We're always being told we should respect other people's beliefs, but....

[Hakluyt]

.....what exactly does "respect" mean in this context? I am an atheist, and I am always happy to be challenged on my lack of belief, and am frequently told that I must have no moral compass and that I have to put up and shut up when Christianity imposes itself on me. I have also been told that I must have no sense of wonder- and, on on particularly memorable occasion, that I couldn't possibly have any charitable impulses!

But if I say anything even remotely "challenging" about faith or people of faith,bi am accused of disrespect. So, what exactly does respecting other people's beliefs mean?

BackOnlyBriefly:
To read your quote in context the reader needs to know that Deuteronomy 4 is all about Moses speaking to Israel and passing on the law to them to live by. He says not to alter it at that time (you can bet your bottom dollar they would have tried!), but this is completely separate to the changing dispensation when the Messiah came as predicted.

Jesus did not suggest the binding law of Moses would remain in effect forever. We know this also because it complements other verses in the bible that point to such a change. Romans 10:4 says "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes", Galatians 3:23 says "But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor [the law].

Luke 24:44 says Jesus said to them "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets must be fulfilled".

Matthew 5:17 described how that Jesus said in relation to the Law and the Prophets "I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

Rainy affects to be unaware that she demonstrates a lack of respect for other people's beliefs

"It is true that Mohammad made up his own religion based largely on the pre-existing bible. He disappeared up a mountain and had visions and all sorts!"

"The Middle East point is nonsense because they all had access to a belief in God of the bible long before Mohammad cooked up his Islamic religion based on an adaptation of the existing bible.
People over time have chosen to move away from God and follow their idols."

Homophobia means a hatred or fear of homosexuals. The bible is clear that God finds the homosexual practice a sin, among other named sins like envy and lying - or bearing false witness

However treating sinners unkindly is hypocrisy because we're all in the same boat. There is no one who has not sinned. Remember that Jesus said "he who is without sin cast the first stone"?

Certain sins have been viewed as socially worse than others, which on one hand seems wrong because like I said, we're all sinners, but on the other hand I suppose our judicial system is a bit like that too. You get more time inside for murder over theft, for example. I have to be honest though, if someone killed my spouse I would want to see them pay more than someone who nicked my car. As far as consequences go this is right in our society, but that still doesn't mean it's ok to single people out for bad treatment.

Some say God promoted healthy lifestyles for people's own good and that the practice of homosexuality is unhealthy for various reasons. There are studies of many thousand participants which show children of homosexual families are less healthy than those from single parents or heterosexual relationships. Then there's the physical problems, AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases are sadly rife among homosexuals www.nhs.uk/Livewell/LGBhealth/Pages/Gayhealththeissues.aspx Perhaps this is one reason He found it to be unacceptable. Possibly for the same reason adultery and promiscuity was not ok with God either. Also homosexuality violates His plan for 'one man and one woman' relationships.

I recognise it's not comfortable to be told something is not ok by God's standards, we have a sin-nature with is drawn towards acting against God and it offends our pride. But in the same way that a child doesn't like parental boundaries, we don't know best as we're not God.

I would reiterate there is nothing on with treating people cruelly for their sins though. As the saying goes, "don't judge me for having different sins to yours".

Oh dear, PigletJohn, nothing disrespectful against anyone there. How would you have portrayed it then, in a supposedly more respectful way?

Or is it simply as I suspected, that you're offended with an alternative viewpoint to your own and would prefer simply not to allow people to speak?

You don't want respect, you want silence. That is completely different.

ARainyDay you can try what you like, but your fellow Christians are justifying the actions and statements in the OT but saying Jesus changed all that. No matter how you play with the words that must mean that Jesus didn't approve of what god did back then. Bit tricky if you believe he is god.

If you say "oh yes he did approve" then Christians now when faced with the record of god's actions have to say "yes all that sick stuff was good. Killing children is a good thing etc etc". They can't do that can they.

The only way out is to admit that it was just a club all along and the members over the centuries tried to learn from past mistakes. If they'd said that in the first place we wouldn't be having this conversation now.

As for your claim that the children of homosexual families are less healthy than those from single parents or heterosexual relationships. Would you care to explain how that would be? Is this something god does to punish those children? I know he is supposed to like doing things like that.

Or could you be referring to their children suffering from bullying. There's a lot of that since some Christians teach their children that those gay people are abominations and this tends to lead to bullying. Even bullying from adults who believe - with some justification given what it says in the bible - that they are doing god's will.

homosexuality violates His plan for 'one man and one woman' relationships.

Yeah he was all for that. That's why there were no more people after Adam & Eve. The race died out because there were no other people to breed with.

oh but wait a minute... :)

BackOnlyBriefly:
regarding your opening statement, I would go by the book rather than what "fellow-Christians" are saying, as you put it.

With regard to the children and health, studies have shown a child from same-sex relationships are not as healthy as even children from ugly divorce and single parent struggles. They apparently are more prone to crime and less mentally healthy, for example.

You often mention God killing children, but you forget that the nation you quote from the bible were heavily into child torture and sacrifice to their false idols, yes, of their own children. God wiped out the lot of them to stop it. Would you have joined in or sat back and hoped they come to their own senses in good time? I hope not.

