The Religious Tolerance Thread

[Steel Accord 6,658]

 

 

Especially in the classroom. Yes, I've come across this, too - it seems to be the "cool" thing to be atheist now. If you want to feel smarter, why not explain to someone else why their religion, and hence their whole life, is dumb and founded on a lie? Great way to make friends. /sarcasm I am curious, though, how the topic has come up. It's not something in the regular curriculum of most schools.

 

 

Well in my experience it usually comes up as when it's related to the actual subject at hand. E.g. history, writing, classic literature, etc. Then the subject inevitably comes into play and usually it's voiced with utterly naked contempt.

 

At which point, as a man of faith, I'm all but compelled to act in it's defense. Even if, no especially, when it's not my religion being insulted.

[Suukorak 354]

 

 

Well in my experience it usually comes up as when it's related to the actual subject at hand. E.g. history, writing, classic literature, etc. Then the subject inevitably comes into play and usually it's voiced with utterly naked contempt.

 

At which point, as a man of faith, I'm all but compelled to act in it's defense. Even if, no especially, when it's not my religion being insulted.

 

Yes. I used to debate this kind of thing fervently with my Christian friend in elementary school. Every single day, on the bus to and from school.

Since then, I like to think I've calmed a bit (not to mention the shift in my views, which I've already discussed). I try to be the voice of peace in these discussions now, but they don't come up too often. Perhaps that's for the best - we don't have to argue about our beliefs in order to practice them.

[Love//Hack 819]

Especially in the classroom. Yes, I've come across this, too - it seems to be the "cool" thing to be atheist now. If you want to feel smarter, why not explain to someone else why their religion, and hence their whole life, is dumb and founded on a lie?

Great way to make friends.

/sarcasm

I am curious, though, how the topic has come up. It's not something in the regular curriculum of most schools.

 

@, I have two questions, if you don't mind answering them.

1. I've often seen people trying to debunk the myth that all Muslims are terrorists. This would suggest that there are many people who believe the opposite, yet I have never met one. Of course, I wouldn't be as able to find them as a Muslim, so I'll ask. Are such people common? Have you met any before?

2. Out of curiosity, what do you think of Sufism? In fact, I wonder what anyone here thinks of it. It's an interesting approach to religion, one that I haven't seen much elsewhere.

[link for reference]

 

In history class when we were learning about Islam, I was kind of the teacher being the only Muslim in my 7th grade sheltered class (before I bumped back up to regular. Ironically.)

 

Oh, and yes of course, a perfect way to make new friends!

(Oh sarcasm. It's simply the best.)

 

As for the questions:

 

Question 1) - I've only seen a few on the internet accepting Muslims and trying to debunk that theory. I don't believe they're exactly common but I'm sure there's a lot out there who don't assume such things. The only ones that I've met were here on MLP Forums in this thread. Kind of funny actually.

 

Question 2) - Hmm... that sounds quite interesting! Didn't knew about it until you showed that link. It's a interesting religious concept.

Edited April 19, 2015 by GoldenGlintingPurple

[John 793]

Sooooo. I think people, mainly Christians, need to be a lot more tolerant of people who believe in evolution (catch-all term there) and atheism. Seriously. I don't blame the atheists for acting a bit hostile towards Christians, given some "christians" attitude towards them. Not that I'm grating on anybody in particular.

 

Agree?

 

So if a subset of "Christians" are being rude towards atheists, and atheists retort in a hostile way back at Christianity in general, atheists are being hostile towards every Christian denomination.  This is what I don't understand about atheists;  it seems like I see more militant atheism than I do militant Christianity on the internet, yet the militant atheists always claim how Christians are negatively effecting their lives or the lives of others.

 

Here's something to consider if you're a proponent of killing off religion:

1.)  I'm a hard science student and I believe wholly and completely in evolution.

2.)  I'm also a Catholic, and Catholics also believe in evolution..  "Today, the Church supports theistic evolution(ism), also known as evolutionary creation,^{[2]"  -Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution}

3.)  These beliefs are not conflicting, because Catholics (The original church actually started by Jesus) are not biblical literalists.  (Here's a video I like to link a lot on forums XD   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htxOjJHB5-8  )

Every passage in the bible was written by a different author for different reasons with different levels of symbolism under different types of genre.  I don't think it would be correct to take the whole book literally (although I still respect your beliefs if you do).  Even saint Thomas Aquinas (from the 11th century) did not take the bible in it's entirety literally!

