<p>Hi, </p>
<p>I was just wondering,
Being seriously involved in a Christian club would be detrimental or beneficial for admissions ? (Or neither?) </p>
<p>I have like hundreds of hours volunteering with my church, and I was just curious.</p>
<p>Thx... ha..</p>
<p>Why would this be a negative? Most schools have active Christian organizations on campus. They also have active Jewish organizations, and Asian clubs, International student clubs, and dozens of others.</p>
<p>Can playing an instrument in church youth services volunteer hours?</p>
<p>(Many of my voluntter hours are from teaching Sunday School and taking care of children during services, but I was just wondering if that could be considered as volunteer hours as well)</p>
<p>I think that taking care of the kids during services would be considered volunteer hours. Not the instrument playing, though. That's just fun!( and shows committment to your music.)
Don't worry so much about how colleges view these things. They are worthwhile activities that you persued because of your interest in them - that's what counts. Colleges will see your genuine committment.</p>
<p>Yeh... I agree... Thx ASAP</p>
<p>would putting down your specific religion be jepordizing your chances? what if the admissions person completely dispises your religion? should you just say, "at my church" instead of clarifing your religion? (btw i am applying to some UCs and I am Roman Catholic)</p>
<p>No - it won't hurt your chances.
UCs won't care one whit what religion you practice. Great scholars come in all religious persuasions! One of the most famous history professors at Princeton was a Roman Catholic - history and religion are very closely linked in every country in the world. </p>
<p>I think that some of the attention that the more extreme fundamantalist Christians have received lately has freaked people out - but most religious students are tolerant and searching for answers, and I think colleges know this.
( I suppose if you said you supported bombing abortion clinics, they might be concerned, but I assume that's not the case...;) )</p>
<p>at upper tier universities (i.e. HYPMS) they might snuff their nose at someone who committed an extrodinary amount of time to a religious activity... I sure would, but I'm a devout athiest... intelligence doesn't beget religion</p>
<p>Um...no, that's not so. Look at the websites for HYPS and you'll find active religious clubs - visit the campuses and you'll see them, too.</p>
<p>I'm agnostic myself, but I don't agree with your last statement at all. Intelligence realizes that facts are facts, and religion is faith. They can and do co-exist quite nicely in intelligent folks who know the difference.</p>
<p>I don't want to get into a religion sucks rant over this... so this is my one statement that I'll make then I'm going to study for my calculus test...</p>
<p>I cannot view any human being who spends time practicing religion to be reasonable, rational, or intelligent. Religion is essentially a system to A) make people less afraid of death B) keep people within cultural boundaries. It developed evolutionarly within mankind for multiple purposes which I care not to elaborate on right now. Mankind is now at the point that we can discern our own irrational nature and come to terms with the idea that god is dead and that the only reason we are on this earth is because our DNA is using us as a host to replicate itself. Read up on evolution and you'll come to the same conclusion all of us practical, rational people have.</p>
<p><read up="" on="" evolution="" and="" you'll="" come="" to="" the="" same="" conclusion="" all="" of="" us="" practical,="" rational="" people="" have.=""></read></p>
<p>I'm quite familiar with evolution, and am a believer (in evolution, that is.) I agree that religion is not rational. What I don't agree with is that an intelligent person can't have faith (note, not belief based on facts, but faith) and also be grounded in the scienfic knowledge of why and how we came into being. I will agree that a literal acceptance of the Bible is inconsistent with scientific knowledge ( the 6000 year old earth, and all that). But many religious people, especially those of my generation, are quite grounded in the scienfic realities, yet still have a belief, which they admit is only faith-based, in a higher being. To say these people are not intelligent or rational would be wrong, and dismissive of a sensibilty that may be different from your own, but is true to their experience.
Sometimes things appear to be mutually exclusive, when in reality, they're not. Religion and science are not necessarily mutually exclusive.<br>
Now, I will agree that the radical fundamentalism that we have seen from some of the Christian right is completely irrational and unreasonable precisely because the adherents confuse what is science and what is faith.
