Not My Thing

“What exactly do you mean when you say you’re not religious?” Thomas asked his friend, Sam.

“Just that,” Sam said. “I don’t participate in any organized religion. So don’t you try to foist your faith on me. I’m not interested in going to church with you. It’s not my thing.”

“How can you live a moral life if you don’t embrace God?” Thomas asked. “Don’t you want to see the light? Don’t you want to be saved?”

“Why must you proselytize all the time, Thomas? We’ve been through this game of yours countless times,” Sam said.

“But it’s for your own good, Sam,” Thomas insisted. “I’m just trying to be a good friend”

“You know what? I’m doing fine without all that religious mumbo-jumbo. For me, life is not a race to get to heaven. And if you disagree, you can kiss my ….”

“Whoa!” Thomas interrupted. “Let’s keep this conversation tranquil, shall we?”

“You want tranquility, Thomas?” Sam said, “then you live your life the way you want to and allow me to live mine the way I want to. I won’t disparage your life choices and I ask you to do the same regarding my life choices. Do we have a deal?”

Written for these daily prompts: MMA Storytime (religion/church), Your Daily Word Prompt (foist), The Daily Spur (race), Word of the Day Challenge (kiss), Ragtag Daily Prompt (tranquil), and Fandango’s One-Word Challenge (disparage).

18 thoughts on “Not My Thing

  1. Marleen April 4, 2021 / 11:39 pm

    Yeah. I, myself, am not an Easter person. But if someone said Happy Easter on this (preceding) day, I didn’t get upset at them. There are a few people who seem pretty stubborn or dense to not catch on after years that I’m not an Easter person (and that you don’t “have to” be into Easter to be a thoughtful or moral person). Oh, well.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Fandango April 5, 2021 / 8:17 am

      Every once in a while I wade in dangerous waters.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. abigfatcanofworms April 5, 2021 / 4:28 am

    Grr. I hate that implication that you can’t be moral without God. None of the atheists I know are criminals – legally or morally. But what would I know. 😂😂 I am one. Good story.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. suze hartline April 5, 2021 / 7:34 am

    and there you have it. I’ve had to hear this sort of stuff for years now. I am stealing the last retort…and using it from now on.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Melanie B Cee April 5, 2021 / 7:43 am

    The issue cuts both ways. I’m a believer, but I do not (and never have) been a ‘you MUST believe as I do” person about it. I’ve known atheists who tried to brow beat ME with logic and make me see it their way too though. Respectful is respectful whatever side of the God debate one is on and neither side ought to tolerate those fanatics within their group. Just my opinion.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Marleen April 5, 2021 / 12:03 pm

      And there are people (whether religious, “spiritual” — more like me now — or, rather, not “a believer” in any way, atheist or agnostic or whatever) who assume they know how and what you think or what you believe if you are not agnostic or atheist (in the case of the religious, there is both what they presume to think you believe and what they think you should believe if you believe). That’s probably largely the fault of The Church (imposing everything on people historically whether in church or in marginalized Jewish communities… and so on); doesn’t seem to me that they should get to win in that way (that everyone who has faith is subsumed under them even after we* have stood for freedom not only from slavery but in thought).

      A starting point would be to know history. But, of course, there is a version of history you can learn one place that will be different from another. Certainly, the same thing is so for secular and current history. I would say it is weightier for religious institutions to insist on a particular history (or set of facts), but we now have huge war machines not based in religion (so sets of “facts” are very powerful anyway+). Yet add on eternal destination; that really is heavy. People who are honest about history can come together (and, in some circles, do); such as Catholic and Jewish scholars and others. It’s kind of amazing to me how some can acknowledge actual history and not be affected in any way to personally adjust what they believe.

      I have come to observe that what many people are doing is playing a philosophical game (and not really believing much of anything). As one can study various philosophies and become a philosophical professor while not subscribing to any philosophy or philosophies as representing anything true or even helpful rather than simply fun or useful for manipulation or lucrative (to be employed or more), any person can pick a religion and not take anything seriously while oppressively using the religion or god card… and perhaps resources.

      * The “we” here, to me, is the general society. People of no faith, people of almost no belief (a current form of this is positing we live in a simulation where nothing is real) and of different religions (but more so individuals willing to be skeptical) and varied thought and faith; people with various approaches on science and so on. I once began looking at the wide range, even in standard medicine, of philosophy and approach (it was overwhelming… not only the numerous divisions but how convoluted that could get… and I stopped reading).

      I hope you’ll forgive me, Melanie. Or indulge me, as it were. I got a bit into the moment. I agree with what you said, that it can go both ways. Then, at first, I was mainly going to say what I started with. Now, what I have written is not only a response to you but a general musing instead. Of course, we know these are things than can happen (and happen often), not that everyone does these things. I agree that respectful is respectful. I value conversation.

      + We got into Iraq when we shouldn’t have, is one example. [1] While it may have been mainly for oil, or for increase paid to the military-industrial-complex^ (certain stock on the market), we can recall religious-sounding rhetoric and blame it on religion again. But it is my point of view that such wasn’t (and isn’t) a religious war. It’s all about the money. You can’t love the Creator or the creation and filthy riches. But we might not be able to think those thoughts.

      ^ Reference President Eisenhower

      [1] Now (since before this administration), we’re harassing Venezuela.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Marleen April 5, 2021 / 12:51 pm

        I shared this with one of my sons a few days ago — not because I want him to become Hindu (which might be irrelevant to how she thinks and might not). I like her work, her deep perspective of takeovers in process. We might determine that if someone has gone to school or made a lot of money (such as Bill Gates), and especially if that someone doesn’t talk about any faith or religion other than in his past, then such a person must be rational… and then good. But this is not so, in my opinion.

        I have a son who wants to buy land and have solar energy there and grow food there. He’s very successful, right now, in the IT world (and more), and I don’t think he would be giving that up. But I knew this would be of relevance to his endeavors.

        [This statement is in no way meant to say that if someone does speak of current religion on their own part that then that person is good. Far from it.]

        Liked by 1 person

  5. grogalot April 5, 2021 / 8:16 am

    I don’t argue religion anymore. My question to the faithful: “Where do you believe heaven is?” Without the magic of the supernatural, religions have nothing! GROG

    Liked by 1 person

  6. leigha66 April 7, 2021 / 9:28 pm

    My “faith” has always been personal, but it is mine and I don’t try to force it on anyone else. I expect the same from others. It is really common curtesy.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.