The incestuous thing is also health-related. Isn't God incredible to have known that right from the start?

With a pure race there would be no genetic problems to begin with. As the race expanded and cousins slept with cousins (which incidentally is still legal in the UK), then second cousins with second cousins, eventually there would have been enough people to dilute the gene pool sufficiently to then say "ok people, job done, no more of that for your own good health!"

That's after all what sets us apart from animals, or at least one reason.

ARainyDay- can I just check- are you a literal Bible believer? A creationist?

'Isn't God incredible'....

The god of the literalists Genesis is certainly incredible to me (not credible; hard to belive; unbelievable).

I would go by the book rather than what "fellow-Christians" are saying,

Well I don't know why god singled out just you to know the truth, but you can sort that out with the millions who think they are Christian.

Anyway you have a limited number of choices. If we believe the bible then god did bad things. Jesus said don't do bad things. So Jesus didn't agree with god. So god isn't jesus or god changed his mind - or what?

You keep forgetting that much of the slaughter of children was ordered by god personally. In the case of Job to win a bet. In the case of the bears because someone called his prophet 'baldy'. I know you will say that it's possible to survive being attacked by a bear, but we'd arrest you for attempted murder.

Hosea 13:16 "Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.

Yeah! that'll teach them! You can just see god rubbing his hands together can't you.

He even ordered Abraham to kill his own son. Christians say "ah but he didn't let him" but he promoted Abraham as a leader and role model for being willing to do it.

Most of the larger atrocities were about securing a homeland for the Israilites - so simply to profit themselves.

But to answer your question. I have grave doubts about the way children are treated in some countries. Especially those where girls are mutilated. However I don't recommend killing everyone there . Collectively we have decided that genocide is immoral. We are more moral than the guy depicted in the bible as god.

Perhaps you disagree though? Would you like us to nuke all the non-christian countries for the greater glory of god?

As for your genetic theory I think you may want to talk that over with experts as it is not as simple as that. Of course an omnipotent god could have just changed the way genetics works to avoid problems, but then why would he change it back afterwards?

studies have shown a child from same-sex relationships are not as healthy as even children from ugly divorce and single parent struggles.

Do you have references for those studies, please? I've just searched using Google scholar and couldn't find any such; there was however this which found that the children of same-sex couples had better scores for general behaviour, health and family cohesion but there were negative associations with increased stigma. Easy solution to that perhaps - respect, and in this case not for mere belief but for people's inherent nature.

I suspect that ARainyDay is not actually up for any sort of discussion- because her faith is unquestioning, and faith, by definition, is not amenable to reason. If it were, it would not be faith.

Hakaluyt:
Of course. There is no point in being a cherry picker when it come's to the bible; either it's true or it isn't.

However it's important to read thoroughly and get context so you know what is literal and what is clearly supposed to be metaphoric. But it IS clear.

Oh and you suspect wrong I'm afraid, if I wasn't up for any discussion do you think I would have bothered to type as much as I have? The bible says to "test the word" and that is exactly what I do.

Obviously you will always get people trying to say black is white but that's when studying it out yourself to get proper context sorts it all out.

BackOnlyBriefly:
I am not singled out by God the way you suggest, but I do differ from the sort of christians you quote insofar as I actually read and study the bible to get the right meaning. I agree with you that most Christians don’t bother. That is probably the biggest difference.

Hosea 13:16 depicted God removing His protection in judgement. Verses 16 were the barbaric practices of conquerors when they took cities by storm, or put to the sword without any distinction of age or sex.

Samaria had rebelled and God warned them they would be severely punished for idolatry and rebellion and that He would not protect them, but they hardened their hearts and didn’t believe a word.

As for the other "atrocities", can you be a bit more specific. Oh and can you please be sure to have the right context rather than deliberately twisting everything to try and suit your agenda, which is futile anyway, because you always get caught out on it.

ErolTheDragon:
OF course, the Regnerus study was conducted in 2012 and studied over 2,000 participants, addressing the broadest spectrum of variables.

2,988 individuals aged 18-39 were culled from a probability-based pool of approximately 15,000 potential subjects in order to find an adequate number of adult children of homosexuals and a comparable number of adults with a similar demographic profile who were raised in other circumstances.

Regnerus’ findings support traditional beliefs that children do best in a married household, and that even sub-optimal heterosexual rearing — such as single parenthood or being raised with stepparents — is better than being raised by a homosexual.

