> The current discussion partly related to whether the left needed to
> grapple with religious/spiritual issues other than to denounce them as
> "the opium of the people." In this respect, I am arguing that being
> able to speak of religious feeling/practices that fall outside of
> organized religion is important.
I don't remember what the conclusion of the recent thread about the meaning of Marx's "opium of the people" phrase was (if there was a conclusion to it), but at least the possibility was raised that he meant that religion was analogous to the opiate preparations which working-class parents often gave their children to pacify them in those days.
Certainly that is an accurate description of a lot of what is called "organized religion," both in Marx's day and today. OTOH, there are religious organizations which try to stir people up, rather than pacify them. But perhaps they should not be called "organized religion."
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ A sympathetic Scot summed it all up very neatly in the remark, 'You should make a point of trying every experience once, excepting incest and folk-dancing.' -- Sir Arnold Bax