations of stories in the bible which are meant to offer moral guidance. My point is that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all have a set of values, things like love thy neighbor, and don't steal stuff, that if everybody follows then we'd have an ideal utopia. Along the same lines, if you consider the enforcemeant of these rules to be fear of a guy sitting on a cloud waiting to strike you down with a lightning bolt as opposed to something as simple as shame and ostrascism, then your still not being reasonable. Reading too much nto religion can have some pretty bad consequences, but most of the time it's a force for good. Scientology completely misses the mark in that respect.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:that if everybody follows then we'd have an ideal utopia.
Oh, really? I think a fair number of homosexuals would disagree with you on that one. Even if you don't think the Bible forbids gay sex, how about the "worship Yahweh" commandment? I do not consider utopia to include knocking my forehead on the floor in the general direction of an imaginary being once a week. (Or five times a day if you prefer the Koran.)
As for the rules that actually have a bit of morality, they are hardly exclusive to religions. Any humanist will agree that stealing is a bad thing. Religion just adds a superset of ritual and random prejudice to the basic primate sense of justice.
Finally, can I just point out that if only everyone would follow the Scientology rites and get rid of all their Body Thetans, then we would indeed have an ideal utopia.
Posted by dantesparadigm (Member # 8756) on :
well first of all on the utopia note I was being sarcstic, kinda hard to tell considering it's in writing, my apologies. I didn't realize you were a scientologist and were taking this so seriously, I was just generally debating the merit of religion, if you're a good person I don't care if you believe in some crazy doctrine, whether it be catholoscism, scientology, or Jedi. As for the whole if only everyone would follow (insert religion here)the world would be a better place bit; thats the kind of thinking that leads to problems, for obvious reasons.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
I am not a scientologist; I was merely parodying the True Believer rhetoric you were spouting. As for debating the merits of religion, I have now given several reasons why they are not, in fact, merits; why don't you come up with some counter-arguments?
Preferably with paragraphs, proper spelling, and no stream-of-consciousness rambling. I see you're a newbie; please be aware that this forum generally has a moderately high standard of literacy. Use a full stop once in a while, and put a capital letter at the beginning of sentences, and you'll find yourself being taken much more seriously. At the moment your posts are quite painful to read.
Posted by dantesparadigm (Member # 8756) on :
My point is that religious people generally have strong positive moral values. I'm not denying that the antiquated nature of major religion can lead to intolerance of certain groups, and there are plenty of frivolous exercises imbedded in organized religion. However non-religious groups, like humanists, have the problem of enforcing compliance. Religion does a great job of this with the whole good people go to heaven bad people go to hell thing. As to resorting to insulting my lack of literary skills, good point I’ll work on it.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Thank you; that's much better.
As for enforcement, I suggest you compare the crime rates of massively secular countries like Norway with those of publicly pious ones like the US. I think you will find the exercise enlightening.
You appear to be operating on the assumption that people will think rationally about their behaviour, and decide that those $100k aren't worth an eternity of Hell. But that's not true. Good, moral behaviour is a habit of mind, inculcated by your parents - as you quite correctly pointed out, the enforcement most religions rely on is shame and guilt, not lightning bolts from the sky. Why should that work any differently for atheists?
Posted by dantesparadigm (Member # 8756) on :
Touché
It would be great if we could all be good people without having to resort to believing dinosaurs lived 5000 years ago in the Garden of Eden, and even then you end up with people who are nice but completely ignorant. I still think the right form of religion leads to a better society. As far as Norway goes, it’s just too cold to get up and shoot someone.
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
So we're back to how awful other people's world views are: wild assumptions about what They really think; manipulation of statistics; and hate. The curse of Internet. No wonder OSC didn't want a free-for-all-on-Mormonism thread.
Anyway, "Jedi" was a funny answer to a nosey question on the Oz census. Too bad they've gone to fining people for it.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
I find it amusing that nobody even bothered to defend the Jedi faith against a comparison to Scientology.
Isn't that far more judgemental? After all, the original statement that started the fight was somebody saying that trying to be a Jedi was "just as good" as practicing Scientology. Saying that one thing is "just as good" as another is the exact opposite of being judgemental, unless you assume that one of the things compared cannot be seriously considered to have real value. And that assumption is highly judgemental.
