|
Freethought
Association of West Michigan
Meeting Minutes for April 10, 2002, #113
Don Hansen
got the ball rolling regarding small group gatherings in personal
homes, on non-meeting dates. He volunteered to host the first
one at his Jenison home on Wednesday, April 17, at 7:30PM. This
will be a free-form discussion time with no assigned topic. Incidentally,
this is how the Freethought Association first began; 5 or 6 people
meeting at Don's house for informal talk from a non-theistic standpoint.
For directions or further information contact Don at #(616) 662-
9326. Don is also willing to mail out maps to his home for those
with a definite interest in attending this kick-off small group
meeting.
Upcoming events
and topics (including updated changes!): APRIL 24, '02, @ 7PM
at our regular meeting location. Our first special guest presenter,
Roger Greeley, will talk on the subject: "Secularism is the
Religion of Humanity." Greeley is a noted author on freethought
topics and a former minister at the UU People's Church of Kalamazoo.
He gave a talk on the life of freethought orator, Robert Ingersoll,
to our group a couple years back. Plan on attending and inviting
others to this special program.
APRIL 27,
'02 (Saturday), @ 10AM. We will be participating in the Adopt-A-Highway
program, meeting at the Citgo station on Plainfield between 5
Mile and E. Beltline. The more participation, the faster and more
enjoyably- spent the time goes.
MAY 8, '02
@ 7PM: "Meditation for Heretics" to be presented by
long time member and Buddhist, Steve Anderson.
MAY 22, '02
@ 7PM: THERE IS NO regularly- scheduled meeting at the Yankee
Clipper Library on this evening. HOWEVER, those interested are
invited to gather at Kurly's Korner at 740 Michigan, NE, west
of Fuller- toward downtown G.R., for social time.
JUNE 12, '02 @ 7PM. "What is Secular Humanism?" will
be presented by Dr. Paul Kurtz, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy
at the State University of New York. Dr. Kurtz, author of 21 books
primarily on religious criticism and secular humanism, founder
and chairman of CSICOP (that scientifically investigates claims
of the paranormal), the Council for Secular Humanism, Prometheus
Books (a publishing house of freethought and thought- provoking
controversial books) and editor-in-chief of Free Inquiry Magazine,
will be teleconferencing with us via 'phone link. There will be
a microphone to be used for the Q&A portion of the presentation.
This former co-president of IHEU (International Humanist and Ethical
Union), BA, MA and PhD holding Fellow of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science, and the Humanist Laureate and
President of the International Academy of Humanism is a very special
guest speaker and not one to miss!
Our topic
for this meeting was "Cults and Religion; A Question of Continuum
or Context?" It was presented by Dr. Gregory Forbes, PhD,
Professor of Zoology and director of the Michigan Scientific Evolution
Education Initiative, the Science Education Center and the Institute
for Evolution Education. Dr. Forbes, a long- time member of our
group, is a popular presenter and always offers engaging topics.
This one was no exception. Before launching into the main outline
of this topic, Dr. Forbes talked briefly about issues of science
and religion that he is often immersed in, due to his work on
education in the area made controversial by religious fundamentalism-evolution.
He spoke in this regard of how science is sometimes termed a religion,
and then making the distinction between the approach and methodology
of these two disparate spheres of human activity.
Related to
his prefacing remarks was how varied and numerous are the products
of religion and the objects of worship therein. This is illustrated
in the book he mentioned, An Encyclopedia of the Gods, that features
some 2,500 separate deities that have been or are actively worshipped
now. When one worships and believes in the Judeo-Christian Bible
God (as one example), s/he is therefore negating the other 2,499
candidates for praise and proselytizing. This characteristic of
placing all of one's faith on one small piece of interpretation
of one body of writing, or on one deity over all others, manifests
itself in not only the numerous religions, but also the splinter
sects and less orthodox/ approved cults.
Dr. Forbes
took us through "Cult Infamy" relating some of the more
heinous cult activities that have reached popular awareness since
the late 1970's. One of these from March, 2000 (Uganda) was The
Movement for the Resurrection of the Ten Commandments of God cult.
The horrible outcome of this group's activity was the death of
530 members. As Forbes noted, this should serve as a wake up call
to those who are now so actively involved in wedging the 10 Commandments
in public schools as a panacea for all societal ills. Others mentioned
included the Order of the Solar Temple that intended its members
to go to the planet Sirius, but instead 5 went to their deaths
in '97 and 16 more in '95, with an additional 48 preceding them
in '94. We talked of the Heaven's Gate deaths, the Branch Davidians
in '93, where 80 died, including 18 children. This group, properly
called the Order of the Seven Seals, still exists. Others included
a group in Tijuana, Mexico taking 12 member's lives in '90 and
the Jonestown Massacre of '78, where a staggering 900 members
of the People's Temple follow cult leader Jim Jones' instruction
to kill themselves in Guyana.
We next turned
to why we should care about cults. Reasons given for concern by
family members of cult participants are the following: the potential
for injury or death of members, their loss of material wealth,
their loss of "free will" or freedom of movement, and
the diminishment of the rights of others. Following this list,
Greg broke us up into small groups and gave each group a paper
with a term that we were to get a definition for. He wanted us
to do this exercise to get past the "I can't define it, but
know it when I see it" approach that so often goes with thinking
on these matters. Some of the terms we defined within our groups
were "church", "sect", "cult", "religion",
"new religious movement (NRM)", and "brainwashing."
