4 ms·

Not to defend OP, but to answer your question: I'd say you have far more choice concerning your religion than in your sexual orientation, race or age - at least

by netrus 12y ago

Not to defend OP, but to answer your question: I'd say you have far more choice concerning your religion than in your sexual orientation, race or age - at least in the Western Society, where you are free to go Christian->Atheist->Muslim, if you want to.

irishcoffee 12y ago
So you're saying its ok to have bigoted opinions about things people choose? Honest question.
- Elrac 12y ago
  Your question may be honest, but you may not be aware how strongly you loaded it with your use of the word "bigoted." In looking through definitions, I came across words like "extreme," "unwilling to change," "prejudiced," "unfair," and "intolerant." You seem to be trying to propose that being opposed to one religion (or all) is an extreme position - which I think is debatable in view of just how many people fit this bill. Is this position prejudiced if it's based on thorough examination and reasoning? If people come by this position based on evidence and reason, do you have a reason to believe they could never be convinced they're mistaken? Finally, is there something wrong with being intolerant of intolerance, oppression and violence? People compare social institutions, technologies and ideas all the time. And people develop opinions on them; some are viewed as better than others. This is the social learning process which has taken us (more or less) from cave dwelling, widespread violence, ignorance, slavery and "an eye for an eye" to the foundations modern societies rest on, more or less to everyone's approval. You wouldn't be trying to use a knee-jerk negative word to discourage, for religions, the kind of discussion which has stood us in good stead in many other areas of social discourse? I hope you won't be too offended by this literally shitty analogy that was the first to come to my mind: Imagine a modern society just like ours, but in which people choose to do without toilets. Nobody talks about it much, it's just what they've always done, and they're unwilling to break with tradition in this respect. It's common practice to do your "business" in the street gutter, next to the curb. There's a daily removal service, and a 3x daily deodorizing service, and they reduce the associated problems. Still, this society has an unusual rate of some infectious diseases, and especially in the summer, deodorizing just doesn't seem to keep up. Here's a different society with a different choice on how to do things. Would you be bigoted if you criticized this society for the pursuit of this practice? If you feel it's important to accept the choices of other groups, would you be willing to live in such a society? Would you think it wrong to at least try to talk to those folks about improving their lives by re-thinking their stance on indoor plumbing? I think I still owe you the answer to your question. So: Yes, I think it's OK to critically examine all ideas, and choices, including religious ones, and to raise those objections we feel are in order. Why on Earth not?
  - irishcoffee 12y ago
    > You seem to be trying to propose that being opposed to one religion (or all) is an extreme position - which I think is debatable in view of just how many people fit this bill. If a person has devoted themselves to a specific religion, and they have not (and do not intend) in any way interrupt, impede, or inconvenience their fellow man, I don't see the debate. The Westboro baptist church is/are as fucked up as the 9/11 bombers. Believe whatever you want. Acting on it in a way that hurts fellow humans, completely different debate. > You wouldn't be trying to use a knee-jerk negative word to discourage, for religions, the kind of discussion which has stood us in good stead in many other areas of social discourse? You're picking on a word. I used it for a purpose: to make anyone who read the reply think about why religion is some special-case group of people we're all "allowed" to discriminate against. I could use your exact same argument to argue that its OK to discriminate against conservatives, liberals, Lakers fans, lawyers, women, the disabled, men, children, ect. Pick a group, substitute "religion" in your argument for whatever you'd like. > I hope you won't be too offended by this literally shitty analogy that was the first to come to my mind: Imagine a modern society just like ours, but in which people choose to do without toilets. Nobody talks about it much, it's just what they've always done, and they're unwilling to break with tradition in this respect. It's common practice to do your "business" in the street gutter, next to the curb. There's a daily removal service, and a 3x daily deodorizing service, and they reduce the associated problems. Still, this society has an unusual rate of some infectious diseases, and especially in the summer, deodorizing just doesn't seem to keep up. Here's a different society with a different choice on how to do things. If you would like me to take the bait of comparing religious beliefs to shitting in the street, I'm not going to bite. > Would you be bigoted if you criticized this society for the pursuit of this practice? If you feel it's important to accept the choices of other groups, would you be willing to live in such a society? Would you think it wrong to at least try to talk to those folks about improving their lives by re-thinking their stance on indoor plumbing? If you think comparing a thought/belief/idea to someone shitting on your front lawn similar, again, this is a lost argument. Thoughts don't hurt people, except maybe the thinker. Actions hurt people. Someone believing in Buddha isn't comparable to someone shitting on your lawn. Honestly, wow. > I think I still owe you the answer to your question. So: Yes, I think it's OK to critically examine all ideas, and choices, including religious ones, and to raise those objections we feel are in order. Why on Earth not? I agree with you. Critically examining ideas is a fantastic idea. Critically examining religion is a fantastic idea. Raising objections, no. Do you think its OK to raise objections to gays/lesbians and the lifestyle they chose? if course not. If someone is devoted to the islam religion, should I object to their lifestyle? No, of course not. You did not answer my question at all.

by netrus 12y ago

irishcoffee 12y ago

So you're saying its ok to have bigoted opinions about things people choose? Honest question.

