Comment by cdoxsey | Hacker News Reader

Comment by cdoxsey | Hacker News Reader

> Libraries don’t just provide free access to books and other cultural materials, they also offer things like companionship for older adults, de facto child care for busy parents, language instruction for immigrants and welcoming public spaces for the poor, the homeless and young people.

This is a description of the proper role of the church in civil society and a public library is a poor substitute.

The church ushered in life with baptism, it educated the youth, it facilitated the building of families in marriage, and comforted the grieving in death. It extolled the virtues of the fruits of the spirit in relationships: "love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control". It sought unity in diversity ("There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."), and undermined social hierarchy ("You shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great")

The church had problems, but it was an important component of civil society. Now having abandoned it, we have nothing to replace it with, and we're paying the price.

I understand that there are a lot of objections to religion here, and I fully expect this comment to be downvoted to oblivion, but purely from a sociological perspective, there was a lot lost in the relentless pursuit of secularism.

Churches encourage complacency (all of life is God's plan), many fought hard against abortion, contraception, and women's rights/equality, and the insular tribalism such places encourage has enabled a lot of truly ugly behavior to be covered up due to in-group loyalty (see the Catholic church's sex abuse scandal for an example). Ultimately secularization was a necessary step in the evolution of society, as it's difficult if not impossible to reconcile a techno-scientific post-industrial society with simplistic parochial ideologies.

Personally, I wish I could believe in religion. I want to live in a world with a heaven and a hell and a god looking out for us, where things are logical and just and evil-doers - eventually - always suffer. I think I'd probably be a lot happier believing in that pleasant lie than I am living with the truth. But such a thing just isn't in my wiring, and I imagine many modern people share that sentiment. Hence, I suspect, all the new age woo that's basically just re-packaging Jesus in a more digestible form.

ever been to an Episcopalian service? I've been to a few dozen at a few different churches in a few different states. They are a split from Catholicism, so the rituals during service can seem familiar. However, the sermon feels like your father or grandfather (and some cases mother or grandmother) reassuring you for the week, and telling you to be your best self. It's about as liberal as mainstream Western religion gets.

Thing is, the denominations that tend to be less fire and brimstone, are also less communal. I always assumed that it comes from strength (or lack thereof) of shared convictions.

They have convictions, too. The more salient differentiator is probably extrinsic vs. intrinsic motivations, i.e. the need for a church to be a place to show off or enforce virtues

> This is a description of the proper role of the church in civil society and a public library is a poor substitute.

It may well be a description of a role that a church should play for those who believe in its religion. But who plays that role for everyone else?

I always assumed this is what TED aspires to be... the Quaker / Unitarian Universalist / Reform Synagogue of North American intellectual and wealthy elites.

Unless I am very badly misunderstanding TED, it provides none of the things that churches provide for their members. Some of these things are described succinctly but clearly in the post you are responding too. Could you expand on this?

Depends on where you were. Growing up in NYC, which is pretty multifaceted and secular, relying on religious services was not going to work as a society-wide solution simply because the entire city did not share a religion. (In fact, some local religious communities, like the Hasidic Jews, are actually under investigation for failing to provide things like English literacy in their curricula.)

One thing New York City has going for it despite its awful governance is strong civic institutions, like the museums and the library systems (there are three), all of which have performed the functions listed in the article for well over a century at this point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com