Religious Insensitivity

[A Vestigial Mote]

90% of the time, people get ridiculed due to misunderstanding.

This might be true, I don't know. But it only takes so many times trying to explain the same idea over again and hearing back the same assumptions and misinformed ideas about yourself before the ignorance seems entirely willful. And yes, I am aware, this probably characterizes how theists sometimes feel as well.

 

[wandering peacefully]

I agree. But it's still an issue we must always remember to approach like adults.

(In saying this though, I'm not implying we're immature)

But how many times in a platform such as this, does the unreasonable , yes in my eyes, need to be coddled with kid gloves before presenting the unbelief side of things? Most especially to people who have been espousing the same exact discriminating material ad nauseum no matter how many ways they are shone they are being hurtfull to others with their perceived innocent rightousness? Repeating ancient ideas as though they should still carry more weight than the actual truth of a given situation?
I say you can be nice to the person and tell them their view sucks and is outdated at the same time. Unless they are an obnoxious a$$ of course. Then they are easily ignored.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

There have been times when I really could have been friendlier to a few Christians on here, I'm just not sure I treated them 100% equally to say, someone who understands the rules of debate and respects them. But I'm not going to lie, the Christian community regularly takes a dump all over us LGBTQ+s. There is money to be made in religious leaders being controversial and they develop followers. The focus of this thread was that I was seeing Christians state that the reason they keep bringing up the same arguments which do not follow the policies of debate well, was because atheists attacked first. I thought, "You know, maybe it would be better to give Christians a benefit of a doubt?"

But I have created a tricky subject for myself. People read my posts, and if I side with Christians, I might upset the nonChristians, if I side with nonChristians, it might upset the Christians. Words have weight, even the worst ideas sometimes change the world.

 

[dybmh]

@A Vestigial Mote,

thank you so much for all of that detail. It is so so incredibly useful and enlightening for me.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

@A Vestigial Mote,

thank you so much for all of that detail. It is so so incredibly useful and enlightening for me.

For me too. Both of you.

Whether or not I made a thread that surpasses mediocrity in and of itself, the community involvement DID make things interesting.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I always remember that beliefs are deeply personal and reflect an emotional connection to life and death. That is not something to be ridiculed lightly. (Am I guilty of that? Probably, I contain multitudes!) However, given that this is a discussion and debate forum, I completely understand and participate in the tumult that is inevitable.

I do not agree with the sentiment that religious beliefs are to be ridiculed and put down by all means, even outside of consensual debate and discussion. We are emotional beings in a complex Universe.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

@A Vestigial Mote,

thank you so much for all of that detail. It is so so incredibly useful and enlightening for me.

Thank you too (and @AT-AT ). Because of this conversation, and having to dig deeper into the reasons why I may do one thing or another, and having to think over my own behavior in the past to question if I had actually gone too far, I've decided I need to dial it back to "professional" a bit more. Keep the discussion cleaner, and stop letting myself be labeled as some of the "riff raff" (which I am sure happens more often than when I am basically called that directly). This dialogue was kept entirely civil from your side, even though I am sure I rankled a bit here and there (or everywhere - it is obviously not for me to assess!)

 

[usfan]

But I did, and will continue to do so, because there are correlating factors that can be drawn - as I mentioned, caliber of evidence, ability to actually "know" facts about the thing, etc.

But your beliefs about God are no more 'evidenced fact!', than any theists. You have a belief about the nature of the universe. Others have different beliefs. How can you ridicule other's beliefs, when yours are no different?

It is those beliefs that attempt to alter the world without proper inter-subjectively verifiable justification or evidence that are the problem.

Straw man. Nobody is trying to legislate 'Christianity!' ..as the Official State Religion. That's the progressive schtick.

• Nobody is mandating belief in the bible.
• Nobody is legislating belief in any tenets of Christianity
• Nobody is mandating church attendance for any group, creed, or denomination

Progressives, however, do all these things. Mandates, legislation, courts. ..to ban competing ideas and force homogeneity of belief..

