If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
So you don't respect the beliefs he actually holds, rather you respect his right to hold beliefs generally. With all due respect, that's a nothingness position. I'm talking about the specific beliefs a person holds and whether or not others should be admonished to respect them.
Do you have "no real view" or "enormous respect" for her beliefs? I'm unclear.
Isn't the Pope God's conduit on Earth?
I guess the problem I have is that one rarely, if ever, sees the special dispensation afforded to religion anywhere else. If I was a self-professed member of the BNP, how well received do you think the defence "you shouldn't judge all BNP members by the actions of the leader and some of the followers" would be? Can you imagine if I advanced that argument on TheSite boards? Things would degenerate into the comments section of The Guardian website.
If his beliefs work for him then I'm happy. Job done. I wouldn't shake his hand though.
I have 'no real view' as to whether her beliefs are what you'd want me to describe as "right or wrong". They don't directly affect me, they make her happy, I'm happy about that and I respect them for it.
That's what Catholics believe. Christians do not recognise his position or respond to his edicts.
In fairness unless you're a left-wing social worker any argument you put forward on TheSite will get attacked
That's not a good analogy by the way - the direct purpose of the BHP is a racist society. Some parts of Christianity have been abused but its overall message is not one of such direct animosity. If what we know about Jesus is true he seemed like a pretty decent bloke.
Hang on what?! I lost my virginity in year 7, as did a few other people I know. Also, should children who don't know how they tie they're shoe laces not wear shoes? No. Don't be ridiculous. You need to learn to put on a condom, just like you need to learn to do lots of other things. It's not a natural skill. Yes the packet comes with instructions, but it's very unlikely you will do it correctly first time and then the whole situation will become even more embarrassing for two probably already embarrassed young people. (also, they use fake willys not cucumbers normally.)
Sex is meant to be enjoyed, it's not just for the creation of children as many religions teach. If sex ed can take out any awkwardness and embarrassment from a persons first few sexual encounters that can only be a good thing.
Erm .... so the bible supports gay relationships as long as there is no sex? C'mon. Stop grabbing at straws to defend an undefendable book please.
I'm trying to get you to think about the implications of beliefs, both tacit and explicit.
OK, so if a man's beliefs, which work for him and therefore presumably make you happy, lead him to remove the head of a solider in public view in Woolwich, you respect those beliefs - perhaps going as far in your condemnation as to not agree with them - merely because he holds them?
I'm fairly sure Kim Jong-il's beliefs in his demi-god status didn't directly affect you and made him happy. Do you respect his beliefs?
Last time I check Catholics were Christians. Though your statement puts me in mind of the turn of phrase "debating the religious is like trying to fight a cloud".
You're trying to say that since pornstars are actors all actors have sex on camera.
I've explicitly not done that.
I understand the rudimentary logical distinction between all Catholics being Christian yet not all Christians being Catholic.
I'm not saying they're under any obligation to believe it. But it's in his job description.
I thought about them long before I joined this site and I'm fully aware of where I arrived with my beliefs.
Yes, I respect that such a person has a belief system that works for them. I do not have to like or agree with a person's beliefs to respect the fact they work for him/her. I'd advise against trying to twist my words in to suggesting that I'm somehow condoning terrorist activity or that the two f***wits you're describing are in anyway 'honourable'
As above.
Another common atheist misconception I'll let the small Dawkins-esque dig slide though...
I guess it's down to semantics in part, but much of Catholic dogma goes very clearly against what is written in scripture (of course on the assumption you take scripture as a source of reference). Once again, if such dogma works for people then all well and good. But I think you'll agree it's hard to describe someone as a Christian when the cult (which is what I consider Catholicism to be) they follow specifically tells them to do things which are against the Word of God.
It's in my job description on a daily basis that people in a certain well-known company have to follow my instruction and directions otherwise, should it need to come to this, they will eventually be dismissed.
People doing the very same job at their level for one of our identical competitors are likely to respect my position, experience, knowledge etc but rightly under no obligation whatsoever to respect my authority or duties.
As for my bird - she knows I call her that by the way and she calls me equally stupid things in return, it's our 'thing' - her beliefs, faith and religion do not impact on or affect my life negatively or in a way that compromises my own.
Contrary to what some may think, I do not spend all day looking at a tin of beans and thinking "Oooooo God created this!" or walking through the dairy aisle of a supermarket and saying to the spotty kid behind the counter "Blessed are the Cheese-makers!!". I live my life in a certain way as does she and we've found a way that compliments us both. If there had been any conflicts we simply would not be who we are to each other.
sex is a bit different than tying shoelaces, that's a bit of a shit comparison no? At a certain age, yeah sure learn to put on condoms but, and dont take offence to this, I understand that a lot of people don't stick to the age of consent, I didn't, but there is an age that's too young. Just my opinion. Sex is meant to be however the people doing it want it to be. I've never had sex to have a baby, otherwise I'd be pregnant now. I never said sex was only for procreation, but I do think the whole age of consent thing is in place for a reason.
Children are going through puberty earlier and earlier, I started my periods not long after I started year 7 and already was in the early stages while I was in my last year of primary school. Because no one understood what was happening I was teased by the boys who also would line up and wait for me to take my top off to get changed for P.E (we didn't have changing rooms). It was very intimidating. In the end I used to wear the same top all day at school and for p.e which was gross but it was better than the alternative. I think it's important to learn early so by the time it happens it doesn't come as a shock and also to avoid self esteem issues when it comes to changing bodies. Because lets face it, puberty is pretty crap.
