Why can't we tell religious types to fok off?

[DrB0b]

I've noticed, and I'm not by far the only person to notice, that when dealing with religious types we're expected to respect their opinions and respond to them seriously, treat them with kid gloves. We're expected to take their beliefs in malign spirits as if they were givens and argue with them on their own terms. I can't help but think that this is no different to taking beliefs in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy seriously and I don't understand why we should extend respect to believers in Allah, Yahweh, Jehovah, Satan, or any other ectoplasmic manifestation. Why is it not acceptable to just describe these people as psychos, why do we have to discuss biblical or koranic verses and try to prove them wrong? Why are religious beliefs exalted above all other forms of belief and why should we have to treat people who, to my mind, believe in fairy tales, as if they were mentally mature human beings and entitled to a greater respect than we give children who believe that the stories we tell them are true? Why do some of us think theology is a science, how can it prove its hypotheses, why is it acceptable to reject the ideas of those who believe in the existence of giant zombie rabbits while simultaneously having to deal seriously with those who believe in giant invisible creators? So many bad things in the world today are the results of the actions of those who believe in omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent bogeymen, why do we accept this and engage with the proponents of these beliefs as if they they weren't delusional and superstitious rather than just rejecting them as psychopaths? For example, if I was to say "all niggers are cnuts" then 99% of the people here would rightly piss on me from a great height but if I was to say "Jesus says all niggers are cnuts" then ~50% would still piss on me from a great height but others would weigh in saying it was my religious opinion, it's a matter of freedom of speech, what does the bible say?, can you prove it?, etc, etc. So what gives, why are people allowed extra leeway if they claim ther odious beliefs are based on religious principles? Opinions anybody?

[Sir Burr]

Hello Kerux? Could you answer this please?

[Boon Mee]

When those Jehova's Wittnesses would show up at my door, they were given the 'bum's rush'.

The religious types should keep their opinions to themselves...

[Lily]

But DrBob, we do tell them to fuck off, don't we?

Only other believers argue with them, because they all believe whatever version is most convenient to them.

[benbaaa]

Religious types fok off.

Yep, seems to work ok for me.

[DrB0b]

But DrBob, we do tell them to fuck off, don't we?

Only other believers argue with them, because they all believe whatever version is most convenient to them.

Some people do but many who wouldn't respect, say, a believer in flying saucers would say that religious believers are entitled to respect and to be taken seriously. Look at newspapers, for example, publish a pic of Mohammed with a bomb on his head or Jesus having sex with Pontius Pilate and suddenly they're bad guys who don't respect religion, condemned even by agnostics and atheists. Publish an article about David Icke and his lizards and it's just a jolly good laugh. I can't see why there should be a difference. It worries me that some of the most powerful and some of the most dangerous people in the world believe in cosmic ghosts and believe that they're acting in accordance with the will of those ghosts. If I was to kill somebody because a ghost told me to I'd be carted off to the loony bin, but it's pretty easy to get away with it (you might even be a hero!) if you do it for God or Allah.

[benbaaa]

I nearly bought "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins when I was in the UK last month, but they only had hardbacks for 20 quid so I didn't. Be interested to know if anyone's read it, 'cos the reviews all suggest that that is exactly what he's telling religious types to do.

[Marmite the Dog]

Because the vast majority of people are brainwashed into believing in fairy tales, so the majority demand respect just by being the majority, and therefore the accepted truth, despite anyone with an ounce of grey matter realising that the idea of an omnipotent being watching over us is complete bollocks.

Sad, but true.

[DrB0b]

I nearly bought "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins when I was in the UK last month, but they only had hardbacks for 20 quid so I didn't. Be interested to know if anyone's read it, 'cos the reviews all suggest that that is exactly what he's telling religious types to do.

Download it here:

Richard.Dawkins - The.God.Delusion (Richard.Dawkins.-.The.God.Delusion.2.pdf) - DivShare

[benbaaa]

Cheers, DrBob and have some greenies.

[benbaaa]

Oh. I must spread some around before giving it to you again.

[ChiangMai noon]

^
Hi Benners.
Long time no see.

[Lily]

It worries me that some of the most powerful and some of the most dangerous people in the world believe in cosmic ghosts and believe that they're acting in accordance with the will of those ghosts

That is the aspect of it that bothers me.

The world according to Garp or Jesus or Mohammed!

[ChiangMai noon]

^
moreover, such non-belief in cosmic ghosts would actually bar you from high office in the enlightened US and UK.
Australia? Lily.

[cali kid]

We're expected to take their beliefs in malign spirits as if they were givens and argue with them on their own terms.

