Posted by:
scmd
(
)
Date: September 16, 2017 10:53PM
badassadam Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not me i fear cults way more than anything the
> government could mustar up but i am pretty scarred
> so.
Perhaps you will always have the greatest fear for what scarred you personally. I don't know. If you were to look more deeply into totalitarian governments, you might come to a realization that allowing a government to make faith-based decisions is ultimately far scarier than allowing someone to choose to join up with an organization that some would consider to be a cult. Except with regard to the most extreme of cults, the application of the label of "cult" will always be a judgment call. A religion to some is a cult to others, and vice versa.
It is my belief that a government can never fully protect the individuals it purports to govern from their own foolishness, from their own gullibility, or even totally from their own vulnerability. Some people as adults have greater ability to look out for themselves than do others. What can be done about that? Not a hell of a lot can be done. We cannot have a two-tiered or multi-tiered system of freedom that grants greater powers of choice and greater liberty to individuals perceived by ranking against measurement of some arbitrary criteria as being higher functioning than are others. The result of freedom is that some individuals ARE going to do themselves in by being overly vulnerable, gullible, or foolish. It's a harsh reality, but it is a reality under our government's foundational document, the U.S. Constitution, and, specifically, the first amendment to said constitution which, among other things, specifies that congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. It would seem that the founding fathers may have recognized that our system of government was in some cases going to err on one side or the other, and their conscious choice was to err on the side of liberty for individuals. Undoubtedly there are individuals who have lived or are presently living within the borders of the U.S. who would have been or would be better served by less liberty and by a more totalitarian structure, but because the rights must be equal to all who haven't given up their liberty by violating laws, for the common good, everyone here who has not forfeited his or her rights has liberty at least to the extent that it does not infringe or encroach upon the liberty of another. With that liberty comes the right to use it to one's own detriment.
No one escapes childhood 100% unscathed. Some parents are abusive. Some are neglectful. Some force religion onto their children to the extent that their children ultimately resent it and in some cases go on to reject any and all forms of organized religion. Others teach their children, either by example or by non-parenting, to be essentially lawless. Between the two extremes are probably a million variations, in part because there is no perfect way to parent with regard to religion or non-religion, and because we're always going to resent what was inflicted upon us in particular.
I am luckier than most in this regard. For me, the parenting wasn't all that bad as I recall it; what my parents did to their offspring is primarily, in my view, the religious equivalent of having allowed us to reach adulthood still believing in the Tooth Fairy and the Romper Room teacher's magic mirror. They facilitated my siblings and me reaching the age of majority still believing in a story that strains the bonds of credulity for any rationally thinking person. I didn't suffer any real abuse from my parents in the name of the church. Others, I understand, were not so fortunate.
I recognize that this is easier for me to say or do than it is for others who survived harsher childhoods than I did. Still, somewhere down the line, a person has to decide either to sink or to swim in this world of adulthood in which we live. What was done to Don, for example, was abhorrent. Most of us, including Don, would probably agree upon that, Yet Don, while continuing to deal with the issues in his own way probably to this day, has gone on to mature and to lead a full life. Don has advocated against anyone raising their children as he was raised, but even he doesn't seem to be wholly comfortable with legislation aimed at banning cult practices. (Forgive me, Don, if I've misconstrued anything you've said.)
Everyone who grew up in this cultish religion or in any other must decided for himself or herself how best to deal with the fallout. Still, one of the worst effects of having been an adherent to an extreme faith is that personal liberties and agency were handed over to a third party, in our case being the COJCOLDS. What you're proposing is to take those personal liberties and agency and hand them to another third party, which is the government. That cannot end well.
Finally, I fully acknowledge that this is far easier for me to say or do than for some others here , and neither can it happen quickly or easily for everyone, but somewhere along the way, each of us needs to come to terms with the effects of this cult-like religion on our early lives, even if the end result were something so devastating as the loss of family to the church, to the extent that we are able to grow up and to function fully as adults. Forever continuing to claim the persona of victims is not helping us, especially if we're seeing the taking of our personal liberties with regard to religion and handing them over to a government [that is not doing particularly well with upholding its present responsibilities, let alone adding exponentially to its powers] as the solution to our problems.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/16/2017 11:02PM by scmd.