Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

999 replies

startrek90 · 20/03/2015 15:32

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 Angry )

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
SolidGoldBrass · 27/03/2015 00:10

The violence and cruelty perpetrated by Lenin against religion were of course entirely wrong: just as wrong (and no different from) all the cruelties perpetuated by different sets of religious leaders against other groups of people who had a different imaginary friend or none at all. However, the logic behind Marx's rejection of religion was entirely valid: religion is an instrument of social control and the point of it is to make sure the masses 'know their place'.

PigletJohn · 27/03/2015 00:19

Some religionists most definitely are assholes.

mathanxiety · 27/03/2015 00:23

What a ludicrous and irrelevant opinion. It is 2015 and our brains and intellect have evolved far beyond all that crudeness.

Mehitabel6 · 27/03/2015 06:46

And this thread was likened to a debating club!
It is like the worst of the school playground.

Hakluyt · 27/03/2015 06:50

I see you have at least stopped trying to redefine the word "atheism" to fit your purposes, math. I suppose that's progress of a sort.

Hakluyt · 27/03/2015 07:01

Some atheists are aresholes.
Some religionists are aresholes.

Of course. But as I have said, being an atheist is not a motivating factor for any sort of action, good or bad. You have to be an atheist and a communist, a hater of religion or a philanthropist. Religion is in itself a motivator- towards genocide or humanitarianism- or to volunteer in the food bank

Mehitabel, what on earth has upset you about the last few pages?

Mehitabel6 · 27/03/2015 07:14

You really are funny Hak Grin
You still have the well known tactic of wide eyed innocence!
Luckily I am off out for the day while you still burble on, not making any distinction between fact and opinion and saying it is perfectly OK to be offensive if it is a fact ( in your mind) - no matter how many times someone tells you they find it rude.
I find it rather like banging my head against a brick wall!

However it does pale into insignificance against some other statements on here.
( I fully expect the reply of bafflement )

Hakluyt · 27/03/2015 07:17

Before you go, mehitabel. This is not wide eyed innocence- please just assume I am stupid. Explain to me in words of one syllable what I have said that you object to. This is NOT a tactic. This is genuine. I honestly,nhonewtly don't know.

Mehitabel6 · 27/03/2015 07:45

I am the fool who keeps banging their head!
I really don't know why!
I have told you the phrase- and you have many, many times, told me that it is a fact and you have every intention of saying it because there is nothing wrong with it.

It is comparing Christianity with a belief in fairies - which to you is the same. This is said to belittle- to make a belief in God seem childish and silly.

It shows no sensitivity to people who think differently to you.

Personally, having being told that would be enough for me and I would avoid any set phrase that someone has found objectionable - it is easy to do, without compromising what you think.

At least a debating club would separate fact from opinion and put 'I think' or 'In my opinion' in front of certain statements.

I know that you are still going to justify it -a fool wouldn't keep banging their head!

Mehitabel6 · 27/03/2015 07:46

Sorry- it is the fool that keeps banging their head! That is me!

Binkybix · 27/03/2015 07:50

I find it rather like banging my head against a brick wall!

It's funny - that's exactly how it feels talking to you too. Honestly, I have a clear example where a fact was presented by someone and you insist it's an opinion.

Binkybix · 27/03/2015 07:51

Also Hak didn't compare God that fairies - she asked why that would be considered rude because she was trying to understand the logic of why people find it so.

merrywindow · 27/03/2015 07:53

It is a shame some atheists on this thread keep lapsing into likening god to an imaginary friend/leprechaun. It is a point which has already been made numerous times and the theists have made it clear it upsets them. To keep saying it is rude and severely undermines anything else the person says, imo.

merrywindow · 27/03/2015 07:54

Xpost

Mehitabel6 · 27/03/2015 08:05

I have not time to trawl back- she has asked lots of times why it is considered rude- stemming from being told it was rude when she actually said it the first time.
I have told her why it is rude- it is said to belittle.

Mehitabel6 · 27/03/2015 08:08

I can't think why, when she has been told exactly why, she can't accept it and avoid. I would- as would other people with any sensitivity.
It does undermine anything useful they might say- my eyes glaze over with boredom the moment imaginary friends, fairies, aliens etc come into what could be an interesting debate.

