Most liberal religious system

Tolya · Post by **Tolya** » 2007-01-01 05:25pm

I was inspired by the "oppressive religions" thread into making this one.

So, which religion can we call the most "liberal"? In terms of personal freedom, freedom of expressing thoughts, a religion which would actually promote scientific research and approach instead of stomping it to ground?

I don't suppose there is a religion which actually includes "religious freedom" (since it would not have any sense), but which belief system would you call the most liberal?

Let's leave out purely philosophical systems and instead focus on beliefs that include some kind of a higher power (God, gods, mono or politheistic).

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2007-01-01 05:37pm

Actually, there are religions that advocate religious freedom, the United Unitarians, for instance. They're about as liberal as you could reasonably expect a church to be.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2007-01-01 06:03pm

Buddhism, depending on what flavor and particularly if you go with the Dalai Lama on the issues, is very open minded and completely unopposed to scientific endeavors, nor is it particularly dogmatic. One of its hallmarks is flexibility.

Maraxus · Post by **Maraxus** » 2007-01-01 07:59pm

I'd go with the Universal Unitarian church. In what other religion can you have reverends who are devout atheists?

Battlehymn Republic · Post by **Battlehymn Republic** » 2007-01-01 08:09pm

Jainism, hands down.

Zor · Post by **Zor** » 2007-01-01 08:30pm

I am going to second Bhuddism.

Zor

Sriad · Post by **Sriad** » 2007-01-01 11:38pm

Rye wrote:Actually, there are religions that advocate religious freedom, the United Unitarians, for instance. They're about as liberal as you could reasonably expect a church to be.

Indeed, they're about as open as it is possible for a church TO be.

The Seven Principles of Unitarian Universalism wrote: 1. The inherent worth and dignity of every person.
2. Justice, equity, and compassion in human relations.
3. Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations.
4. A free and responsible search for truth and meaning.
5. The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and society at large.
6. The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all.
7. Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

Sign off on those and you're in.

Cos Dashit · Post by **Cos Dashit** » 2007-01-01 11:50pm

Battlehymn Republic wrote:Jainism, hands down.

Mmm. I fail to see how a religion that does not permit it's followers to harm animals, including insects, liberal. They are also chaste (at least until marriage) and are as least possesive as possible.

I'd have to throw my vote in for Theism. Belief in a higher being, without any rules or regulations.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2007-01-02 05:34pm

I'll throw Wicca out there, even though I don't know much about it.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2007-01-02 05:36pm

Wicked Pilot wrote:I'll throw Wicca out there, even though I don't know much about it.

Isn't Wicca the "do as ye will an it harm none" religion? That's about as liberal as you can get.

Faram · Post by **Faram** » 2007-01-02 05:44pm

Perhaps Satanism,

The Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth

1. Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.
2. Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure they want to hear them.
3. When in another’s lair, show him respect or else do not go there.
4. If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy.
5. Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.
6. Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.
7. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.
8. Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself.
9. Do not harm little children.
10. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.
11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.

Still a dumbass religion, not as harmful as many others but still nothing for me.

I do not belive.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2007-01-02 05:45pm

Surlethe wrote:
Wicked Pilot wrote:I'll throw Wicca out there, even though I don't know much about it.
Isn't Wicca the "do as ye will an it harm none" religion? That's about as liberal as you can get.

Considering how many people who are into Wicca are also into homeopathy and new age medicine and shit like that, I'm not so sure it would fall under the supporting science category.

Invictus ChiKen · Post by **Invictus ChiKen** » 2007-01-02 06:00pm

General Zod wrote:
Surlethe wrote:
Wicked Pilot wrote:I'll throw Wicca out there, even though I don't know much about it.
Isn't Wicca the "do as ye will an it harm none" religion? That's about as liberal as you can get.
Considering how many people who are into Wicca are also into homeopathy and new age medicine and shit like that, I'm not so sure it would fall under the supporting science category.

Depends on the Wiccan really.

