Respecting Religion

[Conserative Morality]

If you judged Jesus that way, you better have a damned good reason, especially if it leads you to judging separate individuals.

Oh, I have plenty of reasons to judge Jesus that way. Perhaps not the stupidest fucker to ever walk or not walk the Earth, but not someone I admire, or even am neutral about. I judge people based on their beliefs, their personality, their likes, their dislikes, etc. I see no reason to exclude any of those. If someone wants to associatiate themselves with a group, I assume they're intelligent enough to know what said association entails. Muslim entails at least following some of the ideas of Mohammed, Christian entails following at least some of the ideas of Christ, atheist entails no belief in God, etc. Should I stop assuming people are that intelligent?

[Phing Phong]

You know better. I'm sure you've met some people in whatever grouping you put yourself in that you thought, "Man, what a fucktard". Indivuals need judged on a case by case basis.

Yeah, so?

That doesn't mean that they shouldn't be judged on their group association as well. If I think Jesus Christ was the stupidest fucker to ever walk or not walk the Earth, and someone claims to be a Christian, which means at the very least they follow some ideas of his or that are considered to be his, I'm going to judge them for being a Christian in addition to their other qualities and beliefs.

If someone calls themselves a Stalinist, I'm going to judge them for that, in addition to their other qualities and beliefs. Why is this such a problem?

I agree with this point. The beliefs someone holds, which obviously includes religion and politics, are essential in judging their character.

[The Truth and Light]

You know better. I'm sure you've met some people in whatever grouping you put yourself in that you thought, "Man, what a fucktard". Indivuals need to be judged on a case by case basis.

Judging on a case by case basis would be ideal. Sadly, we always commit the mistake of grouping.

Many times, the more vocal elements of a group can harm the image of said group enough so that this 'group judging' becomes the usual way to deal.

What if you met someone who called themselves a singer?

If you automaticallly jumped to thinking about Elvis, Whitney Houston, or whoever before finding out that they're tone-deaf, then not only did you judge them based on the individuals they group themselves with, but you judge them inappropriately.

[Terraius]

You know I find this topic very interesting. I personally have no formal religion, I do believe there may be a greater power, but do not see the need to worship one wholesome belief. My fiance is Roman Catholic and has been all her life, she is accepting of who I am, and we have a child together. We usually have the occasional discussion about the church, and how uptight some religions are, but how without religion sometimes its for the worse. In a way, I like the order of most religions, how there is a power setup for people. In some ways most religions say they are 'accepting', when all they have to say is spiteful things. (Being our child is born before marriage) I feel that religion as a whole needs to be respected, but there needs to be some serious compromise in religious beliefs. This is why I can never pick one devout religion, I would be ashamed of some of the beliefs of any of the religions. Though I do respect all religions, all gods, and most living beings. I feel that all aspects of religion should be forever respected, for some people it is past the fact of the belief, and more tradition in a way.

*On a side note: How can you be pro-abortion? Especially up to 24 weeks. When you kill that child up to 18 weeks that child can feel itself die. How can you kill a child?

Not to be a killjoy, and again im not trying to be Mr. Inquistor here im only trying to clarify,

You do not have a formal religion and you are to be married to a RC? Do you/she know that Canon law prohibts Catholics from marrying outside of the faith? A Catholic may marry another Catholic or a non-Catholic Christian (so long as they are baptized, which 99% of Christian churches do so really any Christian.)

Unless you have a dispensation from the Pope or Bishop of the Diocese. Are you guys planning to marry outside the Church? Not trying to pry but I know alot of Catholics who legitimately do not know that marrying non-Catholics/Christians is not allowed.

[Conserative Morality]

Mhm.. And that's a good reason to get all militant about it and criticize theists every chance you get?

Oh definitely.

Would it also be appropriate to insult children for looking forward to Santa Claus stopping by the house on Christmas?

