Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 21

Author Topic: "You Can't Discuss Religion, That's Naughty (But Only If You're Athiest)"  (Read 25118 times)

MetalSlimeHunt

  • Bay Watcher
  • Gerrymander Commander
    • View Profile

I don't know what you're so terrified of, Virex.
Logged
Quote from: Thomas Paine
To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.
Quote
No Gods, No Masters.

Virex

  • Bay Watcher
  • Subjects interest attracted. Annalyses pending...
    • View Profile

Well, racism is kind of a big deal on this forum and off-line as well and I'd rather stay as far away from it as possible.
Logged

MetalSlimeHunt

  • Bay Watcher
  • Gerrymander Commander
    • View Profile

So, let me get this straight. You think pointing out antisemitism (a form of racism) is, in itself, a racist attitude because of people in Europe who link European antisemitism to Islam?

I can't keep that logical knot straight, Virex.
Logged
Quote from: Thomas Paine
To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.
Quote
No Gods, No Masters.

Virex

  • Bay Watcher
  • Subjects interest attracted. Annalyses pending...
    • View Profile

So, let me get this straight. You think pointing out antisemitism (a form of racism) is, in itself, a racist attitude because of people in Europe who link European antisemitism to Islam?
Unfortunately I am not the one who determines what is considered racist and what not. And no, I think it's a bit on the dangerous side to talk about the relation between Islam and antisemitism in specific.
Logged

MetalSlimeHunt

  • Bay Watcher
  • Gerrymander Commander
    • View Profile

Unfortunately I am not the one who determines what is considered racist and what not.
Sure you are. You're a member of society, and as such contribute your opinion to influence others. Come on man, have some backbone!
Logged
Quote from: Thomas Paine
To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.
Quote
No Gods, No Masters.

Criptfeind

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

Your right, your not the one who determines such things. So don't push crazy things like that.
Logged

Virex

  • Bay Watcher
  • Subjects interest attracted. Annalyses pending...
    • View Profile

Edit: I'd better stop arguing before I hang myself
Logged

Leafsnail

  • Bay Watcher
  • A single snail can make a world go extinct.
    • View Profile

No, I'm not abusing your entirely self imposed weasel words requirement.  I am saying, however, that I don't feel like your viewpoint has any basis in fact.  Although since you're pretending to be so downtrodden (even though Islamophobia is pretty damn mainstream), I guess you won't try to refute such a statement.
Logged

Criptfeind

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

Damn, can we get some more of them dutch in here to put another view point in?
Logged

Virex

  • Bay Watcher
  • Subjects interest attracted. Annalyses pending...
    • View Profile

No, I'm not abusing your entirely self imposed weasel words requirement.  I am saying, however, that I don't feel like your viewpoint has any basis in fact.  Although since you're pretending to be so downtrodden (even though Islamophobia is pretty damn mainstream), I guess you won't try to refute such a statement.
This is exactly why I was using those 'weasel words'. You cant discuss Islam without getting branded an Islamofobe even if it's something trivial. And you wonder why people only debate attack Christianity? What am I supposed to do to be able to have a mature discussion, start every post with Allah Ackbar?
« Last Edit: June 14, 2011, 03:44:31 pm by Virex »
Logged

MetalSlimeHunt

  • Bay Watcher
  • Gerrymander Commander
    • View Profile

And you wonder why people only debate attack Christianity?
I only debate attack Christianity because they're the religion that's dominant in my society. When the US gets enough Muslims that they can be a driving force in government, I'll move on to them as well. (There are only around 9,000,000 Muslims in the US, so that's just a hypothetical.)
Logged
Quote from: Thomas Paine
To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.
Quote
No Gods, No Masters.

Bauglir

  • Bay Watcher
  • Let us make Good
    • View Profile

I like how you rationalized religious privilege while denying the right of Atheists to have any of their moral values acknowledged as worthy of similar protection. Although it is rather strange that you both recognize how morality can divorce itself from religion (Jews eating pork) and yet seem to argue in its favor as something to be protected on basis of shared beliefs. Did I read you wrong? Your argument also seems to ignore that, if one simply needs to point out a common belief system, secular organizations could equally form and say "yeah, this falls under a shared idea of morality."

