Do you treat everyone equal?

[Shadow Wolf]

You had to choose, again would their religious beliefs play any role?

I suppose same beliefs, but carefully supervised to make sure its of a similar i can get along with and not a similar that i tend to dislike.

 

[Nimos]

Not at all Nimos. Its the way we grew up. Never knew anyone more than the other. I mean never had more muslim friends than any other, and vise versa. So maybe its because how I grew up, or maybe its something else. I must say I don't care whatsoever. in fact, I would prefer diversity. I am 100% sure about that.

I think you are the only one from what I can see that would be fine with option 2. Meaning being in the minority.

Just wondering, would it be different if you were 30 people and lets same 10 of your belief and 20 of some other belief? For instance, 10 Christians and 20 Muslims?

 

[firedragon]

I think you are the only one from what I can see that would be fine with option 2. Meaning being in the minority.

Just wondering, would it be different if you were 30 people and lets same 10 of your belief and 20 of some other belief? For instance, 10 Christians and 20 Muslims?

I honestly dont care brother. If there were 10 muslims and 20 Christians or how ever mixture it is,

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Let's assume that you were told that you had to choose two other people to join you for the rest of your life lets say you were shot off the planet to start a new colony somewhere in space. You would never return to Earth and there would be no communication again with those left behind, for whatever technical reason. And every decision made you would vote on.

The only thing you know is that everyone you have to choose from, is equally qualified but you have never met or spoken to any of them. You simply have to choose two people to come along with you, under the following rules.

1. You can choose two people that share your religious beliefs, like a Muslim could choose two other muslims, atheists two other atheists etc.

2. Choose two people sharing the same religion (you didn't know which, it would just be random), but it would be different from yours or two atheists etc.

3. Wouldn't care about it.

So when it comes down to it, would you choose option 1, 2 or 3?

None. I'd just blow my brains out.

 

[MatthewA]

Use to be a very combative individual ever since birth.

Do believe that everyone should be treated equally ; and it is hard to do that by the flesh... due to our hearts and how they are.

Anyone can feel free to talk to me; transexual/muslim/mormon/atheist/murderer :shrugs:

I do not mind, though a lot of the time seems to me as though deep relationship are hard to form with just anyone, however do know that my heart has been changed a lot by God to become more meekness, humility in coming to understand how we as human beings are and can be by and through the Lord Jesus Christ and his teachings.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'd go for the atheists; because they are more likely to be scientists or thinkers and therefore most useful when building a new society.

If we look at the entire religious population, they might be more likely to be atheists, but they would be just as likely to be Baha'is, as many Baha'is are scientists and we are all thinkers.

That aside, I believe that we would need both religion and science to build a new society.

“All religions teach that we must do good, that we must be generous, sincere, truthful, law-abiding, and faithful; all this is reasonable, and logically the only way in which humanity can progress.

All religious laws conform to reason, and are suited to the people for whom they are framed, and for the age in which they are to be obeyed..........

Now, all questions of morality contained in the spiritual, immutable law of every religion are logically right. If religion were contrary to logical reason then it would cease to be a religion and be merely a tradition. Religion and science are the two wings upon which man’s intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone he would also make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of materialism...”
Paris Talks, pp. 141-143

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Im surprised how unwilling people are to answer this.

OK.

 

[Secret Chief]

I don't mind as long as it's medically impossible to have any children. I want no part in ******* up a second planet.

 

[Trailblazer]

That you wouldn't care who joined you on the trip, it could be an atheist and a mormon or whatever. But you would still have to vote on things. So the question is whether the religious background of those joining you would matter to you. Do you think it would be better to have like minded people in terms of religion or not, or would you see everyone as equal, so it wouldn't matter, if it was you and two muslims or JWs for instance.

I think I would care who joined me but who I choose would be based upon character rather than beliefs. It would be difficult to choose because I am a Baha'i and we don't see anyone as 'better' than anyone else, but if I had to choose two people one might be an atheist and one a Baha'i because that way I would have the best of both worlds.

So I think you need an option #4:

4. You can choose two people and one can be a religious believer and one can be a nonbeliever.

 

[Willamena]

Let's assume that you were told that you had to choose two other people to join you for the rest of your life lets say you were shot off the planet to start a new colony somewhere in space. You would never return to Earth and there would be no communication again with those left behind, for whatever technical reason. And every decision made you would vote on.

The only thing you know is that everyone you have to choose from, is equally qualified but you have never met or spoken to any of them. You simply have to choose two people to come along with you, under the following rules.

1. You can choose two people that share your religious beliefs, like a Muslim could choose two other muslims, atheists two other atheists etc.

2. Choose two people sharing the same religion (you didn't know which, it would just be random), but it would be different from yours or two atheists etc.

3. Wouldn't care about it.

So when it comes down to it, would you choose option 1, 2 or 3?

