Its perfectly acceptable to be rude to religous people...

[startrek90]

Definately going to get flamed here but oh well.

I get the feeling that this is perfectly acceptable to be rude about religous people. From reading the threads on this forum, and my experiences in RL, the amount of rudeness and sometimes plain nastiness is awful.

I am religous. I don't care if people are not, if they go to church or how they live their own lives or raise their children. As far as I am concerned as long as you obey the law, do what you want.

So far I have seen people imply that all religous people are closing their childrens mind, are ignorant, bigots.... its horrible!

I don't deny that there are people who are that way and use religion as an excuse.... but quite frankly you can be ignorant and rude without religion.

I am being unreasonable to be offended, but it really bothers me that its culturally acceptable to be rude to and about people of faith. You wouldn't do it to someone from a different culture or race would you? I have never bothered anyone with my faith so please stop taking it as an insult!

(Just venting, been lambasted in RL for daring to buy my son a Noahs ark toy. I thought it was cute with all the animals etc... but apparently I am raising him to be ignorant, bigoted and stupid. He will hate gay people and women and generally be a horrible person.....apparently grrr )

I haven't heard anyone claiming persecution when they've been a bit criticised though.

That would be wildly inappropriate when you consider the dreadful persecution Christians are facing across the globe today - a 75 year old Nun was gang raped in India this week for trying to go back into a school to help the children.

The question is then are people being rude to you OP or questioning aspects of your religion which you consider rude. I generally steer away from both with people because I am not interested in their faith however if I were to tell my parents, for example, the extent of my lack of faith they would be insulted just for that.

Don't think you can really compare religion with culture or race OP, as religion is a lifestyle choice - though I accept that many years being brainwashed by your parents might leave you feeling you didn't have much choice.
I probably wouldn't be rude but we must all be free to ridicule someone if we find what they believe ridiculous.
I find the smug, self satisfied people who knock on my door and try to explain their various faiths are often rude but I wouldn't usually be rude back, unless they push it

As a staunch Athiest... my 19 month old daughter also has a noahs ark toy, because, y'know, all she sees is a boat with animals and stuff to play with.

Despite having a dalliance with christianity in my formative years i've never really understood the schsims which seem to exist within the christian community

I see things in a very black and white way.

Either the bible is the word of god and should be taken as such...

“… from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:15-17).

or it isn't , in which case i'm not sure how anyone can base, well, anything on it.

So lets pop down the 'rational' route and accept that the bible is the word of god. If we have an omnipotent and omniscient god then we have to assume that he's not going to cock up his book.

Which makes me think that the bible should be read as the work of an infallible god or, otherwise, what is the point.

So we should be taking this literally, which is where the hating of gays comes from. (and many more troubling verses)

The major problem comes from proselytising but that is also backed by the bible - so all christians should be doing it

"I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.(2 Timothy 4:2)"

and then also the wars and terrorism which have been waged in (various) gods name. Without the religious justification these people are just bellends and it is a lot harder to rally a group of people with disparate beliefs than a group with a common belief

Unfortunately the same way that 'all' muslims are being tarred with terrorist labels, christians will also get lambasted because of what minorities within their community do.

oh and don't forget that Athiests have no morals, but some do actually try to be nice to people whilst they are here and alive - not because of some otherworldly reward - but because it is the right thing to do.

My 'religion' is a Pago-Christian faith of my own lots of energy based stuff like crystals and flower remedies In other areas of MN I am 'woo'.

No one ever seems to have problem sneering at my faith. Luckily my faith includes allowing people to find their own belief system. For the 'Christians' who despise my pagan bits, the people who hate anyone having any faith, people who are twitchy that witches are real, and the woo-despisers - whatever. I respect your right to not believe the same as me, the right to comment on it, the right to deride me as lond as you respect my right not to care.

People who are rude, regardless of faith or non-faith = not worth concerning yourself about.

madreloco

Of course your definition of 'Evangelism' is correct however as with many words in our language it has more than one definition, from the Oxford dictionary:

"Zealous in advocating or supporting a particular cause"

So on that basis, I'm quite happy that my usage of the word was in fact 'accurate'.

