I’m not big on organized religion (I’m OK with religion, it’s the organized part I don’t like) but I spent enough time in churches in my childhood to know these two verses from the Book of Matthew:
When you pray, don’t be like the hypocrites who love to pray publicly on street corners and in the synagogues where everyone can see them.
and
‘I tell you the truth, when you did it to one of the least of these my brothers and sisters, you were doing it to me!’
I know the whole “prayers” thing is meant as a way of expressing empathy, but when a politician says it and doesn’t do anything to reduce the likelihood of these kinds of things from happening to powerless people, it comes off as sanctimonious, condescending, and completely at odds with the statements of the person their religion is based on. They are not my favorite people in the world and let’s leave it at that.
I gave a +1 to the first question, because that’s just what politicians do when they can’t do anything else. (i.e., immediately following the event.) They give speeches, trying to help calm the community and bring comfort. In the immediate wake of the event, a politician should act a little like a (non-denominational) pastor.
Then, later, when there’s time for legislation, they should step up to the plate and actually protect us. That’s where they’re failing.
For the second question -5. I don’t want some boob of a religionist trying to evangelize on the basis of my tragedy. He can go and take advantage of someone else’s misery; religion is good at that.
I don’t consider it evangelizing. I consider it as someone telling me that they’re sorry for me, that they are thinking of me, and that they wish me the best. It’s just the only way that they know how to express that feeling.
I can deal with that.
Someone evangelizing would be someone telling me that I need to pray. Different subject entirely.
I think we’d be better off without religion, including prayer, so I personally have no problem with the prayer shaming. However most people seem to disagree so it probably causes more harm than good.
You’re a gentleman, that’s what you are. You see a kinder and more sincere effort than (alas) I do.
If someone knows me, and knows I’m a non-believer, and still uses religious language, they’re being offensive and should be scolded for it. If they don’t know me…then why are they making the dangerous presumption of using religious language?
If a co-worker, or distant relative, or friend-of-a-friend suffers a loss, why would anyone be so damned foolish as to say “My prayers are with you” when they should, instead, say something safe and neutral, like, “I’m very sorry for your loss?” Why presume?
But…you’re a better man than I am, I think. (If unclear, I am not being sarcastic or snarky, but sincere.)
But that is my point: that is the only way they know to say something safe and neutral. I just don’t see any reason to reject their concern and care based on the fact that their beliefs differ from mine. I’ll take concern and care from anyone when I need it.
I haven’t noticed that any of my religious relatives or friends have rejected my saying, “I’m thinking of you,” or, “I wish you my best.” Why should I treat them worse than I expect to be treated?
This. People are fed up with “I’m praying for the shooting victims” because nothing else is being done. Prayer without action is just a way to make yourself feel better while you ignore the problem.
I voted +4 for situation B.
As the flipside to Faithfool —ie, a former Christian, now agnostic— I feel the same way about prayer being offered as a personal condolence. It’s that person’s way of expressing their hope that you will get through your loss and their wish that they could do something more for you when they don’t know what else to do. Personally, I would appreciate “you’re in my thoughts” just as much with or without the addition of “and prayers”.
Of course, anyone who knows me well enough to know that I’m agnostic could maybe show a little extra thoughtfulness by taking that into consideration and leaving out the mention of prayer. So, B doesn’t get a full pass.
For situation A, I voted 0.
Like others, I see it mostly as standard boilerplate deserving of little more than an eye-roll. If it’s the only thing the politician has to say, without also giving reassurance of appropriate actions being taken in the wake of the tragedy, then I’d drop the score down to a -2 or -3.
Now if it’s someone who’s actually part of an organization that has in some way contributed to the tragedy, or is actively blocking efforts to prevent such tragedies from happening again, -5!
Such a person is a hypocrite, a scoundrel, and a villain.
May god have no mercy on his soul. May Zeus fry him with lightening. May Cthulhu devour him last. May Satan use him as a suppository.
