Why do you allow people to attack and ridicule Christianity?

Oh well - I’m glad you’re no longer comparing Jedi’ism to Judaism .

In essence, Jedi'ism posits that there are unseen beings in the Universe who can exert an unseen force to influence certain aspects of said universe, and this unseen force manifests itself in certain, chosen individuals being able to preform acts that are indistinguishable from "magic".

That's a descriptor of Jedi'ism, but it's also a summation of how the Universe functions under God, Jesus Christ, and the clergy, if you happen to believe in the biblical (canon) version of Christianity.

So please explain how you can, with any credibility, deride Jedi'ism as "ridiculous", while simultaneously espousing and endorsing the legitimacy of a 2nd belief system which is inherently no different and purports the exact same things.

I agree Jedi'ism is ridiculous, but no more so than Christianity, and that's why I can not enter "meaningful conversation" with Christians, no matter how well-intentioned they might be. What they believe is, to me, every bit as implausible and derisory as Jedi'ism, which is why, I think, so many atheists struggle to take discourse with religious people seriously. I mean, it's like "come on, you are a grown-up, you are capable of applying common sense and logic, you can not believe this stuff,... surely?"

It's not difficult to see then why atheists become exasperated and start throwing around insults, because to many of us, Christians are every bit as ridiculous and lacking credibility as people running around with lightsabers pretending to "force choke" bad guys.

In the last census just under half of people identified as Christian. FYI I am one of those former Christians who is now an atheist and mocks and criticises christianity.

I do understand that for you religion is ridiculous. And that’s your right and it’s a more scientifically logical position than mine. But comparing the adherents of Jedi’ism to the Judaism is, in my view , ridiculous ( your word)
Judaism is a very old religion with a long and rich and torturous history. Jedi’ism is a product of Star Wars .
Ok - you’re equating the two to show how ridiculous religion is - but religion, history, politics and culture are closely intertwined so my plea for courtesy in a discussion about religion is not an attempt to ask for a special favour . I truly believe that refraining from mockery ( not criticism) is an important principle when discussing other people’s religion or culture.

In the last census just under half of people identified as Christian. FYI I am one of those former Christians who is now an atheist and mocks and criticises christianity.

The UK is not predominantly a christian country.
Speaking out about the clear shortcomings of christianity isn't mocking, it's speaking honestly and factually.

You’re completely right. I think because it’s seen as a ‘white’ religion linked to life in the uk, so it’s ok to mock. People would be scared of being seen as racist to mock others.

if it's a case that it's affecting you, sure. if it's something you actually know about and have a valid opinion on (not based on wild assumptions or generalisations for example), sure
if someone is shoving their beliefs down your throat, absolutely. but that can still be done civilly. I regularly jehovas witnesses calling at my house. I disagree with many of their beliefs but I can civilly tell them I am not interested and don't feel the need to hold them or their beliefs in contempt.

it's a question of live and let live.

Yes - you absolutely are. I’d support you in that . It’s just worth thinking about whether you are happy to insult the people you’re talking to or whether you genuinely want them to understand your point of view.

Of course we're allowed to speak against things which trouble us. 🫣

Of course we're allowed to speak against things which trouble us. 🫣

Ok … I think I was trying to argue that it might be better for social cohesion to accept that you don’t need to always point out flaws in other people’s beliefs

Ok … I think I was trying to argue that it might be better for social cohesion to accept that you don’t need to always point out flaws in other people’s beliefs

I do accept that you HAVE to point out the flaws in other people’s beliefs if there is a chance they become law or affect your quality of life …
But otherwise- live and let live

How many times are we going to have to say that pointing out the flaws in most religious systems is not mockery, but merely stating actual facts?

This is a great point.

There used to be a joke that in Scotland "Loch Ness Monster denial" should be a criminal offence. Seems ridiculous on the face of it, until you realise that there is no more proof either way regards the LNM than deities. Why should one demand and be granted special status and the other not?

The same with pre-existing special status already given to religion, which I personally believe should have been ended decades ago. In the census prior to last, the rules were quite unambiguous that if more that 300,000 people claim to be adherents of any group, then that elevates said group into the status of an officially recognised religion in the UK. Approximately 600,000 people claimed to be Jedi adherents, yet the previously declared rules were simply ignored. Jedi'ism is still not an officially recognised religion, yet fewer than 600,000 people in the UK claim to be Jewish, and yet Judaism is an official religion without question. Why the discrepancy?

OK, I have deliberately selected one particularly trivial example of religious privilege for the sake of making a point, but there are plenty of other, far more egregious examples whereby religion is granted privilege on a completely arbitrary basis.

This is a great point.

There used to be a joke that in Scotland "Loch Ness Monster denial" should be a criminal offence. Seems ridiculous on the face of it, until you realise that there is no more proof either way regards the LNM than deities. Why should one demand and be granted special status and the other not?

The same with pre-existing special status already given to religion, which I personally believe should have been ended decades ago. In the census prior to last, the rules were quite unambiguous that if more that 300,000 people claim to be adherents of any group, then that elevates said group into the status of an officially recognised religion in the UK. Approximately 600,000 people claimed to be Jedi adherents, yet the previously declared rules were simply ignored. Jedi'ism is still not an officially recognised religion, yet fewer than 600,000 people in the UK claim to be Jewish, and yet Judaism is an official religion without question. Why the discrepancy?

OK, I have deliberately selected one particularly trivial example of religious privilege for the sake of making a point, but there are plenty of other, far more egregious examples whereby religion is granted privilege on a completely arbitrary basis.

No - a difference of opinion is not mockery.
its true that religion can be very divisive. I think history teaches us that tolerance - including religious tolerance- is necessary if we are to live together in peace because there will always be different views and different beliefs.

“don't see why religions or religious belief themselves should be protected from criticism or satire any more than any other opinion (e.g. political affiliation) should.”
Criticism is fine . Mockery is different- it reduces individuals who are believers into objects of scorn. Mockery of religious belief is not the same as legitimate criticism.

Do you think the same is true of any type of belief or opinion? Are there no beliefs or opinions you think it's ok to mock?

I've asked this several times in different ways on this thread and not really got an answer. None of the defenders of Christianity seem to be keen to say 'Yes, I will respect literally any belief of any kind' or admit 'No, actually, I probably would ridicule a belief in unicorns or the idea that the world is flat or dinosaurs were made up'.

I think this is an important point, because either unsubstantiated beliefs must be respected, or not. Given that there is no proof that any gods exist, why should religions command any more respect than any other belief?

“don't see why religions or religious belief themselves should be protected from criticism or satire any more than any other opinion (e.g. political affiliation) should.”
Criticism is fine . Mockery is different- it reduces individuals who are believers into objects of scorn. Mockery of religious belief is not the same as legitimate criticism.

Do you think the same is true of any type of belief or opinion? Are there no beliefs or opinions you think it's ok to mock?

I've asked this several times in different ways on this thread and not really got an answer. None of the defenders of Christianity seem to be keen to say 'Yes, I will respect literally any belief of any kind' or admit 'No, actually, I probably would ridicule a belief in unicorns or the idea that the world is flat or dinosaurs were made up'.

I think this is an important point, because either unsubstantiated beliefs must be respected, or not. Given that there is no proof that any gods exist, why should religions command any more respect than any other belief?