I wasn't rude about 'atheists'. My beloved DH is an atheist. I critiqued a particular brand of atheist who I have found to be rude and aggressive.

I have never attacked anyone for a lack of belief, and I'm happy to discuss my beliefs and religion in general as long as no one tells me I'm stupid.

I think Babycham, Lettice and Laurie have all made excellent points.

*long

grammar people can also take a deep breath. I'm typing with a cat on my hands/keyboard

Paintedpinksapphires exactly. I agree it does seem more acceptable to be rude about religous people on MN in a way that would be entirely unacceptable about anything else.

WorraLiberty yes someone actually said this to me and then proceeded to call me stupid and question my abilites as a mother and person in general.

there does seem to be an intellectually superior attitude in some non religous people and I am weak enough to be annoyed by that.

By definition, being rude to anyone about anything isn't really 'acceptable' behaviour in polite society.

That doesn't mean that people should be censored from expressing their views about other people's beliefs, politics or whatever.

My DD was given a Noah's Ark book by a (christian) neighbour, and got a Noah's Ark playset as a free gift from a childrenswear catalogue. We said thanks to the former, it was read and the toys played with. Oh, and I used to sing 'the animals went in two by two' with gusto through the village when taking her for walks in her pram. As adults we may be able to see that the Noah story can be viewed as God going genocidal and drowning a lot of innocent animals into the bargain, and discuss that as a matter of philosophy and world view, but jumping on someone for buying a toy rather similar in play value to a farm isn't nice.

Criticising religion is fine. Being rude to people for being religious is not.

But criticising people for their actions, even if they do those things supposedly because of their religion, is absolutely fine. Religion should not be used as a catch all excuse for damaging behaviour.

I think you are setting up a bit of a straw man argument if you are generalising out from the example you give that it is generally acceptable to be rude to religious people. Of course what that person said to you was out of order unless it was in response to you telling them they and their DC were going to Hell. I think the Church of England has such a grip over the institutions of this country, unelected bishops in the house of lords, control of many of the country's state schools and compulsory acts of worship even in those that aren't. I think you need to view hostility towards religion in light of that power imbalance. You may be a perfectly nice and tolerant person OP but historically the church has not been so.

Criticising religion is fine. Being rude to people for being religious is not

This ^^

And also to add that being rude to people for not being religious is also not on.

Tonde the reasons behind those features of our government as historical but I actually agree with you on that.

I'm Scottish, so the queen isn't the head if my church and I voted for independence and a nice secular government but sadly it wasn't to be.

However none of us on this thread are going to be arrested or murdered for our beliefs, lose our jobs or have our families threatened.
These are realities for religious belief (or lack thereof) in a number of countries round the world so I still think we are fortunate.

Criticising religion is fine. Being rude to people for being religious is not.

Indeed. But which is which is firmly in the eye of the beholder. Me criticising your religion may feel to you as if I am being rude to you for being religious. Because its all a bit blurry, that line.

Pbwr Christian theology is rather more complicated than either the bible is the word of God or the whole thing is untrue!

My first degree is in Theology and religious studies and there was a whole range of people on my course religious and non-religious. What seems to have happened in recent years is that atheism is equated with intelligence and with that interest in the study of religion has also declined. You see lots of threads saying 'why does my dc have to do gcse re?'.

I'm agnostic but it is shame that people are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You can be interested in religion without being religious.

OP, you're behaving as if your religion is your own personal choice, a completely benign, individual issue that has zero impact on the lives of others - and that, if you'll forgive me, is hopelessly naive.

People are hostile towards organised religion precisely because of this kind of blinkered attitude to the enormous damage religion has done and still does in terms of promoting social division, bigotry, sexism, homophobia, and fosters a particularly dopy brand of wishful thinking. My own home country is a notable instance of this. I have a lot of time for Quakerism, which never seems that interested in dogma, and some practitioners of liberation theology in the slums of the developing world, and for genuinely good work done by people who interpret the gospels as calls to work to alleviate inequality.

