|
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: Respect my ass (Read 43597 times)
|
meep-eep
Forum Admin
Enlightened
 Offline
Posts: 2847
|
I don't agree with creationist theology either but I can at least repect them and thier faith even though I do not share it.
I'm not going to go into the ID discussion anymore, but I do want to comment on this.
I'm all for treating people with at least basic decency, and I'm all for tolerating things that do not hurt anyone, but why should we respect anyone's beliefs?
What "having faith" means is "I don't actually know anything of this, but it feels right, so I'm going to behave as it is true." Why is that worthy of respect?
I can see how it deserves fear, or ridiculing, or perhaps feeling sorry for, but why would it deserve respect? On what grounds?
I respect the street preacher for being out there all day long, every day, regardless of the weather, but I don't respect him for his preachings, and I certainly don't respect the preachings themselves.
To hell with political correctness.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“When Juffo-Wup is complete
when at last there is no Void, no Non
when the Creators return
then we can finally rest.”
|
|
|
|
|
Neonlare
*Smell* controller
Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 277
Nut Case for Star Control
|
I don't agree with creationist theology either but I can at least repect them and thier faith even though I do not share it. I'm not going to go into the ID discussion anymore, but I do want to comment on this. I'm all for treating people with at least basic decency, and I'm all for tolerating things that do not hurt anyone, but why should we respect anyone's beliefs? What "having faith" means is "I don't actually know anything of this, but it feels right, so I'm going to behave as it is true." Why is that worthy of respect? I can see how it deserves fear, or ridiculing, or perhaps feeling sorry for, but why would it deserve respect? On what grounds? I respect the street preacher for being out there all day long, every day, regardless of the weather, but I don't respect him for his preachings, and I certainly don't respect the preachings themselves. To hell with political correctness.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zwbhAXe5yk <-- The Atheists' Nightmare.
Now, I'm not Religious myself, but I'm not Atheist either. Spiritualism runs through my family (My Grandmother being a Spiritualist who worked as a Medium in a Church, the other atending said Churches). Now I don't really care if people decide that there is/isn't a God, I know what I believe, and that's exactly it. It's what I believe, it doesn't have to be anyone elses. Same as your belief's are yours.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"would newton's law theory actually work if a Chmmr Avatar did a backwards pelvic thrust towards a planet and would this constitute an X=Y-0 in the part it ran straight into a Supox Blade and lasted long enough to survive?" - Elerium (as Valaggar)
|
|
|
Lukipela
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3620
The Ancient One
|
I'm all for treating people with at least basic decency, and I'm all for tolerating things that do not hurt anyone, but why should we respect anyone's beliefs?
I always assumed that idea was to respect someone's right to their beliefs, not the beliefs themselves. For instance, I respect the creationists right to believe in whatever he wants, but that doesn't mean I have to respect his belief.
What "having faith" means is "I don't actually know anything of this, but it feels right, so I'm going to behave as it is true." Why is that worthy of respect?
I can see how it deserves fear, or ridiculing, or perhaps feeling sorry for, but why would it deserve respect? On what grounds?
I would respect having faith on the same level as I respect having love, trust or any other such emotion. It takes some courage (or stupidity) to open yourself up like that. But obviously, it doesn't deserve any special respect. Having faith doesn't make you any sort of special gifted person.
I respect the street preacher for being out there all day long, every day, regardless of the weather, but I don't respect him for his preachings, and I certainly don't respect the preachings themselves.
To hell with political correctness.
As you should. Always respect people for their actions. But if their actions are driven by faith, shouldn't that be credited as well? If someone does something horrid in the name of their faith, both they and that faith get blamed. For the sake of balance, shouldn't it work the other way around as well?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What's up doc?
|
|
|
|
|
meep-eep
Forum Admin
Enlightened
Offline
Posts: 2847
|
I always assumed that idea was to respect someone's right to their beliefs, not the beliefs themselves. For instance, I respect the creationists right to believe in whatever he wants, but that doesn't mean I have to respect his belief. Well, if you take "respect" to mean "tolerate" or "admit the existence of" then I agree. But more often than not, people seem to use it to include that "respect" confers some additional "value".
I would respect having faith on the same level as I respect having love, trust or any other such emotion. It takes some courage (or stupidity) to open yourself up like that. Why not say you respect courage (whatever that means) (or stupidity)?
(And I think it takes a lot more "courage" to take responsibility for your own actions, and to face up to the possibility that life has no meaning, than to hide in the comfort of the unfounded belief that somehow it all does make sense, and if you stay on His good side, everything will work out for you).
Always respect people for their actions. But if their actions are driven by faith, shouldn't that be credited as well? If someone does something horrid in the name of their faith, both they and that faith get blamed. For the sake of balance, shouldn't it work the other way around as well? Ah. The Iraq defense. "So they didn't have WMDs, but the Iraqi people are better off now, so we made the right decision when we went after the WMDs." (Don't flame me for the "better off now", I didn't make this up.)
You can credit a faith for having a positive result, but that doesn't make acting based on a self-deception ok.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“When Juffo-Wup is complete
when at last there is no Void, no Non
when the Creators return
then we can finally rest.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xenoclone
*Many bubbles*
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 104
|
How is either evolution or global warming religious? I'm not following on that one.