Hakluyt · 27/03/2015 08:18

Ah, right, so all this child A and child B stuff was only about the God/fairy analogy. I thought you were talking about all terms which one person finds offensive- as was obvious in my responses. Please note also that I didn't use the analogy at any point. in fact I said specifically that I don't use it.

But I would be grateful for a form of words that theists find acceptable that I can use to express my point of view. That God is a construct. A mythical being that humans have invented to explain things which were at the time, or still are inexplicable, and to provide comfort in times of trouble, and meaning when things are meaningless. And that is the only logical explanation of the God phenomenon. The shorthand "imaginary friend" is unacceptable- although it seems to fit the bill admirably. Comparisons to other mythical beings are also out. So what can I say?

ErrolTheDragon · 27/03/2015 08:18

What a ludicrous and irrelevant opinion. It is 2015 and our brains and intellect have evolved far beyond all that crudeness.

Confused was that aimed at piglet's interjection? Because it was exactly the same thing as the first line of math's preceding post.

It's really odd on these threads. Some of us can see perfectly clearly that hak is herself no fan of the 'fairies' thing. But others persist in going on about her asking a question about it. One which, IIRC from upthread, capsicum at least was perfectly happy to engage with. It's like everyone has their own polarising filters.

merrywindow · 27/03/2015 08:41

I think it was in response to SGB's comment:

religion is an instrument of social control and the point of it is to make sure the masses 'know their place'.

merrywindow · 27/03/2015 08:43

Whiles I agree with the sentiment to an extent, it would be less inflammatory to say "can be" rather than "is" which implies that this is the sole function of religion.

Binkybix · 27/03/2015 09:01

I have told her why it is rude- it is said to belittle

I think that should read 'I have told her why I THINK it's rude' if we're being strict in what's fact and what's opinion.

I agree it can be said to belittle and I would never unprovoked go to a religious person and say it apropos of nothing. Or even in debate usually.

However you need to understand that from many peoples' point of view they see no/little difference in the credibility of fairies and the credibility of God. When I was being harassed about my atheism once in America I eventually used something similar (not fairies) to communicate how I personally felt about the credibility of God in the Abrahamic sense. It wasn't intended to belittle - but to try and communicate that I had a different outlook entirely. And it made him get it more than several other attempts to explain where I was coming from.

BigDorrit · 27/03/2015 09:41

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

keepitsimple0 · 27/03/2015 09:51

And some atheists were Communists whose motivation in eliminating religion from the USSR was hatred of religion.

you gave a list of reasons how and why communists perpetrated violence against religion, and none of them were atheism. There is nothing in atheism that says you must hate religion and kill religious people. Nothing. In fact, many atheists are outright positive towards religion (I am sure you have heard many claim it would be nice if God existed). As I said, it was communism, not atheism, as you seem to be admitting, finally, if only implicitly.

keepitsimple0 · 27/03/2015 10:01

It is a point which has already been made numerous times and the theists have made it clear it upsets them.

it is a point that has been made numerous times - with no retort other than it is rude and belittling. why is the point wrong? Any valid argument as to why fairies are different from God would make such a comment much worse than rude - it would make it wrong. I contend the big reason why it is considered rude is that it is a valid point that hurts.

merrywindow · 27/03/2015 10:27

keepitsimple

No-one said it was wrong. I expect many theists are capable of understanding that it is all the same to atheists. That doesn't change the fact that it is being used here, not in the spirit of explanation, but to deliberately wound and score points. If you cannot see that this is rude or petty then I don't know how to explain it to you.

As regards shutting down the debate, there are numerous polite ways to refer to God such as, eg, god, "god", what you call "god", etc. If you mean the debate about whether or not god is mythical make-believe, etc, do you not agree that this is the difference between atheists and theists - one group thinks it is, the other does not. I don't see what you hope to achieve by repeating your perspective over and over - a theist is hardly likely to suddenly see it your way on the Nth repetition. Hardly useful debate.

I would point out that from a theist's perspective the idea that there is no god is only an (incorrect) opinion. None of the theists on this thread have told atheists here how sorry they are that you will burn in hell, or that they will pray for you or similar passive aggressive stuff that typically puts atheist backs up. I'm sure we all know how annoying those comments can be. It seems to me, the fairies/imaginary friend comments are the atheist version of this.

Swipe left for the next trending thread