Religion in the US.

[guillaumeb]

Civil religion in America has no church, denominations, or institutional center, and it cannot be traced to a single origin story. And yet, it operates as a religion in ways familiar to Americans—it has priests and pastors, altars and sacrifices, symbols, institutions, and liturgies. So, what, then, is civil religion? The term originates with the 18th-century French philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778), who proposed that the French nation needed a civil religion to replace the “unholy” alliance between the Catholic Church and the monarchy. Rousseau explained in book 4 of his Social Contract that he hoped a “purely civil profession of faith” would satisfy what he viewed as the popular need for something to believe in, to give one’s allegiance to, and even to give up one life’s for—a transcendent, unifying point of reference that existed beyond politics and in place of a denominational (most likely Christian) church. Thus, in philosophical terms, civil religion is the appropriation of religion for political ends. The American version of civil religion, though, differs from Rousseau’s idea by incorporating the nation’s Christian heritage more deeply into an understanding and judgment of America.

http://oxfordre.com/religion/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-441

Civil religion, also referred to as a civic religion,[1] is the implicit religious values of a nation, as expressed through public rituals, symbols (such as the national flag), and ceremonies on sacred days and at sacred places (such as monuments, battlefields, or national cemeteries). It is distinct from churches, although church officials and ceremonies are sometimes incorporated into the practice of civil religion.[2] Countries described as having a civil religion include France,[3] South Korea,[1] and the former Soviet Union.[4] As a concept, it originated in French political thought and became a major topic for U.S. sociologists since its use by Robert Bellah in 1960.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_religion

I have previously referred to the concept of civil religion. And the responses generally denied that any such argument could be made.

But as these articles explain, there is in fact a civil religion that is a part of patriotism, with all of the functions we generally associate with religion having a civic equivalant.

[marylandblue]

1. I think we do have a civic religion in the US, but

It's more an analogy or perhaps a substitute for religion rather than having all the same bells and whistles. Still, some people, particularly conservatives, need symbols and a tradition to rally around.

[guillaumeb]

3. Agreed.

The terms vary, of course, but the same needs are being met.


Consider:

the cross versus the flag.


the holy book versus the Constitution.

[TwistOneUp]

2. More pro-religion propaganda. nt

[guillaumeb]

4. Feel free to elaborate. eom

[TwistOneUp]

5. No. nt

[guillaumeb]

6. OK..nt

[trotsky]

27. You got it.

The OP has repeatedly tried to link patriotism/nationalism etc. with actual religion, in an attempt to absolve religion from the horrible things done by its adherents.

Meanwhile, when someone religious does something good, then religion gets full credit.

It's dishonest, deceitful, disingenuous, and despicable.

[TwistOneUp]

30. Yes

And that's the mark of someone that really *doesn't* believe and is asking others to help assuage their doubts.

Sorry,, OP, no belief assistance here. Perhaps try The Lounge; it's my understanding that is the traditional DU forum for humor.

[Voltaire2]

7. Ok. So what?

At least here in the US “civil religion” is about as abhorrent as any other form. Mindless nationalism, god blathering, etc.

[guillaumeb]

10. Many use both types of "religion" as an excuse for what they want to do.

Most do not.

Perhaps the next question would be, how do we eliminate the tendency to dominate that is used by some adherents of both systems?

[Eko]

8. How is this different than nationalism?

[guillaumeb]

11. My view is that both "religions" are tools.

Any tool can be misused.

And each tool is a unifying element for the tribe.

[Eko]

14. No,

How is this different than nationalism?

[guillaumeb]

16. It is the same human impulse,

manifested, and often misused, in different terms.

My view.

[Eko]

17. It sounds like someone took the term nationalism

and decided to call it civic religion. If that's not the case how is it different?

[guillaumeb]

19. I think that the terms describe the same function and behavior.

And the similarities are not surprising.

[Eko]

20. Well then,

One might as well call football a religion since there are millions that "venerate" it on Sundays and follow their "tribes" and are against the "other".

[guillaumeb]

21. Football is stylized war.

War is a sacrament for warriors.

Good call.

[Eko]

22. Millions of people bought Brittany Spears albums

Went to her shows, followed her spats, hated her enemies, listened to her words all the time and dressed like her. I guess Brittany Spears is a religion also.

[The Genealogist]

23. We needn't even go back that far

Look at the Trump cult. They have their ceremonial garb (MAGA hats). They have their cultic chants ("LOCK HER UP&quot . They have their high priests (Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, etc). They even have their own religious network to preach the Trump gospel (FAUX).

