4 ms·

I'll acknowledge the hard work and kindness of (some) religious people if you'll acknowledge that we are talking about beliefs that are very obviously not true.

I'll acknowledge the hard work and kindness of (some) religious people if you'll acknowledge that we are talking about beliefs that are very obviously not true. This isn't mean to be sarcastic, it's a statement about the special treatment that religion gets. Some of us simply do not agree that the best approach to this is to hold hands and discuss it like adults -- for all of the hard work and kindness you mention, there is also quite a lot of bad stuff too. It's far from obvious that the good outweighs the bad.

rainbowmverse 9y ago
I'm looking forward to all the people promoting the Salvation Army ("salvation" is not about saving clothes from the trash) this winter while I know of at least one person who got kicked out of their shelter for being a trans person. Sometimes it's hard to tell whether its promoters don't know or don't care.
rwcarlsen 9y ago
> ...that are very obviously not true This is a sweeping generalization both about what religious beliefs are (for hundreds of religions) and also about how countless individuals uniquely interpret/feel about/understand those beliefs. I think that is very reductionist and incorrect position to hold. Is the bad stuff because of religion - or is it because humans? Humans have built up religion to what it is after all. > It's far from obvious that the good outweighs the bad It is also far from obvious that the bad outweighs the good. I never suggested anything about hand-holding.
- jordanpg 9y ago
  Well, they are very obviously not true, as obvious as any other supernatural claim that is patent nonsense. My point is exactly that religion gets special treatment in this particular context. Sure, we can debate the good/bad stuff, but only after it's acknowledged that the supernatural claims are false. After all, if the supernatural claims are true, that pretty much settles all the rest of the questions concerning religion.
- threatofrain 9y ago
  The core argument here is that religious people cannot discuss the falsity of their beliefs, but that's a problem in discussing other things, because religious people don't constrain their beliefs to the purely metaphysical. Can prayer help with stroke or not? Is Israel special to God's plans or not? Are other religions corrupting the souls of children with false idols or not? Does God generally regulate the affairs of the earth, including its ecology and climate, or not? Does God have prescriptions on medicine and biological contamination or not? Since the confidence of existence in supernatural interaction means that secular frameworks are ignorant, how are spiritually different groups supposed to discuss these issues?
dukoid 9y ago
For instance, in my opinion, no kid should be pressured to take part in any kind of religious activities it does not feel comfortable with. I found this disturbing as a kid in a way I can't describe adequately here. If a religion involves this, it is not making the world a "better place" for me.

rainbowmverse 9y ago

I'm looking forward to all the people promoting the Salvation Army ("salvation" is not about saving clothes from the trash) this winter while I know of at least one person who got kicked out of their shelter for being a trans person. Sometimes it's hard to tell whether its promoters don't know or don't care.

rwcarlsen 9y ago

> ...that are very obviously not true This is a sweeping generalization both about what religious beliefs are (for hundreds of religions) and also about how countless individuals uniquely interpret/feel about/understand those beliefs. I think that is very reductionist and incorrect position to hold. Is the bad stuff because of religion - or is it because humans? Humans have built up religion to what it is after all. > It's far from obvious that the good outweighs the bad It is also far from obvious that the bad outweighs the good. I never suggested anything about hand-holding.

jordanpg 9y ago
Well, they are very obviously not true, as obvious as any other supernatural claim that is patent nonsense. My point is exactly that religion gets special treatment in this particular context. Sure, we can debate the good/bad stuff, but only after it's acknowledged that the supernatural claims are false. After all, if the supernatural claims are true, that pretty much settles all the rest of the questions concerning religion.
threatofrain 9y ago
The core argument here is that religious people cannot discuss the falsity of their beliefs, but that's a problem in discussing other things, because religious people don't constrain their beliefs to the purely metaphysical. Can prayer help with stroke or not? Is Israel special to God's plans or not? Are other religions corrupting the souls of children with false idols or not? Does God generally regulate the affairs of the earth, including its ecology and climate, or not? Does God have prescriptions on medicine and biological contamination or not? Since the confidence of existence in supernatural interaction means that secular frameworks are ignorant, how are spiritually different groups supposed to discuss these issues?

dukoid 9y ago

For instance, in my opinion, no kid should be pressured to take part in any kind of religious activities it does not feel comfortable with. I found this disturbing as a kid in a way I can't describe adequately here. If a religion involves this, it is not making the world a "better place" for me.