The Separation between State and Religion

In time we will realize that Democracy is the entitlement of individuals to every right that was in its times alloted to kings. The right to speak and decide, to be treated with decency, to serve and be served by people in a State of “love” that is, to serve with one’s work for the development of ‘life’. To belong to the Kingdom of Human Beings without racial, national, social or academic separations. To love and be loved. To die at the service of the whole and be honored in one’s death, for one’s life and work was legitimately valued. To be graceful and grateful. To have the pride and the humility of being One with the Universe, One with every realm of Existence, One with every living and deceased soul. To treat with dignity and be treated with dignity for One is dignified together with All others and Life itself. To walk the path of compassion, not in the sorrow of guilt but in the pride of being. To take responsability for one’s mistakes and sufferings and stand up again and again like a hero and a heroine and face the struggle that is put at one’s feet and in one’s hands. Millions of people, millions and millions of people might take many generations to realize the consciousness of our humaneness but there is no other dignified path for the human being.

The “work” as I conceive it is psychological and political. Psychology is the connection between the different dimensions within one’s self and Politics is the actualization of that consciousness in our practical lives. Religion is the ceremony that binds the connectedness between the individual and the Universe. The separation between religion, politics and science, the arts and sports is, in the sphere of the social, the reflection of the schizophrenia within the individual and the masses. The dialogue between individuality and the "human" belongs to consciousness. The tendency to develop cults resides in the shortcomings we’are finding in life as it is structured today. “Life” has become the private property of a few priviledged who cannot profit from it because as soon as it is appropriated it stops to be “life” or “life-giving”.

We are all the victims of our own invention and each one is called upon to find solutions. The only problem is believing our selves incapable of finding them. We are now free to use all Systems of knowledge objectively, sharing them without imposing our will on each other. To become objective about our lives means to understand that the institutions that govern its experience are critically important. That we are one with the governments, one with the religious activities that mark its pace, that the arena’s in which we move our bodies and the laboratories in which we explore our possibilities are ALL part and parcel of our own personal responsibility. That WE ARE ONE WITH EACH OTHER AND EVERYTHING AROUND US and acknowledge for ourselves a bond of love in conscious responsibility. That we human beings know ourselves part of each other and are willing and able to act on our behalf for the benefit of each and every individual. That we no longer allow governments, industries, universities or any other institution to run along unchecked by the objective principles of humaneness. That we do not allow gurus to abuse their power or governors to steal the taxes and use them to their personal advantage in detriment of the whole. That we do not allow abuse from anyone anywhere because life is too beautiful to do so and that we are willing to stop the rampant crime with the necessary compassion Conscious knowledge is every individual's right. Conscious action is every individual's duty.

Blog Archive

Friday, 7 May 2010

Buying the book!!!


We need to discover what civil society means for social policy futures. Does it mean a new and more democratic welfare future based on citizen participation in the shaping and delivery of social services? Or does it envisage the liberalization of welfare in which the state is displaced by a resurgent market? Does this downsizing mean the end of the welfare state? Did it ever exist? Was it a metaphor for a virtuous society based on a welfare compromise? Is virtue being redefined in terms of individual agency in a world where welfare has become once again a matter of personal responsibility? Or can the Zeitgeist of the welfare state be reinvented by a Social Left on the basis of utopian socialist principles? Is Colas contention that the State is the opium of civil society correct?

F. Powell


The book apparently continues to pose greater and deeper questions, we must definitely get it if we are to understand where we are standing today. I will certainly try to get it so that we can further this discussion.


It is wonderful and strange for me to be understanding how democratic I am when I couldn't even really understand the word or cared for it just last year! Or to think of myself as indulging in the realm of politics which seemed too big an arena to pretend a role. 


In the cult all those interests had been numbed behind the pathologic practice of trying to be present to nothing while life fell out of my existence. That is perhaps why today it is so clear to me that "life" is "life giving". It is a great thing that nothing happens in vain and that what doesn't kill us, makes us stronger! 
Posted by at
Labels:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)