 |
Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments.
Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
|
|
|
|
39 members (Andre Fadel, BWV846, Animisha, alexcomoda, benkeys, Burkhard, 20/20 Vision, 11 invisible),
1,180
guests, and
317
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 410
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 410 |
It's kind of silly to imagine that "the media" somehow are the reason that people don't think of "fundamentalist" in some strict religious formulation. The word itself invites anyone who sees it to interpret it on the fly. Root word plus "ist" - how common a formula is that, anyway?
I guess what I object to about the use of the word fundamentalist in the media is that I feel it is used by people who do not believe in God to imply that people who believe in the fundamental beliefs of their faith are generally out killing and persecuting people. I have never seen a reference Mother Theresa that called her a fundamentalist, although all she did was motivated by her fundamentalist faith. Fundamentalist beliefs are not necessarily evil, they can be good and charitable, but they always seem to be referred to as evil in the media. Even the usage of the word by people in this thread seems to me to be entirely negative. I use the term religious fundamentalist to describe those individuals who believe their ancient writings in a very literal sense. It's been my experience that those with a literal approach to those ancient texts tend to be extremely conservative in their views especially towards the equality of women and gay rights. (They also seem to believe that the Earth is thousands of years old and not billions of years old and have an aversion to Darwinian evolution. I recently read the book The Devil in Dover by Lauri Lebo about the introduction of Intelligent Design by the Dover, PA school board after watching a NOVA documentary, Intelligent Design on Trial.) While I have read works by Christopher Hitchens, I have not read The Missionary Position, his exposé on Mother Teresa. He was not charitable.  A Wiki summary of that book can be seen here. Exactly. A "fundamentalist" is one who takes literally the texts of their particular religion. A Christian believing that all the events depicted actually happened i.e. Adam and Eve, Noah, The resurrection etc. I have not read the Koran, but what I have heard is that there are, at points at least, places where it explicitly admonishes followers to be violent against non-believers or their transgressions, and that is what terrorists are using as their justifications for violence- hence Islamic Fundamentalist
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 9,395
9000 Post Club Member
|
|
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 9,395 |
If the school system, INVITES YOU to play there, and this school system does just that, presents an invitation and then approves and/or accepts you to play there, and YOU then, accept the invitation to play here, then, you agree to abide by the rules of the Christian school system.
Whether or not anyone in here believes in GOD matters little. The point is that the school itself does and prays according to their beliefs.
That person always has the choice not to play... They have the choice to decline the invitation... This person chose to accept it.
The school was not being insensitive? They were and are abiding by their own belief's. Just become someone doesn't believe in God they are being insensitive to one that does not? How about reversing that? Being insensitive to someone that does believe in God by bashing them in anyway? A Christian has just as much right to believing as anyone in here does in not believing.
The school didn't invite Tao, it is just another of the Gilmore venues, which is a secular piano series. Several of the other Gilmore venues are churches, as well as secular halls. Do all of the churches also have a opening prayer for the concert? If there are some, do they all thank their god for the performer's talent, regardless of the performer's own beliefs? I would bet that if there are some who do open with a prayer, it is likely that at least some of the people giving the prayer who have enough thoughtfulness to give thanks in a different way, a way that doesn't describe the performer's talent as a product of their own religious beliefs. By the way, don't assume anything about what I personally may believe - it not part of my online identity here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 9,395
9000 Post Club Member
|
|
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 9,395 |
It's kind of silly to imagine that "the media" somehow are the reason that people don't think of "fundamentalist" in some strict religious formulation. The word itself invites anyone who sees it to interpret it on the fly. Root word plus "ist" - how common a formula is that, anyway?
I guess what I object to about the use of the word fundamentalist in the media is that I feel it is used by people who do not believe in God to imply that people who believe in the fundamental beliefs of their faith are generally out killing and persecuting people. I have never seen a reference Mother Theresa that called her a fundamentalist, although all she did was motivated by her fundamentalist faith. Fundamentalist beliefs are not necessarily evil, they can be good and charitable, but they always seem to be referred to as evil in the media. Even the usage of the word by people in this thread seems to me to be entirely negative. I think to a certain extent you are seeing what you want to see in "the media". There are plenty of instances in which the word is used in a neutral way, too, to identify people who see themselves as fundamentalists. But here is something to think about: people use the term in everyday life, and often enough, it is in negative ways based on their own experiences and observations. And that is not something "the media" made up, nor is it necessarily a result of some prejudice. The one person I know who is the most scathing on the subject of the "fundies", as he calls them, is a Christian.
