[Closed] "I asked God to help me"

Butcher, +many.

But is it OK to attack people for their religious, sexual or cultural beliefs? If it's not to the detriment of those around them then I don't think it is. Is it? They are open to discussion, certainly. But not attack.

You see, this is where the problem arises:
One persons discussion is another persons attack.

No, it might not be nice to laugh at anothers deeply held opinions, but humour is a fundamental part of how we debate and reconcile the basic issues of humanity.

Someone is going to get offended, however much care is taken to avoid it.

You can't separate humour and mockery from wider debate - human nature, surely?

Jimbo, don't answer if you don't want to, but I'm seriously interested.

I've asked the above question on many occaisions, but never really had a response.

I'd be genuinely interested in your opinion.

Regards,
Pete.

I'm still considering it TBH. I initially responded to the specific theme of the OP (please check my first post) but the discussion has widened to cover points that I genuinely don't have the answers for. My initial instinct is to defend the right for individual belief whether I personally agree with it or not. The paradox is that, that freedom can allow some to hide behind it and cause harm. I am open minded to the views of others and have lots more to think about.

James.

Cougar, I think it probably comes down to a definition of 'respect'. In terms of expecting ones views (religious or otherwise) to go completely unchallenged and be 'untouchable', then I'm 100% with you in that this should never e te case. If you strongly believe something then being challenged on it shouldn't really be a big deal. However, in terms of expecting ones views (religious or otherwise) to be allowed to be expressed, even if every listener (or reader) dismissed them instantly, then yes I do think that should be expected. I expect to be able to say 'hey, I'm a Christian' and, if they don't agree, for other people to go 'great, I think your wrong, but fair play if that's what you believe in'. More than happy , and fully expect, to then be challenged on WHY I have that belief, but NOT on the fact I have that belief in the first place.

[edited for a should instead of a shouldn't!! stupid iPhone....]

CaptainFlashheart - Member

Butcher, +many.

😀

May I refer you to several hundred posts where you've attacked, nay, MOCKED, other's cultural beliefs that association football is a valid, intelligent and entertaining sporting endeavour?

ernie_lynch - Member
derekrides - Member
However more than that I believe fundamentally to live and let live

Except of course those who fall foul of Dereks Law...........those you want to gun down in the street like you would a dog.

Still, it's nice to see that you have your empathy hat on tonight Derek.

I try so hard to be good.

Resist the temptation to troll you lot.

But I fear it is temptation beyond my power to resist, I had to fall on my own can of anti troll spray last time to cut it out after 9 pages and this one is already at 4 pages and such a target rich environment.

Godless heathens abound and lots with beards, lycra and riding single speed, it's already heaven. 😆

LimboJimbo - Member

I'm still considering it TBH. I initially responded to the specific theme of the OP (please check my first post) but the discussion has widened to cover points that I genuinely don't have the answers for.

Ta for the reply.

Yes I did read your first post - hearty congrats to all of you.
Sounds like a tough little lad. 🙂

My initial instinct is to defend the right for individual belief whether I personally agree with it or not.

However, I don't believe that any belief or opinion should have the right not to be challenged, mocked or belittled.

Obviously, it looks like we're not going to agree on that one, but I really appreciate your response, and all the others too 😀

Pete.

"Challenging that belief is fine, but belittling it seems to cross the line and become attack."

I don't know the bible well; I have only read what was absolutely necessary for anyone going to a UK school in the late 70s and 80s.

I feel I know enough to say that they are fairly sure that anyone who doesn't embrace the word of god isn't going to make it into the Kingdom of heaven. Whether or not another person believes the 'Kingdom of Heaven' exists, those that believe accept that those who don't will be excluded.

I have read a little more of the Koran, but still not all of it. When it is said that the only way a believer may help an infidel is to 'take him under his protection', I honestly don't think they meant to give him a good meal and a bed then say goodbye in the morning. 🙂

I don't think it's balanced at all to claim that atheists are offensive and 'on the attack', and that religious folks are accepting of all. Belittling those who do not believe as you do is fundamental to many religions.

Belittling those who do not believe as you do is fundamental to many religions.

If you think that then I reckon you weren't paying attention at school in the late 70s and 80s when you were reading the Bible.

i`ve read the bible(cover to cover)absolute tosh made up by bearded tent dwelling loonies 😆

Ernie - its absolutely fundamental. Non believers are lessor beings than believers in the eyes of the religious. Its absolutely central to the faith otherwise there would be no point in being a believer if it did not make you a better person.

On these threads on here we have been told one cannot have morals without religion. that its both the right and the duty of the religious to attempt to convert the non religious but we have no right to challenge their superstition.