No, but if your main argument against criticism of a lie is that we don't treat children the same way, you're arguing that we should treat grown adults as children are treated.

I don't agree with that.

Theism gives some meaning to the lives of many people. I don't understand where anyone would get off on shattering that.

If theism is all that these people have in life, then perhaps life isn't so valuable as they think.

[The Truth and Light]

If you judged Jesus that way, you better have a damned good reason, especially if it leads you to judging separate individuals.

Oh, I have plenty of reasons to judge Jesus that way. Perhaps not the stupidest fucker to ever walk or not walk the Earth, but not someone I admire, or even am neutral about. I judge people based on their beliefs, their personality, their likes, their dislikes, etc. I see no reason to exclude any of those. If someone wants to associatiate themselves with a group, I assume they're intelligent enough to know what said association entails. Muslim entails at least following some of the ideas of Mohammed, Christian entails following at least some of the ideas of Christ, atheist entails no belief in God, etc. Should I stop assuming people are that intelligent?

You don't know someone's beliefs automatically after hearing them say their religious title. You don't know whether I believe in abortion after I say I'm a democrat. You don't know if I believe in the Biblical accounts of Jesus after I say I'm Christian.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Judging on a case by case basis would be ideal. Sadly, we always commit the mistake of grouping.

Many times, the more vocal elements of a group can harm the image of said group enough so that this 'group judging' becomes the usual way to deal.

What if you met someone who called themselves a singer?

If you automaticallly jumped to thinking about Elvis, Whitney Houston, or whoever before finding out that they're tone-deaf, then not only did you judge them based on the individuals they group themselves with, but you judge them inappropriately.

I never said that judging by grouping is ok or appropriate. I said that we do this, for X or Y reasons.

[Rynatia]

Is that really 'our' primary argument?

Here I thought it was "God doesn't exist, these people are following a lie, and a rather useless one at that".

Mhm.. And that's a good reason to get all militant about it and criticize theists every chance you get? Would it also be appropriate to insult children for looking forward to Santa Claus stopping by the house on Christmas? Theism gives some meaning to the lives of many people. I don't understand where anyone would get off on shattering that.

Just because it's end of the page doesn't mean you can ignore them >:O

[Conserative Morality]

What if you met someone who called themselves a singer?

I would assume that they sing.

If you automaticallly jumped to thinking about Elvis, Whitney Houston, or whoever before finding out that they're tone-deaf, then not only did you judge them based on the individuals they group themselves with, but you judge them inappropriately.

What?

Why would I assume "Singer" means "Good singer"?

For all I know they could be in a screamo band, or a Catholic choir, or they could just sing on Rock Band. But all of those things fall under "Singer". I don't see why I would assume any other specifics.

[Bottle]

If you judged Jesus that way, you better have a damned good reason, especially if it leads you to judging separate individuals.

Oh, I have plenty of reasons to judge Jesus that way. Perhaps not the stupidest fucker to ever walk or not walk the Earth, but not someone I admire, or even am neutral about. I judge people based on their beliefs, their personality, their likes, their dislikes, etc. I see no reason to exclude any of those. If someone wants to associatiate themselves with a group, I assume they're intelligent enough to know what said association entails. Muslim entails at least following some of the ideas of Mohammed, Christian entails following at least some of the ideas of Christ, atheist entails no belief in God, etc. Should I stop assuming people are that intelligent?

While I agree with you in principle, I've found that at least half of the people I meet who claim to be followers of Christ know less about Christ than I do. So sometimes it's not worth assuming people are that intelligent.

[The Truth and Light]

What if you met someone who called themselves a singer?

I would assume that they sing.

If you automaticallly jumped to thinking about Elvis, Whitney Houston, or whoever before finding out that they're tone-deaf, then not only did you judge them based on the individuals they group themselves with, but you judge them inappropriately.

What?

Why would I assume "Singer" means "Good singer"?

