Beliefs other than your own

Other than your own religion or beliefs (i.e. Christianity, Judaism, Islam...I think those are the only ones represented here. If I missed yours, please tell me), which ones do you agree with or identify with most and why? What parts/laws in that faith do you agree or disagree with and why?

And it should go without saying, but let's keep it respectful .

I personally just believe in being a good person and helping your fellow person. I believe in worshiping how you want, on your time. I don't think God cares if you do it in a church, or in dresses or not. He knows if you're a good person or not. I don't believe in God, but I talk about him like he exists.
I don't agree with Mormonism, they are for the most part good people. But they come up with new laws every year and it's to the point where people are leaving because of it. I don't think God cares if you drink alcohol if you're responsible, I don't think he cares if you want to eat on a Sunday.
I would say I identify more with the Christian religion. They don't force you to wear dress clothes to church, they do fun things, and they let you get involved in singing. For the most part no choirs. It's a fun church and the people are really nice.
Don't think I answered what you were asking, but I just felt like talking about it.

You answered it, more or less .

Well I respect Janaism a lot despite the fact that I would never be capable of following their rules. Here is a short summary of what the religion is about straight from wiki. I think it's rather obvious why I would agree with them



There is no supreme divine creator, owner, preserver or destroyer. The
universe is self-regulated and every soul has the potential to achieve
divine consciousness (siddha) through its own efforts.

• Non-violence- to cause no harm to living beings. This is
  the fundamental vow from which all other vows stem. It involves
  minimizing intentional and unintentional harm to any other living
  creature. "Non-violence", is sometimes interpreted as not killing, but
  the concept goes far beyond that. It includes not harming or insulting
  other living beings, either directly, or indirectly through others.
  There can be even no room for thought to injure others, and no speech
  that influences others to inflict harm. It also includes respecting the views of others (non-absolutism and
  acceptance of multiple views).
  
• Truthfulness (Satya) - to always speak the truth in a
  harmless manner. A person who speaks the truth becomes trustworthy like a
  mother, venerable like a preceptor and dear to everyone like a kinsman.
  Given that non-violence has priority, all other principles yield to it,
  whenever there is a conflict. For example, if speaking truth will lead
  to violence, it is perfectly ethical to be silent.
  
• Non-stealing (Asteya) - to not take anything that is not
  willingly given. Asteya, "non-stealing", is the strict adherence to
  one's own possessions, without desire to take another's. One should
  remain satisfied by whatever is earned through honest labour. Any
  attempt to squeeze material wealth from others and/or exploit the weak
  is considered theft. Some of the guidelines for this principle are
  

(1) Always give people fair value for labor or product.
(2) Never take things which are not offered.
(3) Never take things that are placed, dropped or forgotten by others
(4) Never purchase cheaper things if the price is the result of improper
method (e.g. pyramid scheme, illegal business, stolen goods, etc.)

• Celibacy (Brahmacharya) - to control the senses including
  mind from indulgence. The basic intent of this vow is to conquer passion
  and to prevent the waste of energy. In this vow, the house holder must
  not have a sensual relationship with anybody other than one's own
  spouse. Jain monks and nuns should practice complete abstinence from
  sex.
  
• Non-possession or Non-materialism (Aparigraha) - to
  detach from people, places, and material things. Ownership of an object
  itself is not possessiveness; however attachment to an object is
  possessiveness. For householders, non-possession is owning without
  attachment, because the notion of possession is illusory. The reality of
  life is that change is constant; thus, objects owned by someone today
  will be property of someone else in future. The householder is
  encouraged to discharge his or her duties to related people and objects
  as a trustee, without excessive attachment or aversion. For monks and
  nuns, non-possession is complete renunciation of property and relations
  including home and family.
  

Jains hold the above five major vows at the center of their lives.
These vows cannot be fully implemented without the acceptance of a
philosophy of non-absolutism. Anekantavada (multiple points of view), is a
foundation of Jain philosophy. This philosophy allows the Jains to
accept the truth in other philosophies from their perspective and thus
inculcating a tolerance for other viewpoints. Jain scholars have devised
methods to view both physical objects and abstract ideas from different
perspectives systematically. This is the application of non-violence in
the sphere of thought. It is a jain philosophical standpoint just as
there is the Advaitic standpoint of Sankara and the standpoint of the
Middle Path of the Buddhists.
This search to view things from different angles, leads to
understanding and toleration of different and even conflicting views.
When this happens prejuidices subside and tendency to accommodate
increases. The theory of Anekanta is therefore unique
experiment of non-violence at the root.^[18].
A derivation of this principle is the doctrine of Syadvada that highlights every model is relative
to its view point. It is a matter of our daily experience that the same
object which gives pleasure to us under certain circumstances becomes
boring under different situations. Nonetheless relative truth is
undoubtedly useful as it is a stepping stone to the ultimate realization
and understaning of reality. The theory of Syadvada is based on the premise that every
proposition is only relatively true. It all depends on the particular
aspect from which we approach that proposition. Jains therefore
developed logic that encompasses sevenfold predication so as to assist
in the construction of proper judgment about any proposition.
Syadvada provides Jains with a systematic
methodology to explore the real nature of reality and consider the
problem in a non-violent way from different perspectives. This process
ensures that each statement is expressed from seven different
conditional and relative viewpoints or propositions, and thus it is
known as theory of conditioned predication. These seven propositions are
described as follows:

• 1.Syād-asti — "in some ways it is"
  
• 2.Syād-nāsti — "in some ways it is not"
  
• 3.Syād-asti-nāsti — "in some ways it is and it is not"
  
• 4.Syād-asti-avaktavya — "in some ways it is and it is indescribable"
  
• 5.Syād-nāsti-avaktavya — "in some ways it is not and it is
  indescribable"
  
• 6.Syād-asti-nāsti-avaktavya — "in some ways it is, it is not and it
  is indescribable"
  
• 7.Syād-avaktavya — "in some ways it is indescribable"
  

For example, a tree could be stationary with respect to an observer
on earth; however it will be viewed as moving along with planet Earth
for an observer in space.

Wow...that sounds like a great belief system. I'd have to say I agree with the theories and morals behind it, I just wish I had anywhere near the self-discipline to pull off following a religion like that.

Ditto. To me that really seems the way a religion should be but I can see why it's not popular. Most people prefer to use religion as a tool for their own goals. Not as a source of strict self discipline.


Kinda sad. The world would be a much better place if this was one of the major religions

The world would be a better place if ANY self-bettering religion was a main religion *sigh*