Is there a reason?

[A Vestigial Mote]

OK, your definitions are *much* harsher than mine. For example, I 'condemn' someone when I think their views are immoral and should be fought against. I 'mock' by pointing out the absurdity of their views.

This is a good clarification point... @Amanaki - the threat of removal from Earth is, I must concede, further than I would have figured went the mockery or condemnation you were speaking of.

In the case of someone literally threatening that you should be removed from Earth for your beliefs, there is definitely reason to take note about that person and their feelings, and even potentially reach out for help to push back, and (depending on the level of threat) contacting the authorities to discuss the matter. This also holds if someone is falsely defaming you or the group of your religion publicly, to the point that it begins to harm the group or individuals in some physically manifested way (like loss of funds or support, persecution resulting in loss of rights or people actually getting hurt etc.)

But, to clarify my position somewhat, I feel that someone telling you, personally, that your beliefs are wrong, bad or stupid doesn't qualify for that level of escalation in the slightest. It may call for you sticking up for yourself, and explaining why you think they don't have a solid basis to speak that way, but even if they are mocking - if they have valid points to make, and those points "hurt," I, myself, am not so sure you can entirely put the blame on the person doing the mocking for that "hurt." The moment I feel hurt by particularly targeted words in a one-on-one conversation is the moment I must admit that there is some truth to what is being said, and that I am probably irrationally holding onto something that isn't doing me good.

 

[osgart]

When someone's belief carries consequences for those who do not believe that way, i tend to criticize the belief.

 

[Nakosis]

Why do some people make fun of other peoples beliefs?
Why do some people make fun of religious practice?
Why do some people make fun of people who dedicate their life to the spiritual?

Humor, sometimes we need to not take ourselves so seriously.

Sometimes, some religious ideas need to be mocked. If folks keep their religion to themselves it's not really a problem. Some religious folks who get in your face, or take for granted their belief is a absolute truth that all need to accept, it needs to be mocked.

Being mocked can also build resolve, however there is a fine line between mocking and bullying that really shouldn't be crossed. All beliefs, not only religious beliefs up for making fun off. Keeps us sane, keeps us straight but it should never be personal. I can make fun of your beliefs but still respect you as an individual.

 

[youknowme]

Why do some people make fun of other peoples beliefs?
Why do some people make fun of religious practice?
Why do some people make fun of people who dedicate their life to the spiritual?

Are you assuming all beliefs are equal?

 

[Jumi]

OK, your definitions are *much* harsher than mine. For example, I 'condemn' someone when I think their views are immoral and should be fought against. I 'mock' by pointing out the absurdity of their views.

I don't remember seeing you mocking anyone on this forum so far and I think we've been in many of the same threads. So perhaps mocking means something different than the word that is translated to "mocking" in our native languages.

 

[Jumi]

In the case of someone literally threatening that you should be removed from Earth for your beliefs, there is definitely reason to take note about that person and their feelings, and even potentially reach out for help to push back, and (depending on the level of threat) contacting the authorities to discuss the matter. This also holds if someone is falsely defaming you or the group of your religion publicly, to the point that it begins to harm the group or individuals in some physically manifested way (like loss of funds or support, persecution resulting in loss of rights or people actually getting hurt etc.)

I believe the definition of defamation includes false claims on it's own. There's no rightful way to defame a group. I think you're thinking of disproving some beliefs.

But, to clarify my position somewhat, I feel that someone telling you, personally, that your beliefs are wrong, bad or stupid doesn't qualify for that level of escalation in the slightest. It may call for you sticking up for yourself, and explaining why you think they don't have a solid basis to speak that way, but even if they are mocking - if they have valid points to make, and those points "hurt," I, myself, am not so sure you can entirely put the blame on the person doing the mocking for that "hurt."

I don't think valid points are mocking either, but when people want to make valid points they should be prepared to notice when their valid points don't "stick." Often people do overestimate their own capability to make valid points. You don't think YEC creationists are making valid points? To their minds they are and our response to them is "emotional."

The moment I feel hurt by particularly targeted words in a one-on-one conversation is the moment I must admit that there is some truth to what is being said, and that I am probably irrationally holding onto something that isn't doing me good.