Christianity is the majority view in the area I live in and the one whose adherents attempt to change public opinion or legislation. The views of Christianity are the ones that most affect my life directly,

?
You mean they want to impose the majority view of morality on everyone else? Isn't that what collective legislation is? But the Constitution protects us from the state establishing any religious beliefs.. which is why Progressivism and atheistic naturalism gets a pass..

'we're not religious! We can mandate our beliefs exclusively through the force of the State!'

You, however, are the one who is hypocritical about it. I at least ridicule and expect to be ridiculed. You ridicule and then expect everyone to bathe your feet for you.

Now, now.. you were doing so well.. sticking to critiquing ideology, and avoiding ad hom. But perhaps you needed a fix ..

ROFL!!
Bathe my feet? You think i expect accolades and respect? LOL!!

On internet forums?
Bwahahahaha!!..

Hardly.

I EXPECT mocking, ridicule, and fallacies, from progressive indoctrinees, because that is almost ALWAYS what i get.

I point it out, from time to time, but i do not expect it to change, and i expect (and give) no quarter. You want a debate with me, bring it, but you better have some reason.. fallacies won't cut it with me, and lame ad hominem is a deathbed confession of defeat.

/shakes head/ ..hypocrisy.. you think i shrink from controversy, or the hostile bigotry from these anti-christian pretenders?

Lob your ad hom grenades all you want. I'll just pull the pins and lob them back..

How would "atheism" have any "facts"? Can you even answer that? Atheism is not believing in god(s), that's it.

Exactly. There are no facts to justify your belief.. it is a conclusion based on life factors:

1. Education
2. Upbringing
3. Peers/freinds/family
4. Indoctrination
5. Personal experience
6. Choice

Many factors combine to mold a worldview in a person. 'Absolute Facts', are seldom factors in that list.

But they would like to - and this is one of the big problems.

Projection. Just because you want to legislate YOUR philosophical beliefs on everyone else, does not mean others do. I know of no Christians who want to force belief in any tenets of Christianity.. unlike progressives, who use legislation and the courts CONSTANTLY to mandate their beliefs.

Attempts to sway legislative bodies

see above. Don't project your agenda on me..

And you wonder why you get ridiculed.

I don't wonder at all. It is because of religious bigotry, from an intolerant, State mandated worldview.

I'm surprised (and grateful) that we (Christians) had the freedom and respect as long as we did. It is not typical in human history, and I'm sure we'll be back to Normal Human bigotry, intolerance, and anti-christian persecution very soon. I see the constant propaganda streams against 'the evil Christians!!' .. and suspect the cleansing to resume.. perhaps in my lifetime.. perhaps not..

Hopefully we the people will decide what

Ah, you mean 'morality' should be a majority consensus? ..seems reasonable.

If everyone wants their various medications and computers to work with everyone else then I think we have grounds to want some homogeneity.

Yes, that is the appeal of despotism.. they keep the trains on time.

I would say it is absurd to expect any others to believe in God.

Of course it is. .. as is the antithesis.

Do you expect others to NOT believe in God, because that is your belief? Is accepting that others do not share your beliefs too hard, so you lash out in demeaning ridicule and bigoted screeds?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

But your beliefs about God are no more 'evidenced fact!', than any theists. You have a belief about the nature of the universe. Others have different beliefs. How can you ridicule other's beliefs, when yours are no different?

Straw man. Nobody is trying to legislate 'Christianity!' ..as the Official State Religion. That's the progressive schtick.

• Nobody is mandating belief in the bible.
• Nobody is legislating belief in any tenets of Christianity
• Nobody is mandating church attendance for any group, creed, or denomination

Progressives, however, do all these things. Mandates, legislation, courts. ..to ban competing ideas and force homogeneity of belief..

?
You mean they want to impose the majority view of morality on everyone else? Isn't that what collective legislation is? But the Constitution protects us from the state establishing any religious beliefs.. which is why Progressivism and atheistic naturalism gets a pass..

'we're not religious! We can mandate our beliefs exclusively through the force of the State!'


Now, now.. you were doing so well.. sticking to critiquing ideology, and avoiding ad hom. But perhaps you needed a fix ..

ROFL!!
Bathe my feet? You think i expect accolades and respect? LOL!!

On internet forums?
Bwahahahaha!!..

Hardly.