Last edited by wr; 05/16/12 08:32 PM. Reason: Add last sentence
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,828
6000 Post Club Member
|
|
6000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,828 |
I would not expect any religious organization to change their way of doing anything for the belief of any non believer or for fear of offending someone. It is their church, their property and their right to do as they wish while that person is in their building. In the same way our government separates church verses state, taking away religious freedom as they see fit in their buildings, taking away prayer in the public school systems, the religious organization has the same rights to do as they wish on their premises. Prayer being a part of it. Calvin is no different here.
In some way or another the school invites or allows, whoever plays there. Whether that be through Gilmore or some other venue.
Jerry Groot RPT Piano Technicians Guild Grand Rapids, Michigan www.grootpiano.comWe love to play BF2.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 9,395
9000 Post Club Member
|
|
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 9,395 |
I would not expect any religious organization to change their way of doing anything for the belief of any non believer or for fear of offending someone. It is their church, their property and their right to do as they wish while that person is in their building. In the same way our government separates church verses state, taking away religious freedom as they see fit in their buildings, taking away prayer in the public school systems, the religious organization has the same rights to do as they wish on their premises. Prayer being a part of it. Calvin is no different here.
In some way or another the school invites or allows, whoever plays there. Whether that be through Gilmore or some other venue.
Gilmore isn't a venue, the school is. Anyway, if the issue were anything as cut-and-dried as you seem to think it it, this thread would never have been started. As it is, it is one of the longer ones in recent memory.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 999
500 Post Club Member
|
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 999 |
I would not expect any religious organization to change their way of doing anything for the belief of any non believer or for fear of offending someone. It is their church, their property and their right to do as they wish while that person is in their building. In the same way our government separates church verses state, taking away religious freedom as they see fit in their buildings, taking away prayer in the public school systems, the religious organization has the same rights to do as they wish on their premises. Prayer being a part of it. Calvin is no different here.
In some way or another the school invites or allows, whoever plays there. Whether that be through Gilmore or some other venue.
I don't believe anyone on this thread contested the organization's legal right to have prayers said. Rather, it's a question of etiquette.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,828
6000 Post Club Member
|
|
6000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,828 |
Keeps you active anyway, doesn't it? Etiquette smettique.  People were complaining here and there about being offended. Thus my post about their rights too.
Jerry Groot RPT Piano Technicians Guild Grand Rapids, Michigan www.grootpiano.comWe love to play BF2.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 410
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 410 |
You can't judge the existence of higher existence by the religious books man has created. Men naturally have bias, anger, jealousy, etc - and also good traits too. BUT, the negative actions due to "God" on this planet are not due to god, but to human thinking alone. What if there was no religion? Would there be no violence? Hint hint.. there still would be. People would find excuses for it, whatever they may be. I am in total agreement with everything you say here. But you simply cannot ignore the fact that a huge amount of violence and unreason are derived and motivated explicitly from supposedly "sacred" texts. I concede that in a world free of religion there would still be violence, but I don't concede that the violence would be equal to the levels we currently see. If people all of a sudden put down their Bibles and Korans and began studying the works of Plato, Confucius, Hume, Bentham, ect. I find it hard to believe that the violence we see in the world would not be greatly diminished. To quote Sam Harris again: “I know of no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too desirous of evidence in support of their core beliefs.†I am in agreement. Even though there would be less violence without religion, the "sacred texts" are still man's own writing and creation - and shouldn't be used to judge 'god' at all, only man. Philosophers, myself included, look at religion and religious books to be the most juvenile, sorry excuse for evidence of god there is. I don't know if you missed it or you're ignoring it - but I replied to you way up there^^^^^ the one with the "  " at the end. Do you mind taking a look at that and giving me your thoughts? This is absurd. Religious texts are supposed to be the word of god. Do you think man has a problem with dictation? What other evidence are we to have than the texts that are supposed to express his wishes, wants and desires, his plan?
|
|
|
|
Forums43
Topics223,384
Posts3,349,173
Members111,631
| |
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
