Why, exactly, do I need to respect religious beliefs?

[Candyman74]

@Der_Trihs

It most certainly is. It’s highly destructive to the world and corrupts people both morally and intellectually.

I disagree with you. I’m not religious in the slightest. But I recognise that religion has good points, and I firmly dispute that it morally corrupts people as an absolute. I will agree that there are examples of morally corrupted religious people; there are also examples of morally exemplary religious people who do crap loads of good for their communities and, indeed, for people outside their own communities. They feed the poor, give aid to third world countries, and more.

As for “intellectually” - I’ve met some friggin’ intelligent religious people and some friggin’ dumb atheists.

I don’t believe that religion has any effect either way on morals and intellect. Certainly not the latter, and if I had to posit the former I’d argue that it tends* towards* morals, not away from them.

:rolleyes: Please. They live in a society that wraps them in a protective bubble, making hard for them to even come across anything even mildly disrespecting their beliefs much less “strenuously challenge” them. They live in a sea of praise for their beliefs where the idea that someone, somewhere honestly disagrees with them is often difficult for them to even imagine.

This is not true. Just look at this messageboard for proof. Religious people are both challenged (OK) and mocked (not OK) on a daily basis here.

So you wouldn’t challenge the claims of someone who claimed that black people are subhuman half apes unless they actually went up to a black person and assaulted them?

1. This is a false equivalence. While both might be wrong, one is harmless while the other is harmful.

2. I didn’t say don’t challenge religious viewpoints. I said don’t be a dick about it. Thus, strawman. I would totally mock a racist.

[Trinopus]

@Candyman74

. . . The issue is one of common courtesy.

Exactly: this uses MichaelEmouse’s first definition of “respect,” “not resorting to insults and mockery.”

Atheists are often assholes.

Sure, fundamental Christies often are, too. Doesn’t make it right for them or you.

In my youth, I was an asshole atheist. I went as far as chopping down crosses on hilltops. Major league asshat. My opinions were softened by having meaningful conversations with (very patient!) Christians. The good kind.

It’s basic courtesy and politeness. Values which are, sadly, on the wane. Mocking people is bad. Save it for the bad people.

A writer once said that it’s impossible to write “comedies of manners” for Americans today, as we have none. I hope it isn’t true; I think that some vestigial remnant of etiquette exists, even in the “Limbaugh Era” of aggravation, irritation, aggression, and name-calling. I’m with you on this one: let’s at least try to be genteel.

Trinopus (“Genteel? Genteel? What kind of s*** is that?”)

[bldysabba]

@Ibn_Warraq

I’m impressed that someone who’s grown-up in a Christian society like ours feels confident enough in his knowledge and understanding of Islam to make such a statement about it.

Have you read the Quran and most of the Hadiths?

Additionally, can we assume you’ve read several books on Islam to make it clear why you can say with full confidence that Akbar the Great and Irshad Manji were(or are in Manji’s case) “bad Muslims”.

I assume of course you know who they both are and don’t need to go running to wikipedia(if you must please find a better source).

I say that because making such a comment about Muslims and Islam without knowing who Akbar the Great would show both extreme arrogance and extreme ignorance.

It would seem you’re the one displaying the extreme ignorance here. I do not know who Manji is, but while Akbar was no doubt a great man, there is also no doubt that he was a ‘bad muslim’. Unless you think deciding that Islam is insufficient and founding your own religion somehow makes you a ‘good Muslim’. Reinforcing DT’s point somewhat aren’t you?

[Ibn_Warraq]

@bldysabba

It would seem you’re the one displaying the extreme ignorance here. I do not know who Manji is, but while Akbar was no doubt a great man, there is also no doubt that he was a ‘bad muslim’. Unless you think deciding that Islam is insufficient and founding your own religion somehow makes you a ‘good Muslim’. Reinforcing DT’s point somewhat aren’t you?

He didn’t “found his own religion”.

[PBear42]

@Der_Trihs

No; being a good person contradicts the nature of both religions; they are both barbaric holdovers. Being a good person requires that you be a bad Christian or Muslim, much like how Oskar Schindler did good things, but was a bad Nazi for doing them.

