Magical Sky Pixie, Etc. -- Y'all Know You're Being Deeply Insulting, Right?

The BBQ Pit
21

I wouldn’t be too sure about that. Been in a supermarket check-out lane lately?

I know people who feel that exact way about the Jedi Code. And I’m not being remotely facetious. There is a difference between attacking a concept (God) and attacking someone who subscribes to the concept (Such as yourself, I assume, or Jodi).

No argument there, but then again, there’s nothing in the OP that indicates that people have been going out of their way to be jerks about using the term “Magical Sky Pixie.” Jodi seems chiefly upset that people aren’t showing due deference to a topic they may legitimatly feel is deserving of derision. I think the offensiveness of the term in question is entirely dependent on the context in which it is being used.

And, for the record, I don’t think I’ve ever typed the words, “Magical Sky Pixie” outside of this thread. I prefer “The Big Beard in the Sky.”
BTW, from what I understand, the practice of typing G-d stems from the belief that the name of God shouldn’t be recorded on any disposable medium.

22

I’m one of those athiests who thinks the the MSP or the IPU thing is more than a little obnoxious. A flame war is one thing, but tossing it around in everyday conversation the way that some folks toss around their ignorant mischariterizations of us baby-eatin’, dope-shootin’, church-burnin’, hom’sex’ul’ longhair fifth columnists (see: WV_W) isn’t particularly witty. I mean, if somebody steps on your toes, fine, bring out the knives, but get the fucking chip off your shoulder.

23

Are you really this stupid, happyheathen? Seriously.

How are you to characterize a deity which you “know” to be non-existent? Um, well, you could go with the deity’s name: God, Zeus, Vishnu, whatever. Same as you would do with any other proper noun, whether you believe it to exist or not. Or you could go with “deity.” Oh, hey. You already know about that one apparently, since you used already.

No one is talking about the invisible pink unicorn. That is something entirely different from what we are discussing. Too bad you are too dense to see that.

No one has said anything about a “post-Christian” world. Where did you get that from? Schmuck.

Lastly, your mother is a syphilis-ridden fuck toy.

Are you offended by that? Is your love for your mother so fragile that this would bother you?

It’s just manners, you smooth-brained twit. I’m sorry you were never taught any and have grown into the self-absorbed jerk that you are. But there may still be hope for you yet. There are plenty of books on how to be more sociable and less offensive to people. Pick one up some time, it’ll help you. Really.

24

MILLER –

MILLER, I’m not particularly upset about this. Believe me, I am infortunately incapable of showing this level of restraint when I’m upset, be it in the “I’m hurt” sense or the “I’m pissed” sense. Nor do I expect people to show “deference” to a topic they don’t believe in, as I have said. I simply hope that people would refrain from being actively snide about something they know others (whom they like or respect) feel very strongly about.

This presumes, of course, that it is more important to the individual to be minimally respectful to the believing posters than it is to be snarky in parading out the oh-so-richly-deserved derision of their beliefs. I am aware that some posters will not agree with this, will decide “the heck with the believers and their tender feelings,” and opt for continued snarkiness. I just don’t want those people to be able to say they didn’t know that was the choice they were making.

25

Exactly.

It basically seems to be implying that those of us who do have beliefs in a higher power or whatever are morons, who still believe in the tooth fairy. Or that we’re just being silly, irrational, or down right loony.

And it just shows a lack of respect towards the beliefs of others-it looks like you’re mocking us. It just sounds snarky and sarcastic.

26

People may not believe this, but I try, or have been trying, to not be openly derisive. I don’t (and never have, to the best of my knowledge) use the MSP formulation, but I have gotten frustrated with some Fundamentalist Christian posters and said to them outright, “God does not exist.”

Because, as far as I’m concerned, “the idea of god” is in precisely the same category as “the idea of alien abductions” and “the idea of spoon bending with one’s mind.” I don’t respect those beliefs as beliefs, although I know that certain people that I respect believe them.

I ask this in all honesty: At what point am I crossing the line into disrespect or derision? If I state that I do consider the idea of god to be akin to those other things, is that in itself disrespectful? I accept that Polycarp and cmkeller and Jodi and whoever believe what they believe and that their beliefs are honestly come by, but I also think that what they believe is as much bunkum as Kirlian photography. Can that idea be expressed without some level of derision?

27

Well, IMO a little bit of it that it is very hard to discuss something you don’t believe only using specific terms invented and defined by those that do.

