This is the kind of crap that makes it easier for non-religious people to feel good about themselves. This opinion piece is filled with suppositions, errors and arrogance. So why republish it? Because I am struck by its tone, its use of language and the effort intended to degrade another’s beliefs. In the name of organized religious. Ironic that the defense uses the very tools that cause the rejection of religion.
Examples follow and the bold italics are mine.
“I’m spiritual, but not religious,” represents some of the most retrogressive aspects of contemporary society“
Those in the spiritual-but-not-religious camp are peddling the notion that by being independent – by choosing an “individual relationship” to some concept of “higher power”, energy, oneness or something-or-other – they are in a deeper, more profound relationship than one that is coerced via a large institution like a church.
The trouble is that “spiritual but not religious” offers no positive exposition or understanding or explanation of a body of belief or set of principles of any kind.
I wanted to reply to Mr. Miller but I didn’t see anywhere to do so on the CNN page. I have a religious practice and I understand issues related to the “pick and choose” notion of spirituality often referred to as New Age. But I guess it is opinions like this that make me rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints.
Yes, a citation to Billy Joel followed by more BJ
“You might have heard I run with a dangerous crowd.
We ain’t too pretty, we ain’t too proud.
We might be laughing a bit too loud,
aw, but that never hurt no one”
We ain’t too pretty, we ain’t too proud.
We might be laughing a bit too loud,
aw, but that never hurt no one”
I do not know Alan Miller. Probably a nice twit but twit he do seem to be.
lawdisorder.blog 