Huh? I’m a card-carrying atheist, but I can’t imagine what you think supports this claim. As a simple first approximation, being a good person means following the Golden Rule. No need for religion to recognize the justice of this principle, obviously. There, the religion-is-the-foundation-of-morality crowd goes off the rails. Conversely, though, since Christianity and Islam also cleave to the Golden Rule, they seem to accept the same definition of good person as do you and I. No win to them. No win to us. On this issue, it’s a draw.

[Voyager]

@Bricker

I would argue that a key difference between flat-earth claims and typical religious belief is that the claims made about God are not falsifiable, and the flat-earth belief is falsifiable.

Perhaps you say that because the Catholic Church has skillfully modified its belief system to be unfalsifiable over the past couple of hundred years. From a geocentric creationist system they moved to one accurate astronomically speaking and where even Adam and Eve aren’t quite the way they are in the Bible. One has to think that the Catholic hierarchy realized that many of their previous god beliefs were indeed falsified and they moved on. You surely acknowledge that many religions in the US aren’t nearly so clever.

[Zoe]

Some might question whether Manji is a “good” Muslim, but I think that she is a wonderful leader who keeps pointing to the original meaning of Islam (peace). She challenges people to take responsibility for ridding Islam of the violence of the extremists. And so much more than that…

[Ibn_Warraq]

@Zoe

Some might question whether Manji is a “good” Muslim, but I think that she is a wonderful leader who keeps pointing to the original meaning of Islam (peace). She challenges people to take responsibility for ridding Islam of the violence of the extremists. And so much more than that…

And some question mine.

I’m asking DT to provide evidence to support his claim to being versed enough in Islam to be able to authoritatively claim that I’m a “bad Muslim” for tolerating non-Muslims and that Islam is comparable to Nazism.

[Indistinguishable]

@Ibn_Warraq

He didn’t “found his own religion”.

I’ve often heard he did (Din-i-Ilahi), but I see now on Wikipedia there is some debate as to whether this really was an attempt to found a new religion. So I’ll mention it, even though I imagine you already know far more about it than I do, and, indeed, I do not know enough to speak any further.

[Jragon]

I, personally, think all beliefs should be treated with respect insofar as they’re not harmful. That doesn’t mean immune to challenge or mockery (in the correct context, such as a movie or book), but at least treated as something that people can talk about and respectfully disagree on. And before anybody asks, this includes bigfoot, fair folk, witches, and invisible pink unicorns.

Now, not all religion is immediately harmful. Just the mere belief in a silly invisible sky man isn’t bad, trying to force beliefs on others, or use it to dictate justice systems IS silly, and those should definitely not be protected under society, law, or anything else from question and ridicule. But the more positive aspects (respect your fellow man blah blah), no matter if they stem from a completely illogical sky faerie or not. I think we can respect parts of religion (God says to help the poor) while challenging and ridiculing the less desirable parts (no, your magic sky faerie did NOT tell you to crusade).

Unfortunately, since these beliefs are linked, if you encounter someone that believes their sky faerie tells them both to murder and love the poor, well, I think it’s more important to stand against the bad beliefs than it is to respect the good ones despite their source. So, it really depends on the person. I don’t think any broad brush belief system (“religion” or even “Christianity” since many Christians like to pick out and focus only on the positive rhetoric in the bible) is necessarily open to unrepentant mean-spirited attack and ridicule just for existing and being illogical, just a more fine-tuned or personal one that espouses unsavory things.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@Indistinguishable

I’ve often heard he did (Din-i-Ilahi), but I see now on Wikipedia there is some debate as to whether this really was an attempt to found a new religion. So I’ll mention it, even though I imagine you already know far more about it than I do, and, indeed, I do not know enough to speak any further.

That certainly wasn’t the way it was viewed then. He certainly wasn’t an Orthodox believer but that hardly means he tried to found his own religion.

[Mangetout]

@Illuminatiprimus

When having these sorts of debates, or when there is a debate in society generally, it is often professed that religious beliefs should be respected (i.e. not mocked or strenuously challenged): but why? What is it about a religious belief that makes it different to any other than someone may not agree with? An obvious example is something like flat-earthism. There are people who seriously do profess to believe (key word) that the earth is flat and that no amount of “evidence” to the contrary is going to shake their faith. In general I don’t think that many people would argue such a belief needs to be respected, yet it shares many of the components of religious belief that those who hold them maintain need special protection.

I wonder if it might be that you’re perceiving it as more common than it really is.

Sure, religious people don’t like to be mocked - few people like to be mocked, but are people really asserting some right to mockery-immunity, or are they just saying “please stop mocking me, I don’t like it/don’t think it’s helping”?

