All religions are, by definition, cults. It is like that.
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025
462 points (98.1% liked)
196
5595 readers
898 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
Also, when sharing art (comics etc.) please credit the creators.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Religions are just cults with better PR.
Yeah, came here to say that major religions are by definition successful cults.
But you don’t have to “respect their beliefs.” We should not respect beliefs more than any other opinion or ideology. Religions and beliefs should have to defend their point of view as much as any other political or social constructs. The “that’s just my belief” statement should not be allowed to shut down debate. That mindset enables their hypocrisy and delusion.
The weird, liberal "respect politics" seeps easily into progressive/leftist ideology but they shouldn't be connected. In America at least, liberal identity politics has really corrupted progressive action.
And no, I don't mean advocating for the rights of marginalized groups, I am talking about the idea we have in our heads in leftist spaces that we're somehow supposed to be the tolerant, passive, "intellectual" side. While wearing Che Guevara shirts.
it was the end of the line as soon as religions moved out of basic "don't be a dick or you gonna be struck by lightning" lane into political domain. You can respect historical Jesus but hoo boy it is hard to respect any iteration of Christian church and their symbiosis with state institutions and crime. These guys are hyporcrites. Like there's a russian orthodox church that literally celebrates war and approves violence against Ukrainians. I don't think that how christianity works but they probably know better.
You can respect the cultural aspect of a religion without respecting the "facts" it claims.
Yes all the wonderful cultural aspects! Like the inquisition, book burnings, destruction of local temples, and changing their story to fit better into all the new conquered territories 🤷♂️
The cultural impact of any religion is mass control.
You can, I guess. Culture is shaped by beliefs significantly tho. Dumb beliefs often result in dumb culture.
Dunno, I like the idea of meeting up with my neighbours in my local community once a week, singing in harmony with them, and then arranging small community projects to better the area
(I'm obviously skipping over the judgement of others, the financing, the general right-wing narratives that are peddled, the power structures and the abuse that comes with it)
I'm not religious, so the closest thing I have is volunteering at my local park once a week and working alongside a few of my locals, and though it's nice and we're definitely doing a universal good for the area... I just wish there were more people to actually make it feel like a proper community
I was speaking with a colleague in the US, and he mentioned that he was brought up Mormon (and thankfully escaped), but he missed the community aspect of it and so he joined a Unitarian church, which as far as I understand it brings all the community benefits of church groups but basically ignores any bible preaching. It sounds nice.
I have given up on that. I will respect individuals who follow the buffoonery unless they give me reason not to, sure, but I will never respect a book that says I should be stoned to death, and the surrounding culture that such a book is about love and acceptance.
"Be kind to individuals, but ruthless to institutions." ~ Michael Brooks I think this is useful advice in general, but especially in this case.
What if "respecting the buffoonery" is the real cult?
Join today and become a tankie! Religious freedom is the opium for the masses!
But you don't have to respect it
Fucking Baader-Meinhof Effect, I was just thinking about that!
If music idols can have their own jets and villas people think it's cool, why can't they have their own religious cults!?
They do have their own religious cults. Fame is a cult like no other.
Jared Leto has a cult island, iirc.
You do not have to pretend. Speak the truth, find a way to integrate them into reality.
I learned a long time ago that no, you don't have to respect those beliefs.
You have to respect the person's right to have them. Nothing more.
I am free and protected to tell people their religion is stupid, but I still respect their right to believe their stupid religion freely.
While I generally agree with you, it's important to draw the line when these beliefs become dangerous and harmful to others.
If people believe they should wear silly hats because their religion commands them to, they are welcome to. I don't respect that belief, but I respect their right to hold it.
Refusing to get vaccination for your kids however... I don't think I have to even respect the right to that belief.
You're absolutely right that it's not a black or white line. Vaccinations are a perfect example of that.
I tend to follow the rule of, and I honestly think it's the prime directive, is "You're right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins". You can believe whatever you want, up until it affects others or public safety is involved.
You don't believe school zones should have a 30km speed limit. Great...more power to you...but you still have to obey the law because it puts others at risk. You freedom is your freedom to believe stupid things, not to act on them.
You don't believe seatbelts save lives. You're free to bitch about it private to your family and friends and make their lives miserable with your rants. But you still have to follow the law.
As far as I'm concerned, Vaccines are the same. You're free to believe they don't work. But if the preponderance of evidence is against you, and public safety is concerned, you're right ends with bitching about it. But you still have to do it because it involves the safety of others.