Elrac 12y ago
Your question may be honest, but you may not be aware how strongly you loaded it with your use of the word "bigoted." In looking through definitions, I came across words like "extreme," "unwilling to change," "prejudiced," "unfair," and "intolerant." You seem to be trying to propose that being opposed to one religion (or all) is an extreme position - which I think is debatable in view of just how many people fit this bill. Is this position prejudiced if it's based on thorough examination and reasoning? If people come by this position based on evidence and reason, do you have a reason to believe they could never be convinced they're mistaken? Finally, is there something wrong with being intolerant of intolerance, oppression and violence? People compare social institutions, technologies and ideas all the time. And people develop opinions on them; some are viewed as better than others. This is the social learning process which has taken us (more or less) from cave dwelling, widespread violence, ignorance, slavery and "an eye for an eye" to the foundations modern societies rest on, more or less to everyone's approval. You wouldn't be trying to use a knee-jerk negative word to discourage, for religions, the kind of discussion which has stood us in good stead in many other areas of social discourse? I hope you won't be too offended by this literally shitty analogy that was the first to come to my mind: Imagine a modern society just like ours, but in which people choose to do without toilets. Nobody talks about it much, it's just what they've always done, and they're unwilling to break with tradition in this respect. It's common practice to do your "business" in the street gutter, next to the curb. There's a daily removal service, and a 3x daily deodorizing service, and they reduce the associated problems. Still, this society has an unusual rate of some infectious diseases, and especially in the summer, deodorizing just doesn't seem to keep up. Here's a different society with a different choice on how to do things. Would you be bigoted if you criticized this society for the pursuit of this practice? If you feel it's important to accept the choices of other groups, would you be willing to live in such a society? Would you think it wrong to at least try to talk to those folks about improving their lives by re-thinking their stance on indoor plumbing? I think I still owe you the answer to your question. So: Yes, I think it's OK to critically examine all ideas, and choices, including religious ones, and to raise those objections we feel are in order. Why on Earth not?
- irishcoffee 12y ago
  > You seem to be trying to propose that being opposed to one religion (or all) is an extreme position - which I think is debatable in view of just how many people fit this bill. If a person has devoted themselves to a specific religion, and they have not (and do not intend) in any way interrupt, impede, or inconvenience their fellow man, I don't see the debate. The Westboro baptist church is/are as fucked up as the 9/11 bombers. Believe whatever you want. Acting on it in a way that hurts fellow humans, completely different debate. > You wouldn't be trying to use a knee-jerk negative word to discourage, for religions, the kind of discussion which has stood us in good stead in many other areas of social discourse? You're picking on a word. I used it for a purpose: to make anyone who read the reply think about why religion is some special-case group of people we're all "allowed" to discriminate against. I could use your exact same argument to argue that its OK to discriminate against conservatives, liberals, Lakers fans, lawyers, women, the disabled, men, children, ect. Pick a group, substitute "religion" in your argument for whatever you'd like. > I hope you won't be too offended by this literally shitty analogy that was the first to come to my mind: Imagine a modern society just like ours, but in which people choose to do without toilets. Nobody talks about it much, it's just what they've always done, and they're unwilling to break with tradition in this respect. It's common practice to do your "business" in the street gutter, next to the curb. There's a daily removal service, and a 3x daily deodorizing service, and they reduce the associated problems. Still, this society has an unusual rate of some infectious diseases, and especially in the summer, deodorizing just doesn't seem to keep up. Here's a different society with a different choice on how to do things. If you would like me to take the bait of comparing religious beliefs to shitting in the street, I'm not going to bite. > Would you be bigoted if you criticized this society for the pursuit of this practice? If you feel it's important to accept the choices of other groups, would you be willing to live in such a society? Would you think it wrong to at least try to talk to those folks about improving their lives by re-thinking their stance on indoor plumbing? If you think comparing a thought/belief/idea to someone shitting on your front lawn similar, again, this is a lost argument. Thoughts don't hurt people, except maybe the thinker. Actions hurt people. Someone believing in Buddha isn't comparable to someone shitting on your lawn. Honestly, wow. > I think I still owe you the answer to your question. So: Yes, I think it's OK to critically examine all ideas, and choices, including religious ones, and to raise those objections we feel are in order. Why on Earth not? I agree with you. Critically examining ideas is a fantastic idea. Critically examining religion is a fantastic idea. Raising objections, no. Do you think its OK to raise objections to gays/lesbians and the lifestyle they chose? if course not. If someone is devoted to the islam religion, should I object to their lifestyle? No, of course not. You did not answer my question at all.