[Illuminatiprimus]

Ibn - please stop hijacking my thread, I don’t care if Akbar was a good muslim or not and I don’t think it’s as relevant to the discussion as you clearly do.

I think I need to provide some clarity here as many of you have latched onto mockery as the key part of my OP rather than challenge, which was what I was really driving at (and thought I’d made clear in subsequent posts).

I’m not arguing for a right to be a douche about other people’s beliefs without any consequences; you mock what someone thinks or believes, they can tell you that you’re a prick, and probably mock you back. Unless we’re talking about satire or some kind of artistic work I don’t find it particularly useful to resort to mockery generally for the sake of it. I have been in situations where religious people have behaved in ways that could be construed as mocking, and I think I would have been justified in pointing out how ridiculous their views were as a result (my choice if I want to do that, I’m a great believer in lex talionis after all).

It is more challenge that I’m thinking about, and the example above of the Rabbi was kind of what I was getting at. To widen it, when the Catholic church says something like this and uses the beliefs of their religion as foundation for it, I feel justified (as a feminist) to say I challenge the very notion of a belief that says women are not equal to men, and should be prevented from doing when what men can do. Another good example on the same topic here but for Islam this time. Furthermore, I don’t feel like I particularly have to be nice about saying what an odious belief it is that treats women like this, why should I?

Finally, and this is my major question, should someone say when I’m prosecuting my reactions to such viewpoints “you’re attacking my belief in god, you must respect my beliefs” in that rather catch all nebulous way that people do, should I? Do I have to simply desist at saying that I think any viewpoint is despicable if it has religion attached to it? If so I’m having to respect an institution that puts its own members above the law when it comes to child sexual abuse, or beliefs on sex that encourage people into abstinence education that has been proven does not work, or on executing homosexuals for being a scourge against society, or singling out and killing innocent children as witches.

I find it interesting that the majority of people in this thread seemed to have latched onto mockery and “let them have their belief in the magic sky man, it’s not hurting anyone”, when in fact I thought I made it clear that it was challenging the religious foundation of unpleasant and harmful beliefs that I was talking about. I’ve been told to my face by a Muslim that his religion gave him permission to kill me as a gay man, should I have respected such a belief or should I have been free to say it as I see it and tell him that his religion is hateful garbage and no foundation for any kind of moral code (in my view, of course).

[Grumman]

@Trinopus

Because you don’t want to be the sort of person who doesn’t respect other people’s beliefs.

I do. If you believe that women are inferior to men, I’m not going to respect that belief. If you believe that 2+2=5, I’m not going to respect that belief. And if you believe that your imaginary friend is going to set everyone on fire if they don’t believe in him, I’m not going to respect that belief either.

[Mangetout]

@Illuminatiprimus

Finally, and this is my major question, should someone say when I’m prosecuting my reactions to such viewpoints “you’re attacking my belief in god, you must respect my beliefs” in that rather catch all nebulous way that people do.

They can say this, but shouldn’t, because it’s feeble and dumb. You should be able to respond in any way you see fit.

But as I said, I don’t think it’s as common as you might perceive it to be. Just like the ‘God moves in mysterious ways’ response - it’s not that common (unless stated by the other side and prefixed with “I expect they’ll just say…”)

[aruvqan]

@Punoqllads

Because very few wars have been fought over the dimensionality of the Earth. Very few riots have occurred due to a disagreement over the radius of this world. In short, respecting others’ religious beliefs – no matter how silly they seem to you – leads to a more civil society.

IMHO this.

I have a friend of some 18 years standing that I enjoy the company of. He is highly intelligent, very literate, we can have wonderful conversations, go to stuff and have a blast. He is also very deeply Roman Catholic. Almost to the point of deciding to be a monk or priest deeply believing. [Not rabid like Mel Gibson] He also believes that I am bound for hell because I am not Roman Catholic. Same with mrAru [I am atheist and he is Episcopalian or as mrAru puts it Catholic Lite.]

He will pray for me, but we do not argue about religion because he is of the opinion that salvation comes from God, not from bitching and arguing with someone. More or less discuss once and let God do the rest, and let your own life serve as an example. I can deal with that, he respects my inability to “know” and I respect his firm belief in something that you have to take on faith.

Now if more people in the world could be like him, it would be fantastic.

