Oh this is a hot take that just popped into my mind: by treating "religion" as something that should be kept private, we allow "religion" to be defined by people who refuse to keep it private. The "I'm going to make my religion your problem" crowd. You know the type.

That's not to say that you HAVE to talk about your religion if you don't want to. You are entitled to privacy! And you have the right to choose how much you disclose about your religion, and to whom, and in what context.

But don't let people tell you that you can't/shouldn't have a public side to your religion, if you want one.

@alpine_thistle that makes me think that talking about religion is a lot like talking about either sexuality, or sex in general. Although I can't decide which one is more appropriate comparison, and I feel like there's a some difference.

Either way, there's a component of different people having different comfort levels when talking about it, even when they agree that the topic itself is not negative or shameful in itself.

@annathecrow @alpine_thistle in the US one of the wildest cultural divides I have personally observed two sides of is people's idea of whether sex/religion is publicly appropriate because of *just* how symmetrically mirrored people's opinions are


@annathecrow @alpine_thistle "haha weird but it's good people can express themselves" vs. "it's bad for all of us that they shove this stuff in front of uninvolved people--and think of the children": attitudes toward fursuits with bondage gear or, like, Baptists with signs threatening hellfire.

· · Web · 0 · 0 · 1
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Conventicle of the Lesser Occult Institute

The Conventicle of the Lesser Occult Institute