Mike Dulak grew up Catholic in Southern California, but by his teen years, he began skipping Mass and driving straight to the shore to play guitar, watch the waves and enjoy the beauty of the morning. “And it felt more spiritual than any time I set foot in a church,” he recalled.

Nothing has changed that view in the ensuing decades.

“Most religions are there to control people and get money from them,” said Dulak, now 76, of Rocheport, Missouri. He also cited sex abuse scandals in Catholic and Southern Baptist churches. “I can’t buy into that,” he said.

  • paddirn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    123
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t mind people going to Church and practicing their religion, as long as they stay in their lanes and they’re not trying to force their religious beliefs on everybody else. Trying to better yourself and your community is great, there’s a ton of really nice people out there who go to Church and are just all around good people. It’s all the assholes that think their belief trumps everyone else’s rights that need to eat shit.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      76
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not minding your own business is pretty much why Europeans settled North America…

      The Pilgrims love to say they escaped persecution, but really they were far right extremists who were all pissed off most of Europe wouldn’t follow their strict rules.

      So they came to America and started pumping out as many kids as possible. With the goal to become the majority so they could force everyone to follow their rules.

      We’re worse off because there’s no more “empty” land to send them all too. If we ever colonize another planet, it’s 100% going to be extremists overwhelmingly signing up to go first. Until then, we’re stuck with them.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        None of my family were pilgrims. I don’t think you can just ignore the tens of millions of immigrants from Europe who weren’t pilgrims

        • vonbaronhans@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          40
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I think their point is that the pilgrims set the cultural precedents for what would later become America, to which later immigrants would be beholden.

          I don’t know how true that is, but I think “protestant work ethic” is at least one example of that sort of thing.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Would they have came here if the pilgrims didn’t first?

          Like, not just “would they have wanted to” but would the Native population have repopulated the shoreline by then and repelled any settlers like they did the vikings?

          The pilgrims were successful at gaining a foothold because they showed up in a place and time the local population had mostly just died off from sickness and the survivors initially helped the pilgrims.

          50 years later, even 20 or 10 years later and it would be a different story.

          • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            1 year ago

            The Pilgrims didn’t come here first (of the Europeans). They were beaten by multiple different European groups.

            Like, not just “would they have wanted to” but would the Native population have repopulated the shoreline by then and repelled any settlers like they did the vikings?

            I don’t know. Why don’t you ask the French traders that came before or the Spanish pushing upwards from the entire continent they had control over?

            The pilgrims were successful at gaining a foothold because they showed up in a place and time the local population had mostly just died off from sickness and the survivors initially helped the pilgrims.

            Not relevant to your argument. Also I am fairly confident you are mixing up the Pilgrims and the Purtains. But hey facts don’t matter anymore so believe whatever you want.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              When you make comments like that, people stop trying to help you…

              Although I’ve noticed a trend where people like you assume they “win” when the other person gives up helping you. Just a heads up that’s not what it means.

    • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Staying in your lane” is the exact opposite of what Christians and Muslims are explicitly ordered to do. Convert acquisition is the primary objective of both faiths.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The Bible says if a family member considers another religion (or you just suspect they are) it’s your duty to God to kill them before it spreads to other people in your family.

        It’s why ill never trust the people who claim they have to follow the bible literally. Either they don’t know what it says, or they’re absolute psychos.

        Edit:

        https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy 13:6-10&version=KJV

        6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

        7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

        8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

        9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

        10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage

        • Konala Koala@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well, I heard somewhere that it is written in the bible that those who scorn the bible will be visited by apocalypse, fire, earthquake, and flood which will obliterate your cities, but for those who believe in the bible will save themselves and find true redemption.

          And I also heard somewhere it may have also stated in the Bible that the power and the greatness of God cannot be denied. Those who reject the Path to enlightenment must be destroyed.

        • M0ty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It talks to Jews in ancient Israel about gods of nations that surrounded them.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Oh…

            So some of it is outdated and we shouldn’t follow the bible literally?

            I already don’t, you better go tell the Christians to shut the fuck up about LGBTQ…

            • M0ty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Good job on discovering dispensationalism. About LGBT, there isn’t a single place in Bible, old or new testament where isn’t put in a positive light

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                About LGBT, there isn’t a single place in Bible, old or new testament where isn’t put in a positive light

                It’s hard to tell what you were trying to say, but any attempt to clarify that is going to make it really easy to point out how wrong you are.

                So I don’t expect you to even try

                Btw:

                For anyone wondering what “dispensationalism” means, it’s a thing Christians invented so they can ignore the parts of the bible that they don’t agree with. While saying the parts they do believe in are the literal words of God and have to be followed.

                It’s a shitty cop out

              • SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                About LGBT, there isn’t a single place in Bible, old or new testament where isn’t put in a positive light

                That’s just simple not true.

                In the old testament it says that all homosexuals must be killed, and in the new testament that homosexuals cannot go to heaven.

                How is that a positive light?

      • electrogamerman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly this.

        Dont forget the part about having as many children as possible and convert them too.

        There is no religion telling their servants to love their children even if they are not religious.

    • kromem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly while I get that the whole “you do you” mantra is the politically appropriate line these days…

      No, I’m fucking not ok with people practicing their religions.

      I’m really not ok with people telling their children that it’s not only possible for dead bodies to get back up and float up into the sky, but that it 100% happened and is the only reason they aren’t going to suffer eternally.

      I’ll not ok with getting together to talk about how men are inherently better than women and that it was fine that an old dude raped a 9 year old because she was mature for her age.

      I’m not ok with passing along the instructions that who your parents were defines an appropriate social caste for the rest of your life based on the supposed mechanics of resurrection.

      These are not appropriate things for a modern society, and honestly I’m tired of pretending that it is fine.

      Yes, I think the right to have the government not interfere in religion is important, but that’s a separate issue from whether or not I’m ‘fine’ with the superstitions from an age when people peed on their hands to clean them continuing to be given a social pass purely out of respect for ancestral tradition.

    • electrogamerman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The thing is the whole purpose of religion is to force beliefs into others to attract them into the religion and make them pay money. THAT’S LITERALLY WHY RELIGIONS WERE INVENTED.

      There is no “Im religious but I let other live their lifes.” They are constantly being told to invite friends and family to convert them and to have 10 children, so the children can be converted too.