I'm not going to go further and point out how logically flawed the argument was in other respects, just that having the argument at all was based on a certain person making an extraordinarily negative judgement of the Jedi faith.
And no, I'm not a Jedi. Oh boy, am I ever not a Jedi.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
I'm not going to argue on that one; I do indeed judge religions, from Scientology to Catholicism, to be extremely detrimental organisations. The main difference between Scientology and other mystery religions is that it takes its imagery from science fiction rather than fantasy. I was merely pointing out that the people who usually jump all over me for such disrespect apparently do not consider Scientology worthy of a defense.
Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
A Jedi is not offended by this ignorance and hatred. All the insults are just part of the balance of the Force. It would tremble if all these voices were suddenly silenced.
<---anticipatorily flinching.
Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
"apparently do not consider Scientology worthy of a defense."
That's how I feel. In an online forum, anyway. If it came down to it, I would defend the right of Scientology to exist (as long as those practicing it still allowed those who need drugs to bloody well take them) in a legal sense. But I'm still going to say that the principles of Scientology disgust me and scare me and I'm not going to defend its *worth* as a religion.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
I agree entirely. Where we differ is that I think the same thing about all religions. What amused me was that whenever I make such a statement (except in this thread, apparently) people jump all over me.
"We are both atheists : I believe in one god less than you do. When you understand why you do not believe in all the other gods, you will understand why I do not believe in yours."
Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
Oh, I feel pretty much the same way about all religion as I do about Scientology, but in a waaaaaaaaay less extreme way. I'd feel more comfortable if, say, a bunch of reform or conservative Jews staged a coup and took over the government than a bunch of Scientologists.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Well, if given the choice between plague and cholera, yes, I might go with cholera too. On the other hand, at least the Scientologists only want your money, which isn't too different from any other government; Orthodox Jews, presumably, would make us live by the Noachide laws, which I would find rather oppressive.
Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
"at least the Scientologists only want your money"
And to take away everyone's meds. Dear Jesus, please restore my seratonin levels!
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Isn't that Christian Scientists?
Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
Oh well, I sit corrected.
Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
"Residual drug deposits which have remained in the body have been known to cause lessened perception, tiredness, confused thinking and to create an artificial “drug personality,” which can cause a person to harbor hostilities and distress that affect all aspects of his life."
(from the website above)
That's my favorite part. What, you're still tired and confused? Silly you. It's just the residual effects of those prescription drugs you USED to take. Not the fact that you're no longer taking them. Isn't that convenient...
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Well, I didn't read your link in full detail; it seems to me that they might have a point about the current drug culture in the US. I don't mean heroin, or even marijuana, but stuff like aspirin and valium. It seems to me that Americans expect that, for any given problem, there will be a pill that magically makes it go away. If this is what they are objecting to, I have to agree. But there are clearly circumstances in which drugs are in fact useful; dropping antibiotics, say, like the Christian Scientists want, is just silly.
Interesting trivia : In Norwegian, the word 'drugs' would usually be translated into 'narkotika', narcotics; stuff like aspirin is referred to as 'medisin', which I trust I need not re-translate. There is no single word meaning all the kinds of non-food stuff we put in out bodies.
Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
You mock the blessed relief of aspirin, as I sit here in highly medicated, hormonally unstable, and erratically writing a true b#%$ of an Eng. paper? I presume you are male...
Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
In all seriousness, I think there is somthing to what you say-- you read about all the misdiagnosed, overtreated Ritalin kids... awful. Where is the balance? Darned if I know. Sigh. Back to Sir Gawain.
Posted by Somnium (Member # 8482) on :
Just where did you get the idea that Christian Scientists are wanting to drop Antibiotics?
I mean seriously, if you call yourself a scientist, Christian or not, and you want to do away with antibiotics, I think you have lost your right to coining yourself with the term of scientist.
I think the word you are looking for is fanatics, more specifically ones, who use terms like scientist to feign a sense of authority.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Not scientists who happen to be Christian, but members of the Church of Christ, Scientist. Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
Also, there are legitimate reasons for a scientist to wish to do away with widespread use of antibiotics. You are making an unjustified assumption by suggesting that any scientist would necessarily have a desire to reduce human death and suffering due to infectious disease.
