Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[RF]

Am I the only one that gets rather worked up when you point out obvious flaws in a religion belief structure or in how much hypocrisy people commit whilst still claiming to be devout members of this religion and get told that it's taboo to discuss religious issues?

As an example, let's say to a Christian person something stupid like, "Bluh bluh, dinosaurs" or something like that. Then that person tells me that I can't discuss it because it's WRONG. Or I point out that, y'know, quite a few priests have sexually molested Catholic children and therefore they aren't holy (in which case the system is wrong) or that the system is fine and there is no god. But, no, that's not a sign that "sin" and "moral patheticness" is universal, but that the modern athiest world has corrupted them or some equal crap along those lines.

But, if something happens wherein an athiest murders a thousand people or rapes or Christians have found one scientist willing to claim that evolution is false, it gets trumpeted in the faces of every single person out there as proof these people are "correct"? That the modern world is corrupt and terrible and etc. And yet they never get secluded due to this, or told that they shouldn't bring religious issues into the workplace. Because it's their religion.

After all, religious issues are only religious issues if they're caused by an athiest. It's not like I can get equally offended by being given proof that a significant portion of humanity refuses to look to the future instead of living in the dark ages. Hell, no.

Has anyone else experienced something like this? Is this some sort of free pass for people incapable of actually seizing control of their own lives? Like a "Oh, don't mind him, he's special" kind of thing?

I'm genuinely confused, here.

Anyone help? :p

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

P.S. This is quite genuinely not an attack on people's beliefs, but instead a questioning of the different moral and ethical standards that people in society are held to based on religion (or lack thereof). It just seems to me that non-religious people are expected to cowtow to every silly demand whilst religious people are given more leeway in how unreligious they can be. It's just silly.

[G-Flex]

I'd say this is true of most groups who don't want to be questioned, especially ones who are used to being in power (politically or culturally): They just don't want to hear any of it, and react harshly to any sign that their own ideological hegemony is being threatened.

[ggamer]

I agree wholeheartedly. Some with both above posts.

[Bauglir]

Essentially, yes. Interestingly, I tend to see the reverse zealotry equally often, but I strongly suspect that it's only because I live in a University town and spend a lot of time on campus, and while the religious demographic is relatively smaller, I don't see any reason to believe that the "Fails at self-examination" demographic varies much no matter where you are. Or that I don't fall into it, myself, for that matter, but ah well.

People hate to consider the possibility that they're wrong, and so will preemptively get defensive about it. For examples, see every Internet Argument ever. I don't think religion is a particularly special concept in this regard, it's just one where nearly everyone believes himself or herself to have discovered the One True Path. Including us agnostics

[Willfor]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHWvqhfA73A

Yes, that is a christian white rapper critiquing the hypocrisy of christianity.

You are not the first, you are not the last, and this has come up in every religious thread this board has ever had. Everyone will defend their opinions, and every side has people within it critiquing itself. Please stop thinking this is in any way special. It's seriously not.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

As an example, let's say to a Christian person something stupid like, "Bluh bluh, dinosaurs" or something like that. Then that person tells me that I can't discuss it because it's WRONG. Or I point out that, y'know, quite a few priests have sexually molested Catholic children and therefore they aren't holy (in which case the system is wrong) or that the system is fine and there is no god. But, no, that's not a sign that "sin" and "moral patheticness" is universal, but that the modern athiest world has corrupted them or some equal crap along those lines.

But, if something happens wherein an athiest murders a thousand people or rapes or Christians have found one scientist willing to claim that evolution is false, it gets trumpeted in the faces of every single person out there as proof these people are "correct"? That the modern world is corrupt and terrible and etc. And yet they never get secluded due to this, or told that they shouldn't bring religious issues into the workplace. Because it's their religion.

This video touches on some of what you're talking about, in terms of an existant double standard some people have towards atheists.

[MorleyDev]

In these kinds of arguments I just keep spouting "why?" or similar statements like a five year old. It's a good idea to phrase everything as a question, it forces people to actually think.

Not just religious issues either, most belief systems and moral opinions can be broken down quite quickly with this and the point they cover their ears and go "lalalalalalalala" is when I declare myself victorious and run off into the night ^,^ If they admit they honestly don't know, I applaud...and run off into the night.

[Criptfeind]

Oh god yes. I hate this as much as when atheists run around yelling at religious people for being 'dumb to believe that shit' and not giving any thought to their own beliefs, instead relying on half baked philosophy copy pasted directly from some dickish historical figure and a poor knowledge of... Well... Reality.

[freeformschooler]

In these kinds of arguments I just keep spouting "why?" or similar statements like a five year old. It's a good idea to phrase everything as a question, it forces people to actually think.

Why aren't you on GD more? You definitely fit in around here.

[TherosPherae]

Eh, I used to do that a lot, back when I took everything at face value and didn't bother to do any research. Then again, that was also back when I was a jerk of a 12-year-old, so that probably wasn't the only thing pissing people off.

Nowadays, if someone brings up the topic and tries to argue about it from either side, I'll usually try to call it off or change the topic before chairs are thrown. If they insist on discussing it, I will either withdraw from the conversation or, in the case that it was pointed at me, defend my beliefs to the best of my ability.

Tl;dr: Religious discussions, I do not like them.

[freeformschooler]

Also this:

it's just one where nearly everyone believes himself or herself to have discovered the One True Path. Including us agnostics

But I thought agnosticism was about recognizing that there are multiple One True Paths.  Or in other words, none at all.

[Bauglir]

Yup, and recognizing that there is no One True Path is the One True Path. And now to go detonate my head, I think it has to happen after reading something like what I just said, much less typing it.

[freeformschooler]

Yup, and recognizing that there is no One True Path is the One True Path. And now to go detonate my head, I think it has to happen after reading something like what I just said, much less typing it.

My head detonated before I even finished reading this paragraph.

How can this be the One True Path if other True Paths are accepted as just as valid? Perhaps it is for me, but goodness knows not for other people. I think everyone has to find and carve their own path themselves, even if they have the support of other people guiding them along. Conflict mostly seems to only arise when they start believing that what their True Path entails should be the same for others.

And 10 years from now I'll probably be a hardcore fundie or anarchist or something. I'm not perfect.

[RF]

Oh god yes. I hate this as much as when atheists run around yelling at religious people for being 'dumb to believe that shit' and not giving any thought to their own beliefs, instead relying on half baked philosophy copy pasted directly from some dickish historical figure and a poor knowledge of... Well... Reality.

Honestly, I agree. Nothing makes athiests look quite as bad as some idiot spouting what he essentially believes is doctrine. Richard Dawkins is quite bad for this. I quite understand what he's up to, but he's like a wind blowing at a wall. All athiests like that are.

They may eventually take down the wall, but it's going to take a LONG time. It's best to tunnel under it and that it out that way, instead. Undermine the pillars of the faith instead of being big tits and arguing logical fallacy with people who've had a lot experience with it.

[G-Flex]

They may eventually take down the wall, but it's going to take a LONG time. It's best to tunnel under it and that it out that way, instead. Undermine the pillars of the faith instead of being big tits and arguing logical fallacy with people who've had a lot experience with it.

"Undermining the pillars" aside, people forget that if you want to actually influence people, you need to understand them first. Religious people have trouble converting (or, well, doing anything but alienating) the irreligious because they don't understand the mindset and therefore come at it from completely the wrong angle. The same thing happens the other way around. If people are going to try to persuade people (or a society) holding a dissimilar worldview, they need to understand its purpose first, and what people actually get out of it, and to consider the fact that the purpose might be legitimate.