# Is it possible for religion to be a "private matter"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 21, 2003, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009 "2003-09-21T17:42:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/41 "2003-09-24T20:32:34Z")
[Moderator Hat ON] TVAA, do NOT call your fellow posters “foolish one”, and you should not be “belittling” posters. Attack the post, not the poster. Blink, if you see an instance of what you believe is trolling, please report it to the mods, don’t call the poster a troll in the thread. [Moderator Hat OFF] ---
**Author:** ![TVAA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c57346/32.png) [@TVAA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVAA)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/42 "2003-09-25T01:03:41Z")
Objection: What is the difference between attacking a person, attacking that person’s beliefs, attacking the person’s ideas about their beliefs, and attacking their expression of their ideas about their beliefs? No matter what, any criticism will inevitably (and correctly) be interpreted as an attack on the posters themselves. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Asbestos\_Mango](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@The\_Asbestos\_Mango](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Asbestos_Mango)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/43 "2003-09-25T01:37:06Z")
> [@](#): > > I hate to call you on this Thea, but that’s hardly non-sarcastic or on topic, is it? Why, how dare you, you new to the boards and daring to criticize me poster you… I outta say really mean things to you and hurt your feelings, you whippersnapper. [sub] Your point is well taken. I will do penance by spending a frightening amount of time watching the Hampsterdance site’s dancing hamsters.[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![TVAA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c57346/32.png) [@TVAA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVAA)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/44 "2003-09-25T12:02:45Z")
Returning to the OP: This “energy work”, if it’s anything like the general “healing energy” fads, has absolutely nothing in it which is genuinely objectionable to actual Catholic sensibilities. It doesn’t involve the invocation of spirits or entities to bring about healing. (I wonder how **Thea** interprets Native American rituals, but that’s another thread altogether.) If it doesn’t work, then it’s objectionable because it’s pseudoscientific claptrap, but it’s utterly harmless. Again, **Thea** has no reason to complain. If it works, which I find extremely unlikely, **Thea** _still_ has no reason to object. By definition, she’s not working with the occult, because she’s merely working with a phenomenon she doesn’t currently understand. **Thea** doesn’t understand high-energy particle physics, either, yet she doesn’t suggest that particle physicists are occultists. Why? Merely because she hasn’t been trained to react to them in that way. This thread is nothing but knee-jerk false piety. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/45 "2003-09-25T14:49:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TVAA \* > \*\*But **Thea** ’s problem, stated in her OP, is not an example of such a case [of religious faith rubbing up against secular responsibilities]. I strongly suspect that such “energy work” is complete and utter rubbish, but there’s not actually anything in it that truly contradicts **Thea** ’s beliefs. There are no invocations of sentient, spiritual powers that presumably would be demons. There aren’t any otherwise evil acts that contradict her moral beliefs. She’s reflexively rejecting something she’s not familiar with. > > There are quite a few people who claim that meditation and exercise/martial arts like tai chi invite demons into the body. This is no different from the people who used to claim that midwives cast evil spells. \*\* And again, this is wholly irrelevant to the OP. We can sit here and dicker around about whether certain spiritual beliefs are actually contradictory to **Thea** ’s religious worldview, but that avoids the larger question **Thea** proposed for debate. Is “energy work” incompatible with the Catholic belief? Who cares? The point behind the example is not to explore the contours of what spiritual invocations are and are not acceptable to practicing Catholics, but rather to discuss the intersection of one’s privately held beliefs with one’s real-world responsibilities. The issue **Thea** seeks to resolve is not a reconcilation of “energy work” with her Catholicism, but rather a balancing of her own belief system with aspects of her daily life that may require her participation in things she (rightly or wrongly) finds incompatible with her particular faith. The “energy work” stuff was actually only a small part of **Thea** ’s OP. She included other examples as well, such as certain job requirements for waitstaff and policemen and dietary restriction’s impact on company dinners. I’m not particularly bothered by a good hijack every now and again, but let’s not pretend this little side trip of yours is anything but that. You are simply wrong when you say **Thea** ’s OP was not appropriate for a form dedicated to reasoned debate. Her OP asked a question very different from the one you are trying to answer, and it is a question worthy of discussion. ---
**Author:** ![TVAA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c57346/32.png) [@TVAA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVAA)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/46 "2003-09-25T15:21:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dewey Cheatem Undhow \* > \*\*The point behind the example is not to explore the contours of what spiritual invocations are and are not acceptable to practicing Catholics, but rather to discuss the intersection of one’s privately held beliefs with one’s real-world responsibilities. The issue **Thea** seeks to resolve is not a reconcilation of “energy work” with her Catholicism, but rather a balancing of her own belief system with aspects of her daily life that may require her participation in things she (rightly or wrongly) finds incompatible with her particular faith. \*\* But that is precisely my point. Truth is universal. It transcends belief systems of all kinds. **Thea** ’s purpose in taking the class is to learn how to treat a specific type of injury or condition. Whether rightly or wrongly, this “energy