Attitudes and behaviour.

[BashfulAnthony]

I have been away from here for a while, posting with sensible people.  I quote here from the rules of that forum, which I have advocated over a period of years for this place, with no sensible response:


"The issue being addressed here is that it is not acceptable to attack another member's beliefs.

It is perfectly fine to disagree with other members, and to let them know why. There are certain aspects pertaining to Christianity in particular that people are simply not ever going to agree with one another about. The moderators have no problem with this, and understand that it is to be expected in both real life, as well as on this forum.

When it comes to what someone believes regarding their faith, it is not the same dynamic as a political stance, which one chooses based on reason or critical thinking, and how they feel about politically-based policies or issues. When it comes to religious belief, what one believes is personal to them, it is what they base their lives and actions around, and in many respects defines who they are, based on their understanding and belief of Christianity, and how it pertains to them as individuals. In short: Their belief is an extremely important part in terms of their definition of who they are. In overtly attacking their beliefs, you are also attacking that member.

Disagreements, even passionately adamant disagreements (to the point of telling another member that they are wrong in what they believe) is permissible, so long as it addresses the particular point that is disagreed with. However, it must be done without attacking that other individual for what they believe.

--And that has to be upheld among the members who post on this forum.

The moderators are aware of the fact that there are aspects of Christianity that not every member accepts, or even feels to be correct in terms of another member's beliefs of what Christianity is. It is absolutely fine to disagree with another member regarding this, even to the point of stating that you feel they are wrong, and explaining your reasons why. But what is NOT acceptable, and what takes place on this forum every day is to attack that person for what in essence, is an integral part of who they are in what is highly personal to them in their perception of Christianity, and scripture, and is something they base their live's on, and what greatly defines who they are as individuals upon.

WHAT IS BEING MANDATED IS HAVING RESPECT IN ONE'S POST TOWARDS THOSE WITH WHOM ONE ADAMANTLY DISAGREES, no matter how adamantly you disagree with or feel another member's beliefs are wrong, BUT IT CANNOT BE DONE IN AN ATTACKING WAY, WHEREBY THE INDIVIDUAL HIM/HERSELF IS BEING ATTACKED BASED ON THEIR OWN PERSONAL BELIEFS.

By outright attacking another member's beliefs in their interpretation of, and understanding of Christianity, you are attacking that person. You are attacking that person inasmuch as their beliefs contribute greatly to who they are as people. This will no longer be tolerated. Despite the inevitable disagreements among members, these disagreements must be constructed in one's posts, where the member him/herself is not personally attacked for what they believe." (I choose not to say which site this is from as I do not wish any of the atheists here to log-on to it and spread their vitriol there.                         

All we get on here is pedantic, presumptuous comment, with no regard for the sincere beliefs of other human beings  -  the constant infantile use of terms like, "magic," fairies," "spaghetti monsters," etc.  All this from people who have made it their role to debunk and belittle the lives of others through their beliefs  -  and this, in a number of cases, over a period of years, no less.  It is cruel and heartless and unfathomable   They should be ashamed of themselves  -  a forlorn hope!

[Nearly Sane]

It might help if you even tried to live up to the rules you want set up, and even in your post above , you can't manage to do it. Do as you say but not as you do?

[Nearly Sane]

And that is leaving aside the simple assertion that religion should be given special privileges in discussion because it it 'personal'.

[BashfulAnthony]

It might help if you even tried to live up to the rules you want set up, and even in your post above , you can't manage to do it. Do as you say but not as you do?

What beliefs of yours do I belittle, eh?  Your belief in boozing, maybe?  Not even that!  Answer my post, with a little intelligence, if you are able.  The post is specifically about religious belief, here on this R&E forum  -  had you not worked that out?  Apparently not!

[Outrider]

All we get on here is pedantic, presumptuous comment, with no regard for the sincere beliefs of other human beings  -  the constant infantile use of terms like, "magic," fairies," "spaghetti monsters," etc.  All this from people who have made it their role to debunk and belittle the lives of others through their beliefs  -  and this, in a number of cases, over a period of years, no less.  It is cruel and heartless and unfathomable   They should be ashamed of themselves  -  a forlorn hope!

