Religion

muriel_volestrangler

(106,671 posts)

22. No; we've shown that 'non-religious', applied to a variety of areas, is the long-standing meaning

Sat May 2, 2015, 11:48 AM

May 2015

It's not a matter of 'appropriating' the word; it already meant 'nonreligious' a long time before people started talking about the separation of church and state. You might say the people in the 19th century who started talking about that separation did borrow 'secular' for their subject, but I don't see that as a big problem. It still managed to mean 'nonreligious' as well - they didn't take away that meaning.

Honestly, your post makes so little sense, you may as well try and restate the whole thing again. It's a word salad.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

42 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What Does Secular Mean? [View all] rug May 2015 OP

Unfortunately, I think this horse is out of the barn. cbayer May 2015 #1

Only in some echo chambers is secular conflated with nonbelief or atheism. rug May 2015 #2

I'm not so sure. There was recently a "secular coming out day" cbayer May 2015 #3

Political wars start with the seizibg of words, then arsenals. rug May 2015 #4

Worse than that, I think the word atheist comes with a lot of negative baggage. cbayer May 2015 #5

That is interesting logic you've got there Lordquinton May 2015 #25

Well, Lord, let's hear it. Very clearly now. Are you calling me a homophobe? rug May 2015 #29

If enough people use it to mean "non-religious" - then that becomes a valid use. Jim__ May 2015 #6

And I think that is exactly what is happening and it's cbayer May 2015 #7

Creating ambiguity is a common tactic to disguise all sorts of things. rug May 2015 #8

If enough people use it that way - to mean non-belief - then it becomes a valid use. Jim__ May 2015 #9

No, really that isn't how it works. TM99 May 2015 #26

Yes, that's exactly how language works. Jim__ May 2015 #27

Try again. TM99 May 2015 #30

Guess again. Only next time try reading before guessing. Jim__ May 2015 #35

I can read just fine. TM99 May 2015 #36

Really? Where did you read anything about my use of the word secular? Jim__ May 2015 #38

It does not introduce an ambiguity. TM99 May 2015 #39

Let me try to unwind your changing claims. Jim__ May 2015 #40

Wow, you are something else. TM99 May 2015 #41

You said nothing about ambiguity until post #39. Jim__ May 2015 #42

Eventually, though, language purists have to give in. cbayer May 2015 #28

Purist must cede? TM99 May 2015 #31

I don't expect you to cede easily, in fact cbayer May 2015 #32

Yuppers I will fight. TM99 May 2015 #33

Openlysecular.org is a growing organization. cbayer May 2015 #34

See my post #36 TM99 May 2015 #37

I agree with Jim edhopper May 2015 #10

It is most difficult for those who are both secularists and believers. cbayer May 2015 #11

I would think that secularism inherently supports the separation of church/state standard. pinto May 2015 #12

It does ibndeed. And says nothing about beliefs. rug May 2015 #13

Secular. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #14

And? rug May 2015 #15

So Warren Stupidity May 2015 #16

And your point in #2 - "Only in some echo chambers is secular conflated with nonbelief" is incorrect muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #17

"distinguished from the church and religion; civil, lay, temporal." rug May 2015 #18

Not 'state affairs'; used for art, education and morality, for hundreds of years (nt) muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #19

To accept your usage, you have to accept that atheism means more than it is. rug May 2015 #21

No; we've shown that 'non-religious', applied to a variety of areas, is the long-standing meaning muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #22

Who has shown what? rug May 2015 #23

The OP article was about the 'non-religious' meaning; it was cbayer who introduced 'non-belief' muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #24

They don't get to define it. Igel May 2015 #20