Is it symmetric, however? For a non-believer to say, “I’m praying for you” means he’s lying. For a believer to say, “I’m sorry” doesn’t require a lie.
Also, if “Our prayers are with you” becomes the standard boiler-plate public commiseration, it puts atheists on an unfair spot. Do they lie, or do they call attention to themselves when that’s not appropriate?
It’s like those boobs who, when you say Happy Holidays, infer a war on Christmas.
The default comment should not be a religious one.
(“May the Lutheran Rite Christian Trinity relieve your sorrow.” “May Saint Abernathy, patron saint of greeting card salesmen, offer you comfort.” “I’ll cut off a chicken’s head in your family’s name tonight.”)
Hate it intensely. The people who say it are invariably assholes who do nothing about the issue, but love getting public credit for praying. Which is very anti-Christian, but what do they care? Buncha hypocrites and Pharisees, the lot of them. Matthew 6:6 is a complete mystery to them.
I guess I am more easy-going than you. If someone says “Merry Christmas” to me, I say “Merry Christmas” back. Same with any other seasonal greetings, I return what I am given. Honestly, when it comes to person to person communication, I just don’t care. (Now, if you want to start an argument about “In God We Trust” on our currency, well, I can go with that.) When it comes to dealing with people in everyday life, I’m pretty laid back. They’re just people, same as me.
I have been offered more prayers recently than someone like me, without religion, can comfortably handle, but I assume that for the religious prayer is a serious matter and that they are offering something real: that is, that after telling me so they really are going to speak aloud or silently an actual entreaty to God (or maybe something else, I don’t know) that they sincerely believe in, to do something good for my deceased daughter or perhaps for me, and that effort is neither empty nor negligible to them And for their good intentions alone I can and do sincerely thank them.
People who pray for light while refusing to pay the electric bill are a different matter.
It sounds like you’ve had some bad experiences with people who used religious language. But for a genuinely religious person, who believes in the efficacy of prayer, to not pray for you would mean they didn’t care (regardless of what you believe about prayer). And by telling you that they’re doing so, they’re trying to let you know that they care, in a way that a lot of people actually appreciate. If it’s tactless of them, I think it’s somewhat the same kind of tactlessness as trying to give a consoling hug or pat on the back to someone who doesn’t like being touched.
Aye, I’ve had some bad experiences, many of the sort where they are making sure they are seen to be offering sympathy. They aren’t doing it to be sympathetic: they’re doing it to gain notice in the eyes of God…and their fellows. The sort of make sure others are watching when they put money in the donation plate. It doesn’t count unless everyone knows.
(Exactly the opposite of what Jesus taught!)
And I will hasten to note that these are only a minority of Christians, and I must not judge the whole of the faith by these bad apples.
Agreed - scored as a zero for me as I don’t care one way or the other.
Halfway agreed. I say thank you and very mildy appreciate the gesture. Someone is trying to be nice, offhandedly or not, simplistic platitude or not. So I’d score it +1. It still means very little to me personally, but eh - a nice comment is a nice comment. People deserve the benefit of the doubt for trying to be nice.
But then I’m the kind that really doesn’t want anyone to do anything for me when I’m bereaved. I’m a bit solitary by nature and often process better being left alone.
What’s missing here is that the “prayer-shaming” that’s being complained about isn’t really shaming ordinary people for praying. It’s shaming political leaders, like Congressmen and Senators, who COULD actually do something about these tragedies and instead merely tweet or Facebook that they’re praying. I don’t CARE if you’re praying! Pray away! But if you can also do something substantive to help stop this goddamn crap and ALL you do is pray, then you should be pointed and laughed at with the utmost prejudice.
I should note that, as an atheist, I find the idea of ordinary people praying for the victims of things to be utterly useless and mostly a sop to the pray-er’s feelings about themselves, but I don’t generally SAY that to the people in question because it’s none of my business.