For all I know they could be in a screamo band, or a Catholic choir, or they could just sing on Rock Band. But all of those things fall under "Singer". I don't see why I would assume any other specifics.

Why would you assume any specifics after a religious title?

[Norvenia]

Yet another reason why I'm an Episcopalian: our official doctrinal positions are listed in the Book of Common Prayer under "Documents of Historical Interest." I know Buddhist-Episcopalians and Muslim-Episcopalians. I consider myself a Jew as well as an Episcopalian; my mother's family is Jewish and I embrace that aspect of my heritage. Episcopalians have espoused every heresy from Arianism to Manichaeism. We're a theologically eclectic bunch, to say the least. But we all come together in the same church, and sing the same hymns, and pray before the same alter. And so we are a community of faith, united by worship rather than dogma. There can be no litmus tests in the Episopal Church.

The Episcopalian church did not exist before the United States was a nation, and its mother-church the Anglicans did not exist until the reign of King Henry the 8th, some thousand years after the Arian and Manichaeian heresies.

True. That doesn't keep Episcopalians from espousing Arian and Manichaean views, though.

[The Truth and Light]

What if you met someone who called themselves a singer?

If you automaticallly jumped to thinking about Elvis, Whitney Houston, or whoever before finding out that they're tone-deaf, then not only did you judge them based on the individuals they group themselves with, but you judge them inappropriately.

I never said that judging by grouping is ok or appropriate. I said that we do this, for X or Y reasons.

CM seems to find these reasons sufficient. I simply find them ignorant.

[Astrolinium]

Theism gives some meaning to the lives of many people. I don't understand where anyone would get off on shattering that.

If theism is all that these people have in life, then perhaps life isn't so valuable as they think.

Forgive me because I'm tired and possibly getting sick again, but this sounds like you're advocating some theists commit suicide if it gives their lives meaning.

[Conserative Morality]

You don't know someone's beliefs automatically after hearing them say their religious title.

I know SOMETHING about their beliefs. If they say that they're a Christian, and then reveal that they not only don't believe in Christ, but don't believe in any of Christ's ideals, then all they've proven to me is that they're absolutely disrespectful of the English language and should not be taken seriously.

You don't know whether I believe in abortion after I say I'm a democrat.

No, I don't, that's probably because Democrat is both a broad label and one that has little to do with abortion.

You don't know if I believe in the Biblical accounts of Jesus after I say I'm Christian.

No, but I do know that you believe in at least some ideas about Christ or espoused by Christ, unless you're a complete fool, in which case it'd be your fault instead of mine.

[Conserative Morality]

While I agree with you in principle, I've found that at least half of the people I meet who claim to be followers of Christ know less about Christ than I do. So sometimes it's not worth assuming people are that intelligent.

Don't crush my youthful optimism! I want to believe in mankind!

[King Koopa I]

Mhm.. And that's a good reason to get all militant about it and criticize theists every chance you get?

Oh definitely.

Would it also be appropriate to insult children for looking forward to Santa Claus stopping by the house on Christmas?

No, but if your main argument against criticism of a lie is that we don't treat children the same way, you're arguing that we should treat grown adults as children are treated.

I don't agree with that.

Theism gives some meaning to the lives of many people. I don't understand where anyone would get off on shattering that.

If theism is all that these people have in life, then perhaps life isn't so valuable as they think.

Well, agree to disagree. I for one can see your point, but I've seen my fair share of people that would have completely lost it after the loss of their spouse or other loved one had it not been for this "god delusion" as you might call it. Like it or not, it can and does serve a positive purpose.