Really? I idnt know that, and now that I do it wont make any diference.

I can't help but think that this is no different to taking beliefs in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy seriously and I don't understand why we should extend respect to believers in Allah, Yahweh, Jehovah, Satan, or any other ectoplasmic manifestation.

Neither do I, and I dont.

Why is it not acceptable to just describe these people as psychos, why do we have to discuss biblical or koranic verses and try to prove them wrong?

We do? I always thought I would just let them waist there lives living by guidlines created by weak minded people that need religion to have a purpose in life.

Why are religious beliefs exalted above all other forms of belief and why should we have to treat people who, to my mind, believe in fairy tales, as if they were mentally mature human beings and entitled to a greater respect than we give children who believe that the stories we tell them are true?

As for the first part of the question; Probably because most people that decide what is politicaly and socially correct are religious themselves, and hey, they make the rules right.
As for the second part, We dont have to do anything or give anybody respect for thse things, that is up to you and how easily you are influenced by propaganda I would guess.

Why do some of us think theology is a science, how can it prove its hypotheses, why is it acceptable to reject the ideas of those who believe in the existence of giant zombie rabbits while simultaneously having to deal seriously with those who believe in giant invisible creators?

Refer to: "As for the first part of this question" above.

So many bad things in the world today are the results of the actions of those who believe in omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent bogeymen, why do we accept this and engage with the proponents of these beliefs as if they they weren't delusional and superstitious rather than just rejecting them as psychopaths?

When in Rome (unfortunately)

[Marmite the Dog]

moreover, such non-belief in cosmic ghosts would actually bar you from high office in the enlightened US and UK.

Really?

[Lily]

moreover, such non-belief in cosmic ghosts would actually bar you from high office in the enlightened US and UK. Australia? Lily.

Jing ler?

No, we don't have to believe in God to take office.

I suppose we do have some, but we dont seem to be susceptible to religious nutters and when they do pop up, they are treated as nutters.

[ChiangMai noon]

Really?

not legally but there is no way a non believer is getting elected in either the US or the UK in practice.

[stroller]

Elected for what? Plenty of non-religious MPs in the UK.

[ChiangMai noon]

Elected for what? Plenty of non-religious MPs in the UK.

I was thinking of the very highest office.

[Marmite the Dog]

I think many of our recent PMs might say that they believe in fairies, but probably don't really.

That Arsehole Blair is the first one that I can remember who takes that mumbo-jumbo seriously.

[NickA]

not legally but there is no way a non believer is getting elected in either the US or the UK in practice.

Are you telling me Thatcher was religious?

I very much doubt it, she was a nutter, yes, but not a religious nutter.

[Itchy]

Before rushing to codemn religion you perhaps ought first to understand what religion is and the impact it has had and continues to have on our lives.

The rabid condemnation of religion usually drags up a host of accusations against religion that are equally true, if not more so of secularism.

The classic being religion and war - The 20th Century is defined by non religous wars that redefined human madness.

The other accusation of irrationality, denies the vast contribution of religion to thought and study on all aspects of human existance.

I certainly see no evidence that secularism has in anyway improved the world.

Quite the contrary.

[DrB0b]

Before rushing to codemn religion you perhaps ought first to understand what religion is and the impact it has had and continues to have on our lives.

The rabid condemnation of religion usually drags up a host of accusations against religion that are equally true, if not more so of secularism.

The classic being religion and war - The 20th Century is defined by non religous wars that redefined human madness.

The other accusation of irrationality, denies the vast contribution of religion to thought and study on all aspects of human existance.

I certainly see no evidence that secularism has in anyway improved the world.

Quite the contrary.

Who's condemning it? I see no accusations here that religion per-se is bad. I can't tell from a few lines of posts whether anybody here either understands or doesn't understand what religion is or its impact on our lives - don't you think you're rushing in and making unwarranted assumptions about people based on nothing at all? The original question was why do religious people, some of them anyway, insist on being given respect for their beliefs purely because they are their beliefs? Why is that a TV interviewer can give a politician a good mauling but can't have a go at the pope or the archbishop of canterbury? Why should we be sensitive about the religious feelings of muslims or anybody else when we're not particularly sensitive about the feelings of vegetarians or trainspotters? I don't particularly want to get into yet another religion-bashing thread, I'm just curious as to why religions are considered different to any other large group of people who share something in common, why religions, mainstream ones, are treated with deference and respect.

If you don't know what I'm talking about download and read the book linked above.

[Itchy]

The original question was why do religious people, some of them anyway, insist on being given respect for their beliefs purely because they are their beliefs?

I see you have changed what you claim to be your original question.