Basicly you could sum the faith up as follows:

Honor the God and Goddess,

Observe the Sabbaths and Esbaths (That is fullmoon. Equinox an Eqenox(spelling) and the solstices).

Harm none without a just cause.

Treat others as you'd want to be treated.

An there you have the core of the faith. As I understand it anyway.

Invictus ChiKen · Post by **Invictus ChiKen** » 2007-01-02 06:00pm

Edit: You are free to use all the New Agey medicines you want. But it is HIGHLY recommend to see a good doctor first.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2007-01-02 06:17pm

General Zod wrote:Considering how many people who are into Wicca are also into homeopathy and new age medicine and shit like that, I'm not so sure it would fall under the supporting science category.

A religion pushing the scientific method is like a brewery pushing for prohibition. I think a better standard would be if a religion in procedure and in practice does not push against science.

Mobiboros · Post by **Mobiboros** » 2007-01-02 07:12pm

I'll also vote buddhism.
There is a core set of beliefs but they are completely up to the individual to interpret as best for their life.

Wicca is very open as well, but it depends on which variety.

kheegster · Post by **kheegster** » 2007-01-05 11:41am

The core tenets of Buddhism are generally open-minded, but individual sects often have extremely restrictive moral codes. Even in terms of science, they tend to have their own worldviews and might not be very amenable to the scientific method. My father is a straunch Buddhist, and his views on science often irritate me greatly.

I personally feel that as a organised religion, the western wing of the Anglican Church (i.e that based in the UK and the US Episcopals, and not the nutty African branch) )is probably the most liberal. It's probably the only Christian denomination that has disclaimers on the truthfulness of its own creed.

TithonusSyndrome · Post by **TithonusSyndrome** » 2007-01-05 12:31pm

Isn't Zoroastrocism so incredibly laid-back that the religion's failure to enforce sustained beleif from it's adherents has been the root cause of it's slow descent into obscurity? How much more liberal can you get than "liberalizing" yourself to death?

Losonti Tokash · Post by **Losonti Tokash** » 2007-01-05 04:19pm

TithonusSyndrome wrote:Isn't Zoroastrocism so incredibly laid-back that the religion's failure to enforce sustained beleif from it's adherents has been the root cause of it's slow descent into obscurity? How much more liberal can you get than "liberalizing" yourself to death?

It probably has more to do with the fact that the only way to be a Zoroastrian is if your parents were when you were born. It's not a religion that converts because conversion is against the rules.

Buddhism as I understand it most certainly does support science. Siddhartha told his followers that if science ever contradicted his teachings then they should go with the science.

There's a million different sects though so I don't doubt there's at least one that is anti-science.

kheegster · Post by **kheegster** » 2007-01-06 10:20am

Losonti Tokash wrote:
Buddhism as I understand it most certainly does support science. Siddhartha told his followers that if science ever contradicted his teachings then they should go with the science.

There's a million different sects though so I don't doubt there's at least one that is anti-science.

Buddha can't possibly have told his supporters that because the idea of scientific inquiry and scientists most certainly didn't exist in 800 BC India. The closest they would have had would be philosophers, who nevertheless didn't practise anything remotely approaching science.

You probably got the idea from a quote given by Carl Sagan in Cosmos, where he interviewed the Dalai Lama, and the latter said that if science ever disproves reincarnation, and Buddhism would have to find a way to change its beliefs.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-01-06 10:52am

Any "Scriptural" religion is bound to be more conservative than a religion which lacks such a revered and unchanging document. You can point to specific examples of liberal Christian denominations but they're not guaranteed to maintain this outlook forever by any means.

The very nature of a Scripture-based religion is intrinsically conservative, since it worships a piece of text that cannot ever change. And of course, most Christians don't realize that most of the world's religions have historically lacked a definitive book of holy Scriptures.

Battlehymn Republic · Post by **Battlehymn Republic** » 2007-01-06 03:19pm

That would explain the Abrahamic religions, Hinduism, even Confucianism- but what about Buddhism and Taoism, then? I can't think of any other Scriptural religions, other than things like Scientology.