3 ms·

> The way we're headed, religious belief is becoming more and more fringe. Not really https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism ht

> The way we're headed, religious belief is becoming more and more fringe. Not really https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Demographics_... but even if it was so, at which point is it OK to discriminate against people holding fringe views?

JabavuAdams 16y ago
I don't see any stats on change over time in the link you provided. Are you seriously suggesting that religion is as well-respected today as it was 100 years ago? > but even if it was so, at which point is it OK to discriminate against people holding fringe views When they are a danger to others. Insanity is culturally-defined. We currently discriminate against people we consider insane.
- spindritf 16y ago
  > Are you seriously suggesting that religion is as well-respected today as it was 100 years ago? There is a huge leap from "more and more fringe" to "as well-respected today as it was 100 years ago". Religious views are common, not "more and more fringe", not even just "fringe". Also, extrapolating observations about popularity of religious views doesn't seem to me like a very reliable way of making predictions. >> at which point is it OK to discriminate against people holding fringe views > When they are a danger to others. Which is clearly not the case. > We currently discriminate against people we consider insane. Sure, but the trend is to make the effort not to. People like John Nash https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/John_Forbes_Nash,_Jr.#Schizophrenia https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/John_Forbes_N... receive recognition despite their problems, or for overcoming them.
  - JabavuAdams 16y ago
    > There is a huge leap from "more and more fringe" to "as well-respected today as it was 100 years ago". Okay, I suppose it depends which circles you travel in. > Which is clearly not the case. Debatable. The religious influence on politics in the US has harmed many. The influence of fundamentalists around the world has harmed many. > We currently discriminate against people we consider insane. Sure, but the trend is to make the effort not to. People like John Nash https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/John_Forbes_N.. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/John_Forbes_N.... receive recognition despite their problems, or for overcoming them. Yeah, but he wouldn't be allowed to say join the military, or to become a judge. In any case, I'm not for blacklisting scientists. Many great historical scientists had bizarre ideas that are less well remembered than their main discoveries.

JabavuAdams 16y ago

I don't see any stats on change over time in the link you provided. Are you seriously suggesting that religion is as well-respected today as it was 100 years ago? > but even if it was so, at which point is it OK to discriminate against people holding fringe views When they are a danger to others. Insanity is culturally-defined. We currently discriminate against people we consider insane.

spindritf 16y ago
> Are you seriously suggesting that religion is as well-respected today as it was 100 years ago? There is a huge leap from "more and more fringe" to "as well-respected today as it was 100 years ago". Religious views are common, not "more and more fringe", not even just "fringe". Also, extrapolating observations about popularity of religious views doesn't seem to me like a very reliable way of making predictions. >> at which point is it OK to discriminate against people holding fringe views > When they are a danger to others. Which is clearly not the case. > We currently discriminate against people we consider insane. Sure, but the trend is to make the effort not to. People like John Nash https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/John_Forbes_Nash,_Jr.#Schizophrenia https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/John_Forbes_N... receive recognition despite their problems, or for overcoming them.
- JabavuAdams 16y ago
  > There is a huge leap from "more and more fringe" to "as well-respected today as it was 100 years ago". Okay, I suppose it depends which circles you travel in. > Which is clearly not the case. Debatable. The religious influence on politics in the US has harmed many. The influence of fundamentalists around the world has harmed many. > We currently discriminate against people we consider insane. Sure, but the trend is to make the effort not to. People like John Nash https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/John_Forbes_N.. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/John_Forbes_N.... receive recognition despite their problems, or for overcoming them. Yeah, but he wouldn't be allowed to say join the military, or to become a judge. In any case, I'm not for blacklisting scientists. Many great historical scientists had bizarre ideas that are less well remembered than their main discoveries.