Can you imagine a world where a whole group of people could up and say "We don't believe it red lights...it's against our individual rights to not stop at intersections..." ?
The idea of the social contract where whe agree to live with certain limitations and rules in order to keep others safe and enjoy the auspices of things like medical care, infrastructure, stability and the pursuit of happiness, is a long held concept. It's only in recent years where (especially in the U.S.) it's been replaced with the attitude of "fuck you as long as I take care of myself."
That's the original definition of meme.
a slice of fried Dawkins
No thanks.
What's the difference in a cult and a religion?
2000 years.
Well it took 300 years between Jesus allegedly being around and the emperor Constantine promoting it as the dominant religion. So way shorter than 2000.
A lot less. The mormons are rich enough to buy an army now and they were founded in 1830.
They had the unique position to snatch up a state nobody (accepting the natives) really wanted. They settled on a salt lake. It's a miracle they survived. (This isn't pro Mormon, it's just wild that they survived).
The way they tell it, yes. Plans to occupy that area were afoot a few years before Joseph Smith was extra-judicially punished for his crimes in Illinois. It is a wild tale for sure.
Plenty of white folks saw the value in that area decades before this, mostly mining companies. They just needed a bunch of sincere hard-working schmucks to build the infrastructure. Brigham Young was happy to provide them.
The Mexican-American war had just broken out when the rank-and-file were re-consolidating in Council Bluffs, Iowa after Joesph was murdered for the crime of becoming a mask-off kiddie-fiddling tyrant.
Brigham happily leased about 500 men to the federal government for a Mormon Battalion to go secure the port of San Diego. He negotiated an exception to military uniform requirements so the ~$50/man uniform allowance could go into a general fund for the larger group to migrate west. $50k cash provided Brigham much needed liquid capital for his territorial schemes. The church was already land-rich at that point, but cash money was limiting. The battalion never saw any action, so it was regarded as a successful gambit.
The poor ordinary Mormons experienced crushing poverty for many years after settlement, it’s true. As usual, the sweet, sincere believers in things beyond themselves were used so the inner circle could accumulate more worldly wealth.
You know all those places they were chased out of? You bet your bippy that days before things got nasty, agents of the church left town with boxes of deeds to all that cheap frontier land that was sure to soar in value over the years.
It is no coincidence that in that same era, Brigham received revelation that we were yet un-worthy of the full blessings of the communistic lifestyle they originally aspired to.
Yeah, a wild ride.
But still pretty dumb.
That was a neat little history lesson, thanks!
I don’t have to respect people for their beliefs.
Some people believe vaccines cause autism. Their beliefs are stupid and actively dangerous to society, and I will call them on that shit.
That would be so nice. We'd actually have a nice public transport system everywhere if vaccine caused autism.
How DARE you not respect the obvious stupidity of others??!?!
I heard that the act of comparing two things immediately gives the lesser of those two things some validity simply because they are being compared. I didn't believe it at the time, but I sure do now.
Case in point: vaccines cause autism vs no that's fucking stupid.
Somehow we all thought it was fucking moronic, but now we live in a world where it is somehow NOT immediately dismissed as bullshit.
Is it wrong to hope for a nearby nuclear disaster? Seems less painful than current conditions.
You can have respect for somebody's right to hold whatever beliefs they please. But that doesn't mean you have to respect the nonsense.
Exactly how rude is it to ask “Do you guys actually belief those obviously false and absurd things or are you just trying to maliciously gaslight me?” ? It gives the benefit of the doubt of Hanlon’s Razor.
People can believe whatever they like as long as it stays in their head
As soon as their beliefs start negatively impacting anyone or anything, that's when we have a problem
The problem with most belief systems is that people want a tribe that believes what they believe, so they naturally spread like a disease.
As a quasi-religious person who also cares about things like scientific accuracy, whether things cause suffering, and like, basic feet-to-the-ground truths; no the fuck I will not pretend about that shit. If your beliefs cause harm I will challenge them.
I have equal disdain for every religion. There is no worse disease plaguing the human race.
How dare you talk to our god and savior flying spaghetti monster like that!
If you don't obey our religion, you will... actually... still go to heaven with stripper factories and beer volcanos. Flying spaghetti monster loves you no matter what
R'amen!
Y'all might get a pass, but only cause y'all not tryna stick your noodles in my business.
I like the spaghettios. That's a fun religion
Um, we prefer Pastafarians, but thanks.
spaghettios are the cool pastafarians
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›