I think he was actually just making a pragmatic argument. If you say that eating pork is against your religious beliefs and point out that you are Jewish, the person you're saying that to can go check and see, "Oh, yeah, it totally isn't kosher for Jews to eat pork, I guess you aren't just trying to ruin my dinner party or whatever." Whereas if you say that wearing clothes to court is against your religious beliefs, and point out that you are a Anti-Pantsian, nobody can go check on what Anti-Pantsians believe to make sure you're not just being a douche. If you legitimately were an Anti-Pantsian and that was legitimately your religious belief, there'd be something to an argument that that ought to be protected legally. But nobody can verify whether it is or not, hence the problem.
Logged
In the days when Sussman was a novice, Minsky once came to him as he sat hacking at the PDP-6.
“What are you doing?”, asked Minsky. “I am training a randomly wired neural net to play Tic-Tac-Toe” Sussman replied. “Why is the net wired randomly?”, asked Minsky. “I do not want it to have any preconceptions of how to play”, Sussman said.
Minsky then shut his eyes. “Why do you close your eyes?”, Sussman asked his teacher.
“So that the room will be empty.”
At that moment, Sussman was enlightened.

MetalSlimeHunt

  • Bay Watcher
  • Gerrymander Commander
    • View Profile

The issue with that, Bauglir, is that it makes time and tradition the driving force in a legal matter on one's ability to refuse an activity. That doesn't set a good precident.
Logged
Quote from: Thomas Paine
To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.
Quote
No Gods, No Masters.

RedKing

  • Bay Watcher
  • hoo hoo motherfucker
    • View Profile

As stated though, the problem with granting blanket acceptance to things like that is that it could be abused. "Wearing pants is against my morality." "Allowing gays to live is against my morality." "Working is against my morality."

The thing with a religion (for the most part) is that the claims are verifiable and reproducible. If you're Jewish and you claim that eating pork is against your religion, there's plenty of written evidence to support that, as well as a whole lot of other Jews who will back you up on that claim. (There are also plenty of Reformed Jews who will nod while wolfing down that last pork chop, but that's a different story.)

I like how you rationalized religious privilege while denying the right of Atheists to have any of their moral values acknowledged as worthy of similar protection. Although it is rather strange that you both recognize how morality can divorce itself from religion (Jews eating pork) and yet seem to argue in its favor as something to be protected on basis of shared beliefs. Did I read you wrong? Your argument also seems to ignore that, if one simply needs to point out a common belief system, secular organizations could equally form and say "yeah, this falls under a shared idea of morality."

Maybe the better answer is to throw out the whole thing? Heck, two of the examples you gave for abuse are actually covered by Abrahamic religious tradition already, and we clearly don't protect the second because, thankfully, not even religion's sanctity in our society is enough to allow such monstrosity a serious hold in our culture. Instead it exports itself to African countries... but at least we don't allow it here. The "against my morality to work" thing is however protected, and I believe even was once enforced in some locations, although only on the Sabbath. It isn't much of an abuse though, since not working means not getting paid.

I think what I was trying to get at is that atheists can have perfectly valid moral objections similar to religious objections. The problem lies in how you legally codify that, because morality is a much more individualized concept, and if you extend equal protection to individual morality, it's prone to the sort of abuses I pointed out.

Granted, truly off the wall abuses are unlikely to be protected, in the same way that some religious exemptions/obligations that go strongly against the mainstream are either not protected (stoning non-secular offenders to death, polygamy) or are strictly regulated (use of hallucinogens, animal sacrifice).

I'm not arguing one way or the other in terms of atheists' rights as far as exemptions go, I'm pointing out that it's a thorny issue.
Logged

Remember, knowledge is power. The power to make other people feel stupid.
Quote from: Neil DeGrasse Tyson
Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you.

freeformschooler

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

And you wonder why people only debate attack Christianity?
I only debate attack Christianity because they're the religion that's dominant in my society. When the US gets enough Muslims that they can be a driving force in government, I'll move on to them as well. (There are only around 9,000,000 Muslims in the US, so that's just a hypothetical.)

That would be a lot of work because if suddenly there were more Muslims than Christians in the US, less people have grown up with and become embittered to the extremist side of their belief system, and thus they would have to educate themselves about "mainstream US religious fundamentalists" all over again :( Maybe it's best that we stick with Christians vs Athiests. As long as the same boring arguments are rehashed, and the same awful blanket statements are made, I'm pretty sure nothing more serious or more frustrating will happen except more hatred on both sides.

EDIT: Also, now I'm Agnostic Pineapplist. Strawberries are against my belief system but my agnosticism prevents me from hating on your for eating them.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 21