[The Realm of God]

You know I find this topic very interesting. I personally have no formal religion, I do believe there may be a greater power, but do not see the need to worship one wholesome belief. My fiance is Roman Catholic and has been all her life, she is accepting of who I am, and we have a child together. We usually have the occasional discussion about the church, and how uptight some religions are, but how without religion sometimes its for the worse. In a way, I like the order of most religions, how there is a power setup for people. In some ways most religions say they are 'accepting', when all they have to say is spiteful things. (Being our child is born before marriage) I feel that religion as a whole needs to be respected, but there needs to be some serious compromise in religious beliefs. This is why I can never pick one devout religion, I would be ashamed of some of the beliefs of any of the religions. Though I do respect all religions, all gods, and most living beings. I feel that all aspects of religion should be forever respected, for some people it is past the fact of the belief, and more tradition in a way.

*On a side note: How can you be pro-abortion? Especially up to 24 weeks. When you kill that child up to 18 weeks that child can feel itself die. How can you kill a child?

Not to be a killjoy, and again im not trying to be Mr. Inquistor here im only trying to clarify,

You do not have a formal religion and you are to be married to a RC? Do you/she know that Canon law prohibts Catholics from marrying outside of the faith? A Catholic may marry another Catholic or a non-Catholic Christian (so long as they are baptized, which 99% of Christian churches do so really any Christian.)

Unless you have a dispensation from the Pope or Bishop of the Diocese. Are you guys planning to marry outside the Church? Not trying to pry but I know alot of Catholics who legitimately do not know that marrying non-Catholics/Christians is not allowed.

Yes you may not intentionally be trying to be an Inquisitor but I really think you should go for the priesthood.As you know your stuff. Or join the his Holiness Holy Inquisition (doesn't exist anymore but still)

Apparently most of what I've said has been this



Still going to ask my priest though.

[Conserative Morality]

Why would you assume any specifics after a religious title?

I wouldn't. I'd assume generalities. Believe in either the ideals of Christ or ideas about Christ.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I never said that judging by grouping is ok or appropriate. I said that we do this, for X or Y reasons.

CM seems to find these reasons sufficient. I simply find them ignorant.

CM is judging according to the information he has and what he thinks of a prominent figure of a group. In this case, Jesus.

I don't know if he's applying the same criteria to individual people though.

Yes, it would be ideal to judge on a case by case basis. But not everyone does it. (not saying this applies to CM)

[Conserative Morality]

Forgive me because I'm tired and possibly getting sick again, but this sounds like you're advocating some theists commit suicide if it gives their lives meaning.

No, I'm saying that their lives don't have much value to them if all that they value about it is their belief in God.

I'm not talking about suicide. I'm saying that they have little appreciation of life.

[The Truth and Light]

You don't know someone's beliefs automatically after hearing them say their religious title.

I know SOMETHING about their beliefs. If they say that they're a Christian, and then reveal that they not only don't believe in Christ, but don't believe in any of Christ's ideals, then all they've proven to me is that they're absolutely disrespectful of the English language and should not be taken seriously.

You don't know whether I believe in abortion after I say I'm a democrat.

No, I don't, that's probably because Democrat is both a broad label and one that has little to do with abortion.

You don't know if I believe in the Biblical accounts of Jesus after I say I'm Christian.

No, but I do know that you believe in at least some ideas about Christ or espoused by Christ, unless you're a complete fool, in which case it'd be your fault instead of mine.

You come to the more reasonable and individual conclusions here by realizing theat behind the title could be a liar or an idiot, or something you find you completely failed to anticipate. Ding ding.

[King Koopa I]

I find it rather amusing how intolerant atheists on here are of Christians, Jews, and Muslims, especially considering their primary argument is "they're intolerant." The hate that hate made?

Finally xD.


Your flag always distracts me...

I'm glad I could be of sevice.

[Conserative Morality]

Anyway, I'll be back, but I've got some ME3 demo multiplayer with friends I need to get on. They're getting impatient about it.

[Conserative Morality]

You come to the more reasonable and individual conclusions here by realizing theat behind the title could be a liar or an idiot, or something you find you completely failed to anticipate. Ding ding.

I tend to not assume people are liars or idiots. Sue me.