I find that assumption highly objectionable, though I've come to expect it
By the way, atheists hate "all religions" mostly because those other religions contradict their own self worship. I've never been able to understand how a human being could possibly fail to know that there must be beings far superior to mankind in the universe. It's utterly untenable, if rather amusing.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Again, can I point out that I am not talking about actual scientists, but members of the Church of Christ, Scientist? The concepts are rather well separated.
For the last paragraph, I assume you know my posting habits and are trying to get a rise out of me? Most amusing.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
Actually, I wasn't talking to you. But I did like the way you took Sommy's "I've never heard of 'Christian Science'" bit seriously. It does mean that you missed the slight jab at yourself in that post, though.
What about your posting habits, by the way?
Okay, want a real rise? I'm not talking to you even now, I'm still only talking about you. Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
Survivor, meet KoM. KoM, meet Survivor.
*ducks for cover*
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Camus, are you seriously implying that this guy is for real?
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
As much as you are. Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
KoM, I believe he was very serious about what he said and am quite surprised with the way you responded. I'm not saying you should have responded any differently, just surprised about it.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
Wait, I'm a little confused here. Everyone seems to know this KoM guy and all, but who is he? Does he really claim to be some kind of authoritative representative of the human race, or at least its adult male contingent? Please, don't be concerned. Many entities in the universe, some more powerful than myself, have no interest in physical suffering and death as they affect humans. And I wasn't claiming that I was such an one anyway.
As for my comments, while they were truthful, they weren't serious in the sense of not being made with a smile. I'm not trying to pick a fight with your King, yo. And if a fight does occur, absolutely nothing is at stake.
Posted by CRash (Member # 7754) on :
You two have seriously never met before? I don't know whether to run for shelter or stay and watch.
Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
A part of me wants to stay and watch, the other part is disappointed in myself for even encouraging certain behavior. In any case, if either part party decides that a discussion on the meaning of atheism is necessary, this thread is definitely not the place for it.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
I just want you to explain. Why would I have necessarily met KoM before? And what about our meeting would give you all cause to either run away or watch?
I wasn't the one who introduced atheism into the discussion, so I suppose that I can agree that this thread should be more about the question of what the Jedi way means in the "real world" than about atheism. I don't know whether KoM agrees with that idea, certainly his earlier posts suggest otherwise. Maybe that's just the "posting style" somebody mentioned.
Really, what's the deal?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
I'm an atheist; indeed, on this board I am moderately notorious for being quite intolerant of theism. For you to come up with "because those other religions contradict their own self worship" looked quite a bit like a deliberate provocation.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote: And what about our meeting would give you all cause to either run away or watch?
The two of you share certain similarities.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Nah. I can tell by the way Survivor hits the italics that he is middle-aged, depressed, and running a little to fat. I, on the other hand, am youthful, debonair, and quite handsome. Additionally, I possess a subtle and playful sense of humour, while Survivor's sentence patterns plainly reveal a rather stodgy disposition.
Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
Be careful KoM, no one wants to see you get suspended here too. Well, actually a lot of people want to see you get suspended here, but I'd rather you didn't. It's too quiet when you're not around.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
Okay, I could kinda tell that KoM was an atheist. Like appointing himself your god wasn't enough of a clue. Like I said, he's the one that brought the subject up, eh?
So that doesn't explain anything.
I'm not really running a little to fat. More like...inching. Okay, really, I'm probably as fat now as I'm ever going to get. It used to worry me, but now I think I'll just live with it. Unless Milfeulle Sakuraba becomes my live-in cook, I'm not going to make any progress. Actually, something tells me that if I were to rely on Milfeulle's cooking, I would actually lose weight.
Huh.
Middle-aged...I don't know. How old is that? I suppose the important thing is my life-span rather than yours...how depressing Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Where did I declare myself anyone's god? If anything, I'd rather have you worship the IPU.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
Sorry, what does KoM stand for again?
Okay, a more serious question. What's the IPU?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
It's a game name. And Wiki is your friend. Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
But if I worshipped the Invisible Pink Unicorn...wow, that would really be bad for you. I don't think that you realize...huh, apparently nobody realizes how hard we had to work to suppress all that nonsense.