I speak for myself, here, but  I suspect there are others that agree with at least part of what I say - to make the comparison between 'intercessionary prayers' or 'miracles' and 'magic' is not to attack the believer, but to comment on the belief.

To describe the Bible, Qu'Ran, Bagavad Ghita, Odyssey, Book of Mormon etc. as 'fairy tales' is not to attack the believer, but the texts upon which the belief is (sometimes) founded.

It is not 'our role' to belittle the lives of believers - there might, at a stretch, be some who feel the need to point out how believers belittle their own lives through their belief. We want to show how trivial and yet dangerous belief is.

Believers of all stripes lend credence to the idea that Religion is a valid enterprise, and behind that credence extremists, terrorists, misogynists, homophobes and racists hide the preposterousness of their philosophies with the fact that they are exactly as justified as any other religious creed.

Religious people deserve respect, yes, but religious belief doesn't. This is our version of 'hate the sin, love the sinner', so if you recognise how it feels, perhaps you'll encourage some of the anti-gay Christians out there to bear that in mind, in the future.

O.

[ProfessorDavey]

I have been away from here for a while, posting with sensible people.  I quote here from the rules of that forum, which I have advocated over a period of years for this place, with no sensible response:


"The issue being addressed here is that it is not acceptable to attack another member's beliefs.

It is perfectly fine to disagree with other members, and to let them know why. There are certain aspects pertaining to Christianity in particular that people are simply not ever going to agree with one another about. The moderators have no problem with this, and understand that it is to be expected in both real life, as well as on this forum.

When it comes to what someone believes regarding their faith, it is not the same dynamic as a political stance, which one chooses based on reason or critical thinking, and how they feel about politically-based policies or issues. When it comes to religious belief, what one believes is personal to them, it is what they base their lives and actions around, and in many respects defines who they are, based on their understanding and belief of Christianity, and how it pertains to them as individuals. In short: Their belief is an extremely important part in terms of their definition of who they are. In overtly attacking their beliefs, you are also attacking that member.

Disagreements, even passionately adamant disagreements (to the point of telling another member that they are wrong in what they believe) is permissible, so long as it addresses the particular point that is disagreed with. However, it must be done without attacking that other individual for what they believe.

--And that has to be upheld among the members who post on this forum.

The moderators are aware of the fact that there are aspects of Christianity that not every member accepts, or even feels to be correct in terms of another member's beliefs of what Christianity is. It is absolutely fine to disagree with another member regarding this, even to the point of stating that you feel they are wrong, and explaining your reasons why. But what is NOT acceptable, and what takes place on this forum every day is to attack that person for what in essence, is an integral part of who they are in what is highly personal to them in their perception of Christianity, and scripture, and is something they base their live's on, and what greatly defines who they are as individuals upon.

WHAT IS BEING MANDATED IS HAVING RESPECT IN ONE'S POST TOWARDS THOSE WITH WHOM ONE ADAMANTLY DISAGREES, no matter how adamantly you disagree with or feel another member's beliefs are wrong, BUT IT CANNOT BE DONE IN AN ATTACKING WAY, WHEREBY THE INDIVIDUAL HIM/HERSELF IS BEING ATTACKED BASED ON THEIR OWN PERSONAL BELIEFS.

By outright attacking another member's beliefs in their interpretation of, and understanding of Christianity, you are attacking that person. You are attacking that person inasmuch as their beliefs contribute greatly to who they are as people. This will no longer be tolerated. Despite the inevitable disagreements among members, these disagreements must be constructed in one's posts, where the member him/herself is not personally attacked for what they believe." (I choose not to say which site this is from as I do not wish any of the atheists here to log-on to it and spread their vitriol there.                         

All we get on here is pedantic, presumptuous comment, with no regard for the sincere beliefs of other human beings  -  the constant infantile use of terms like, "magic," fairies," "spaghetti monsters," etc.  All this from people who have made it their role to debunk and belittle the lives of others through their beliefs  -  and this, in a number of cases, over a period of years, no less.  It is cruel and heartless and unfathomable   They should be ashamed of themselves  -  a forlorn hope!