It’s like trying to discuss channelling with someone who wants me to discuss things that they’ve been told by their “spirit guide”. And they’ve specificaly asked only people who don’t believe in “Spirit guides” to participate. (Yes, I should have stayed way the hell out of that thread in retrospect)

If I just start out saying, “your spirit” guide is wrong in this, etc etc, I’ve just led them to believe that I now accept their concept of a spirit guide. And then they’ll respond to me with,
“No, this is what my spirit guide really means”, and they still have no idea why anything they propose from that source is going to get an “oh really?” from me.

So if I want to respond, I’m going to do so using circumlocutions like “so-called spirit guide”, “the subjective experiences which you believe to be from a spirit guide” (or alternately “claim to be from a spirit guide”, depending on my belief of their personal veracity.)

I try to stay out of the religious discussions, because I do have a lot of respect for people’s belief and faith and *do not * doubt the veracity of their experience. Where I differ is in the interpretation of it.

When I do, I usually end up with some long-ass simile, (see above) sometimes also rather insulting no doubt to people who believe in god. Because after all, anything describing god as anything but supreme has to be considered insulting by anyone who believes that he/she is. By definition. Which is why I usually don’t bother (which is what I do at work, and with anyone I don’t know, since I’m an atheist who doesn’t feel the need to witness. Really isn’t required. And here in the bible belt it disturbs people needlessly)

I don’t like MSP because it’s shorthand, more of a toss-away line than a response, and also, it’s imprecise. While religious people can be said to be using magical thinking from a non-religious perspective, they don’t see it that way.

Personally, I hate it when I’m called an “Immoral atheist”… For religious people to whom morality comes from religion, most seem to beleive that atheists cannot have morals. I would beg to differ, it is just as intuitively obvious to me that “harming no-one unecessarily” and “helping when possible” are fairly comprehensive concepts on which to base a personal morality, and ones that most atheist I know follow, because we like to make other people happy too. Most sane people do.

I’d like people to quit doing that, especially from the statehouse. But I’m not holding my breath.

28

Neurotik -

Do get back to us after the medicines kick in, 'K?

29

Fair enough. I assumed that, with “deeply offensive” in the thread title, you were more, y’know, deeply offended. I guess I’m seeing “Magical Sky Pixie” as being a statement of belief itself: God is mythical, unnecessary, and kind of silly. It’s just a snappier way of saying it. It is confrontational, and in a thread that had previously been polite and cordial, getting confrontational without cause would be offensive. Jerky, too. However, it is also be an honest statement of belief, as much as professing to belief in Christianity is. IMHO, YMMV, BYOB.

Of course, there’s still the unresolved question of how people who really do believe in Magical Sky Pixies feel about the term.

On preview, I see that I’m on the same side of this argument as happyheathen, which by itself is enough to make me rethink my position. Gimme a little bit to re-think this, and I’ll get back to you.

30

Whatever, happyheathen. I’m dead on with my remarks and you know it. Unless you are in deep denial about yourself.

pldennison, I think that you can express your own opinions on the subject without being derisive. It is, IMO, perfectly acceptable for you to state straight up that you don’t believe that God exists. Nor do I think it is unacceptable for you to state that you think it is akin to alien abductions or whatever (provided you don’t have a condescending tone, which is always insulting). That’s a valid opinion. It’s mostly in the tone, I think. Waving your hand at someone during a discussion on religion and talking dismissively of magical sky fairies is obviously insulting.

Basically, use your good judgement.

31

To sidetrack briefly from the main thrust of the thread …

This sounds like one heck of an urban legend, which doesn’t even make sense, unless it refers to a super smart computer translation program that is not quite smart enough to recognise that variation on spelling.

The actual reason for not writing the name “God” is not the commandment against taking the Lord’s name in vain (in which case it would be a pretty cynical use of a loophole), but rather a prohibition against writing the name of God somewhere where it might be thrown away or improperly disposed of.

There is a disagreement as to whether this applies to either the Name as it’s translated into other languages, and also whether it applies to words on a computer screen, which is why some observant Jews write it as God, and some as G-d. (This has been mentioned several times before on the board, by posters with far more knowledge than me, but it bears repeating here).

You are now returned to your discussion.

32

I try not to disrespect other’s beliefs. But I don’t believe. Not in a supreme being or supernatural entity as most religions describe it. In fact MSP seems like a very apt description to me. That’s what I believe the notion of a god is.

Now, I’ve never used any of those “disrespectful” names knowing how most people would feel about it. I’m nice that way. But I also speak my mind and I am a very honest person. I could use those words knowing exactly how most people feel about it --knowing that some find it disrespectful-- because, well, sometimes the truth hurts.

I will respect any and all persons own personal beliefs, but not to the point of subjugating my own personal beliefs.