If someone were to lie about your position, wouldn't you feel somewhat hurt? Emotional responses aren't proof either way in my opinion.

 

[dianaiad]

Why do some people make fun of other peoples beliefs?
Why do some people make fun of religious practice?
Why do some people make fun of people who dedicate their life to the spiritual?

Because they can.
Because they want to justify their own self centeredness, and don't want to acknowledge that, yeah...there just might be people who find comfort and happiness in believing differently.

That's why

 

[dianaiad]

I'm sure there are several reasons. But I won't speak for others. I'll only speak for myself.

For me, I make fun of a lot of things in life, including myself and my own behaviors and actions. I like to laugh.

Of course, I'm careful about making fun at the expense of others and exercise discretion, but I think often people are too sensitive and tend to take things personally when they shouldn't. If one doesn't allow oneself to be susceptible to the judgment of others (and self-judgment, for that matter) that would likely lead one to more happiness and personal freedom.

If one makes fun of your beliefs, religious practices, or dedication to spirituality, does this somehow diminish their value to you? Does it matter what others think?

Only when it impacts me. Like when people who make fun of my beliefs jazz themselves up to throwing stones.

I have a problem with that.

Or when people who make fun of the beliefs of others do so by blocking access to events or services, or vandalism, or desecrating things holy to that group, or attempting to disrupt events and/or services, or...well, you understand where I'm going with this.

Since I have experienced all these things myself, you can understand why I have a very dim view of those who 'make fun of,' or mock, the sacred beliefs of others.

 

[Jumi]

Or when people who make fun of the beliefs of others do so by blocking access to events or services, or vandalism, or desecrating things holy to that group, or attempting to disrupt events and/or services, or...well, you understand where I'm going with this.

That sounds horrible.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I believe the definition of defamation includes false claims on it's own. There's no rightful way to defame a group. I think you're thinking of disproving some beliefs.

You're right that "defaming" ends up including libel/slander for the most part, which are both attempts to misrepresent - but also just means an attempt to maliciously attack the reputation of. At times there could be statements ringing of truth, but that truth be stated in a simplistic and purposefully negative way. Like "Some Catholics literally believe they are eating flesh when they partake of the Eucharist!" This could be used to negatively paint the ritual as something akin to acceptance of cannabalism, but this statement itself isn't altogether untrue. So, I wouldn't hold this sort of mockery to the same standard as something like libel or slander. If someone were to fact check, they would find the statement to be sound, and represent reality - not a lie. And yet looking further might reveal that it is still more symbolic than anything, and there are no Catholics who openly favor cannibalism as part of their doctrine.

I don't think valid points are mocking either, but when people want to make valid points they should be prepared to notice when their valid points don't "stick." Often people do overestimate their own capability to make valid points. You don't think YEC creationists are making valid points? To their minds they are and our response to them is "emotional."

Mocking can contain completely valid points. An easy example is a friend of mine, who used to like to say he held women he wanted to, or was willing to date to a "two-finger" standard. I won't go into the sordid details of what he claimed that meant, but in the end it meant he wanted thin/toned women, when he himself was overweight, and did not take care of himself very well. I mocked him for this every chance I got. I had a point... and damned if he was going to find himself "safe" from ridicule around me.

And YEC creationists, specifically, make their "points" without regard to evidentiary support. They simply don't care. And so there is absolutely no reason to care about their "arguments" either. They should be ripped to shreds for the junk that they are. Just as if someone was seriously trying to argue that the moon is made of cheese. Who cares about their points, or whether they even think they are truly correct in making assertions? They have no evidence, there's no benefit to their holding that belief, etc.

If someone were to lie about your position, wouldn't you feel somewhat hurt? Emotional responses aren't proof either way in my opinion.

If they lie about my position to others? Sure, I get angry. Like anyone, I don't want my position to be misrepresented so as not to end up having the position itself hurt/damaged in the minds of other people who I may need to do business with at some point. And I, myself, sustain such "damage" as a function of how much those other people are swayed by the words of the one doing the misrepresenting... but I covered off on this in my original statements about defamation/libel/slander. Otherwise... someone saying a lie about my position directly to me is nothing more than a nuisance, and an opportunity to educate someone. I don't get hurt by the direct words of others that are lies/misrepresentation or misunderstanding. There is absolutely no reason to be.