I have never been rude to a religious person, because its not my habit to be rude to other people within reason, but I don't believe that organised religion deserves my respect. And anyone who can't see why that is is being wilfully blind.

Paintedpinksapphires I couldn't agree more

I had always identified as an atheist but when I see the comments from atheists on here I start to realise I do not want to be lumped in with them. So superior and righteous and belittling of anyone that chooses religion.

Religion or otherwise is a choice and I believe in debating, questioning and understanding but let's not any of us pretend we know the facts and everyone else is an idiot. We can only form conclusions based on what we currently know. For me, that means I don't believe in God but I would never criticize or be rude to anyone who draws a different conclusion (I may, in the right circumstances, discuss with them why they believe what they do).

honsandrevels

"all scripture is god breathed" so i should be ignoring this bit because it doesn't suit?

Theology may be a complicated (man made) subject but either you are taking this literally or not. It seems that (criminals not withstanding) that the populous as a whole give more credence to whole of The Law Book than many christians do to the bible.

Imagine what would happen if we decided some laws didn't apply to us?

Spooling forward many years when my daughter is taking her gcses or whatever test is around then, I don't see any major objections to her having to do RE if equal time is given to all the major religions (a bit like cameron wanting all the party leaders at the TV debates)

However I would far prefer that she used that time to do pretty much anything else - science, art, history, maths, english, flugelhorn

On a slightly separate but related issue, the Equality Act includes religion and belief in its protected characteristics along side gender, race etc which I always found odd - not because you should discriminate against religion but because, as has been said, it is a choice unlike the other characteristics

Pbwer Have you ever wondered why certain books made the 'cut' to become part of the bible? Why is Mark's gospel part of the New Testament but not 'the gospel of Thomas' or the Gospel of Truth' or the thousands of other Gnostic gospels. Studying religion is like looking at any philosophy. What were the motivations of the authors? What was the historical context?

You are equating theology with evangelism which is way off the mark.

I agree with pbwer, I am interested in religion from a psychological perspective but if you don't believe that the bible is the word of God then I can't see how you can follow Christianity as a religion rather than a philosophy.

Murders, arrests, job losses for religious reasons don't take place in the UK PaintedPink? Are you sure about that statement?

Love the sinner, hate the sin.

Very solid life philosophy. Someone should make that, you know, a thing.

Kindly learn the difference between being rude about a PERSON and being rude about a BELIEF.

Am I not allowed to say that believing man didn't walk on the moon is ridiculous and ignorant because the people who buy that conspiracy theory might have their feelings hurt?

Yes, I am allowed to say that. But I cannot say that believing a human being can get up and walk again three days after death is ridiculous and ignorant, because people who have chosen to believe that feel wounded?

These beliefs existed for thousands of years before any living Christian came along. We are ALLOWED to criticise such beliefs....they belong to no one personally.

This whining about rude atheists is nothing more than "Shut up. I don't want to hear your common sense, logic and reason so I shall shame you into being quiet by calling you rude".

It's infanile. Believers need to wo/man up and cope with the fact that rather a lot of people find your beliefs ridiculous. And we are allowed to say so. Sorry about that.

And by the way, I am never, ever "offended" by a creationist calling my certainty in the fact of evolution "stupid".....I just blind them with science and show that their beliefs are the stupid ones.

If I can cope with having my beliefs challenged, why can't you?

'there does seem to be an intellectually superior attitude in some non religous people and I am weak enough to be annoyed by that.'

That's all right. There is a superior attitude in some religious people and as an atheist I am annoyed by that, too. I've been told by certain Christians that Christians are more moral, better people. All sorts of things. It's rude of them but now I just do an inward eye roll and can't be bothered to challenge them or get into any debate about it. I just say 'that's not been my personal experience' and change the subject. This would work for you when people criticise your faith.

Ideally we would all keep our opinions to ourselves about other people's beliefs. It isn't an ideal world.People can be annoying about all sorts of things.