3 ms·
I rather like your "religion" (at first glance it seems logically consistent), but I wouldn't personally espouse it except in the kind of company that might tol
by xyzzy123 11y ago
I rather like your "religion" (at first glance it seems logically consistent), but I wouldn't personally espouse it except in the kind of company that might tolerate modest proposals :)
There is the "bootstrap problem", which is that what you're describing is more or less a truncated form of humanism - and that in itself is of course a belief system much in the manner of a religion (I guess, as you observe above).
Practically speaking, religion and belief are enshrined as "protected characteristics" for discriminatory purposes in most human rights laws. Right up there with age, disability status, sex, sexual orientation and so on.
- jqm 11y agoSure, "enshrined"... i.e, useful to the state. When not useful or maybe harmful, enshrining doesn't take place. Instead they send federal agents to burn your compound down. And thus it has always been. I personally don't care for organized religion (nor organized much of anything for that matter). But this bias is irrelevant to the point. That is... belief systems are not the same as intrinsic characteristics of a person and don't in any way deserve the same respect. The comment about "my religion" was to illustrate a simple point. That is, it is practically impossible to respect and refuse to counter all belief systems. Which why would we? Now, for a workplace where people need to get along, yes, there should be rules about not being rude. But that might include not mocking the kind of shoes someone wears or their preference in movies. Or their religion. But that's as far as I would take belief protections. Religion has gotten a special pass for far too long, probably because it has been useful to the state.