HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Religion & Spirituality » Religion (Group) » On Respecting Beliefs

Thu May 7, 2015, 07:42 PM

On Respecting Beliefs



Another great video from Theramin Trees. Also points out how a lot of the beliefs in the Abrahamic faiths dehumanise nonbelievers.

32 replies, 1724 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 32 replies Author Time Post
Reply On Respecting Beliefs (Original post)
MellowDem May 2015 OP
Fumesucker May 2015 #1
Heddi May 2015 #2
mr blur May 2015 #5
Starboard Tack May 2015 #10
LineLineLineReply .
hrmjustin May 2015 #14
Humanist_Activist May 2015 #3
bvf May 2015 #4
Starboard Tack May 2015 #23
bvf May 2015 #24
phil89 May 2015 #27
mr blur May 2015 #6
Starboard Tack May 2015 #22
rug May 2015 #7
Yorktown May 2015 #8
rug May 2015 #13
Yorktown May 2015 #15
rug May 2015 #16
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply .
hrmjustin May 2015 #17
Yorktown May 2015 #18
rug May 2015 #19
hrmjustin May 2015 #20
Yorktown May 2015 #21
rug May 2015 #25
Yorktown May 2015 #30
rug May 2015 #31
Yorktown May 2015 #32
Humanist_Activist May 2015 #9
rug May 2015 #11
phil89 May 2015 #28
rug May 2015 #29
Starboard Tack May 2015 #12
Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #26

Response to MellowDem (Original post)

Thu May 7, 2015, 09:06 PM

1. Wretched, weak, selfish creatures, powerless to resist all manner of temptations.

Can you hear me? Am I typing loud enough?

It's for your own good, you, you kindling you...









Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MellowDem (Original post)

Thu May 7, 2015, 09:23 PM

2. I predict that the exact people who should see this won't.

They'll be beleaguered with less-than-optimal web speeds, unable do to anything but type on an already-bogged down and slow to load website for hours on end betwixt watching Cuba Gooding movies about lovable homophobic bigots. But this...no, too much bandwidth. It takes too long. It's buffering. Maybe they can watch it when they get better internet in the year 7653.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Heddi (Reply #2)

Fri May 8, 2015, 09:24 AM

5. Or they will, but...

 

Cognitive Dissonance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Heddi (Reply #2)

Sat May 9, 2015, 08:01 PM

10. What a sweetheart you are.

Love your new sig line. Love your honesty. I'll inform the yacht club at our next meeting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #10)

Sat May 9, 2015, 08:19 PM

14. .

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MellowDem (Original post)

Fri May 8, 2015, 12:24 AM

3. I do find many of the beliefs of various religions as completely dehumanizing....

 

not to mention the victim blaming, atrocity diminishing, etc.

Things such as original sin, hell, divine judgement, heaven, etc. are just atrocious ideas in general.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MellowDem (Original post)

Fri May 8, 2015, 12:55 AM

4. Powerful. Thanks. n/t.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvf (Reply #4)

Sun May 10, 2015, 12:37 AM

23. I'm curious. What did you find so "powerful"?

Was it the graphics or the message? Or was there something else that held the power? Did you have some kind of revelation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #23)

Sun May 10, 2015, 03:40 AM

24. "I'm curious."

 

Yes, you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #23)

Sun May 10, 2015, 11:36 AM

27. He didn't say anything about

 

revelation. Not everyone thinks in such goofy religious terms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MellowDem (Original post)

Fri May 8, 2015, 09:25 AM

6. Excellent piece, thank you! ( nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mr blur (Reply #6)

Sun May 10, 2015, 12:34 AM

22. What did you think was excellent about it?

Dd you learn something new?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MellowDem (Original post)

Fri May 8, 2015, 12:06 PM

7. I disrespect your dog. Does the dog give a shit?

 

The disrespect is directed against the person, cartoons notwithstanding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #7)

Sat May 9, 2015, 02:40 AM

8. The disrespect is directed against harmful ideologies

 

Eventually, against the fundamentalists who want to prevent these ideologies from being amended.

The Founding Fathers seperated Church from State. They met stiff resistance. Religious types never let go easily.

Whatever the reason, the imprisonment of local Baptists marked a turning point in the life of James Madison. It steered him toward a career in politics as well as a lifelong partnership with his fellow Virginian, Thomas Jefferson. Over the course of many decades devoted to public service (including a combined 16 years in the presidency), these two men would decisively shape the relationship between church and state in the new American republic.