You forget to mention [i]rather intelligent[/i] bearded tent dwelling loonies pitduck. Unless of course you think there is nothing spectacular about a book still being in print 2000 years on.

ernie_lynch - Member
You forget to mention rather intelligent bearded tent dwelling loonies pitduck. Unless of course you think there is nothing spectacular about a book still being in print 2000 years on.

As against er latter day bearded tent dwelling loonies who write atb gospels?

Ernie - its absolutely fundamental. Non believers are lessor beings than believers in the eyes of the religious. Its absolutely central to the faith otherwise there would be no point in being a believer if it did not make you a better person.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there mate. You and JC appear to be as one on this. Although apparently you weren't aware.

EDIT : With regards to this btw : [i]"otherwise there would be no point in being a believer if it did not make you a better person"[/i]

(nothing spectacular about a book still being in print 2000 years) not really the world is still full of loonies 🙁

Unimpressed eh ? The world always has been, and still is, "full of loonies".

Never mind pitduck, at least you're sane - and that's what counts.

i never said that ern 😳

"otherwise there would be no point in being a believer if it did not make you a better person"

I suspect you will find that most believers are believers because they believe something - rather that they want to become a better person. Most (but not all) that I know find reconciling many of the questions raised here tough but still believe. There are lots of self help books if you just want to get better at something.

exceptions allowed of course

I remember watching American werewolf in London when I was a kid. It scared the bejeesus out of me and I had all sorts of terrible thoughts and nightmares floating around in my young mind for a loooong time and to this day, have a bit of trouble if I'm honest with walking across the Yorkshire moors in the pitch black of night.

I also went to Sunday School and was told about the consequences for non-believers.

Luckily, I'm older now and intelligent enough to realise that these were just stories.
😀

You're gonna get people like Woppit frothing at the mouth with talk like that.

Sometimes the mouth froth is so severe and all over th screne that I cun hurdli see whatt it is I''m trng t type...

TandemJeremy - Member
Ernie - its absolutely fundamental. Non believers are lessor beings than believers in the eyes of the religious. Its absolutely central to the faith otherwise there would be no point in being a believer if it did not make you a better person.

I agree with your comments there TJ [b]to the extent that they are correct[/b]. There are believers who seek to impose their views (incorrectly I agree) and look down on others (incorrectly I agree). Equally there are (1) believers who do neither, (2) non-believers who do both and (3) non-believers who do neither. It happens across religions - some Christians take the little word "the" in John 8:12 to do exactly that - amazing! And to think that religious people sent missionaries around the world to impose their views on other cultures not that long ago.

As others have said, its a pity that folk cannot live and let live. Otherwise they come across as intolerant, patronising, condescending and rude. You know the other day, some stranger who knows nothing about me, my family or beliefs or lack of them wrote:

You have successfully indoctrinated your children into a medieval superstition. Well done! However this does shed light on your general lack of rational behaviour and thought and credulous nature. More to be pitied than hated.

Extraordinary to think that such behaviour continues these days, isn't it? Like missionaries, you would have hoped it had died out long ago.

I struggle with long sentences, but:

please - keep your superstitious garbage to yourself

Why? If you don't like to read it, don't. The idea that one is supposed to keep ones widely held, mainstream and inoffensive views to oneself just to protect your little mind is quite ridiculous.

I can't see how he was trying to convert anyone or force anything on anyone. So jog on.

Non believers are lessor beings than believers in the eyes of the religious.

Have you asked them all? I don't think you know what you are talking about.

You atheists are no different to people banging on about how 29ers are stupid without ever having ridden one.

I read an interesting book on religion, which pointed out that many fundamentalist atheists are so because they can't believe that there is anyone or anything in the world more important than them ....... sound like TJ to anyone?

It also pointed out that many fundamentalist atheists justify there beliefs by highlighting the extremists in religions (such as the god hates fags lot) to justify there extreme Ego belief system.

For any atheists with an open mind the book was this one:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Case-God-religion-really/dp/1847920349

For the ignorant ones keep on as you were ...... and try not to have a stroke when these posts come up

Molgrips, that's rubbish.

I was forced to go to church and participate in organised religion for over a quarter of my life.
I'm perfectly capable of making up my own mind, thanks.

Whats a "fundamentalist atheist" and how do they differ from "atheists"

It also pointed out that many fundamentalist atheists justify there beliefs by highlighting the extremists in religions (such as the god hates fags lot) to justify there extreme Ego belief system.

In the same way that many people dislike the BNP because they are racist. It is just a little bit "core" to their faith isnt it?

You atheists are no different to people banging on about how 29ers are stupid without ever having ridden one.

Will we go to hell if we decide not to?

What utter bobbins

Atheism is not a belief.

The belief in the superiority of religious people is absolutely inherent and central to the faith. Otherwise it would be pointless and there would be no drive to convert. All you need to do is read the pronouncements even moderate leaders with an open mind to see this.