work” is taught as a vital part of doing just that. If this contradicts **Thea** ’s religious beliefs, she can drop out. She has no more right to complain than a devout Hindu seeking work at a cattle slaughterhouse. Now, if she can present a reasoned case that this therapy doesn’t actually work, she can appeal to the universal nature of truth to justifiably object to the necessity of learning the therapy. Her personal beliefs are just that – personal – and have no power over anyone but her. If **Thea** is not concerned with the validity of this treatment, she has no case. She has no reason to object; her religion prevents her from following this career path. If she objects on objective grounds, she might have a point, but her objections this far are irrelevant. ---
**Author:** ![Fatwater\_Fewl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/4491bb/32.png) [@Fatwater\_Fewl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fatwater_Fewl)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/47 "2003-09-25T16:51:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TVAA \* > \*\*\*\* But that is precisely my point. > > Truth is universal. It transcends belief systems of all kinds. Sure, the _universe_ can be defined as the Ultimate Truth and as such would transcend all kinds of belief systems. But such a broad definition is of no help to **Thea** in the _particulars_ of applying her belief system and finding a balance between private and public expression of it. > [@](#): > > **Thea** ’s purpose in taking the class is to learn how to treat a specific type of injury or condition. According to the OP, Thea is taking massage therapy. I did not know that massage therapy was limited to a specific type of injury or condition. AFAIK some people go to massage therapists for the sheer pleasure of the experience and aftermath. > [@](#): > > Whether rightly or wrongly, this “energy work” is taught as a vital part of doing just that. It might help everyone if you read with more care, **TVAA**. Responding to a **kalhoun** post, Thea said: > [@](#): > > Actually, “energy work” is not taugt as part of the curriculum. This is a community college. There are, however, a few students in the class who have experiene doing energy work, and the subject does come up in class from time to time. ---
**Author:** ![TVAA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c57346/32.png) [@TVAA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVAA)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/48 "2003-09-25T17:26:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Fatwater Fewl \* > \*\*According to the OP, Thea is taking massage therapy. I did not know that massage therapy was limited to a specific type of injury or condition. AFAIK some people go to massage therapists for the sheer pleasure of the experience and aftermath. \*\* That seems rather an abuse of the therapy. Opiates are used to treat extreme pain, but I’m told that people take them for the sheer pleasure of the experience. > [@](#): > > \*\*It might help everyone if you read with more care, **TVAA**. Responding to a **kalhoun** post, Thea said: \*\* Then there’s really no problem, is there? So, is “energy work” being taught, or at least taught _about_ in class or not? If it’s discussed in class as a valid technique, all my objections to **Thea** ’s position apply. If it’s not, she has no reason to complain in the first place. Problem solved. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Asbestos\_Mango](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@The\_Asbestos\_Mango](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Asbestos_Mango)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/49 "2003-09-25T17:37:29Z")
Actually, IMV, it doesn’t really matter if you’re invoking Lord Hunk-Ra or your own Inner Bloody Awful Poet (or just sayig “Om”, for that matter). It’s the intentional manipulation of psychic energy that I have a problem with. > [@](#): > > Thea doesn’t understand high-energy particle physics, either, yet she doesn’t suggest that particle physicists are occultists. Why? Merely because she hasn’t been trained to react to them in that way I leave the questions of quantum mechanics to my cat, Schrodinger. ---
**Author:** ![TVAA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c57346/32.png) [@TVAA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVAA)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/50 "2003-09-25T17:46:14Z")
So you’re against the Mass, then? And prayer. Don’t forget prayer. ---
**Author:** ![CrazyCatLady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dfb087/32.png) [@CrazyCatLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrazyCatLady)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/51 "2003-09-25T19:31:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Thea Logica \* > \*\*I leave the questions of quantum mechanics to my cat, Schrodinger. \*\* Forgive me if I’ve been whooshed, but is that supposed to be some kind of proof of your knowledge of quantum physics? If so, it’s a piss-poor one. I mean, my cat’s named Eponine, but that doesn’t exactly mean I know much about the works of Victor Hugo, or even about _Les Miserables_, you know? As for the OP, I think that it depends on how you define “private.” If you mean that it will never in any way affect anything you do outside the church or your own home, then the answer is obviously no. Your personal system of ethics will affect the decisions you make and the way you act in public. One’s religion might, for instance, prompt one to volunteer at a shelter, or to give money or food to a panhandler. It might lead one to be kind and gentle and forgiving to others who have committed some offense. If by “private” you mean not deliberately drawing attention to one’s religion in public, then I think that’s quite possible. In most instances, it’s quite possible to follow a belief system without jumping up and down yelling “Look at me! Look at me! I’m a (religion of your choice)!” I have worked with plenty of folks who managed this over the years, from those who simply told interviewers that they were not available to work on certain days (no explanation given or requested), to those who simply said, “Thank you, but I don’t eat meat/pork/catfish/beef,” or “I’d prefer not to take part in that, but thank you for offering.” As long as it didn’t affect job performance, it was a non-issue. In instances where their beliefs actively interfered with their ability to do a given job, one of four