2 girls at the same time.

Two tenants

1. You must protect those weaker than you
2. You may only punch up or in self defense.

Smoking weed to resolve differences

honestly I don’t know. When you look at the religions of the world all of them say “love and help each other please :) be good to your fellow human beings, be kind, be gentle” and then you look at the execution of those ideas by the majority of religious people- and it’s all twisted and used for hate & you see people saying that without the threat of eternal punishment there is nothing holding them back from hurting others

instead of religion forcing compassion I’d say we should just teach compassion really

Probably a deist one. One where it says that God have left us, because he wanted that we need to go forwards without his guidance, and it’s the only way to have more civilized society, especially given how bed-time stories don’t have much to do with today’s reality.

Gods do not exist and find your way through science and technology.

Oh, and if I’m mortally wounded, definitely do not put me in a machine and sacrifice thousands of psychics to keep me alive.

And remember, Gods don’t exist! Definitely don’t be a heretic or an alien!

It literally doesn’t matter. Religions have tried before, but people are always there to corrupt the hell out of it. It’s an intrinsic problem with religion; relying on blind faith will always, eventually, lead to tragedy.

I’ve actually put a lot of thought into this lately, what with the most recent schism in The Satanic Temple.

The seven tenets are great. I’d keep those.

I would start with the understanding that it was an atheistic religion, and I would treat it as such. I would write a constitution, and a charter, and any group that agrees with and meets the requirements laid out in the constitution should be allowed to affiliate themselves. It should be organized as a non-profit.

I like the way that TST’s ministry program worked before Doug threw most of the ministers out. I’d steal that. I would amend the process slightly though; I’d say that any person with a diagnosed personality disorder would not be eligible for ministerial positions, as narcissists, people with borderline personality disorder, etc., should not ever be in leadership positions. I would say that any person that successfully completes the ministerial program should be eligible to be a leader of a congregation, and people that have not passed would not be.

I would propose that the congregations send representatives to a national (or international) convention where they decide what the organization’s position should be on issues–I believe that it takes two majority votes in the SBC over a period of four (?) years for major doctrinal changes, or changes to the constitution–and those representatives would also select board members, who would in turn select a president. (I’d have terms of board members be offset so that there was never a period where a large percentage of the board was turning over.) Fundamentally, the church should be run by the people, and should be serving the congregants, rather than the congregants serving the organization.

I believe that yes, members and congregations should be paying in to the national organization, but no person within the organization should be getting paid for their work. I don’t care if it’s a collection, a set amount per person per week, or what; operating a religion requires funding. That said, the only compensation to anyone within the org should be minimal travel expenses for people that need to travel for their position; otherwise, it should be entirely a lay ministry. (Yes, that would be a financial hardship for some ministers, but I’d rather see that than have people seeking leadership for the financial benefit.) Finances should be fully transparent, and visible to all members, so that everyone can see where money is coming in from, and where money is going.

I also like the Mormon model of fully engaging all members. As long as it’s not onerous, I think that this can help individuals feel seen and heard, and also keep them feeling like a part of community. I would do things like have each members selected in turn to deliver brief biweekly sermons, with sources, and then have members in each congregation engage in a roundtable discussion about the sermon. You would want to have the possibility of sub-groups within each congregation so that different needs of individual members could be taken care of.

I made some notes somewhere, but I’m not sure where they are right now.

singing

Buddhism is effectively a “how to” guide to satisfaction , it just goes against everything corporations preach. To be fair, I’m not strong enough to be a Buddhist, but of the religions I’ve studied, it seems pretty open and shut, “follow these instructions and you will have a good life”. Buddhism wins. But it doesn’t involve parties and such

Tak does not require we think of him, only that we think.

• Terry Pratchett, Thud!

Discworld in general has a ton of good quotes, but Thud! is especially full of relevant ones, being about religious extremists warring against inconvenient truths.

Ask questions. Evidence trumps all. Oh and I guess be nice.

But at that point it’s effectively antithetical to anything religion is. Like the actual teachings of Jesus in the Bible are mostly good to live by. But because 90% of Christians (or other religions/pick a sect) never actually read the Bible, the actual religion in practice is a lot of preachers spreading their own shit or whatever the hierarchy says. And the core concept is to ignore reality and blindly trust the impossible.

I don’t think there is a religion that can be overwhelmingly beneficial today.

Most religions already emphasize kindness, generosity and compassion but it is ultimately easily corruptable. Every religious group seemingly has to hate somebody.

Long ago it would have imperative to human development, to explain the world around us and to motivate people to work cooperatively. Science has fulfilled that role however and now it seems religion makes individuals closer minded, refusing to believe in reason.

If religious people sternly stuck to their principles (looking at American Christians) I don’t even think we’d be having this conversation in the first place.

Nothing is True Everything is Permitted

Origin

This idiomatic expression originates from Friedrich Nietzsche, the famous philosopher who wrote the phrase in his 1859 book, “The Geneology of Morals.” However, Nietzsche attributes the phrase’s origin to Hassan-i-Sabbah, the leader of the historical Assassins. This sect was a part of Isma’ili and Shia Islam. However, there is no verified proof of these claims.

Maybe not the best source https://english-grammar-lessons.com/nothing-is-true-everything-is-permitted-meaning/

“Blessings to the Future Generations” forward-thinking traditions rather than handicapping the now to fit the past’s biases