"chosen people" "righteous"

Well, another day, another religious thread. These are so predictable and soooo (in my opinion) pointless. A hundred and fifty something posts, and as ever, it goes nowhere. What would some of you people do without this to argue about? As far as I can see, nobody is trying to 'convert' anybody, and nobody is using religion on this thread to view anybody as 'lessor' than themselves. I'm not going to use the word 'respect', as that just seems to give people something else to rear up about, so how about some manners? A lot of people have personal beliefs, which they dont attempt to impose on others, so why would you feel it's ok to insult them?

What is a fundamentalist atheist? What are the fundamentals of atheism that must be adhered to in order to attain the title?

What would some of you people do without this to argue about?

Work! Anyway if God didnt want us to debate it he wouldnt have given us the Internet!

😀

Mitch, most of us are just engaging in debate.

People from the non belief side are perfectly willing to explain our non belief, in the context of debate.
You're more than welcome to question my views, laugh at them if you like.
I won't be offended.

If you wish to justify an opinion, sadly, you have to expect the same in return, from some at least.
It's just human nature, part of the the ineffable whotsit of thingy, er life.

We've luckily reached a stage of evolution in a minority of countries where this kind of game is now possible.
Don't take your ball in because the other side are now, finally allowed to play by the same rules.

Rusty - I dont, for a single second, have a problem with debate. I enjoy p**s taking as much as the next person, and dont take any offence from it. What I get annoyed about (to be honest, I even think 'annoyed' is too strong a term) is the assertion that if you dont want to touch Dawkins where he wees, you're some kind of moron.

Me and MSP still want to qualify for "fundamentalist" status. Do we get badges?

"A lot of people have personal beliefs, which they dont attempt to impose on others, so why would you feel it's ok to insult them?"

Couldn't agree more Mr B Match but more importantly...

Is your wife wearing a woolly jumper today?

is the assertion that if you dont want to touch Dawkins where he wees, you're some kind of moron.

Its often believers who bring up Dawkins*.

*Other authors exist.

She left for work at about six Ro5ey , and as I recall, she was sporting some sort of suit thing. I do like to imagine there was a jumper under there somewhere though!

Tme for some culture, then:
"The sea is calm to-night.
The tide is full, the moon lies fair
Upon the straits; on the French coast the light
Gleams and is gone; the cliffs of England stand;
Glimmering and vast, out in the tranquil bay.
Come to the window, sweet is the night-air!
Only, from the long line of spray
Where the sea meets the moon-blanched land,
Listen! you hear the grating roar
Of pebbles which the waves draw back, and fling,
At their return, up the high strand,
Begin, and cease, and then again begin,
With tremulous cadence slow, and bring
The eternal note of sadness in.

Sophocles long ago
Heard it on the Aegean, and it brought
Into his mind the turbid ebb and flow
Of human misery; we
Find also in the sound a thought,
Hearing it by this distant northern sea.

The Sea of Faith
Was once, too, at the full, and round earth's shore
Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furled.
But now I only hear
Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,
Retreating, to the breath
Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear
And naked shingles of the world.

Ah, love, let us be true
To one another! for the world, which seems
To lie before us like a land of dreams,
So various, so beautiful, so new,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night."

Say hello, wave byebye.

Sorry about that surfer, I was just being lazy, and it wont happen again. 😉

fundamentalist atheist described: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/my-new-years-eve-dream-ab_b_37567.html?

Essentially: The fundamentalist atheists are an active and highly vocal subset of atheists who object to a great many things, not the least of which is being described as 'fundamentalist atheists.

Sound about right? or are you now trying to say that TJ isn't highly vocal, who objects to pretty much everything? (including himself when he gets confused).

Happy Days !!

Haven't read all the thread but just to throw in a thought:
God doesn't have a religion, we chose to spilt up the teachings of holy men whether it was Jesus, Allah, Krishna, whoever, to serve our own purposes.
The core of all fundamental teachings is the same and they often cross reference each other.
If we took one thing from all these teachings it would have to be:- LOVE ALL.
Somewhere in our interpretation of all these teachings we seem to have forgotten that simple bit.

The fundamentalist atheists are an active and highly vocal subset of atheists who object to a great many things, not the least of which is being described as 'fundamentalist atheists.

Bit like errr.... Atheists then?

Fromn this point on I will refer to myself as an "extreme fudamentalist atheist" just to give it... you know.. a bit more cred.

that ok, as long as its me,me,me,me,me,me,me,me,me,me et al. your atheist views will be fine.

Well, another day, another religious thread. These are so predictable.....

Most of the posts from the free-thinking, libertarian atheist could in fact just be cut'n'pated from the last thread - nothing new to say, just the same old generalisations and provocations 😆