But why at the age of 7, does someone need to know that? Sex isn't for children; so why are we teaching children this stuff? I can understand teaching about puberty around that age though.
It also teaches children who are being abused that it is not okay, if you have a child being sexually abused who is taught about sex and told that it is for grown ups then they will know what is happening to them is not right and they will speak up about it. I was sexually abused at a very young age, and I was told by the person that it was what happened to little girls, so don't bother saying anything to anyone because it's normal. If I'd had a sex ed lesson that said actually this is something that two grown ups are supposed to do together it would have changed my childhood dramatically.
Sorry, I would just like to reiterate the fact I and several other girls I know lost our virginity in year 7. I know a few boys who did as well.
While you appear to have retreated from your original position of respecting someone's beliefs merely because they hold them, I'm not sure what you're saying now is actually coherent in any meaningful sense. At best it seems you're not really clear what you believe, and at worst, as you seem to be cognizant of, you're admitting to respecting the belief system of a person which leads them to behead innocent men in the street or subjugate millions.
That would indeed be ridiculous, the manufacturer's name would clearly be on the label.
All I'm saying is that unless you hold the bizarre position that a person's belief are to be respected, no matter what they are, then the only way you can believe there is no conflict is to lead the the topic unexamined. Either Jesus was the son of God, as the Christians believe, or he wasn't. He was either a prophet, as Islam has it pegged, or he wasn't . Either way one - or both - of them are wrong. Set Hindu's creation story against that of the Jews, same deal: one or both are wrong.
I also have strong beliefs, but I do not try to force(I do introduce them to the book I read, but it is a case of take it or leave it) them on all the people, I believe you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink it.
Personally I would confront the situation and explain you have your own beliefs, and what you believe doesn't correspond necessary with his or a lot of other peoples in that case, and perhaps if the person in question doesn't like it, say to him perhaps you would like to share my beliefs also.
I think this is the fault of the intellect believing it is so good everyone else should have it, as you say you wouldn't expect the entire world to become vegan.
Peace and light
Peter
I've not retreated at all but if the idea helps you pigeon-hole me in to a particular view you have of me/believers then I've got no intentions of encroaching on that
Not the original manufacturer but there you go
No.
There is no conflict because, well there is no conflict. Some New Atheists are convinced there must be conflict where there is none and this is such a case. Here's an example, my other half does her morning prayers. I leave her alone to do them, they aren't destructive or negative, they don't damage me physically or spiritually plus she's my OH so where the hell would I get off on objecting to her doing it? Anyway part of her ritual is to waft certain joss-stick smoke over me. I think that's cute to be honest but on a spiritual level is it doing me any harm? Don't be daft. The fact that she's doing it (it's her blessing me) shows she loves and cares enough for me to want to do it. I have no problem whatsoever.
How do you suggest any of that affects me or my relationship with her? I'm genuinely curious (not to mention somewhat baffled).
I'm not pigeon-holing you, let alone believers on the whole; you espoused a very particular position which I'm tackling. It turns out - depending on how you're choosing to phrase it at any given time - that you respect the beliefs of, for example, every heinous totalitarian psychopath that's every existed. As Genghis Khan was conducting one of, if not the, most efficient killing, raping and conquering spree in human history, you'd take the position "if it works for him, I respect his beliefs". I think that's one of the most immoral and insane positions I've ever heard expounded.
Are you telling me you think God makes tins of beans?
I'm not admonishing you to challenge every innocuous belief your other half has, no matter how ill-founded. I think if you examined your beliefs and hers you'd see a lot of logical contradictions. I'm talking, as I always have, about the consequences of belief. And what starts with this supposedly benign respect for your other half's prayer time, clearly seems to extend all the way up to genocide and beyond.
If people wish to endorse slavery, genocide, or other morally bereft stuff then I would dislike even detest that person, but I would still respect their right to an opinion. there are no "wrong" opinions, whether factually or "morally" (I use quotes since morals don't exist).
That said, I think the OP probably grew up in a closed-minded environment, or based on that didn't develop empathy or more pertinently critical thinking to question his own beliefs. That said, I think many people tend to presume all share (or should share) the beliefs they do. It's human nature, really. I don't usually do it, but then I have a quite laissez-faire view of life. I'm also a libertarian, so perhaps this is why.
You respect the right for people to be in possession of opinions? That sounds a lot like you respect the right for people to continue to be in possession of their brain.
Countries don't exist either, so I once heard.
Are you trying to compare my OH to Genghis Khan? Well played there..
OK I'll play along Why wouldn't I?
Keep the militant atheism in check for 5 minutes?
And?
Some New Atheists feel the need to use extremes at any given opportunity when discussing matters with someone who holds beliefs they disagree with or hold in contempt. I'm not knocking, judging or objecting by the way. But it's a good case in point of what this thread is all about. All you can do is just smile at them wait for them to run out of steam. This is what is done at work my ferociously anti-religious colleague who even objects to people saying 'bless you' when he sneezes.
OK but bear in mind some religious people are treated as if their beliefs are to be held in contempt and as if it's almost an audacity that they have faith instead of something scientific.