Some ::MIGHTY FIST SHAKING:: stories for you all

[trinityvixen]

I'd rather go to any and every Hell than go to Mormon heaven. (h/t newredshoes)

Seriously, Mormons: knock that shit off. You're officially on notice that if you try to baptize any more people posthumously, against their will, I will dig up Joseph Smith's corpse and stomp it into little bits, which I will then feed to a pig, whose shit I will then press into communion wafers and sell to you. You want to eat your ancestors, go ahead. Leave everyone else's the fuck alone.

Note to Judeo-Christianity: All your religions are as stupid as this one.

If you don't want your park littered with religiosity, DON'T START BY PUTTING THAT SHIT THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. They can't have a leg to stand on, right? Even Evil!SCOTUS as we currently have must recognize that this is bullshit...right?

Goodbye Southern Strategy?

I doubt it. These things go in cycles, and we'll have maybe forty years of progressive policies if the trends are to be believed, and then the South will have a resurgence. (It always rises again, as we know.) It won't be white, though it will probably still be conservative. However, if we are so blessed as to have even four years of not having to listen to Suh-thuh-ners dictate how the rest of us are going to hell for not hating people and loving Jeebus enough, that's a welcome relief.

Comments

[slackwench.livejournal.com]

I actually have no idea. I just see it as the same question, basically.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

There's not really any rhyme or reason for why one religion waxes or wanes. Even when you have huge numbers (Hinduism, Buddhism), you might have geographical isolation coming into play. Or evangelism makes up what you don't have in numbers. Who knows?

[ivy03.livejournal.com]

There's not really any rhyme or reason for why one religion waxes or wanes.
As a merely academic point--not true. Setting aside things like empires spreading them, one of the reasons Judaism and Christianity spread initially was because they fostered a community and created social support for taking care of the poor. (As opposed to the other religions in that time period which offered no such thing.)

...Of course, this isn't really the point you're making here, but even if you're an atheist, religion isn't completely random.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

There's also the fact that dominant religions took over the habits and ceremonies of the indigenous religions.

So, no, there is a reason, it's just not always easy to predict which will be more effective than others.

[wellgull.livejournal.com]

Buddhism managed to traverse some pretty impressive geographical isolation -- it crossed the Himalayas and the Gobi and Taklamakan deserts by 200 CE.

I think the deciding factor is, as you say, how heavily a given religion evangelizes. Judaism has so few adherents today relative to Christianity because it doesn't try to convert people; while Islam and Mormonism are two of the fastest-growing religious groups currently because they're very, VERY serious about missionary work and about ensuring discipline among the faithful in areas where they already hold sway.