Blimey - where to start.

First I don't agree that religious beliefs should be placed on a special pedestal compared to other belief, for example political beliefs. There is no doubt that there are plenty of people who hold political beliefs as dear and as personally as some hold religious beliefs. And additionally non religious philosophical and ethical beliefs can be just as sincerely held too.

But if you are to place certain things at the top of the heap in terms of being personal, being integral to the person, then surely sexuality will trump any belief (whether religious or not). Yet I don't see religious people holding back from putting the boot into people who are homosexual (not all religious people of course, but some).

And you have to understand the reciprocity of strongly held views. Sure a religious person may feel insulted or offended by a non religious person referring to their strongly held beliefs in terms of  "magic," fairies," "spaghetti monsters," - but of course it cuts the other way, with people who believe strongly in rationality etc feeling insulted by religious people's adherence to what they see as see as supernatural nonsense that offends their sense of rationality. Plus they may feel offended by the often casually thrown insults of the religious that non religious people don't belief in anything - have no moral compass etc etc.

So basically it cuts both ways - and in reality there is no right not to be offended. And if you have strongly held and perhaps rather extreme views or beliefs, expect them to be challenged, ridiculed, insulted etc etc if you raise them. That's life - if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Ad as Outrider the challenge is on the belief not the believer.

[bluehillside Retd.]

BA,

All we get on here is pedantic, presumptuous comment, with no regard for the sincere beliefs of other human beings  -  the constant infantile use of terms like, "magic," fairies," "spaghetti monsters," etc.

You're confused. It's right to have "regard" for the rights of others to believe whatever they wish, but not for the beliefs themselves just because they happen to hold them. You may find terms like "magic" etc to be infantile, but frankly some of us find the term "god" to be the same. When someone attempts an argument for a god that works equally well for, say, fairies, then its a perfectly legitimate response to say so. 

Example? If someone insists that he has "intuited" the objective fact of "god", then he has no choice but to accept equally the objective fact of pixies if someone else thinks just as sincerely that that's what she has intuited. 

[Rhiannon]

So BA wants special privileges for Christians but expects to insult pagan beliefs with impunity.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Rhi,

So BA wants special privileges for Christians but expects to insult pagan beliefs with impunity.

And those of followers of Bacchus too it seems.

[BashfulAnthony]

All we get on here is pedantic, presumptuous comment, with no regard for the sincere beliefs of other human beings  -  the constant infantile use of terms like, "magic," fairies," "spaghetti monsters," etc.  All this from people who have made it their role to debunk and belittle the lives of others through their beliefs  -  and this, in a number of cases, over a period of years, no less.  It is cruel and heartless and unfathomable   They should be ashamed of themselves  -  a forlorn hope!

I speak for myself, here, but  I suspect there are others that agree with at least part of what I say - to make the comparison between 'intercessionary prayers' or 'miracles' and 'magic' is not to attack the believer, but to comment on the belief.

To describe the Bible, Qu'Ran, Bagavad Ghita, Odyssey, Book of Mormon etc. as 'fairy tales' is not to attack the believer, but the texts upon which the belief is (sometimes) founded.

It is not 'our role' to belittle the lives of believers - there might, at a stretch, be some who feel the need to point out how believers belittle their own lives through their belief. We want to show how trivial and yet dangerous belief is.

Believers of all stripes lend credence to the idea that Religion is a valid enterprise, and behind that credence extremists, terrorists, misogynists, homophobes and racists hide the preposterousness of their philosophies with the fact that they are exactly as justified as any other religious creed.

Religious people deserve respect, yes, but religious belief doesn't. This is our version of 'hate the sin, love the sinner', so if you recognise how it feels, perhaps you'll encourage some of the anti-gay Christians out there to bear that in mind, in the future.

O.

Fine, but you are not properly addressing the central point being made  -  the harm that attacks on their belief has on individuals.  I experience this here:  the attacks made on Sassy and her beliefs, for example, are a disgrace.  Others come in for similar treatment.  Does it give the perpetrators some kind of buzz to denigrate and impinge so on a person's cherished thoughts and beliefs?  The oft-repeated suggestion that theist are in need of counselling, or have some kind of psychological aberrance is a prime example.

[Shaker]

So ... basically, after weeks and weeks away, not posting here but posting somewhere you regard as better, you've fetched up here again just to bleat and whine about this place.

Why didn't you stay with your 'sensible' people?

[Nearly Sane]

It might help if you even tried to live up to the rules you want set up, and even in your post above , you can't manage to do it. Do as you say but not as you do?

What beliefs of yours do I belittle, eh?  Your belief in boozing, maybe?  Not even that!  Answer my post, with a little intelligence, if you are able.  The post is specifically about religious belief, here on this R&E forum  -  had you not worked that out?  Apparently not!

See 'with a little intelligence if you are able'. in this post  or 'posting with sensible people' or the lazy generalisation of 'any of the atheists here to log-on to it and spread their vitriol there' in the OP. It does not live up to the part of the rule 'WHAT IS BEING MANDATED IS HAVING RESPECT IN ONE'S POST TOWARDS THOSE WITH WHOM ONE ADAMANTLY DISAGREES'.

[Nearly Sane]

Rhi,

So BA wants special privileges for Christians but expects to insult pagan beliefs with impunity.

And those of followers of Bacchus too it seems.

Silenus too

[bluehillside Retd.]

BA,

Fine, but you are not properly addressing the central point being made  -  the harm that attacks on their belief has on individuals.

Again you have it backwards. "Attack" and "critique" are different things: if you don't want to have your beliefs critiqued, don't come to a forum to discuss them (or confine yourself to the faith sharing area). What you're actually objecting to I think is the rebuttal of the expectation of some that their faith claims should be especially privileged in some way - which I for one think is fair enough. 

[BashfulAnthony]

So BA wants special privileges for Christians but expects to insult pagan beliefs with impunity.

Don'i be absurd!  Where did I say any such thing?  I am saying that it is wrong to debunk what a person's belief is, to the point of harm.  That applies equally to the beliefs of anyone, what ever they may be.  It seems that some are on here for the sole purpose of "having a go" at others' beliefs.   Did you even read my post?

[ProfessorDavey]

All we get on here is pedantic, presumptuous comment, with no regard for the sincere beliefs of other human beings  -  the constant infantile use of terms like, "magic," fairies," "spaghetti monsters," etc.  All this from people who have made it their role to debunk and belittle the lives of others through their beliefs  -  and this, in a number of cases, over a period of years, no less.  It is cruel and heartless and unfathomable   They should be ashamed of themselves  -  a forlorn hope!

I speak for myself, here, but  I suspect there are others that agree with at least part of what I say - to make the comparison between 'intercessionary prayers' or 'miracles' and 'magic' is not to attack the believer, but to comment on the belief.

To describe the Bible, Qu'Ran, Bagavad Ghita, Odyssey, Book of Mormon etc. as 'fairy tales' is not to attack the believer, but the texts upon which the belief is (sometimes) founded.

It is not 'our role' to belittle the lives of believers - there might, at a stretch, be some who feel the need to point out how believers belittle their own lives through their belief. We want to show how trivial and yet dangerous belief is.

Believers of all stripes lend credence to the idea that Religion is a valid enterprise, and behind that credence extremists, terrorists, misogynists, homophobes and racists hide the preposterousness of their philosophies with the fact that they are exactly as justified as any other religious creed.

Religious people deserve respect, yes, but religious belief doesn't. This is our version of 'hate the sin, love the sinner', so if you recognise how it feels, perhaps you'll encourage some of the anti-gay Christians out there to bear that in mind, in the future.

O.