“A Memorial and Remonstrance”
James Madison, 1785Their earliest collaboration followed the framing of Virginia’s state constitution in 1776, which exempted dissenters like the Baptists from paying taxes to support the Anglican clergy. That did not go far enough to satisfy Jefferson, so in 1779 he presented a bill to the state legislature guaranteeing full religious liberty to all Virginians—not merely tax exemptions to non-Anglicans—only to meet with resistance from those who deemed his measure too radical. Among them was Patrick Henry, who countered by proposing a “general assessment” on all citizens to support Christianity itself as the established religion of Virginia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yorktown (Reply #8)

Sat May 9, 2015, 08:15 PM

13. "Eventually, against the fundamentalists"

 

So, you concede attacking fundamentalists, not just fundamentalism. A refreshing admission.

However, you attack all religious belief, not just fundamentalism. If you say you attack only non-fundamentalist beliefs, but not non-fundamentalist believers, you are being disingenuous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #13)

Sat May 9, 2015, 11:15 PM

15. Some religious doctrines require fundamentalism.

 

The Torah does. The Quran does. Their foundational texts are fundamentalist.

Therefore these texts and attached doctrines need to be pummelled. Hard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yorktown (Reply #15)

Sat May 9, 2015, 11:17 PM

16. It looks like you don't understand what fundamentalism is.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #16)

Sat May 9, 2015, 11:21 PM

17. .

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #16)

Sat May 9, 2015, 11:25 PM

18. fundamentalism means the literal application of some ideological program.

 

There are no if's and but's in the Torah: blasphemers, gays, and witches must be killed.
There are no if's and but's in the Quran: blasphemers, gays, and witches must be punished.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yorktown (Reply #18)

Sat May 9, 2015, 11:32 PM

19. The cure for literalism is not more literalism.

 



See that rectangle of text near the top?

That's Torah. The rest of the page is commentary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #19)

Sat May 9, 2015, 11:33 PM

20. Well said rug!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #19)

Sat May 9, 2015, 11:46 PM

21. You are wrong. Literalist pacifism is not a danger.

 

Some doctrines taken literally are not dangerous because they are good doctrines. Like pacifism.

Some doctrines taken literally are dangerous because they are bad doctrines. Like the monotheisms.

Your "cure for literalism is not more literalism" carefully avoids that key point.


btw: just curious: where do you speak from? What supernatural do you believe in and why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yorktown (Reply #21)

Sun May 10, 2015, 10:28 AM

25. "Literalist pacifism"?

 



Ok.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #25)

Sun May 10, 2015, 09:56 PM

30. What a subtle point you made.

 

Nice way to avoid admitting there are good and bad ideas/ideologies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yorktown (Reply #30)

Sun May 10, 2015, 09:58 PM

31. Doubtless. But the subject is literalism.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #31)

Sun May 10, 2015, 10:03 PM

32. And it is what I answered to

 

I am merely pointing out that being the literalist follower of a doctrine does not entail equally dangerous consequences depending on the intrinsic degree of dangerosity of the doctrine itself.

If my doctrine is mass extermination of a group, being a literalist of this doctrine creates harm.
If my doctrine is to never hurt anybody, being a literalist of this doctrine won't.

In the spectrum of ideologies, the Old Testament or the Quran contain plenty of opportunities to harm others if taken literally. As the Garland shooters so powerfully demonstrated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #7)

Sat May 9, 2015, 04:10 AM

9. So does your church show respect or disrespect towards LGBT people...

 

when it describes them as objectively disorded, and their "activities" as "gravely depraved"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Humanist_Activist (Reply #9)

Sat May 9, 2015, 08:05 PM

11. That teaching from your (former) church is ignorant and disrespectful.

 

Now, tell me about your dog.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #11)

Sun May 10, 2015, 11:38 AM

28. Sorry

 

but if you're in the RCC you have no credibility on this subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phil89 (Reply #28)

Sun May 10, 2015, 05:27 PM

29. No active Catholic has credibility on this subject?

 

Ok, phil. This is your one chance to explain how that is not a bigoted statement.

Go ahead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MellowDem (Original post)

Sat May 9, 2015, 08:06 PM

12. Why would anyone feel obliged to respect the beliefs of others?

Especially if one finds them absurd.
I respect everyone's right to believe whatever they choose, but not the beliefs themselves. And I have no expectations about others respecting my beliefs, nor do I care. Beliefs are very personal.

Actions are a whole other kettle of fish. Beliefs! Who cares?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #12)

Sun May 10, 2015, 10:53 AM

26. I can sign on to this set of statements.

Although I think 'respect' is a word that's used oddly. I don't actually 'respect' one's right to believe absurd things. I acknowledge it. I understand that I might not have any way to stop people from believing absurd things. It's the way things actually are - people believe absurd things. That doesn't mean I actually 'respect' that they can believe absurd things, merely that it happens whether or not I agree with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread