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?

If the believers who demand respect only meant that they should be allowed to think what they like then they'd have had no reason to say it at all. I don't know of any atheists who want to ban thinking.

We all know what is said and what is meant, but Dione I've rarely seen you address any issue, only play this endless game of picking at the words to stop other people addressing them. Normally as you know I ignore you and I can only suggest others learn to do the same.

Often along with the demand for respect I get "you wouldn't say that about Islam" and when it's Muslims I'm speaking to they will often say "you wouldn't say that about Christianity" (if only they read each other's posts).

And as I think I mentioned earlier nearly every thread eventually gets onto the "how dare you compare my religion with xxxx" because of course xxxx is only believed by stupid people and doesn't deserve respect. No one really respects someone else's belief. It's just a thing they demand of others.

Respect, while I don't deny that the OP and I have had heated discussions before on this site, you are wrong. As I have said, the OP has repeatedly received the advice that you, me and others have given her on this thread she still doesn't understand what "respect for beliefs" means.

I have found that when this happens wrt concepts such as Respect and Love, it is good to get an idea of the OP's own starting point. I asked her earlier what she would say to her DC if they asked this question. She hasn't answered. I ask for actual RL or MN examples because these provide better insight than fictional examples.

Dione the only person who doesn't understand the words is you. And actually I think you DO understand them, but are pretending not to in order to derail a thread you can't get MNHQ to delete.

Have you tried offering HQ a bribe or getting on your knees and begging them? There must be some way to make them stop us saying things you don't like - it's just not fair is it.

btw there is another thread at the moment (no don't anyone link to it) with people saying "oh but what happened to respecting other beliefs" :)

So anyone claiming it doesn't happen can go look.

Back, what are you talking about? I have not reported this thread or any of the posts on it. If the thread is being derailed by my presence it is because of the ridiculous accusations being made against me. I ask questions regarding the OP, I am told that I am telling the OP to "shut up". I am accused of trying to derail the thread, so I explain the rationale behind my questions. And now you are making up a story that I want the thread deleted. that is complete nonsense.

I don't know if MN comment on such stuff, but if you wish, I will ask them to confirm that I have not reported this thread or any of the posts on it.

No one is claiming that it doesn't happen Back, what is being discussed here is what "respecting other people's beliefs" means.

Might it save time and stop the derailing of an interesting discussion if you just list all the questions you want to ask me, Dione? I'll answer them and then we can move on.

Hello :)

Have only just seen this thread, so having a read.

I seem to be getting a severe case of deja vu But always good to think about these things.

Respect is a funny word, because while my initial response is that it's good to respect the person but not necessarily the belief, in actuality the person doesn't always demand respect, as in the case of the pp's BIL or Hitler or someone or Cameron or Osborne or Duncan Smith

So I would say that respecting someone requires a certain level of action from that person to warrant such. A different word I might use is to value someone. I would say that everybody can be valued, whatever they have done, because in my opinion everybody is created by God in God's image, which gives inherent value. This does not mean that I sanction what they are doing or saying, whereas respect would, but that I see them as someone of value, someone loved by God. It doesn't mean that I personally 'love' or even 'like' them. I 'respect' people who I think are worthy of respect, I 'value' everyone.

As for 'respecting' beliefs - no, I don't see a need to do that. I don't respect some beliefs, but I value the person and respect many people as well. I don't think there is any need for atheists to respect my belief either, but I would hope that I could inspire some respect in them through my behaviour and respect of them.

I don't care too much when people use the old fairies and thor argument, I can see why they do. My own faith is robust enough not to be dented by such rhetoric, and it is a little tired now - I look forward to the new 'sky fairy' metaphor.

Dione, I don't suppose you have reported the thread because you've been here long enough to know it wouldn't work. I was laughing at your constant complaints that it shouldn't have been started and suggesting things you might try.

Relax and join in. You might enjoy it.

madhair - oh yes, you inspire respect. That's pretty much what I think, except that the 'value' is simply because they're another sentient being.

Madhairday, very well put.

Respect probably isn't the right word.

Thank you Errol (hope all is good with you?) - and I agree re the sentient being thing too and can quite see that as a valid alternative

madhairday Sky fairy isn't rhetoric, nor is it a metaphor. It's a valid point, and a point that won't change. Using that term is not intended to ridicule, it's intended as a comparison. There is no more evidence for god than there is for fairies. Yet one is believed wholeheartedly and the other dismissed (usually) as fanciful. Since the difference between the two beliefs is not evidence, then it must be something else. I'd put my money on social acceptance lending credence. And that's a very bad reason to believe in anything.

I agree that the word "respect" is wrong. I said as much, but was disagreed with .

It is a metaphor. Describing one concept as another because you think they have similar qualities (in this case, lack of evidence for their existence) is using a metaphor. I wouldn't dispute that it is used to make what the user believes to be a valid point.
It's not offensive to me, I just wonder why there isn't more variety in the metaphors used!

Do you think it's an effective way of getting people to think about it? As I said way back down the thread, it's not something I really get my knickers in a twist about, being asked why I believe in one deity and not another. But if you are truly wanting to engage in discussion, then bringing the "childish" thing into it, whatever your own opinions, may not facilitate that.

Also, I find that sometimes people of faith find it really hard to comprehend the idea of atheism. So comparing their belief their God with belief in another supreme being isn't going to help, because it's just the same thing, only with a different God. The only way of conveying what atheism is is to compare belief in God to belief in something that the other person can't imagine believing in, like fairies, or something made up.

I see it more as a direct comparison..."I don't believe in fairies for precisely the same reason as I don't believe in god". Maybe my understanding of "metaphor" is a bit wrong? But anyway, I certainly don't think it's rhetoric.

And there's no "metaphor" we could use that would be less offensive than fairy, is there? Father Christmas? Easter Bunny? Darth Vader?

The very issue is that things that are not believed in because there's no evidence suggesting their existence are, nearly always, considered childish. Which says rather a lot about how important evidence usually is. But god has been given a free pass, which is what atheists struggle to understand.

Incidentally, my comment about no one agreeing with me above sounded a bit bolshy. I was more wondering if I was being unclear in what I was saying rather than being cheesed off at not being agreed with. Actually came back to say that

Maybe then compare with what was once a 'serious god' but from outside the usual scope of our culture eg Quetzalcoatl ? (apart from anything else it's just such a cool name its got to be better than the poor old hackneyed 'sky fairy' )

respect - sometimes on these threads someone may disagree, others may agree but not get round to saying so before the thread moves on.

Oh, I know, Errol - was just a bit worried I might have sounded a bit sour. Not my intention.

I cannot give you the answer you want, or in fact demand from me. If you really think that, in my forties and after years of questioning my faith and science education and practice, I am suddenly going to get a (reverse?) damascene moment when somebody compares my belief in God with a "Sky fairy", you are mistaken. I am not a believer because I am ignorant, nor because I am unthinking. And I know that my belief is irrational, like so many other things...

You are being perfectly clear, of course. Yours is not a new position, nor a complex one. But you seem to be expecting something I can't give. I have no problem with your lack of respect for my religious faith. As I said, way back at the start, I only get miffed when I am offered a fairly basic explanation of empirical evidence as though it's something I wouldn't have thought of. But then, as I have also acknowledged, that's my issues talking. Another manifestation of irrationality perhaps?

And I find the concept of atheism perfectly easy to understand.

I wonder if it comes across as though I don't understand it because the sky fairy/Thor/whatever thing just makes me shrug a bit. Anyway, I understand the metaphor/analogy/explanation. It just doesn't change what I believe.