Fine, but you are not properly addressing the central point being made  -  the harm that attacks on their belief has on individuals.  I experience this here:  the attacks made on Sassy and her beliefs, for example, are a disgrace.  Others come in for similar treatment.  Does it give the perpetrators some kind of buzz to denigrate and impinge so on a person's cherished thoughts and beliefs?  The oft-repeated suggestion that theist are in need of counselling, or have some kind of psychological aberrance is a prime example.

But you don't seem to understand or similarly recognise the hurt that attacks by some christians on gay people (or simply people for whom basic human rights of equality for people regardless of their sexuality is an integral part of their moral compass) may cause. You can't expect things to be all one way. If you want things that are important to you to be respected then you need to accord the same respect to others.

But the bottom line is that no-one is forced to spend time on this forum. If you don't like the nature of the discussion then stop posting and move elsewhere. What isn't reasonable it to expect to be allowed to post with impunity, even when those posts may cause insult or offence to others, but to expect your own views to be protected from posts that you might find insulting or offensive.

[Rhiannon]

You find talk of magic and fairies insulting and denigrating. These are pagan beliefs.

[Nearly Sane]

So BA wants special privileges for Christians but expects to insult pagan beliefs with impunity.

Don'i be absurd!  Where did I say any such thing?  I am saying that it is wrong to debunk what a person's belief is, to the point of harm.  That applies equally to the beliefs of anyone, what ever they may be.  It seems that some are on here for the sole purpose of "having a go" at others' beliefs.   Did you even read my post?

Perhaps not post something that refers specifically to Christian beliefs if you want to make that point? Did you read your OP?

[BashfulAnthony]

BA,

Fine, but you are not properly addressing the central point being made  -  the harm that attacks on their belief has on individuals.

Again you have it backwards. "Attack" and "critique" are different things: if you don't want to have your beliefs critiqued, don't come to a forum to discuss them (or confine yourself to the faith sharing area). What you're actually objecting to I think is the rebuttal of the expectation of some that their faith claims should be especially privileged in some way - which I for one think is fair enough.

Again, you miss the point.  I have no objection to Christianity being criticised:  my point is that people here are too often personally attacked for their beliefs, rather than the religion itself.  There is too little actual debate, only abuse, debunking and personal insinuations.   

[Shaker]

... the bottom line is that no-one is forced to spend time on this forum. If you don't like the nature of the discussion then stop posting and move elsewhere. What isn't reasonable it to expect to be allowed to post with impunity, even when those posts may cause insult or offence to others, but to expect your own views to be protected from posts that you might find insulting or offensive.

By rights that ought to be all that needs to be said on the issue.

[Andy]

BA,

Fine, but you are not properly addressing the central point being made  -  the harm that attacks on their belief has on individuals.

Again you have it backwards. "Attack" and "critique" are different things: if you don't want to have your beliefs critiqued, don't come to a forum to discuss them (or confine yourself to the faith sharing area). What you're actually objecting to I think is the rebuttal of the expectation of some that their faith claims should be especially privileged in some way - which I for one think is fair enough.

Again, you miss the point.  I have no objection to Christianity being criticised:  my point is that people here are too often personally attacked for their beliefs, rather than the religion itself.  There is too little actual debate, only abuse, debunking and personal insinuations.

I think someone is projecting.

[bluehillside Retd.]

BA,

Again, you miss the point.  I have no objection to Christianity being criticised:  my point is that people here are too often personally attacked for their beliefs, rather than the religion itself.  There is too little actual debate, only abuse, debunking and personal insinuations.

No I don't. You're conflating different terms here: "debunking" - eg showing the argument to be logically false - is fine; personal attack is not, but I see very little of the latter. Frankly my experience is that abuse is more likely to come from people who call themselves christians than from those who don't. 

bluehillside's third maxim: The more (big C) the Christian, the less (small c) christian he is likely to be.

[ProfessorDavey]

BA,

Fine, but you are not properly addressing the central point being made  -  the harm that attacks on their belief has on individuals.

Again you have it backwards. "Attack" and "critique" are different things: if you don't want to have your beliefs critiqued, don't come to a forum to discuss them (or confine yourself to the faith sharing area). What you're actually objecting to I think is the rebuttal of the expectation of some that their faith claims should be especially privileged in some way - which I for one think is fair enough.