I EXPECT mocking, ridicule, and fallacies, from progressive indoctrinees, because that is almost ALWAYS what i get.

I point it out, from time to time, but i do not expect it to change, and i expect (and give) no quarter. You want a debate with me, bring it, but you better have some reason.. fallacies won't cut it with me, and lame ad hominem is a deathbed confession of defeat.

/shakes head/ ..hypocrisy.. you think i shrink from controversy, or the hostile bigotry from these anti-christian pretenders?

Lob your ad hom grenades all you want. I'll just pull the pins and lob them back..

Exactly. There are no facts to justify your belief.. it is a conclusion based on life factors:

1. Education
2. Upbringing
3. Peers/freinds/family
4. Indoctrination
5. Personal experience
6. Choice

Many factors combine to mold a worldview in a person. 'Absolute Facts', are seldom factors in that list.

Projection. Just because you want to legislate YOUR philosophical beliefs on everyone else, does not mean others do. I know of no Christians who want to force belief in any tenets of Christianity.. unlike progressives, who use legislation and the courts CONSTANTLY to mandate their beliefs.
see above. Don't project your agenda on me..

I don't wonder at all. It is because of religious bigotry, from an intolerant, State mandated worldview.

I'm surprised (and grateful) that we (Christians) had the freedom and respect as long as we did. It is not typical in human history, and I'm sure we'll be back to Normal Human bigotry, intolerance, and anti-christian persecution very soon. I see the constant propaganda streams against 'the evil Christians!!' .. and suspect the cleansing to resume.. perhaps in my lifetime.. perhaps not..


Ah, you mean 'morality' should be a majority consensus? ..seems reasonable.

Yes, that is the appeal of despotism.. they keep the trains on time.

Of course it is. .. as is the antithesis.

Do you expect others to NOT believe in God, because that is your belief? Is accepting that others do not share your beliefs too hard, so you lash out in demeaning ridicule and bigoted screeds?

You were starting to do so well, usfan. So all I can say is that if people want to debate you, and show you that you're an anti-Progressive bigot who doesn't know the first thing about debating, despite deserving a lot of respect as a human being, we all do, that is up to them.

If you want people to be easier on Christianity, well I think they should, but you can start by getting over this nonsense you are feeling that Progressives have taken over the United States and are the dominant beliefs.

Also, there are rules of debates. It isn't all subjective. Start studying subjects like Inference. Learn what is a good debate and bad debate.

 

[usfan]

you're an anti-Progressive bigot

I oppose Progressivism at the ideological level. I do not mock or ridicule progressives for their beliefs, other than by inference, as i expose the progressive agenda, propaganda, and indoctrination.

If you want people to be easier on Christianity

i 'want' no such thing. Ideology must stand on its own, and not be coddled by lies, revisionism, or elitist decree.

nonsense you are feeling

Projection. I deal in reason and facts, not warm fuzzies. This is a written forum. Emotions are irrelevant.

I'm here to exercise reason, and marvel at the folly and madness of humanity.. and the lollipops..

I try to organize my replies logically, informitively, with clarity, and spicy terms. I do not shy away from controversy, bullies, bigots, or PC shaming. If you do not like my posts, don't read them. If you do not want me to reply in your threads, i won't. I'm very easy going and accommodating..

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I oppose Progressivism at the ideological level. I do not mock or ridicule progressives for their beliefs, other than by inference, as i expose the progressive agenda, propaganda, and indoctrination.
i 'want' no such thing. Ideology must stand on its own, and not be coddled by lies, revisionism, or elitist decree.

Projection. I deal in reason and facts, not warm fuzzies. This is a written forum. Emotions are irrelevant.

I'm here to exercise reason, and marvel at the folly and madness of humanity.. and the lollipops..

I try to organize my replies logically, informitively, with clarity, and spicy terms. I do not shy away from controversy, bullies, bigots, or PC shaming. If you do not like my posts, don't read them. If you do not want me to reply in your threads, i won't. I'm very easy going and accommodating..

We are cool. But if you are going to insist people put on their Big Boy pants against Christianity, and also insist you don't mock progressives while using the term "progressive indoctrinees" every other post, just make sure to ready yourself for the responses.

 

[usfan]

The topic here is 'Religious Insensitivity.'

Should we be 'sensitive' to the beliefs of others, or attack and ridicule them? Are lies and phony caricatures fair tactics, to demean the beliefs of others?

Christianity, as an ideology, can 'take it.' It has been taking it for millennia, and expects no less. But if anti-christians attack Christianity with a propaganda stream of lies and phony caricatures, how is defending from those attacks, 'bigotry!', or insensitivity?

I have examined the tactics, the beliefs, and the narratives from the anti-christian detractors, and find them revisionist, bigoted, and motivated by a competing ideology of what i label, 'Progressivism'. That is the Source of the hostile, anti-christian propaganda, and that is where the ideological battle lies. So as a defender of Christian ideology, the beliefs of Progressivism also comes under scrutiny, especially since it is hell bent on the destruction of Christianity.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

The topic here is 'Religious Insensitivity.'

Should we be 'sensitive' to the beliefs of others, or attack and ridicule them? Are lies and phony caricatures fair tactics, to demean the beliefs of others?

Christianity, as an ideology, can 'take it.' It has been taking it for millennia, and expects no less. But if anti-christians attack Christianity with a propaganda stream of lies and phony caricatures, how is defending from those attacks, 'bigotry!', or insensitivity?

I have examined the tactics, the beliefs, and the narratives from the anti-christian detractors, and find them revisionist, bigoted, and motivated by a competing ideology of what i label, 'Progressivism'. That is the Source of the hostile, anti-christian propaganda, and that is where the ideological battle lies. So as a defender of Christian ideology, the beliefs of Progressivism also comes under scrutiny, especially since it is hell bent on the destruction of Christianity.

I see. For what it's worth, I do respect you as a person, I even like you. You are able to meet passion with passion, intensity with intensity.

 

[usfan]

I'm sorry if i spoiled the effect. I did not get to reply to the other posts, before the hand holding, kumbaya singing part began..

I like that part, too, and am sorry i missed the brief interlude.

But nobody is more surprised than i am, at the level of anti-christian postings here, in an alleged 'religious!' forum. The constant narratives, distortions, and overt lies about xtianity are pretty shocking, in a forum allegedly dedicated to 'religious' discussion.

It seems more like an atheist forum, where xtianity bashing is the preferred sport..

For not being a 'religion!', the atheists here sure like to promote their beliefs, while bashing others..

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I'm sorry if i spoiled the effect. I did not get to reply to the other posts, before the hand holding, kumbaya singing part began..

I like that part, too, and am sorry i missed the brief interlude.

But nobody is more surprised than i am, at the level of anti-christian postings here, in an alleged 'religious!' forum. The constant narratives, distortions, and overt lies about xtianity are pretty shocking, in a forum allegedly dedicated to 'religious' discussion.

It seems more like an atheist forum, where xtianity bashing is the preferred sport..

For not being a 'religion!', the atheists here sure like to promote their beliefs, while bashing others..

I personally feel this is more of a fellowship forum with a slightly stronger-than-average focus on debates. Could be wrong though.

 

[usfan]

I personally feel this is more of a fellowship forum with a slightly stronger-than-average focus on debates. Could be wrong though.

I'm sure it depends on what subforum you are in. What is appropriate in one is not in another..

 

[sealchan]

But your beliefs about God are no more 'evidenced fact!', than any theists. You have a belief about the nature of the universe. Others have different beliefs. How can you ridicule other's beliefs, when yours are no different?

Straw man. Nobody is trying to legislate 'Christianity!' ..as the Official State Religion. That's the progressive schtick.

• Nobody is mandating belief in the bible.
• Nobody is legislating belief in any tenets of Christianity
• Nobody is mandating church attendance for any group, creed, or denomination

Progressives, however, do all these things. Mandates, legislation, courts. ..to ban competing ideas and force homogeneity of belief..

?
You mean they want to impose the majority view of morality on everyone else? Isn't that what collective legislation is? But the Constitution protects us from the state establishing any religious beliefs.. which is why Progressivism and atheistic naturalism gets a pass..

'we're not religious! We can mandate our beliefs exclusively through the force of the State!'


Now, now.. you were doing so well.. sticking to critiquing ideology, and avoiding ad hom. But perhaps you needed a fix ..

ROFL!!
Bathe my feet? You think i expect accolades and respect? LOL!!

On internet forums?
Bwahahahaha!!..

Hardly.

I EXPECT mocking, ridicule, and fallacies, from progressive indoctrinees, because that is almost ALWAYS what i get.

I point it out, from time to time, but i do not expect it to change, and i expect (and give) no quarter. You want a debate with me, bring it, but you better have some reason.. fallacies won't cut it with me, and lame ad hominem is a deathbed confession of defeat.

/shakes head/ ..hypocrisy.. you think i shrink from controversy, or the hostile bigotry from these anti-christian pretenders?

Lob your ad hom grenades all you want. I'll just pull the pins and lob them back..

Exactly. There are no facts to justify your belief.. it is a conclusion based on life factors:

1. Education
2. Upbringing
3. Peers/freinds/family
4. Indoctrination
5. Personal experience
6. Choice

Many factors combine to mold a worldview in a person. 'Absolute Facts', are seldom factors in that list.

Projection. Just because you want to legislate YOUR philosophical beliefs on everyone else, does not mean others do. I know of no Christians who want to force belief in any tenets of Christianity.. unlike progressives, who use legislation and the courts CONSTANTLY to mandate their beliefs.
see above. Don't project your agenda on me..

I don't wonder at all. It is because of religious bigotry, from an intolerant, State mandated worldview.

I'm surprised (and grateful) that we (Christians) had the freedom and respect as long as we did. It is not typical in human history, and I'm sure we'll be back to Normal Human bigotry, intolerance, and anti-christian persecution very soon. I see the constant propaganda streams against 'the evil Christians!!' .. and suspect the cleansing to resume.. perhaps in my lifetime.. perhaps not..


Ah, you mean 'morality' should be a majority consensus? ..seems reasonable.

Yes, that is the appeal of despotism.. they keep the trains on time.

Of course it is. .. as is the antithesis.

Do you expect others to NOT believe in God, because that is your belief? Is accepting that others do not share your beliefs too hard, so you lash out in demeaning ridicule and bigoted screeds?

It's a balance...to share a resource we must accept a mutual agreement as to how to share it fairly. That includes limitations on our free speech where it negatively impacts the right to free speech of others. That includes having to pay taxes for emergency services th as t you might never need. Etc...

I think your arguments are based on a black and white view of a much more nuanced reality.

 

[sealchan]

There have been times when I really could have been friendlier to a few Christians on here, I'm just not sure I treated them 100% equally to say, someone who understands the rules of debate and respects them. But I'm not going to lie, the Christian community regularly takes a dump all over us LGBTQ+s. There is money to be made in religious leaders being controversial and they develop followers. The focus of this thread was that I was seeing Christians state that the reason they keep bringing up the same arguments which do not follow the policies of debate well, was because atheists attacked first. I thought, "You know, maybe it would be better to give Christians a benefit of a doubt?"

But I have created a tricky subject for myself. People read my posts, and if I side with Christians, I might upset the nonChristians, if I side with nonChristians, it might upset the Christians. Words have weight, even the worst ideas sometimes change the world.

If you see someone of a particular background is wrong, the best argument is always given in the terms of their own belief.

If you want to undo prejudicial attitudes which are stoked by fairly direct one-liners from the Bible, you have to use the entire Bible and its context within the facts of Gods creation (aka science) in your argument IMO.

And then have the patience of Job.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

If you see someone of a particular background is wrong, the best argument is always given in the terms of their own belief.

If you want to undo prejudicial attitudes which are stoked by fairly direct one-liners from the Bible, you have to use the entire Bible and its context within the facts of Gods creation (aka science) in your argument IMO.

And then have the patience of Job.

I really think you're correct, and that it may be beneficial to other people of my beliefs and stances to read and consider your post as well.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

So we've got one side who considers the religious texts a great form of proof. One of, if not, the highest.

Then we've got another side who considers Wikipedia articles and books on the subject of Philosophy, debate practices, etc, a great method and goes with that.

This could create problems and communicational barriers.