 

[stvdv]

1: Why do some people make fun of other peoples beliefs?
2: Why do some people make fun of religious practice?
3: Why do some people make fun of people who dedicate their life to the spiritual?

Most people hardened themselves to not feel their pain, becoming insensitive to virtues like compassion/Love. Hence they act insensitive
1: By suppressing their emotions they become insensitive and lack virtues like "compassion", "empathy" and "Love". Resulting in making fun etc.
2: When you are connected to Love there is no urge to "make fun of religious practice of others". It just reflects their own imperfections.
3: When you are connected to Love there is no urge to "make fun of people who chose a spiritual life". It just reflects their own imperfection.

 

[Jumi]

You're right that "defaming" ends up including libel/slander for the most part, which are both attempts to misrepresent - but also just means an attempt to maliciously attack the reputation of. At times there could be statements ringing of truth, but that truth be stated in a simplistic and purposefully negative way. Like "Some Catholics literally believe they are eating flesh when they partake of the Eucharist!" This could be used to negatively paint the ritual as something akin to acceptance of cannabalism, but this statement itself isn't altogether untrue. So, I wouldn't hold this sort of mockery to the same standard as something like libel or slander. If someone were to fact check, they would find the statement to be sound, and represent reality - not a lie. And yet looking further might reveal that it is still more symbolic than anything, and there are no Catholics who openly favor cannibalism as part of their doctrine.

I admit I've never heard the word used for anything else than "libel" so I accept that you could be right on the word. The way Christians have been portrayed as cannibals hasn't been without consequences though. So joking about it might not be as innocent as you might think. As to Catholic and some other traditional Christian beliefs, the "flesh of Jesus" isn't "symbolic", but for Protestants it is symbolic. The people trying to steal and analyze the Catholic wafers for DNA had their reason for it, though unethical. But that might be another whole set of discussions...

Mocking can contain completely valid points. An easy example is a friend of mine, who used to like to say he held women he wanted to, or was willing to date to a "two-finger" standard. I won't go into the sordid details of what he claimed that meant, but in the end it meant he wanted thin/toned women, when he himself was overweight, and did not take care of himself very well. I mocked him for this every chance I got. I had a point... and damned if he was going to find himself "safe" from ridicule around me.

It can be some sort of hypocrisy, yes, but there are also people who prefer overweight men/women while being in shape themselves. So your friend isn't completely wrong, he might be a bit unrealistic if he expects to find a partner who would follow his standards and accept him also.

And YEC creationists, specifically, make their "points" without regard to evidentiary support. They simply don't care. And so there is absolutely no reason to care about their "arguments" either. They should be ripped to shreds for the junk that they are. Just as if someone was seriously trying to argue that the moon is made of cheese. Who cares about their points, or whether they even think they are truly correct in making assertions? They have no evidence, there's no benefit to their holding that belief, etc.

I agree with you on the YEC creationism, which is why I brought the example. But suppose someone wanted to criticize my theistic view and instead took to criticizing some minor modern sect of Christianity and it's views. His "valid points" would be as pointless to me as a YECs.

If they lie about my position to others? Sure, I get angry. Like anyone, I don't want my position to be misrepresented so as not to end up having the position itself hurt/damaged in the minds of other people who I may need to do business with at some point. And I, myself, sustain such "damage" as a function of how much those other people are swayed by the words of the one doing the misrepresenting... but I covered off on this in my original statements about defamation/libel/slander. Otherwise... someone saying a lie about my position directly to me is nothing more than a nuisance, and an opportunity to educate someone. I don't get hurt by the direct words of others that are lies/misrepresentation or misunderstanding. There is absolutely no reason to be.

Well you said if someone gets angry, then the point that makes someone angry about might be because they have validity, when in fact it's hard to know if the person who gets angry actually sees it as a misrepresentation. I think many people who are against certain religions(or atheism) make such mistakes with quite high frequency and I think to the disfavor of what they were actually trying to do.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Well you said if someone gets angry, then the point that makes someone angry about might be because they have validity, when in fact it's hard to know if the person who gets angry actually sees it as a misrepresentation. I think many people who are against certain religions(or atheism) make such mistakes with quite high frequency and I think to the disfavor of what they were actually trying to do.

