So which are you?
>>3151833
Le religion
>>3151840
How the fuck is that even possible without them chimping out
>>3151858
>>3151860
>>3151833
legitimate religion includes spirituality, there are not and cannot be seperated
>>3151883
That's not the point of the image, there is an overlap. But you can most certainly have one without the other.
>>3151858
>>3151860
I'd think this was written by a Subaru-driving hippie chick who voted for Bernie and loves music festivals, but it's too articulate
"spiritual but not religious" is the ultimate callow youth pretentiousness, a way to feel special and unique without having to commit to anything meaningful
>>3152303
almost as if people instinctively recognize the vulnerability of religion to become swept into ideology and are rejecting it...
>>3152321
You could technically be part of a religious institution and conduct the rituals and without being spiritually committed, I suspect this is actually quite common.
>>3152321
>At its core, religion is the bond of piety
Your distinction of religion does not equate to what religion is, religion is an institution with forms of worship and rules you absolutely have to follow. For lack of a better example, spiritual 'hippies' do not have a doctrine or rites or rituals they must perform. Yet they are just as spiritual as any religious church goer.
>>3152737
The Supreme Court has doctrine, rites, and rituals. Freemasonry has doctrine, rites, and rituals. They are not religions. Your definition of religion is faulty. It is the bond of piety. It necessarily involves "spirituality" (a term which has yet to be defined adequately) as well as any doctrine or activity essential to said piety.