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 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 many theists are capable of understanding it is all the same to theists, what is the reply? Why are fairies different from god?

I disagree that it is solely for wounding. it makes a good point. Good enough that there is no answer. In fact, it's a similar point that got me questioning about religion in the first place. What is the difference between Allah and Zeus? Why do some people have evidence for Allah and not Zeus? it's not all just to poke fun. It gets to the heart of the matter.

I would point out that from a theist's perspective the idea that there is no god is only an (incorrect) opinion.

while of course people can decide for themselves what they think about god, everyone should accept it's not a matter of opinion. You can be wrong. Christians could be wrong, Muslims could be wrong, and atheists could be wrong. Since we are all making competing claims, most of us are wrong. (not directly replying to what I quoted, just pointing this out).

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.

while I would hate if someone told my kids about hell fire, I couldn't care less if someone told me about it. I know there is little chance of it.

What someone has happily told us, however, is that they think it is absolutely fair and right that everyone's tax money goes to pay for christianity to be propped up in this country.

it makes a good point. Good enough that there is no answer. In fact, it's a similar point that got me questioning about religion in the first place.
I see, you are attempting to convert people to your beliefs. Is that what this thread is now? I thought it was about politeness.

it's not a matter of opinion. You can be wrong.
Of course and maybe all "sides" are wrong

while I would hate if someone told my kids about hell fire, I couldn't care less if someone told me about it
Not all people are like you. Some are much more sensitive (atheists and believers). I think it is preferable to be kind and gentle, while still making your point if you must. You catch more flies with honey, you know?

What someone has happily told us, however, is that they think it is absolutely fair and right that everyone's tax money goes to pay for christianity to be propped up in this country.
Then after some debate they graciously said they would think about it, which I thought was the most wonderful result.

I see, you are attempting to convert people to your beliefs. Is that what this thread is now? I thought it was about politeness.

isn't that what any debate is about?

I was, however, addressing the point that it is purely there to insult. it isn't.

Then after some debate they graciously said they would think about it, which I thought was the most wonderful result.

i didn't see that. So there is a point to trying to get people to agree with you?

The reason why the deluded whine and stamp their feet over the use of the term 'imaginary friend'?

Truth hurts.

Deep down in every 'believer' (aside of those with genuine cognitive problems) is a little lurking suspicion that their imaginary friend is, in fact, imaginary. They don't really want to look at this suspicion, because in many cases to acknowledge it would be to acknowledge that they have wasted an awful lot of time worrying about the imaginary friend. (Similarly, people who have obtained 'qualifications' in various scams such as homeopathy hate having it pointed out to them that they have wasted time and, in many cases, a lot of money, studying for a qualification in Advanced Magic Dust and Wand Waving and they didn't even get a game of Quidditch thrown in).
Also, to many people, rejecting the superstitious nonsense you were brought up with can feel like rejecting your family and your culture, which you may also be reluctant to do. But the fundamental ridiculousness of all religion is still there. Hence all these desperate demands that other people take your imaginary friend seriously, because if you can convince them of its existence then maybe you'll be able to keep on convincing yourself.

Yes sometimes . But it was a polite debate for the most part where people tried to see each others' perspectives. And crucially, her faith was not under direct attack, only an associated privilege.

I would love to live in John Lennon's "Imagine" world, but I accept that faith is a part of the human condition (not all humans, but many). Not just faith in religion, but also political ideologies. I don't think we will foster peace by being divisive and confrontational but by setting the example of tolerance and respect. Sometimes you have to be more assertive and challengeing or you will get ridden roughshod over, but I haven't seen a need here. The majority of theists on this thread have been pussycats compared to the nuns at my old school.

Sorry was replying to keep

SGB Everything in your post there seems to me to be a reason not to mock the afflicted religious. It's just cruel, no?

MerryWidow You miss the point over and over again.

The theist and atheist position is nowhere near equal. Point one. That there is no god is not merely an opinion - it is a virtual fact based on the evidence that is available to us (rather a lot).

Point two - let's all be nice and polite. Why? If YOU want to be nice and polite, fill your boots. How dare you presume to inflict that restriction on anyone else? What is it to you how other adults chose to express themselves?

One of the most repulsive things about the 'group think" mentality of this site is this obsequious, drippy insistence on "respecting" everyone. As if anyone has any damn right to tell others who and what they should and should not "respect".

I decide what I respect, and my respect is earned which makes it worth something - unlike the moist eyed facsimile of it shovelled about on here.

