more more more
nick
i agree that there is a huge misconception with religion and sex, and sadly, from what i have seen, it comes mostly from the religious end.
i'm not speaking about the leaders of different religions (well... okay, the evengicals are a HUGE exception, but they usually are) i speaking of the majority of the population.
i know individuals who are very religious though and think that violence is more socially exceptable, and morally exceptable then sex.
i find this attitude grostesquely disturbing in many ways.
there are individuals who have actually read thier religions policies, and listen to thier church leaders and speak to them, such as yourself, but there are many more who don't.
it's also interesting how different religions views have changed about sex through out thier history, (catholicism being the most changed, as it's the oldest).
some regilgions views have drastically changed, and it's easy to see how, or why.
(especcially when you look at the new testament and the apochryphal writings of the new testament as compared to the old testament).
but i digress,
i personally did know that pope john ii discussed sex, while not a member of the catholic faith or an acolyte there of, i didn't follow all of what he had to say, though i noticed he had a fairly positive spin on the topic.
the same with the current LDS president Hinkley in the mormon faith.
one last thing: wittgenstein would have been making this quote not long after world war one.
there was still a mist of victorian attitudes in the air in europe, particularly in englad (where wittgenstein taught).
nataShA
religion.
what a tricky topic that one, so many people where it on thier sleeves like a rank that it isn't funny.
it's a little funny how it works, too many religions encourage investigation with in the religion but not without.
don't expand your minds.
if you can read contrary material, or see contrary evidence, and have your faith non-shaken. then you can trully believe.
i've written a bit on religion, both in notebooks of various sorts, and papers for school (when i attended such a thing) .
it's a topic i always turn back to.
i listened to an interview on fresh air yesterday by a professor who had just written a book on the mistranlation of the bible, particullarly the new testament.
it seems medieval scholars were making up stuff, or adding stories they had heard from the time
the apostles (if they were the ones who actually wrote it) to the time of... well up to today.
not much is being added (unless you belong to one of the religions that were founded here in the states), but it is being repackaged with a whole modern lingo, which may or may not pull meaning from the words.
i'm also currently reading a book on jesus (see keep coming back to it) called: jesus, a life. it's interesting, the author, once a faithful christian now considers himself an agnostic.
personally, and keep in mind this is me, i think that religion or faith is a private matter.
that being said, who's to judge whether you're hindu, muslim, mormon or wiccan?
none.
i like the quotes from Einstein and Russell that Kevin put up.
one of my favorite quotes on this topic are from the early twentieth century philosopher Wittgenstein.
"Death is not an event in life: we do not live to experience death. If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present. "
"For a truly religious man nothing is tragic."
"Not every religion has to have St. Augustine's attitude to sex. Why even in our culture marriages are celebrated in a church, everyone present knows what is going to happen that night, but that doesn't prevent it being a religious ceremony."
"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent."
righteous cathedral
nick, you didn't do anything, the conversation just sort of tapered off.
it does that from time to time, gives us all a chance to catch our breath.
i've said, at this particular point in time, all that i want to say about both art/theater and the recent production of macbeth in general.
ok, maybe not.
macbeth has been put to bed.
much to my relief.
the show was, well you've read kevins review, and if you haven't then go- he puts it well.
it's nice to be able to focus on something new, and i've got two things with which to focus, the first being the one act unwrap your candy, and the second being picasso at the lapin agile.
the one act is fun. small cast (five) and a general a happy go-lucky cast.
we get along, there's no animosity amoungst us.
that's nice.
and another thing is, i both trust my cast mates and my director.
there's something.
trust in your fellow artists.
man, it's a great feeling to know when you can trust your fellow actors/designers/directors.
the other nice thing about macbeth being finished, is, i feel as if my time is my own again.
even though i have obligations, more rehearsals mainly, i feel like i've got free time.
and more importantly, that i don't have to borrow time from somebody else to have it.
it's a beautiful day today.
to bad it's so damned cold.
and my nose is sore.