These people are scary, and may take us all down the warpath to "the rapture" if we allow them to do so. Our government needs to stay rooted in fact and science; its business is to serve all the people of all religions as well as those who profess none, such as ourselves. But to claim that all religious people are not intelligent or rational is naive and fails to recognize the complexity of the human spirit.</p>
<p>As a graduate of an Ivy divinity school, I find astrife's post to be one of the most truly ignorant things I have ever read on CC. I do not mean that as a pejorative; I mean literally ignorant, as in "without knowledge." It shows a complete an utter misunderstanding of what religion is, what it means to think theologically, and so much more.</p>
<p>I believe in evolution as the *means * to creation. Religion is not science. The Bible was not meant to be taken literally in the scientific sense. Genesis is not about science, but is a polemic against determinism.</p>
<p>True religion is not superstition, which is an attempt to control things in the universe by magical thinking. It is not irrational, though there are some things in it that go beyond reason (maybe "nonrational"). It comes as a great surprise to many people, especially young ones, that reason doesn't cover everything and is NOT the only way of knowing. Love is a form of knowledge; art is a form of knowledge; and faith is a form of knowledge. What is "known" in these cases is different from what is known through scientific rationalism.</p>
<p>Everyone in my family has often said that even if we did not believe in life after death, the incredible deepening of understanding of THIS world and our relations with other people would be more than sufficient to have us continue to practice our religion. </p>
<p>I would suggest doing a thorough study of what religion is before dismissing. Suggested reading: Start with Aristotle, then Aquinas, perhaps some G.K. Chesterton, C.S. Lewis, Tolkien's letters, Pope John Paull II's "The Acting Person," ---- I could go on and on and on. </p>
<p>It is sad that astrife thinks that people who practice religion are not "intelligent," when so many mental giants throughout history have been believers. Try reading "How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization" for a clue as to where so many of the world's ideas on science, international law, and so much more actually come from. Astrife probably labors under the delusion that the separation of church and state was first discovered by Jefferson! Perhaps astrife should read about the church's astronomical discoveries...</p>
<p>CC would not allow a post long enough to cover all this. What a shame that one so young has cut him or herself off from so much of the world's knowledge, and thinks in such a prejudicial --- dare I say irrational? ---way.</p>
<p>"at upper tier universities (i.e. HYPMS) they might snuff their nose at someone who committed an extrodinary amount of time to a religious activity.."</p>
<p>This is not true at all. Top universities have hundreds of extracurricular activities on their campuses. This includes activities related to religion. They want to attract students who'll participate in those clubs and add to the diversity on campus. They do not scorn people who are involved with religions. In fact, such people probably impress adcoms more than do the students who do activities like Mu Alpha Theta, Student Government, Model UN, and violin and piano playing which are overrepresented in the applicant pools.</p>
<p>I find astrife's assertion that Ivy league schools would "look down on" religious activities to be ludicrous and ill-informed. For reasons unknown, he is transferring his own beliefs about the correlation between faith and idiocy/irrationality onto admissions officials. </p>
<p>Even the most cynical, jaded, religion-bashing adcom knows that many bright, involved students belong to religious groups and many bright students have religious beliefs. He would be a fool to slight admissions candidates because of participation in religious activities. That would not be compatible with a college looking to recruit the best students possible.</p>
<p>astrife: You probably don't realize it, but top schools have religion classes, schools of religions, alumni who are clergy, and the colleges have highly regarded, erudite campus chaplains who greatly believe in their religions.</p>
<p>Above all, colleges are looking to form well-rounded freshman classes. I personally am in the agnostic or deist category. Although I agree with astrife's views on why humans create religion, I do find his/her comments to be ignorant since nobody should be that sure of themselves on the topic or that rude. As to the OP, no adcom is going to hold being religious against anyone any more than they would do the opposite. They would view zealots or closed minded people negatively.</p>
<p>I have no problems with atheists, but I hate when atheists believe they are intellectually superior for their beliefs. I can understand agnostics/atheists being critical of Christians who believe they can explain God through logic, but I don't understand why you are so bitter to those who have faith in their religions. Further -- why are you unable to view these people as "rational" or "intelligent"?</p>