What I said was that if someone gets hurt by inaccurate/misrepresenting words stated directly to them, then there is likely something of note to be taken from the words. If they are affecting you in a one-on-one conversation, then how can they be just outright lies? Isn't it as easy as laughing off a person's blatant foolishness if they are lying/mistaken? The only reason to get angry in a one-on-one conversation is if a person consistently and unabashedly continues to make the same exact statements over and over again in the conversation after you have tried to correct the misinformation.

I myself will almost never say the same thing twice, but will reframe, or change analogies, or let the conversation evolve toward some other related topic, etc. If someone has given me their latest reason for "X", then that latest reason is what I address/tackle... never a rehash of the same exact point I just made about "X" that they attempted to refute, and only going back to "X" if there is some new/missed point to be made. If, however, they never answered my question about "X" when posed, then I will try to revisit, time and time again, and maybe we'll find out just how scared they are to give an answer.

Point being, all of this stuff is situational. And it isn't as easy as "hurting someone is bad" and "respecting someone is good." Those may be the case generally, but to say they are hard and fast laws of interaction between humans is naivete.

 

[Jumi]

What I said was that if someone gets hurt by inaccurate/misrepresenting words stated directly to them, then there is likely something of note to be taken from the words. If they are affecting you in a one-on-one conversation, then how can they be just outright lies? Isn't it as easy as laughing off a person's blatant foolishness if they are lying/mistaken? The only reason to get angry in a one-on-one conversation is if a person consistently and unabashedly continues to make the same exact statements over and over again in the conversation after you have tried to correct the misinformation.

Don't know. I'd guess everyone can be a bit different on that. I get more angry at lies I guess than someone really trying hard and honestly to get at my beliefs. That's what I'm here for, if someone fixes a mistake for me, that's worth it. I also don't generally laugh at people or their mistakes even if I think their views are full of it.

Point being, all of this stuff is situational. And it isn't as easy as "hurting someone is bad" and "respecting someone is good." Those may be the case generally, but to say they are hard and fast laws of interaction between humans is naivete.

Agreed. I'm not a big fan of rulebooks myself, I think if we observe how discussions develop we will notice if they're purposeful or not. Of course what is purposeful for you might not be so for me.

 

[dianaiad]

That sounds horrible.

Standard operating procedure. Well... not the rock throwing so much. I haven't had THAT happen for over forty years.

On the other hand, I've never been to Temple Square in Salt Lake City where I didn't see the sort of mockery and demonstrations I have described.

Pretty much every vocal or 'different' group has had that sort of thing happen to them. I don't like it.

And I don't do it.

 

[Spirit of Light]

This is a good clarification point... @Amanaki - the threat of removal from Earth is, I must concede, further than I would have figured went the mockery or condemnation you were speaking of.

In the case of someone literally threatening that you should be removed from Earth for your beliefs, there is definitely reason to take note about that person and their feelings, and even potentially reach out for help to push back, and (depending on the level of threat) contacting the authorities to discuss the matter. This also holds if someone is falsely defaming you or the group of your religion publicly, to the point that it begins to harm the group or individuals in some physically manifested way (like loss of funds or support, persecution resulting in loss of rights or people actually getting hurt etc.)

But, to clarify my position somewhat, I feel that someone telling you, personally, that your beliefs are wrong, bad or stupid doesn't qualify for that level of escalation in the slightest. It may call for you sticking up for yourself, and explaining why you think they don't have a solid basis to speak that way, but even if they are mocking - if they have valid points to make, and those points "hurt," I, myself, am not so sure you can entirely put the blame on the person doing the mocking for that "hurt." The moment I feel hurt by particularly targeted words in a one-on-one conversation is the moment I must admit that there is some truth to what is being said, and that I am probably irrationally holding onto something that isn't doing me good.

