Guest Soul_Searcher Posted November 10, 2006 Report Share Posted November 10, 2006 But what happens when people who believe in either a different god, or no god get, mocked or bashed? Is that not insulting? It does work for both sides. Neither side tends to be aware, or cares if they are hurting the other side, because in their mind it doesn't matter. As long as you are right and know the truth, does it really matter what you do concerning another persons faith, or lack there of? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgallan Posted November 10, 2006 Report Share Posted November 10, 2006 I concur with Soul Searcher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LionHeart Posted November 10, 2006 Report Share Posted November 10, 2006 But what happens when people who believe in either a different god, or no god get, mocked or bashed? Is that not insulting? It does work for both sides. Neither side tends to be aware, or cares if they are hurting the other side, because in their mind it doesn't matter. As long as you are right and know the truth, does it really matter what you do concerning another persons faith, or lack there of?I agree completely.What I was merely pointing out is that religionists have a God that can be bashed while atheists do not. Both parties can certainly be insulted in one way or another concerning religion. It's just that when a religionist has their God bashed on, the tend to take it personally. You can't bash on an atheist's God because they don't have one.From my perspective, and I may be wrong about this, it seems that it would be far more insulting for an atheist to try to convince a religionist that there is no God than vise versa. Simply because the religionist, or at least many of them, already have that personal conviction of the existence of God. It seems to me that an atheist being convinced of the existence of God would be less insulted because God is not being tore down in them; only being built up. At least that's how I see it. But I am a religionist. My perspective may be biased. Perhaps SGAllen, being an atheist, can give us some insight on this.L.H. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Soul_Searcher Posted November 10, 2006 Report Share Posted November 10, 2006 I agree completely.What I was merely pointing out is that religionists have a God that can be bashed while atheists do not. Both parties can certainly be insulted in one way or another concerning religion. It's just that when a religionist has their God bashed on, the tend to take it personally. You can't bash on an atheist's God because they don't have one.From my perspective, and I may be wrong about this, it seems that it would be far more insulting for an atheist to try to convince a religionist that there is no God than vise versa. Simply because the religionist, or at least many of them, already have that personal conviction of the existence of God. It seems to me that an atheist being convinced of the existence of God would be less insulted because God is not being tore down in them; only being built up. At least that's how I see it. But I am a religionist. My perspective may be biased. Perhaps SGAllen, being an atheist, can give us some insight on this.L.H.I won't speak for others, but i will share my view. So many people think only their perspective is either important or valid. Faith is the entire meaning to some peoples lives, it's the truth that ties all the asspects of life together and gives truth. So if the truth for another is that there is no god and that view point is just as crucial to them as god is to a believer, then why wouldn't detracting from their truth be just as bad in their eyes, as detracting from god is to a believer. It's all a point of personal truth.How many times do I hear " LDS is the only faith that matters" or " Well i hope you grow up and open your eyes" on this board? I've had missionaries come to me and try to point out how wrong and misguided i am and then try to tell me that they have the only or best truth. While I'm not athiest, some people on this site have pointed out that my views are worse cause i sit on the fence and don't take a clear stance. So how is it less important to me to be told, not only am i wrong, but i'm worse than an athiest, compared to telling you there is no god?The second you think your views are more important than anothers,or that trying to prove them wrong will do less damage than if it were to happen to you, you've already crossed the line in my eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pushka Posted November 10, 2006 Report Share Posted November 10, 2006 I agree with Soulsearcher and SGallan. Not only is it insulting to be told that you are possibly damned because of your unbelief, for those who are agnostic there is the added worry of not being sure if you believe or not, and thinking that if you are incorrect and there is a God, you will be judged harshly for your doubt in his existence, if the Christians are correct in their assumptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted November 10, 2006 Report Share Posted November 10, 2006 I don't deny that atheism is held religiously. What I am saying is that it shouldn't be that way, and it's not healthy. That's an interesting comment. Psychologists have discovered that the people who are most mentally healthy are not the atheists. But neither are the ultra-gung-ho theists. The data suggests that the people in the middle ground, the one's who go to church once a month, who pray on occasion, and profess a belief in something, are actually the most healthy mentally speaking. Moderation in all things my friends, including your religious devotion, will bring you the most happiness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Soul_Searcher Posted November 10, 2006 Report Share Posted November 10, 2006 YAY!!! I'm the most healthy in mental terms. OH DEAR HEAVENS!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now we are all in big trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serg Posted November 10, 2006 Report Share Posted November 10, 2006 Soul: Though james in his great book The Will To Believe introduces his pragmatism in his views concerning religion, you would see that even in his eyes(a democratical "agnostic") gnosticism is th emore vulnerable of positions when it comes to religion. Also, if you were president of a nation Soul, certainly you would develope certain criteria to judge in COMMON most (if not all) people. Hence, introducing concepts as "positive rights", international rights, etc... you would be(recognize it or not) believing that SUCH are in any term better than others, or mere anarquy. On monday I'll come again to keep on this, (I got no time now). Regards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsuzuki Posted November 10, 2006 Report Share Posted November 10, 2006 This is an attempt to put everyone on the same page, so that the real discussion can begin, instead of having everyone talk past each other.Honestly, it doesn't appear anybody here can accurately conceptualize a non-believer such as myself. Everybody wants to somehow put me into their belief paradigm instead of accepting mine for what it is. Try me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow Posted November 12, 2006 Report Share Posted November 12, 2006 This makes me so sad.Everyones testimony will get tested,and it keeps getting harder.They will make it so it is "embarassing to have a belief in God".....People like this stink....http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71985-0.htmlWhat, specifically, are you complaining about? Seems reasonable to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.