When we turned to definitions given of these same terms but by
more authoritative sources, Forbes noted that much of what we
noted was mirrored in these sources. Dr. Forbes gave us the historical
background to the concept of brainwashing and further noted that
there is no empirical data to support this as a real phenomenon.
If one is susceptible to or already prone to making large mental
shifts, then the indoctrination methods of a cult might prevail
for those individuals.
After examining
the ways that concepts such as "cult" and "church"
etc. are viewed, we reflected on where these members of a "conceptual
family" might exist on a continuum. Where do we draw the
line as to when a cult becomes a sect, or becomes a religion?
How arbitrary are these decisions? Greg showed us a graph with
a pathway showing "cult" at the bottom, leading up to
"church" as it is seen as more accepted and orthodox,
then when specific tenets or interpretations or charismatic leaders
emerge and take hold of sufficient interest within the religion,
"sects" emerge, which then lead up to "denominations"
as they become more orthodox and accepted. This progression is
often based on the survivability over time of the splinter group
or non-mainstream faith. We noted some groups that were designated
freely as "cults" at one time that now have "church"
or "church of" in their title and how this no longer
seems jarring. They have survived over time and gained credibility.
The aforementioned graph showed a zig- zag line as beliefs and
practices went in and out of larger levels of acceptance and perceived
orthodoxy. It was discussed how the term "cult" is almost
always used in a derogatory fashion by those in the larger, more
mainstream faith groups. Those within what are disparagingly termed
cults rarely label themselves in that manner.
We next turned
to what Dr. Forbes (in a Jeff Foxworthy fashion) titled "You
Might Be in a Cult If…" This gave a checklist that one
could hold up various groups against and see how they compared
and contrasted to what a cult is deemed to be. This list contained
the following items: The group is focused on a living leader to
whom members seem to display excessively zealous, unquestioning
commitment. The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members
or similarly preoccupied with making money. Questioning, doubt,
and dissent are discouraged or even punished. Mind-numbing techniques
are used to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members
should think, act, feel, dress, discipline children, marry, etc.
The group is elitist (special exalted status for a few) and/or
is polarized in an "us vs. them" mentality. The group's
leadership is not accountable to any authority. The group teaches
(explicitly or implicitly) that its supposedly exalted ends justify
means that members would have considered unethical before joining
the group. The leadership induces guilt feelings in members in
order to exert control over them. Members' subservience to the
group causes them to cut ties with family and friends and to give
up personal goals and activities that were previously of interest
to them. Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of
time to the group. Members are encouraged or required to live
and socialize with only other group members. During this recitation
of examples of what are seen as cult-like practices, we examined
various mainstream religious denominations, the military, the
government, large corporations and even the Freethought Association
in the light of this list.
Dr. Forbes
provided a summary of cult/sect characteristics. This included
them being leader(s) centered -with zealous, unquestioning allegiance
to the leader(s); an exploitive aspect (economic, sexual, behavioral),
operating using coercive persuasion tactics and subterfuge, limiting
freedom of movement and communication, time constraints, etc.,
and the idea of doctrine over person-the doctrine of the group
is more important than the person and it may not be questioned.
At this time we compared/contrasted secular groups with religious
ones and it was noted that in Maoist China there was an allegiance
of the type noted above to a leader but it was free of deification
or the supernatural. Other examples were noted in this vein as
well.
We discussed
the difference between Counter-cult groups and Anti-cult groups.
The former focus on doctrinal differences between new religious
movements and established religions. The opposition is theological,
with the goal being to dissuade potential converts, unify the
faithful, and contain or destroy the "minions of heresy."
The latter focus on techniques or modes of influence used to recruit
and maintain converts. Their opposition is to subterfuge-the techniques
of influence and try to de-program converts and gain public awareness
of activities within the cult.
We looked
at why cults form and what common and different aspects of humankind,
cult membership fulfills. We also examined to what degree cults
differ from established religions or even if they do. Again, we
thought about conceptual families along the possible continuum
of a given group's make-up. And we, again, looked at the contextual
issues influencing our designation of something being, say, a
cult or sect or religious denomination. There was a question raised
as to how cult phenomena differ in other countries. Dr. Forbes
indicated that it is primarily a U.S export, though once inserted
into another country, the attributes of that country and culture
influence the shape of the cults. He compared it to Creationism,
which is similarly a chiefly American phenomenon. It was mentioned
that Humanism is sometimes termed by non-humanists a religion,
and that these concepts are further intermingled by those who
term themselves "Religious Humanists." One distinguishing
element noted between religious groups and secular humanists is
the former relying on moral authority while the other examines
ethical values. It was brought up that our country's founders
strove for a peaceful coexistence between religion and secular
society.
It was interesting
to evaluate many different entities, both the obvious and the
less- expected ones, against the "checklist" of cult
characteristics. Sometimes there are surprising results. Dr. Forbes
asked about personal comfort levels in this exercise---if something
we held to be valid and valuable personally looked to be about
50% similar to a cult, how would we feel? What about 60%? Would
we re-label or re-examine or put it out of mind?
Secretary:
Charles LaRue
|