Either that or the worshipers of the fantastic Unicorn are rather more involuted than I ever thought possible. I think it's just a random coincidence, though. I mean...hmmm.
You know what, I don't think I care one way or the other. It would've mattered back then, but it doesn't matter anymore.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
That post makes no sense. Once more, with coherence.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
You're just making the wrong assumptions
Which is to say, we don't agree because you don't have the context to understand what I'm saying.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
If you cannot manage to make your posts comprehensible, how am I supposed to tell whether I agree or not?
[ October 30, 2005, 07:45 PM: Message edited by: King of Men ]
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
*sprays down S and KoM*
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
*brings chips, candy, and sodas, and passes them around to spectators*
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Much as I appreciate having a fanbase, I'd like to point out that we aren't actually arguing yet, much less flaming, since comrade Survivor has yet to explain what the devil he is talking about. Also, kq, you appear to have forgotten the asbestos clothing.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
Hmph. Well, now that I've been...moistened, by certain persons, I think that I will give in to my boredom and find something more interesting to pass the time.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Much as I appreciate having a fanbase
Yup. And I'm also a liberal pinko commie.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Yup. And I'm also a liberal pinko commie.
I *knew* it!
Posted by Orson Scott Card (Member # 209) on :
Those of us who actually are communists really resent the way the name has been coopted by state monopoly capitalists ...
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:Also, kq, you appear to have forgotten the asbestos clothing.
Oh, yeah. I'm just so hot I don't catch fire, but if any of the rest of you want it, it's over in the corner. Posted by Javelin (Member # 8643) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orson Scott Card: Those of us who actually are communists really resent the way the name has been coopted by state monopoly capitalists ...
Not to mention those of us who are state monopoly capitalists! Jeesh! Posted by TheHumanTarget (Member # 7129) on :
...you all fail to mention those of us who are Hasbro Monopoly capitalists...
Posted by Javelin (Member # 8643) on :
It is interesting how "communism", as people know it today, at its root, was practice by early Christians, and many Christians today, and yet it is VERY different than what the general public understands, i.e. Marxism, Stalinism, Moaism, etc.
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javelin: It is interesting how "communism", as people know it today, at its root, was practice by early Christians, and many Christians today, and yet it is VERY different than what the general public understands, i.e. Marxism, Stalinism, Moaism, etc.
You have to admit, they went a long way in popularizing the term.
quote:Originally posted by Kingo of Men Where did I declare myself anyone's god? If anything, I'd rather have you worship the IPU.
And why not the FSM?
Posted by Ghengis Cohen (Member # 8813) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orson Scott Card: Those of us who actually are communists really resent the way the name has been coopted by state monopoly capitalists ...
If you equate "state monopoly capitalism" to Marxism, then bravo. I don't know if you'd consider me a communist, but here's how I see things:
If it had not been for Karl Marx, we might all be living in communism today.
1. Marx rejects specialization, which is insane, since you need specialization to prosper and progress as a society. In fact, without specialization, there's hardly a need for society beyond the tribe. 2. Marx's rationalizations about the necessity of a transitory "dictatorship of the Proletariat," IMO lays the foundations for Leninism and all the horrors of Big C Communism. 3. Marx stupidly and needlessly antagonizes religion. As Javelin pointed out, before Marx, religion had been communism's best friend.
I see the best hope for true communism to occur in religion, science, and family. Marriage and family are the closest thing that civilization has produced to a long-term working communist unit. Science will gradually produce technologies that render large-scale manufacturing mostly obselete (think nanomanufacturing on a scale that you could create car components from a computer in the same way you now print a document). And religion works on our hearts and minds to make us more generous and less greedy. I look forward to a day when plenty and generosity abound to the point where it's "from each according to his abundance, and to each according to his wants."
If you have a manifesto somewhere on this topic, please link me. So far I've only seen hints of what you mean by communism.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
The FSM is a pagan cult, unworthy of comparison to the Greatness that is the Unicorn, may Her hooves never be shod.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:And religion works on our hearts and minds to make us more generous and less greedy.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)