From RationalWiki
Revision as of 04:03, 24 December 2008 by ListenerX (talk | contribs) (New <s>rant</s> article.)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
There is a broader, perhaps slightly less biased, article on Wikipedia about Spirituality
Conservlogo late april.png
For those living in an alternate reality, Conservapedia has an "article" about Spirituality

"Spirituality" is a code word of sorts. If someone uses it in a conversation, generally, it is shorthand for one of the following statements:

  1. "I have a confession to make — I believe in God! I'm so sorry!"
  2. "I'm a New Age quack. Give me all your money."

Guilty believers

Some people have given "religion" such a bad name that other people want absolutely nothing to do with it, but still believe in God, which makes them feel guilty because they actually agree with the baddies on something. So, instead of taking the bother of challenging the fundies and denying them a monopoly on the use of a very strong word, they try to pussy-foot around the issue by saying things like, "I'm more spiritual than religious."

On account of feeling so guilty, this sort of "spiritual" person is ripe to be suckered by the other sort:

New Age quacks

See also: New Age

These smooth-talkers slither around waxing lyrical about human potential and making claims such as, "I can help you get in touch with your unique spirituality" and "There's a little bit of God in all of us," never considering that the most divine part of them is probably what is bubbling in their intestines. Some of them put a "scientific" veneer on their blather by trying to claim that it is "scientifically proven," e.g., saying that prayers have been caught in the act of healing hospitalized people.

Of course, they usually charge a fee for their incalculably valuable services, which has let some of them become filthy stinking rich as professional brown-nosers.