Meme

[llcoolvad]

The Belief-o-Matic meme

(I think one and two are reversed, honestly)

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Secular Humanism (98%)
3. Liberal Quakers (88%)
4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (82%)
5. Nontheist (72%)
6. Theravada Buddhism (70%)
7. Neo-Pagan (64%)
8. Bahá'í Faith (55%)
9. New Age (49%)
10. Taoism (47%)
11. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (46%)
12. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (43%)
13. Orthodox Quaker (42%)
14. Mahayana Buddhism (40%)
15. Reform Judaism (40%)
16. Jehovah's Witness (36%)
17. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (33%)
18. New Thought (33%)
19. Jainism (30%)
20. Sikhism (29%)
21. Scientology (27%)
22. Seventh Day Adventist (20%)
23. Hinduism (18%)
24. Eastern Orthodox (16%)
25. Islam (16%)
26. Orthodox Judaism (16%)
27. Roman Catholic (16%)

http://beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html

OK, *** SOOOO *** not accurate that I match more stuff in Mormon, Scientologist, or Christian Scientist faiths than in Jewish or Roman Catholic. And Jehovah's Witness? Seventh Day Adventist? This is all just filler. I'm an atheist, people. Secular Humanist. I'll take the UU, that's fine. The Quakers, Nontheists, also fine. Anything crazy? Not fine! No sacred undergarments. No thetans. No "clear". I don't know what Jainism is. I always think of Baha'i as flaky 60s-leftover faith. I like holidays, so there is no Witness here (or wait, is that the Adventists? feh!). Stupid test!

When your test starts out and asks what is the number of the deity and you say "No God or supreme force" shouldn't the test filter out belief systems that include gods? Foo.

Comments

[llcoolvad.livejournal.com]

my tendency to go all "Hello trees! Hello sky!" when faced with the natural world

Ha! This made me actually laugh out loud.

I guess I could follow that part of Jainism to some extent -- except mosquitos. There must be a clause about mosquitos. No one could possibly suffer them to live.

I'd like to think of myself as a highly-moral non-theist, if I'd actually thought of it in those terms before. I had a discussion with a work friend about a year ago about religion, and she asked me something along the lines of "without religion, why would anyone be good?" and I replied "why wouldn't they? I mean, I believe that this life is all you get. So why wouldn't I want everyone to have a good time?" She was a bit flummoxed, I think. She said "so you really believe that starving orphans in Africa are just going to die, and that's it? No heaven? That's pretty awful!" and I said "Why yes, it IS pretty awful, isn't it?! Doesn't that mean we need to do as much as we can to improve lives everywhere? Rather than just writing it off and saying "oh, how terrible, but at least they'll get their eternal reward!"

She's still unconvinced, of course. Which is fine. But I think she understands my position a little better. It's like you say "atheist" and people hear "anarchist" and visualize cities burning.

[kicking-k.livejournal.com]

Yes, I agree - and at the moment when you say "Christian", many people have a tendency to hear "fundamentalist". It's a struggle!

As I see it, atheists of your (and my husband's) stamp are certainly more morally laudable than people like me, who can't quite shake off the idea that it must all sort itself out hereafter. It's the Devil's Disciple worldview - that true goodness is not self-interested, and if you act morally without believing you'll be rewarded for it, that's less self-interested (and therefore more worthy) than acting morally in the belief that you'll be rewarded in heaven (or even on earth, I suppose). (Oh, dear, Shaw put this all so much better.)

I'm sorry to say that "Hello trees! Hello sky!" was a misquotation of "hello clouds! hello sky!", and not original to me.