To think that belief in Father Christmas is not comparable to religious belief.

[Throughthelongnight]

Just that really. I have noticed that the expectation is that we all go along with the pretence of FC for the sake of parent's children's sensibility, but the same is not afforded where religious belief is concerned.

A lot of people were offended by Galileo, Darwin, and so on. Would you have said they should keep quiet?
(and I know I'm not them)

Yes. Sometimes it is necessary to offend. Vital maybe.

You can't shut down debate because of "offense".

If I said you asking me questions offended me. Would that make stop?

Anyone can say they find anything offensive. Overused the term just becomes meaningless anyway.

It's a shame if people's feelings are hurt if somebody challenges their ideas. But it's inevitable. If people express their ideas as incontrovertible facts, then other people are going to say "Hang on a minute..what about....?" I don't want to just anyone's feelings. But I also don't think that any except the most private, personal ideas have a right to go unchallenged. Particularly on a debating thread like this.

Also. Trying to justify the rape of children, calling people racist just for criticising religopn, and questioning peoples intelligence/calling them ignorant for not believing in a god with no truth.

All very, very offensive in my opinion.

Proof not truth

I find, for example, the suggestion that questioning Islam makes you a racist pretty bloody offensive.......

Goodness me. All the chest clutching about someone possibly thinking you are racist. Who said only theists were thin-skinned?

You all keep saying that people are trying to shut debate down.

But no one is, there have been no deletions, no one has stopped you saying anything.

No one has said that the very act of criticising Islam is racist, just that some criticisms of Islam use racist/orientalist tropes. That isn't the same as saying every one who says everything negative about Islam ever is racist.

The Muslims on this thread have engaged with you, answered questions and generally not resorted to insults, which is more then has been extended to us.

I always think of Stephen Fry when people have to lower themselves to playing the "You've offended me (therefore you must shut up)" card in order to try to shut down any adult debate:

Boo Fucking Hoo

What is interesting looking back at this debate is the difference in the way in which the atheists on the whole (though there are exceptions - freudian and others) speak to people who disagree with them and the way that the people who follow a religion on the whole have spoken to those who disagree with them. For example the personal insults such as calling people mentally ill, unintelligent, gullible, simple etc have all come from one side. Its quite enlightening.

Isnt it also interesting that whilst the religious people here admire posters like Dione for her calmness and kindness to all and seek to emulate that, the atheists seem to admire the posters amongst them who are the most offensive, the most rude and seem to egg eachother on to be more and more vile. As if ridiculing those who disagree with you is some sort of admirable quality. For me that is one of the reason why I really dont think much of atheism (but I do have respect for atheists as human beings). What does it teach you about being a better human being? Nothing. And the proof is in the pudding with regards to this debate.

I know that is not going to go down well but after all your comments about causing offense being some kind of virtue I thought you could probably take it.

Gorilla, can you explain how it's insulting to demand more proof for the existence of a God than "a book says so", but taking umbrage at being called a racist for no reason is just people being thin-skinned? Or does hypocrisy and double-thinking come so easily to certain religious people that they don't realise they are doing it?

And the Muslims on this thread have studiously avoided many questions, certainly the really tricksy ones, which would reveal unavoidably unpalatable truths about the Koran, and perhaps their own beliefs.

What a very strange post, Anne. I only mentioned being offended by the racist thing because there has been a lot of talk about hurting Muslim people's feelings by questioning Islam.

But since you say you're happy to answer questions, please could you answer mine from earlier?

Please could you confirm that there is nothing at all in the Qur'an about it being OK for a man to beat his wife?

When is it necessary to offend people?

Dione you asked me to explain something earlier.

I had said this:
Though generally the ridicule is brought to the party by those who make such outrageous claims.

If an adult says "Do you know I have this feeling there is something more than what we see" there can be no ridicule.

But if an adult says "my magic invisible friend told me that this book is true and.. and.. and he sent a ghost into some woman right... so he could be born and... and...then he sort of died, but came alive again and he made the universe and he like flooded the world cos he got it wrong and I nearly forgot he played this clever trick on the first two people he made so he could punish everyone forever and.."

Well it might be tactful to just walk away, but there's little one could do to prevent her/him looking ridiculous and if you're in a debate that's not a reasonable expectation.

The other thing I said was this:
I know the comparison with other beliefs can also feel like ridicule, but you can hardly count that since to experience it as ridicule exposes the 'victim's' contempt for that other belief.

That's the bit where I say "So what's the difference between believing in god and believing in ghosts, fairies, odin or talking apes?" and they say "how dare you accuse me of being so stupid"

Well that's not being very nice to the people who do believe in those things is it? The poster who responds like that is saying that people who believe things s/he doesn't are stupid and deserve ridicule.

And while the poster will assume I am being nasty in fact I really don't see a difference and am waiting for some reason why one is clearly right and the others wrong.

I don't Dione is calm and kind to all. She is patronising, wilfully obtuse, disingenuous, condescending and mimsy.

You could flip it round and ask, how come the believers like the posters that want sverything to be nicey-nicey and to have any difficult questions avoided and smoothed over, usually by trying to shame or smear posters, whilst the non-believers like the posters that keep asking the vital questions, however difficult, and won't be put off with nonsense, waffle, avoidance and guilt-tripping.

It is not kindness to let adults make fools of themselves by coming out with bizarre and outrageous statement that they cannot or will not back up sufficiently, it is patronising and unfair to allow them to delude themselves and make fools of themselves, IMHO.

I find it i interesting that some atheists on here have stated that they are not racist because they have muslim friends - yet acknowledged that they wouldnt be able to say some of this stuff to their real life muslim 'friends'.

Whereas all the muslims on here would be able to openly say every thing they have written on here in RL too.

The gross attacks on religion, people, mental health issues, muslim women.....and all from those who supposedly want to rid the world of oppression and intolerance to 'help' those poor little oppressed women in the third world, whilst spewing venom and mocking those very same 'oppressed womens' beliefs.

Dionne, I, too, answered this question earlier. And quite well.

X-post peaceful!

Defuse, maybe that's because it is dangerous to speak out against Islam.

cross posted with Gosh

Oh and defuse

If all of you lot spent as much time helping the many women who ARE oppressed by your religion as you do on here, I'd have more respect.

I think I did state I do have discussions liked this with my family, and others who I knew from university.

Funnily enough we have very good discussions, all still friend's after it and it's very interesting. Oh and to add, NONE deny that the book is sexist, and say that modern muslims need to acknowledge that this is wrong, outdated and fight against those who think it is 'traditional islam' and something to be adhered to. Something which some posters here have failed to do - some that aren't even bloody muslim.

It's not necessary to offend people. But saying "I am offended" does not give you a "get out of jail free" card.

And in a debate about religion, it is not reasonable to be offended if your religion is questioned. The example of the circular "The Qur'an is divinely inspired. For something to be divinely inspires the must be a God. Therefore the Qur'an is proof of the existence of a God" argument is a case in point. It is not reasonable for people to be offended if anyone says that is a pretty bonkers thing to say. Because it is patently illogical. It's fine for use within groups of believers, but for robust debate outside that intimate circle, it doesn't stand up for a second. As anyone could see after a moment's thought. Saying that somebody is a racist, or a Western imperialist apologist for expressing that view is a pretty feeble argument.

People get killed for speaking out publicly again Islam. Haven't you noticed that?

A colleague of mine came out with a very 'Islamaphobic' comment last week. I told him he was ignorant, this offended him, I knew it would but I thought it was necessary.

I thought being all polite would not have got the message across to him about what I thought about his comment.
I was more direct and offended him. I think it worked though. He later apologised and we talked about it.