Table 1. After Regnerus, Ranked Outcome Measures
Measure/Family Type Intact Biological
Married Family Lesbian Mother Gay Father Adopted by Strangers
N (919) (163) (73) (101)
Currently married 1 6.5 8 2.5
Currently cohabiting 2 7 6 1
Family got welfare 2 8 7 1
Current public assistance 1 8 2.5 4
Currently employed 1 8 7 5
Currently unemployed 1 8 6 7
Voted last election 4.5 8 1 3
Recent suicide thought 1.5 7 8 3
Recent/current therapy 1 6.5 6.5 8
Identifies as heterosexual 1 8 7 5
In same-sex relationship 3 5 6 8
Had affair 2 8 6 5
Ever STI 1.5 7 8 5.5
Ever sex touch by parent 1 8 3 2
Ever forced sex 1 8 7 5
Educational attainment 2 8 5.5 1
Family safety/security 1 8 7 2.5
Family negative impact 1 8 6 5
Closeness to mother 1 2 7 8
Closeness to father 1 7 4 8
Physical health 1 8 2 3
Overall happiness 1 5 8 4
CES-D depression index 1 8 7 5
Attachment scale (depend) 1 8 7 6
Attachment scale (anxiety) 1 7 5.5 5.5
Impulsivity scale 5 8 7 2
Household income 1 8 4 2
Current relationship index 1 5 8 7
Trouble current relationship 1 5 8 5
Frequency marijuana use 1 7 5 2
Frequency alcohol use 6.5 1 6.5 8
Frequency of drunkenness 2.5 6 8 4
Frequency smoking 1 8 7 5
Frequency watch TV 2 8 7 4
Frequency been arrested 1 7 8 2
Frequency pled guilty 1 7 8 4
N female sex ptnrs (women) 1 7 8 3.5
N female sex ptnrs (men) 1 5 8 3
N male sex ptnrs (women) 1 5 8 3
N male sex ptnrs (men) 1 8 7 2
Rank average 1.56 6.88 6.39 4.24
Rank std deviation 1.20 1.63 1.78 2.08
Rank std error 0.19 0.26 0.28 0.33
Table 1. After Regnerus, Ranked Outcome Measures (cont.)
Measure/Family Type Divorced Since Age 18 Step Family Single Parent Other
N (116) (394) (816) (416)
Currently married 6.5 2.5 5 4
Currently cohabiting 8 4.5 4.5 3
Family got welfare 4 6 5 3
Current public assistance 7 5.5 5.5 2.5
Currently employed 4 2 3 6
Currently unemployed 4.5 3 2 4.5
Voted last election 2 4.5 6 7
Recent suicide thought 4 6 1.5 5
Recent/current therapy 3 5 4 2
Identifies as heterosexual 3 6 3 3
In same-sex relationship 4 7 2 1
Had affair 1 7 4 3
Ever STI 3 5.5 4 1.5
Ever sex touch by parent 5.5 7 5.5 4
Ever forced sex 6 3.5 3.5 2
Educational attainment 3 5.5 4 7
Family safety/security 5.5 5.5 4 2.5
Family negative impact 7 3 4 2
Closeness to mother 5 3 6 4
Closeness to father 5 2 6 3
Physical health 5 4 6 7
Overall happiness 2 6 3 7
CES-D depression index 6 3 2 4
Attachment scale (depend) 4 5 3 2
Attachment scale (anxiety) 8 3 2 4
Impulsivity scale 6 3 1 4
Household income 3 5 6 7
Current relationship index 2.5 6 2.5 4
Trouble current relationship 7 5 3 2
Frequency marijuana use 8 3 6 4
Frequency alcohol use 4 3 5 2
Frequency of drunkenness 7 2.5 5 1
Frequency smoking 6 4 3 2
Frequency watch TV 5 6 3 1
Frequency been arrested 5.5 5.5 4 3
Frequency pled guilty 6 5 2.5 2.5
N female sex ptnrs (women) 6 3.5 2 2
N female sex ptnrs (men) 6 7 2 4
N male sex ptnrs (women) 4 7 6 2
N male sex ptnrs (men) 6 5 3 4
Rank average 4.95 4.64 3.89 3.46
Rank std deviation 1.74 1.51 1.46 1.74
Rank std error 0.28 0.24 0.23 0.27

Regnerus? Wow- there's an authority to cite. Any others who haven't been discredited for both nothodology and conclusion?

a Regnerus FAQ

Always context BigDorrit, it's too easy to arrive at the wrong conclusion without the right context.

'My Dad was never there when I grew up, and even when he was in the house he would shut himself off in his room and study papers on end' ... has a whole different meaning if you know the Dad is trying to ward off the bailiffs and pay for his child's education so they can have a better life, so struggles to hold down two very demanding jobs, one requiring great concentration in the home office most evenings and weekends.

Hakluyt:
The trouble with many studies that try to say same-sex children do well are not randomised studies and are self reported by the parents!

Not very biased then.

Well,could you provide another study that says they don't that isn't the widely- and I mean widely- discredited Regnerus?

"studies have shown a child from same-sex relationships are not as healthy as even children from ugly divorce and single parent struggles."

I see the word "studies"

So if we look at some of the other studies, perhaps they will prove to be more sound.

Rainy, can you provide links to some of the other studies, please?

PigletJohn,
You make a fair point. His article offers two, one of which I already gave m.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2012/June/Gay-Parenting-Could-Negatively-Impacts-Kids/

However this seems like honing on on one very minor point. The fact is, I put it amongst other health factors and I notice no one has tried to argue against the NHS website!

BigDorrit,
Your last message seems to indicate you don't really understand what context means. It's not about bias; it's about hard work of study and reading, and not twisting what's been said.

That's a link to a CNN report- where's the study?