Here ou have a lot of good points
To disagree with someones religious view is not wrong in it self ofcourse And we who follow a path (religion) should accept that people will ask questions or even test us from time to time. But what my OP was meant for was those people who say very negative or wrong about a religion without haveing the knowledge or understanding of the religion they make critique of. Example calling a Gof evil because they have a "rule" or guideline that say different then the moral code of today. The rules or guideline are ment for those who follow that religion, not for others.
And i noticed that when people lie my self bring up the "moral" word we tend to get slamed are people afrid of moral code? i do not have answer to that

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Why do some people make fun of other peoples beliefs?
Why do some people make fun of religious practice?
Why do some people make fun of people who dedicate their life to the spiritual?

You could look from the point of view of others, and add 'Why do some people dislike or distrust the non spiritual'. Or 'Why do some countries have laws discriminating against beliefs/non-beliefs'?

Ultimately, people are people, and some seem to struggle past a schoolyard mentality of 'People like me vs the rest'.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Here ou have a lot of good points
To disagree with someones religious view is not wrong in it self ofcourse And we who follow a path (religion) should accept that people will ask questions or even test us from time to time. But what my OP was meant for was those people who say very negative or wrong about a religion without haveing the knowledge or understanding of the religion they make critique of. Example calling a Gof evil because they have a "rule" or guideline that say different then the moral code of today. The rules or guideline are ment for those who follow that religion, not for others.
And i noticed that when people lie my self bring up the "moral" word we tend to get slamed are people afrid of moral code? i do not have answer to that

Well, there is no use claiming that a god's moral code is greater than that of humanity at the outset, since many of the rules/laws of revealed religions have been done away with in favor of better secular/humanistic rules and laws that we have in place for those things now. Obvious examples are slavery, treatment and rights of women, setting aside homosexuality as an issue, etc. As humans, we have deemed the rules we have in place better and more conducive to maintaining civilized society - allowing our ideas of morality to change along with our growth as a species. Gods generally do not allow for this kind of change. Their edicts stand as a given - there's no talking it over, no trying to get a god to see your side of things, no opportunity to appeal. Hence the reason some people may call the god "evil" - because the god's moral edicts may not stand up to our more appropriate rules set forth in modern times, and the god doesn't seem to care. And in many cases, the god is even reported to have requested that people do things even the god itself says are immoral! Like me asking you to kill someone for me. That would be evil. And the god has done something similar, and so people call it evil... because that is the term we have reserved for actions like that. And if the person who believes would agree that asking another to commit murder is immoral, and then agrees also that their god has asked another to commit murder, then we are left with an admission that their god has committed evil. Perhaps the god isn't all evil... but people are really very unhappy to have to admit that their god has done evil. And this, quite honestly, presents itself as a form of deceitfulness. If the believer is unwilling to admit that what the god has done should be considered evil when they agree with all terms presented as evidence, then they are lying. And that's why they are then taken to task. That's why some people get frustrated, and that's why people start hurling insults.

 

[LuisDantas]

Why do some people make fun of other peoples beliefs?
Why do some people make fun of religious practice?
Why do some people make fun of people who dedicate their life to the spiritual?

There are in fact a few very good reasons.

First and foremost, it must be acknowledged that there is a pretty huge and varied bunch of beliefs and practices claiming to be religious or spiritual.

There is a very significant degree of genuine prejudice and unfair repudiation of the misunderstood happening at any given time, but there is also a lot of destructive social and political pressure demanding unfair privilege or expecting to keep enjoying it.

Perhaps paradoxically, one chief reason for expressing feelings of ridicule is to make it possible to learn better. If the feelings exist, hiding them is hardly any solution to anything. Some form of acceptance and confrontation must be engaged on so that resolution can be attained.

Beyond that, a sad reality is that so-called religious and spiritual beliefs come in all shapes and forms, and it turns out that quite a few are hateful, intolerant, abusive and/or just insane.

There are many ways of dealing with that, a full spectrum from voluntary obliviousness to all-out repression. It is a very risky field to navigate, but to deal with it we need. It is necessary to clarify which groups have which goals with which levels of internal cohesion and of mental sanity. There is simply no other way to enable true respect, nor to engage in proper defense when it is called for.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why do some people make fun of other peoples beliefs?
Why do some people make fun of religious practice?
Why do some people make fun of people who dedicate their life to the spiritual?

I'ld guess, for the same reason one makes fun of Trekkies or bigfoot hunters.