Again, you miss the point.  I have no objection to Christianity being criticised:  my point is that people here are too often personally attacked for their beliefs, rather than the religion itself.  There is too little actual debate, only abuse, debunking and personal insinuations.

But you seem to be talking against yourself.

I thought your whole argument was that because religiously held beliefs were so important to the person, so personal that it wan't possible to attack the belief without, in effect, attacking the person. That seemed to be the upshot of your original post.

And lets face it if you want to look for the most personal of attacks then you should look no further than person who attack another persons sexuality, which lets face it is far more intrinsic to the basic nature of a person than any belief, religious or otherwise, strongly held or not.

[BashfulAnthony]

You find talk of magic and fairies insulting and denigrating. These are pagan beliefs.

They are insulting and degrading when referring to Jesus.  Perhaps you are one, then, who thinks that is okay.  But I do not specifically object to that:  it is when Christians are "accused" of believing the Christian Gospels to be "magic,"  and that Christians are therefore in some manner weird, or strange.  This is hugely hurtful, and in no sense an acceptable way to address people.  It is only insulting if I refer to you personally as being odd in some way, rather than your beliefs.  This is my whole point, which you have still notappreciated.

[BashfulAnthony]

All we get on here is pedantic, presumptuous comment, with no regard for the sincere beliefs of other human beings  -  the constant infantile use of terms like, "magic," fairies," "spaghetti monsters," etc.  All this from people who have made it their role to debunk and belittle the lives of others through their beliefs  -  and this, in a number of cases, over a period of years, no less.  It is cruel and heartless and unfathomable   They should be ashamed of themselves  -  a forlorn hope!

I speak for myself, here, but  I suspect there are others that agree with at least part of what I say - to make the comparison between 'intercessionary prayers' or 'miracles' and 'magic' is not to attack the believer, but to comment on the belief.

To describe the Bible, Qu'Ran, Bagavad Ghita, Odyssey, Book of Mormon etc. as 'fairy tales' is not to attack the believer, but the texts upon which the belief is (sometimes) founded.

It is not 'our role' to belittle the lives of believers - there might, at a stretch, be some who feel the need to point out how believers belittle their own lives through their belief. We want to show how trivial and yet dangerous belief is.

Believers of all stripes lend credence to the idea that Religion is a valid enterprise, and behind that credence extremists, terrorists, misogynists, homophobes and racists hide the preposterousness of their philosophies with the fact that they are exactly as justified as any other religious creed.

Religious people deserve respect, yes, but religious belief doesn't. This is our version of 'hate the sin, love the sinner', so if you recognise how it feels, perhaps you'll encourage some of the anti-gay Christians out there to bear that in mind, in the future.

O.

Fine, but you are not properly addressing the central point being made  -  the harm that attacks on their belief has on individuals.  I experience this here:  the attacks made on Sassy and her beliefs, for example, are a disgrace.  Others come in for similar treatment.  Does it give the perpetrators some kind of buzz to denigrate and impinge so on a person's cherished thoughts and beliefs?  The oft-repeated suggestion that theist are in need of counselling, or have some kind of psychological aberrance is a prime example.

But you don't seem to understand or similarly recognise the hurt that attacks by some christians on gay people (or simply people for whom basic human rights of equality for people regardless of their sexuality is an integral part of their moral compass) may cause. You can't expect things to be all one way. If you want things that are important to you to be respected then you need to accord the same respect to others.

But the bottom line is that no-one is forced to spend time on this forum. If you don't like the nature of the discussion then stop posting and move elsewhere. What isn't reasonable it to expect to be allowed to post with impunity, even when those posts may cause insult or offence to others, but to expect your own views to be protected from posts that you might find insulting or offensive.

Did you read my OP?  I have spent the last two months away from this forum, and not encountered any kind of personal attack:  it is only here, it seems, that the posters deal in that kind of posting.  I re-appear her, just to find the same old, same old.