MellowDem
MellowDem's JournalNon-sequiter
Women in religion does nothing to address the point that religious texts that claim to have the perfect word of god cannot be amended.
Ignoring the text undermines the central claim of the religion.
I know some shamans and healers to this day kill others based on demon possession, or diagnose illnesses based on nothing. All religion is based on the same flawed premise, which can and does lead to harm.
Like I said...
I see plenty of intellectual dishonesty and cognitive dissonance in regards to horribly misogynistic texts. No blinders here. I'd say progressive religion based on these texts, on the other hand, requires redacting a lot of the text.
Where?
One can believe or not believe in evolution. No where does the quote say evolution is a belief.
Of course it's my opinion...
And it's also my opinion that words have meaning, so no, criticizing Republicans for their beliefs isn't bigotry. Bigotry requires pre-judging. Criticizing stated beliefs or those who hold them is not bigotry, by definition. You know their beliefs beforehand, indeed, knowledge is the basis of your judgment. Yes, the word bigotry is butchered everywhere to the point of being useless, but I'm trying to distinguish between attacking someone for being gay and attacking someone for ideas they hold and promote, because I believe it's a meaningful difference.
Yes, some claim religion is akin to ethnicity or culture, but it's not, definitionally. Yes, some people lump religion in with culture or race or some other group, but they're the ones using it wrong not the other way around.
And yes, by definition, religion is a choice. Religion is a belief system. There are many belief systems. Choice is the mental process of choosing one. A person has the ability to change their beliefs, and everyone does, every day, on a whole host of beliefs. I myself do. Lots of proof. If religion isn't a choice, then neither is any other belief, like political beliefs, and therefore all criticism of Republicans on this site is akin to criticizing homosexuals for being "unclean". It's nonsense what you're proposing.
No, not what I said....
anyone that indoctrinated their children in anything should be embarrassed and ashamed. Religious indoctrination just happens to be socially acceptable. I'm all for changing that perception.
I shoot for a future where no beliefs are off limits or automatically deserving of respect, but where people engage in critical inquiry of all beliefs.
I will belittle and mock or whatever else seems persuasive or effective a belief that says women are second class for example.
I'm not defending him...
Just see no good reason to doubt his lack of faith. You're basic distrust of one type of minister is a bit biased IMHO, nearly all came to their beliefs through indoctrination. None have absolutely any evidence on which to base their beliefs. It wouldn't surprise me if many don't believe at all based on that thin reasoning.
I always suspect people who are self-promoting, and if he is, I may believe his main motivation is money, but that's not relevant to the sincerity of his lack of belief.
As far as I can tell, pastors are desperately needed in many denominations, and the job security is better than being an atheist spokesman I would imagine.
Yes, then we amended it
Any amendments to the Bible yet? The Torah? How about the Koran?
Nah, they gotta settle for terrible apologetics to get away from a terrible text that cannot be changed without undermining their own religion. Kinda sucks when a person must engage in intellectual dishonesty and cognitive dissonance of their beliefs to be good people, while the consistent and honest believers are the most scary. Certainly says something about the belief system.
No, it's a proposition...
amply supported by evidence. A belief is simply the psychological state holding the proposition to be true. Religious propositions are often termed beliefs colliquially. The terminology can be confusing, to say the least.
It's not teaching people have a problem with...
it's indoctrination. Telling a child God exists isn't teaching them anything. Educating children on what others believe is teaching. Even tell them what you think, but just don't present it as fact.
As for legislation, it would be impossible to enforce and open to abuse by those that can't distinguish between education and indoctrination, like creationists. So I'm fine with settling for making it a socially disgusting and unacceptable practice that will lose a person respect.
To call religious belief a "personal characteristic"
on par with anything else in that list is wrong. I don't know why the site administrators did it, but I'm guessing it's to keep the peace. Religion has a privileged status compared to other ideas, and this site bows to that privilege as much as most others do. They want the focus on politics. Fair enough, but it doesn't make the policy any less rational. You could rightly call political positions a "personal characteristic" under that logic. It's certainly comparable to religion in that it's a choice.
I've seen Republicans called all sorts of nasty things on this site, but it's not bigotry. Some of it may not be very substantive or good criticism, or even very rational, but that's just an ad hom fallacy, not bigotry, because Republicans are a political party with a defined ideology. The criticism is directed at the Republicans for holding ideas we don't like, not for inherent, unchangeable traits. Further, these ideas can hurt others when implemented, unlike, say, sexual orientation or the color of skin. You can say the exact same about religion, but many don't, because of it's privileged status and, of course, the focus of this board is politics. But the Republican Party mix the two often enough, and it's easy to see from that that they are no different as concepts as to each other, so no bigotry is involved in reality when criticizing religion, whatever the policies say IMHO. But I think banning ad homs against others covers any other situation, so saying someone is stupid because of their religious beliefs may be a bad argument, it is rude, and it shouldn't be on a discussion board, but it's not bigotry. Saying someone is stupid for being a Republican, by the way, is no better, but is allowed because of the forum we are on.
During the new Pope announcement, many harshly criticized the Pope and Catholic doctrine. Many others responded that this was bigotry. There were even some epic long threads by some about leaving DU which had become bigoted towards religion. That's one recent prominent example, but there are others from time to time.
Religion is a choice by its own definition. It's a belief system, not a physical trait. Everyone can choose beliefs. There is ample evidence to suggest that most people can be and are manipulated to believe certain things, so it's not a totally free choice (like anything else). That's why many atheists identify as free thinkers, because they are against manipulation of a person's mind and for critical inquiry, whether by religion or anything else.
Profile Information
Member since: Thu Jul 24, 2008, 05:59 PMNumber of posts: 5,018