The two atheists.

I need someone to argue against.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The two atheists.

I need someone to argue against.

Beautiful!

Maybe I should select a couple of Jews after all.​

 

[Willamena]

I'd just like to say something about treating people equally: it has nothing to do with their infinite diversity. It has only to do with how you treat them. Consistency, integrity, and honesty.

 

[blü 2]

Yes but its not the option you have, all of them have the exact same IQ and can all do the same things. The atheists might say that religion ought to be band, you don't know. The christians might want to build a church and raise everyone as Christians. All the technical issues are in order, so you don't have to worry about it. But whatever you do, it will be a vote between the 3 of you regarding the direction things should go.

As I said, "I don't foresee much by way of proselytizing in a group answering this description, but if there were it would be unacceptable. A shared philosophical outlook will maximize cooperation and hence the chances of survival."

So if I get to choose, I choose people whose outlook resembles mine. That would mean three people of "no religion", among many other things.

 

[Nimos]

I think I would care who joined me but who I choose would be based upon character rather than beliefs. It would be difficult to choose because I am a Baha'i and we don't see anyone as 'better' than anyone else, but if I had to choose two people one might be an atheist and one a Baha'i because that way I would have the best of both worlds.

So I think you need an option #4:

4. You can choose two people and one can be a religious believer and one can be a nonbeliever.

That is not really the idea behind what im asking

Its about whether you favor/trust or would feel more secure amongst people which share your beliefs rather than someone that didn't and if you don't care, then the answer should be number 3, however you have no clue which people you would get with you, so it could be anything.

I don't think a lot of people would prefer being the minority given no other information than someone else's religious background. Personally I would choose number 1. And the reason, I would choose that, is because I think it would be easier for me at least, to focus on what would be important and not on whatever religious stuff, someone might bring. Again, based on the conditions, I think at least working from the same basic philosophy on how you view the world can be beneficial.

My concern with choosing the other options, is not especially due to them being religious, but the risk of them being religious fundamentalists, because I would see no way for me to get along with them, and I at least know that atheists ain't that.

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't think a lot of people would prefer being the minority given no other information than someone else's religious background. Personally I would choose number 1. And the reason, I would choose that, is because I think it would be easier for me at least, to focus on what would be important and not on whatever religious stuff, someone might bring. Again, based on the conditions, I think at least working from the same basic philosophy on how you view the world can be beneficial.

So you would choose two atheists? I guess if I have to choose from choices 1-3, I would choose #1 too, and I would choose two Baha'is, for the same reasons you would choose two atheists.

 

[Altfish]

All religious laws conform to reason, and are suited to the people for whom they are framed, and for the age in which they are to be obeyed..........

I'd argue with that.. Religions can be decisive, inflicting their dogma onto non-believers.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'd argue with that.. Religions can be decisive, inflicting their dogma onto non-believers.

I fully agree, but I was talking about religious laws, not about the religious beliefs that Christians hurl at atheists.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Parents don't even treat their own kids as equals. You're asking for a miracle but will more than likely get lies.

I certainly try. But in no way do I treat them the same.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Let's assume that you were told that you had to choose two other people to join you for the rest of your life lets say you were shot off the planet to start a new colony somewhere in space. You would never return to Earth and there would be no communication again with those left behind, for whatever technical reason. And every decision made you would vote on.

The only thing you know is that everyone you have to choose from, is equally qualified but you have never met or spoken to any of them. You simply have to choose two people to come along with you, under the following rules.

1. You can choose two people that share your religious beliefs, like a Muslim could choose two other muslims, atheists two other atheists etc.

2. Choose two people sharing the same religion (you didn't know which, it would just be random), but it would be different from yours or two atheists etc.

3. Wouldn't care about it.

So when it comes down to it, would you choose option 1, 2 or 3?

Out of those choices, I'm choosing 1.
If I knew more about their rigorous beliefs, it could easily move to 3. But that's literally the only differentiator you're giving me. I can mitigate against one risk by choosing 1.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Let's assume that you were told that you had to choose two other people to join you for the rest of your life lets say you were shot off the planet to start a new colony somewhere in space. You would never return to Earth and there would be no communication again with those left behind, for whatever technical reason. And every decision made you would vote on.

The only thing you know is that everyone you have to choose from, is equally qualified but you have never met or spoken to any of them. You simply have to choose two people to come along with you, under the following rules.

1. You can choose two people that share your religious beliefs, like a Muslim could choose two other muslims, atheists two other atheists etc.

2. Choose two people sharing the same religion (you didn't know which, it would just be random), but it would be different from yours or two atheists etc.

3. Wouldn't care about it.

So when it comes down to it, would you choose option 1, 2 or 3?

OMGosh, religion would be way down at the bottom of the list of criteria for whom I would choose. I can't answer this question, LOL.