But that's not necessarily a bad thing.

... that they're decent people simply by virtue of attending church or being religious without actually having to go through the bothersome process of actually being decent people, then yeah, that's a bad thing.


And that's incredibly widespread.

Once money and power came on the scene the hucksters,the shysters mingled among the honest men of the cloth. Today the line is so fine you often can't tell one from another.When they can get away with being tax free while they have a "house" that might only be used once or twice a week and rake in the $$$ while never being forced to use it for the flock or the neighborhood you can see where temptation is overwhelming to get on this gravy train. On top of that you have politics creeping in and using the pulpit as a stumping stone and bending the ears of the flock to the point it's either you do it this way or the Van Gogh look will be everywhere!

I would say "no". Religion is politics.

if the IRS would just do there job, things would be much different.

Most clergy who live in parsonages live simply and live there full time. It's hardly a gravy train.

However, the parsonage exception is widely misused by some and I support it's elimination, but there will be consequences that effect some of the neediest among us.

Some pulpits are used as a "stumping stone" for promoting social justice and civil rights. Be careful about throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Beyond the obvious fact that this bishop was acting as a homeless guy, I don't think this is a particularly good example of what is obviously an important question.

It is one I have thought about for many years.

Does Benny Hinn know that his faith healing does not work?

Did Paul and Janice Crouch deliberately fleece their flock in order to gain incredible wealth?

Does Pat Robertson know that he just makes shit up?

I cannot tell what goes on in a person's mind. Nobody can. The only way I can judge a person is by their actions, not their beliefs. In my examples, especially the first two, I firmly think that they are deliberately and consciously deceptive. This should be a crime, and Jimmie Bakker went to prison for the same.

But I think the best way to fight this utter madness is to heap scorn and ridicule on them and do so publicly and with lots of sound and fury.

Likewise for the vast majority of today's Republican Party, who are in the same crowd as the religious fleecers.

I don't care whether they are deliberately acting. It's their behavior that I object to.

Do the religious charlatans believe their own words or not?

There is a large chorus of liberal believers who immediately jump to condemn these people as not being Christians, not being believers. The bigotry contained therein is the implication that to truly be evil, manipulative, greedy, etc. - well, only an atheist can do that. A true believer in god could never be so horrible.

It disturbs me how many people, even here on DU, internalize this logic to such an extent they don't even realize they're perpetuating really old bigotry against non-believers.

So I agree with you - we cannot and will never know what goes on in their minds, and to pretend we do is folly; we can only criticize and address the behavior.

I know many people who I like very much with whom I disagree on a variety of issues. The last thing I worry about is their religious beliefs.

Now if those beliefs, whether feigned or real, spurn them to act poorly, then I have no reservations. Whatever their beliefs, it will not save them from my condemnation.

Thanks for the response.

If someone I knew said to me "I think those damn faggots all need to burn in hell", I'd go take a shower and regard them with disgust from that moment on, avoiding them as completely as possible, whether they ever acted on those beliefs or not. Some things go far beyond the rather amiable "disagree" that you paint here.

My point is, without some action that can be judged, just because some person says they are a Christian, or whatever, I will not judge them on that basis. If they tell me I am going to rot in Hell for eternity, or if they take a stand like you suggest, I would have something to say about that.

As an atheist, I generally do not give a damn if people believe in god(s) or not.

That was my point. Sorry that I didn't make myself clear.

Saying "I believe in God" is just as much an action as saying "I believe that gays are going to Hell". The difference between the two is nothing to do with action, it is to do with the nature of the belief.

I've been puzzling lately over this distinction in types of beliefs because our UU is struggling about inclusion of all religious beliefs. Our official position (stated in our bylaws) is that people of all religious beliefs are welcome. But I don't think that meant to include beliefs like being gay is a sin. Meanwhile there are members who mock a belief in God and basic beliefs of Christianity, both in hallway conversation and also in the presentations of official events. So some of us (me included) are advocating that we should live up to our official welcoming position with regard to belief in God, belief in the Trinity, and similar sorts of beliefs, but at the same time will continue to denounce other beliefs like gays are going to Hell. Somehow all beliefs are not equal but I struggle to explain exactly how and why.

even if I read something of that nature that a person had written somewhere that they had never intended anyone else to see. Just knowing that they held such thoughts, whether or not they ever expressed them openly or acted on them, would repel me from any contact with them.

I'm a struggling, but devout, Christian. You've put into words a concept I've been struggling to get my own head around. We can't know what is going on in their heads. And some times their behaviour can be pretty despicable.

I have a friend who had the misfortune to be locked up in the Federal prison system for a few years after a series of supremely bone-headed business moves that had arson as a grand finale. He was one bad individual. So one day he goes to an Easter Sunday church service in prison, just to break the monotony. A fellow prisoner delivered the sermon. He said it was a passionate, personal, and absolutely beautiful bit of preaching. It changed his life forever. That prisoner delivering the sermon was Jim Bakker. Stripped of the trappings of celebrity, thrown into jail, and publicly humiliated for his excesses he somehow found himself free to be Christian instead of religious. I'm sure there's a lesson in there somewhere for a sinner like me.

We all let our love of things get in the way of doing the "right" thing. Believer, non-believer, we're no different in that respect. And many people will stoop pretty low to get what they think they want and need.

Snake oil is snake oil and the sellers know exactly what it is.

I figure anyone who dons a garment to enact a religious ritual gets that as well as any secular stage actor.

How many thousands of times has 'Hamlet' been done? Is the story true? Who knows.

To some extent, the play's the thing.