Nobody, but nobody even thinks to demand that their political beliefs are respected. And if they tried to insist they'd be be handed their arses on a plate. Quite rightly.

But religion? Oh, dear me, no...that must be respected because feelings get hurt. So what? What kind of childish fool gets all lip wobbly because someone else describes their imaginary friend as an imaginary friend? How does this actually harm anyone in any real sense of the word? It doesn't. The law recognises this which is why it's perfectly legal to criticise, laugh at, mock and ridicule religious and superstitious beliefs to our heart's content.

New flash theists - there is NO difference between your belief in dead men walking and cosmic dictators who telepathically communicate with you and the belief that little goblins come out at night and eat stray socks from the dryer.

NONE. The only difference is that you believe (for no sensible reason) one and not the other. The fact of your belief does not give the idea credibility or automatically assign it protection from ridicule.

If I can laugh at the idea of goblins, I can laugh at the idea of dead men walking.

There is no harm in criticism or ridicule. You not liking it much is not "harm". There is, conversely, rather a lot of harm in the idea that that religious convictions must not be mocked. People die for that idea every fucking day on our planet. How dare you promote it?

You want your beliefs respected? Get respectable beliefs.

"Education about the various religions in a neutral way is important"

Not at early ages when children are impressionable and invariably believe everything they are taught by figures of authority.

Teach them about religions once they have developed a healthy sense of scepticism. Teenage years would be fine, imho.

There is no harm in criticism or ridicule.
Does that just apply to theists or to everyone Caffe?

How dare you presume to inflict that restriction on anyone else?

I certainly have not dictated to anyone else how they should behave. Indeed I have attempted to soften my thoughts by adding "I think", "imo", "No?", etc. I also did not say religion should never be mocked, rather that I had not seen a need for it in this thread. If my wishy-washy stance makes you angry, I don't know how you get through life tbh.

If you want to rage at the religious, that is your prerogative, and I am certainly glad you have that option of free speech. It just seems unlikely to me that being confrontational in the context of this thread is likely to achieve anything other than you and your fellows feeling smug and chest-beating, while a lot of theists go away thinking atheists are jerks.

drippy insistence on "respecting" everyone

everyone should be respected. Ideas needn't be. there is a dance there.

What is a 'virtual fact', Caffe? Now that seems a nonsensical term, to me...

I agree with Cote.
My DCs studied various world religions and philosophies in World History class in high school, not in isolation as you might find in RE, but in a broad historical context.

Another narcissistic rant from Caffe I see.

'I decide what I respect, and my respect is earned which makes it worth something - unlike the moist eyed facsimile of it shovelled about on here.'

Cote- I totally agree.

In theory it would be great to teach objective religious studies in primary, but in practice I don't think it works. As you say kids have yet to develop a healthy scepticism, and I don't think they have the maturity to understand what faith is from a theoretical approach. Many teachers usually have an axe to grind themselves - many are christian in my experience ( bothy as an ex primary school teacher and a parent school governor).
Plenty of time in the teenage years.

Primary children should be learning the basics of what we are- atomic theory, phases of matter, the electromagnetic spectrum- at primary school, which they don't........but that is another argument.

Math- so how about Islam? Some Muslims think that their particular god deserves respect to the extent that they will kill people who don't show him enough. How do you feel about that?

While I agree that RS should mainly be a secondary school subject, I'm inclined to think that some exposure to the existence of a variety of religions (and ideally, non-religious alternatives) at primary is a good thing. Back in my day, we really only did Christianity other religions were totally alien to me - even catholicism was quite 'other', and I don't think that was at all a good thing. A bit of Diwali and Eid alongside the Nativity play at least - 'cultural' religion.

BigDorrit - TBF I'm not sure I've ever heard much criticism of Jainism or Shintoism.

I must look them up so I can criticise with authority....

Just to clarify I really don't mind what people say, as long as they make it clear it is their opinion.

So you would say in your opinion god is real.
That is not a universal truth then. You accept that he is only real for you.

Like an imaginary friend.

It is quite interesting that these threads don't attract many posters out of the thousands on the site. It gets a lot of traffic, but the same people all the time. I think most people are not bothered.

Of course antumbra
I have even posted a definition of faith. Why on earth should I expect everyone to think the same as me? We are all free. We may change our minds. My father was an atheist until he was 52 yrs. who knows what I will be in 10 yrs time? These things are not set in stone. That is why I object to solidgoldbrass telling me what she wants me to think.