[aruvqan]

@Der_Trihs

A rational person?

The fact is, there are few people who respect everyone else’s beliefs, and they are accurately regarded as solipsist goofballs. For the great majority of people this has nothing to do with respecting the beliefs of others; it has to do with picking a particular kind of belief namely religion and demanding that it be given special treatment.

Wo0t!!1!

I am a solipsist goofball!

I wish I had the money to get a custom title sniffle

[Bricker]

@Lobohan

Some claims about God are falsifiable.

The bible says that God flooded the Earth. We have seen no evidence for the flood and great evidence contradicting it. So that claim isn’t true.

The bible says that the sky is a rock dome that has water above it. That claim isn’t true.

The bible says that we were descended by one couple. Modern genetics show that the genetic Adam and Eve didn’t live at the same time. Further it shows that they weren’t created, but rather evolved from previous forms. So that claim isn’t true.

The trouble is that religious people have little desire to argue honestly. They can just dodge and weave and let bits drop off until the definition of God becomes a phantom.

As to claims that:

[ul]
[li]There was a literal Flood[/li][li]The sky is a rock dome[/li][li]All humans literally share two genetic ancestors that lived at the same time[/li][/ul]

I would agree it’s appropriate to treat those claims, and the persons making them, in just the same way we’d treat flat-earthers.

[SecondJudith]

Hell, I mock religion all the time. Have you seen a Sukkot service? That lulav business is straight-up ridiculous.

I am also happy to respond to “my religious belief is that women are inherently inferior to men” with “well then your religious beliefs are harmful and stupid”.

@Mangetout

They can say this, but shouldn’t, because it’s feeble and dumb. You should be able to respond in any way you see fit.

But as I said, I don’t think it’s as common as you might perceive it to be. Just like the ‘God moves in mysterious ways’ response - it’s not that common (unless stated by the other side and prefixed with “I expect they’ll just say…”)

I agree with both parts of this.

[furt]

@Illuminatiprimus

It is more challenge that I’m thinking about, and the example above of the Rabbi was kind of what I was getting at. To widen it, when the Catholic church says something like this and uses the beliefs of their religion as foundation for it, I feel justified (as a feminist) to say I challenge the very notion of a belief that says women are not equal to men, and should be prevented from doing when what men can do. Another good example on the same topic here but for Islam this time. Furthermore, I don’t feel like I particularly have to be nice about saying what an odious belief it is that treats women like this, why should I?

You don’t. Have at it. Feel free.

Finally, and this is my major question, should someone say when I’m prosecuting my reactions to such viewpoints “you’re attacking my belief in god, you must respect my beliefs” in that rather catch all nebulous way that people do, should I? Do I have to simply desist at saying that I think any viewpoint is despicable if it has religion attached to it? If so I’m having to respect an institution that puts its own members above the law when it comes to child sexual abuse, or beliefs on sex that encourage people into abstinence education that has been proven does not work, or on executing homosexuals for being a scourge against society, or singling out and killing innocent children as witches.

I find it interesting that the majority of people in this thread seemed to have latched onto mockery and “let them have their belief in the magic sky man, it’s not hurting anyone”, when in fact I thought I made it clear that it was challenging the religious foundation of unpleasant and harmful beliefs that I was talking about. I’ve been told to my face by a Muslim that his religion gave him permission to kill me as a gay man, should I have respected such a belief or should I have been free to say it as I see it and tell him that his religion is hateful garbage and no foundation for any kind of moral code (in my view, of course).

AFAICT, you’re upset at a prohibition that does not exist. Books with the exact same point of view as you have been bestsellers in America and the UK. Speech laws are somewhat different in the IK, but in America you are quite free to criticise any religion in any manner you see fit so long as you are not abusing an individual or inciting a riot.

Now, the kind of no-holds barred rhetoric you seem to favor may turn off people, or it may simply fail to persuade, but that’s another issue.

You’ve now given us some clarity of the kind of things you want to say (not mockery but “challenge” – still a very vague word), but I’m still struggling to understand what problem you’re having. If your thread was prompted by an actual event, it would help enormously to recount it. If it’s prompted by what you fear might happen, give us exactly what kind of thing you’d like to say and what kind of reaction you expect.

My suspicion, frankly, is that you’re going around being a douche about other people’s religions, and people are treating you as such. But if that isn’t the case, enlighten us.