If I go take a cylinder of ice out of an ice cap, measure its CO2 versus temperature ratio, and determine that temperature has gone up in the past with C02 levels... how is that religious? And where did Jesus say that curbing pollution or being more efficient with energy is a sin?
I should note that I'm in no way anti-Christian... I'm marrying one this August. 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lukipela
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3620
The Ancient One
|
Well, if you take "respect" to mean "tolerate" or "admit the existence of" then I agree. But more often than not, people seem to use it to include that "respect" confers some additional "value".
I take respect to mean "Respect can refer to the objective, unbiased consideration and regard for the rights, values, beliefs and property of all people. Kant's categorical imperative as well as what is commonly understood of being a gentleman incorporate the concept of respect." Source is wiki, crappy as it may be. Of course, If you rather see it as that you are merely tolerating others rights to say, freedom of expression, right to vote or right to coexist then you are essentially correct.
Why not say you respect courage (whatever that means) (or stupidity)?
Because different things can inspire courage/stupidity in those who are not naturally courageous. Such things are love and faith. It would be incorrect for me to state that someone is an idiot because he did something foolish in the throes of passion. Equally well faith can inspire someone to deeds they might not otherwise have performed, be they good or bad. To simply ignore the reasons behind actions seems a tad foolish.
(And I think it takes a lot more "courage" to take responsibility for your own actions, and to face up to the possibility that life has no meaning, than to hide in the comfort of the unfounded belief that somehow it all does make sense, and if you stay on His good side, everything will work out for you).
Because if you know that you will be judged for your actions in both life and afterlife, you don't have to take any responsibility for what you do? Wouldn't you be more prone to think about what you do? Also, I find it silly to say that lack of faith would mean a lack of meaning, we all make our own meanings. Not being an atheist I can't vouch for this, but I assume that our atheist brethren do have purposes of some sort in their life, be they mundane or not. I doubt they just walk around blindly going "Oh no meaning, oh no morals, woe are us!". Also, feel free to hide in the comfort of whatever belief of purpose/non-purpose that sustains you, but to assume that all beliefs are summed up that simply once again seems a tad silly.
Ah. The Iraq defense. "So they didn't have WMDs, but the Iraqi people are better off now, so we made the right decision when we went after the WMDs." (Don't flame me for the "better off now", I didn't make this up.)
You can credit a faith for having a positive result, but that doesn't make acting based on a self-deception ok.
And now I am supremely confused. I said "Judge people by their actions" and you make some sort of war case of it? Judging the Americans based on their actions in the war doesn't really justify it, unless you count "lying to start a extremely poorly planned war" to somehow be a virtuous action. Elaborate please?
I didn’t mean to say you did. I was just saying Christian hating is quite common and generally ignored.
That's because Christians are a powerful majority in a powerful part of the world. Few of the downtrodden enjoy their overlords company very much, even centuries after most grievances have been settled. As a side question, where does all this Christian bashing, hating and so forth take place? At least in Europe, Christians aren't a hated and despised group of lepers. And I would assuem they aren't in the US either.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What's up doc?
|
|
|
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1387
|
Neonlare
Now, I'm not Religious myself, but I'm not Atheist either. Spiritualism runs through my family (My Grandmother being a Spiritualist who worked as a Medium in a Church, the other atending said Churches).
Atheist means you believe there is/are no god(s) that exist or have ever existed or will ever exist outside of people's imaginations. A god is something that can do things not naturally possible, things that are "supernatural" (whatever little ground that term actually covers anymore). If you are unsure either way, then you are Agnostic.
A Spirit can have supernatural abilities or it cannot and I think it can even be either supernatural/natural itself. But it is at least supposed to be indestructible either way.
So you might be both an Atheist and a Spiritualist at the same time, depending on your personal definitions from what I understand.
Bioslayer
But hating Christians is politically correct.
Everything else Bioslayer said after this is crap, but in the US at least, this much is true (except for the "hate" part, which is a wee bit strong). There is basically nothing you cannot say about Christianity, which is not the case at all for Juddaism and Islam, its older and younger sibling religions. Looking at the whole European Muhbombhead media firings, I would say the same is true in the EU nations as well. Interestingly, the same can probably be said for Atheists, it is not strongly politically incorrect to bash their beliefs either I don't think.
Do not know about non-middle-eastern religions like Hinduism and the various micro-religions of the world. Probably no one cares about them either way so they have no protection but are never verbally directly attacked anyway.
But us Agnostics, we don't have any beliefs to bash in the first place and are thus invincible. And because we do not put faith into anything, we are unaffected by delusional beliefs. We also have limited telekinesis and are considered highly desirable by all women.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 07, 2007, 05:44:54 pm by Deus_Siddis »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Valaggar
Guest
|
But us Agnostics, we don't have any beliefs to bash in the first place and are thus invincible. And because we do not put faith into anything, we are unaffected by delusional beliefs. Not really. Agnostics believe in the doctrine that the existence of the supernatural is unknown/unknowable. So they do have a belief too.
The only people that don't have any beliefs whatsoever are indifferent people, who don't care about these issues.
Your inspirational Bible quote of the day, Mathew 10:34: Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household'. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. Know what you believe.
"He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me." - What is your problem with this? God is by definition superior to any relatives. He is, after all, Creator, while parents are only those who gave birth to somebody. And His love knows no bounds.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11
|
|
|
|
|