[Eko]

24. Yup, Dumps a religion also. Good point.

[guillaumeb]

33. That is a reflection of their musical sophistication. eom

[Eko]

36. Well now,

If millions of people believe in it and its a best seller than it must be good.

[guillaumeb]

37. I agree that it might be a best seller.

And those who like it consider it to be good music.

[Eko]

25. Not sure where you were going with this.

I thought is was not even possible but you are pushing me even more away from religion. Brittany Spears, Nationalism, Dump, Football, I want no part of any of that madness.

[TwistOneUp]

31. It isn't. nt

[MineralMan]

9. Robert Bellah again?

I'll pass. He and his "civil religion" were great favorites of another poster in the past.

[The Genealogist]

12. What is your point? Who is denying the existence of such a thing?

We can't even buy a loaf of bread with cash without being slapped across the face with God.

[guillaumeb]

13. That religion in all of its forms is everpresent.

And it serves a purpose.

[The Genealogist]

15. Yes, social control being one of the purposes, and American civil religion is no different

Watch what happens to the person who fails to say the Pledge of Allegiance or stand up during the national anthem. It isn't pretty.

[guillaumeb]

18. A certain former NFL quarterback comes to mind. eom

[Act_of_Reparation]

29. Is-Ought

Read your Hume, sir.

[TwistOneUp]

32. Yeah, religion does "serve a purpose"

The purpose: humor! HAHAHAHA Remember laughing? Reading all those old books that contradict themselves and are touted as "ways to live" is a hoot! Take this one example:

"Thou shall not kill", but "if someone works on the Sabbath, kill them".

Consistency in action! lol

[erronis]

26. What about the US tax code and separation of powers?

I don't understand much of the argument/presentation in the OP but it seems obvious to me that the US has a concept of religion embedded into its laws and rules.

There are exemptions for religious organizations including property taxes, income taxes, adherence to labor and safety rules. Not too long ago I think polygamy was allowed altho perhaps not codified.

I may have joined a non-religious church at some point and for $10 I could have been ordained a minister. I really like the Pastafarians since I absolutely love marinara sauce with good semolina spaghetti.

My view, obviously, is that religion/churches is a way to get folks in line, tithe their dues, vote for the self-anointed leaders.

[guillaumeb]

34. 501(c)3 organizations have guidlelines.

If they violate these legal guidelines, the IRS should sanction them.

But this rarely happens.

[trotsky]

28. "responses generally denied that any such argument could be made"

False. That is a completely false statement.

What's been argued is that while there are elements in common, such a "civil religion" is missing critical elements that make it different than religions like Christianity or Islam.

You have ignored all points contrary to yours, slamming the people who bring them up as being members of a "choir" who don't think for themselves and are merely following someone else's direction. You smear them as following a fictional "11th commandment" that you made up, robbing them of their self-determination and individuality.

Why do you persist in doing this? Why do you attack and demonize?

You've never explained.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=304549

[guillaumeb]

35. An easy one to answer:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218304845

[trotsky]

38. Nope, further proof that you are repeating falsehoods.

You keep trying, and keep failing.

When are you going to show us what a Christian is supposed to behave like?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=304549

[MineralMan]

39. What is your point, guy, in linking to my thread?

Explain yourself, please.

[guillaumeb]

40. Why do you persist in your demonstrated behavior?

A behavior exhibited since at least 2014?

[trotsky]

41. Because I don't like you.

I really, really don't like you because you defend religious privilege.

I really, really, really don't like you because you blast everyone who disagrees with you as being part of a "choir" or following a stupid "commandment", thus robbing them of their own thoughts and individuality for the sake of propping yourself and your horrible stances up.

Others I have engaged in this "demonstrated behavior" with are now banned from DU for being disruptors. You always seem to leave that part off.

In conclusion,
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=304549

[guillaumeb]

42. You do not have to "like" me.

And I do not like your tactics. But that has nothing to do with arguing actual points, and having actual dialogue.

[trotsky]

43. "Actual dialogue" coming from you would be a genuine and welcome surprise.

You won't answer a simple, straightforward question.

You scream "mis-framing" or "choir" or "11th commandment".

You abuse, gaslight, and project.

You engage in whataboutism.

I don't think you'd recognize "actual dialog" if it bit you in the ass.

[guillaumeb]

44. When you misframe,

I will note it.

And again, post one example from the article of apologia for abuse. You cannot, because it is not there.

[trotsky]

45. Now you're mixing up your threads.

If you want to discuss why you support exceptions for clergy when it comes to mandatory reporting laws, I'd be happy to do so anywhere, even on this thread.

But that's not the topic here.