Or what pldennison said.

33

Honest question, then. If someone told me that they were certain of the existense of Kirlian photography, I would probably not think too much of their intellectual fortitude. Do you think less of the intellectual prowess of the above posters (and other doper believers) because of their belief? Would they be “smarter” in your book, if they were athesists?

34

Of course we all know that no christian could ever, ever disresect anyone else’s beliefs.

35

Of course we know that no black man would ever utter a racist remark about another individual. :rolleyes:

What the hell is your point?

36

Could you kindly make that “some religious people” ?

There are certainly persons who call themselves Christians who act as if they’re practicing magic, who believe that if they do X, Y, and Z, then God will make sure that good things happen to them. That is the practice of magic, just as much as if you believe that if you cast a certain spell, you’ll be able to harness certain powers to your benefit.

The God I believe in cannot be harnessed, manipulated, or otherwise operated like a machine to produce certain results in response to certain inputs. To quote C.S. Lewis, he’s not a tame lion.

The dynamic of the relationship between God and the people of God has been viewed as just that - a relationship - ever since the time of Abraham. It doesn’t operate in a ‘magical’ way any more than my relationship with my wife does.

Unless you’re referring to my belief in the existence of God per se. Except that part of it, by itself, doesn’t act like what you call ‘magic’, even from your POV.

But I think you can see my point when I say that it’s stupid and counterproductive to respond to anti-atheist bigots elsewhere by insulting believers here.

Is there a Christian reg here who is known to utter derisive remarks about nonbelievers? I can’t think of one. Anti-atheists show up here and post inflammatory posts for a short while, and then they’re gone again when they realize that this entire board, believer and nonbeliever alike, unites in its loathing of such conduct.

I hope you (all) can see that Jodi is just asking for the same respect in return, for all those here who believe in a deity of one sort or another.

It is quite possible to be upfront about rejecting the idea of a deity of any sort, and then joining the discussion, assuming arguendo that there is one, if that’s what’s called for, or otherwise responding to the points that believers make.

This is not about political correctness. This is about common courtesy. Don’t muddle the language by confusing the two.

37

Fair question, beagledave. No, I don’t believe that someone who believes in a deity is on average any dumber or smarter than someone who does not. There are theist Dopers who I think are complete idiots, and there are nontheist Dopers of whom I think the same. Just the same, there are brilliant theists here and there are brilliant atheists.

I’m not one of those people who thinks that belief in the supernatural (or some individual supernatural thing) is, by itself, some indicator of weak-mindedness or stupidity. It is my opinion that the converse is somewhat true – that is, that a weak-minded or not-so-bright person is more likely to be a theist.

38

I like the term, only because it very appropriately describes my feelings regarding “God.” I haven’t used it, except on very rare occasions, and never on the board that I can think of. I do find the notion of god(s) to be childish, silly, and completely irrational. That is simply the result of the sum of my experiences. Perhaps I should not feel this way, but the fact is, that I do. While I’m not going to go out of my way to hurt anyone’s feelings, I’m not going to hide my own beliefs to prevent someone else from being offended. Of course, I’m not going out of my way just because you’re religious – I am a rather blunt and (sometimes brutally) honest person in general.

Maybe that makes me a bad person, but it’s the way I am. I have trouble seeing religion in any other way than as a clinical, psychological condition. Having come from a background of mental illness, having, evaluating, and consequently losing my own beliefs, I tend to dissect everything and see it from a human perspective. I got over my own need for those kinds of beliefs; to me, the “faithful” are just at a bit earlier stage of emotional/mental development.

I’m not going to start fights because I learned long ago that I’m a minority and that it’s a waste of energy I could better expend elsewhere. But I’m also not going to hide who I am just to spare someone’s fragile feelings.

And that’s one of the reasons I stay out of GD.

39

Wow. Generalize much?

This, perhaps, is the attitude that Jodi might be referring to…at least it’s the kind of attitude that irks me. No qualifiers…you just had a more pc way of saying All theists are dumber and less emotionally developed than folks who have “gotten over” those beliefs.

**

A request for courtesy and avoidance of blatant insults is considered hurting “someone’s fragile feelings”?

**

But of course, you didn’t.

40

Wow. Generalize much?

This, perhaps, is the attitude that Jodi might be referring to…at least it’s the kind of attitude that irks me. No qualifiers…you just had a more pc way of saying All theists are dumber and less emotionally developed than folks who have “gotten over” those beliefs.

**

A request for courtesy and avoidance of blatant insults is considered hurting “someone’s fragile feelings”?

**