things happened. Either a) they anticipated such situations and did not apply for those jobs b)they discussed the matter with the interviewer before accepting those jobs and worked something out c)they discussed it with the interviewer and were not offered the job or d)they got fired for performance-related reasons. After all, an ER doc doesn’t get to pick and choose which patients he treats. If you’re unwilling to treat certain patients, you can’t do the job, and your ass is out the door. A firefighter doesn’t get to pick and choose which fires he puts out. If you’re unwilling to put out fires at certain places, you can’t do the job, and your ass is out the door. And a cop doesn’t get to pick and choose which citizens he protects. If you’re unwilling to protect certain citizens, you can’t do the job, and your ass is out the door. It doesn’t matter _why_ you aren’t willing to do the job you were hired for, the fact that you aren’t doing it is adequate grounds for firing. I don’t know the full story about the Jehovah’s Witness who was fired after not singing to a customer, so I can’t really comment on it. After all, it’s perfectly possible that she got mad and threw a full plate at the manager’s head when he told her to go sing or had some other perfectly valid grounds for dismissal. I cannot imagine a catering person not making sure there were vegetarian options at a company function, given the growing number of vegetarians in the country. It’s not always a religious thing, either, as I know several atheist veggies, and one or two who just don’t digest meat well and a few who eat veggie because they’re trying to lose a little weight. As for the “energy work” in your class, I suspect that, since the curriculum didn’t include it, your particpation (or not) wouldn’t have come up in the first place. And if it did, all you really would have had to say was that you felt uncomfortable participating and the matter would likely have been dropped. There’s no need to go around saying, “Oh, I can’t do that because I’m a [insert religion].” It’s really quite enough to just say, “I’m sorry, but I can’t do that.” If someone presses for an explanation, _then_ you can bring up your religion. Before that point, it’s pretty much unnecessary. ---
**Author:** ![Fatwater\_Fewl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/4491bb/32.png) [@Fatwater\_Fewl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fatwater_Fewl)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/52 "2003-09-25T20:36:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TVAA \* > That seems rather an abuse of the therapy. Opiates are used to treat extreme pain, but I’m told that people take them for the sheer pleasure of the experience. From the [Consumers’ Guide to Therapeutic Massage & Bodywork](http://www.ncbtmb.com/consumers_guide.htm) found on the National Certification Board for Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork: > [@](#): > > Whatever their need - pain relief, rehabilitation, **relaxation** , or physical or mental rejuvenation - consumers know that Nationally Certified practitioners will provide quality, professional service. [bolding mine] Apparently, the comparison to opiates is invalid. 😛 > [@](#): > > So, is “energy work” being taught, or at least taught _about_ in class or not? > > If it’s discussed in class as a valid technique, all my objections to **Thea** ’s position apply. If it’s not, she has no reason to complain in the first place. > > Problem solved. If it comes up in class, Thea will have to decide whether the principles by which she professes to live require her to make her opinion on the topic known. Faith is a funny thing. Some people feel they have to proselytize about religion. Some people feel they have to proselytize about about science. Say what you want about the relative merits of the two. But examine the proselytizing of both. ---
**Author:** ![TVAA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c57346/32.png) [@TVAA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVAA)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/53 "2003-09-25T22:04:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Fatwater Fewl \* > \*\*Apparently, the comparison to opiates is invalid. 😛 \*\* So it is. How does that joke end? “Madam, we’ve already established what you are, now we’re just haggling over the price.” > [@](#): > > \*\*If it comes up in class, Thea will have to decide whether the principles by which she professes to live require her to make her opinion on the topic known. \*\* No, she’ll be forced to recognize whether those principles require her to make her opinion known, and then she’ll have to decide whether to follow them. > [@](#): > > \*\*Faith is a funny thing. Some people feel they have to proselytize about religion. Some people feel they have to proselytize about about science. \*\* There is no god but Truth, and Science is its prophet. Nah, it’s not catchy enough. How about “Science! Obey it or be vaporized by 1920’s-style death rays!”? ---
**Author:** ![SnoopyFan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d07c76/32.png) [@SnoopyFan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnoopyFan)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2003, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/54 "2003-09-26T00:44:00Z")
**How about “Science! Obey it or be vaporized by 1920’s-style death rays!”?** Who would want to follow a god that changed its mind all the time? ---
**Author:** ![TVAA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c57346/32.png) [@TVAA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVAA)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2003, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/55 "2003-09-26T01:23:48Z")
Did I mention the 1920’s-style death rays? ---
**Author:** ![Fatwater\_Fewl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/4491bb/32.png) [@Fatwater\_Fewl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fatwater_Fewl)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2003, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009/56 "2003-09-26T07:52:08Z")
1920’s-style Death Race? Is David Carradine that old? **TVAA** > [@](#): > > No, she’ll be forced to recognize whether those principles require her to make her opinion known, and then she’ll have to decide whether to follow them. I thought that was implicit in “professes”. But yes, I agree. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-religion-to-be-a-private-matter/203009.md?page=2)