 

 

At the end of the day, if you hate religion for whatever reason (if its a silly reason or a reasonable reason), that's fine by me.  I would love to have a deeply intellectual philosophical conversation with you to enrich my own world-views, just don't label me as something I'm not (a biblical literalist).  I think we could benefit more from each other by discussing our beliefs and understanding what exactly it is that each other believe instead of writing off each others' beliefs as silly because of some assumptions we've made.  <-- Sorry about the long sentence!

[HaroldGenhi 82]

So if a subset of "Christians" are being rude towards atheists, and atheists retort in a hostile way back at Christianity in general, atheists are being hostile towards every Christian denomination.

 

'Militant atheists', what exactly is your definition of a militant atheist? How do they differ from say a militant muslim or a militant christian? I feel we need to generally establish a definition of terms before addressing them so there is nothing lost in translation. If I disagree, I'll transition to PMs so as not to start a war of ideals. Clarity in ideas is all I seek.

Edited April 19, 2015 by HaroldGenhi

[Steel Accord 6,658]

So if a subset of "Christians" are being rude towards atheists, and atheists retort in a hostile way back at Christianity in general, atheists are being hostile towards every Christian denomination.  This is what I don't understand about atheists;  it seems like I see more militant atheism than I do militant Christianity on the internet, yet the militant atheists always claim how Christians are negatively effecting their lives or the lives of others.

 

Here's something to consider if you're a proponent of killing off religion:

1.)  I'm a hard science student and I believe wholly and completely in evolution.

2.)  I'm also a Catholic, and Catholics also believe in evolution..  "Today, the Church supports theistic evolution(ism), also known as evolutionary creation,^{[2]"  -Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution}

3.)  These beliefs are not conflicting, because Catholics (The original church actually started by Jesus) are not biblical literalists.  (Here's a video I like to link a lot on forums XD   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htxOjJHB5-8  )

Every passage in the bible was written by a different author for different reasons with different levels of symbolism under different types of genre.  I don't think it would be correct to take the whole book literally (although I still respect your beliefs if you do).  Even saint Thomas Aquinas (from the 11th century) did not take the bible in it's entirety literally!

 

 

At the end of the day, if you hate religion for whatever reason (if its a silly reason or a reasonable reason), that's fine by me.  I would love to have a deeply intellectual philosophical conversation with you to enrich my own world-views, just don't label me as something I'm not (a biblical literalist).  I think we could benefit more from each other by discussing our beliefs and understanding what exactly it is that each other believe instead of writing off each others' beliefs as silly because of some assumptions we've made.  <-- Sorry about the long sentence!

 

 

First off, I don't understand the quotation marks around "Christians", is this to imply that those that are being rude are not Christians, or more so, 'not true Christians'. Secondly, you proceed to clump all atheists together as being rude to all Christians as a result. No. As you've built it up. A subset of Christians are rude to atheists and in response a subset of atheists are rude to all Christians, while another group is only rude to that specific subset and another doesn't partake in any rude remarks. This same spectrum will exist for Christians or anyone of any other religion and even then that is a very general division. You will have a subset of Christians who will never be rude and be nice to everyone. You will have a subset of Christians who are rude to a specific group of atheists. You will have a subset of Christianity who are rude to all atheists. Now you can replace "Christians" and "Atheists" and you get a very generalize dynamic for many religions in the world.

 

And 'militant atheists', what exactly is your definition of a militant atheist? How do they differ from say a militant muslim or a militant christian. Need to generally establish definition of terms before arguing them so there is nothing lost in translation.

 

And I would advise continuing this via PM as requested by the OP and mod.

[HaroldGenhi 82]

And I would advise continuing this via PM as requested by the OP and mod.

I can do that. I didn't think my comments were overly critical or disagreeing, but more as a means of clarification of beliefs. The final set of questions were purely to establish clarity and if I disagreed with that then I would have switched to PMs as per the original request of OP and the mod. So my apologies for apparently over-stepping.

 

I can edit my post to remove what I would feel would come off as the most disagreeing and keep the clarification section where I only ask for definition of terms. I feel that would be more agreeable, assumably. Whichever it is, it is never my intent to instill a fight of passive aggressive comments, but to impart a dialogue of collective understanding and tolerance, hopefully.

[John 793]

I can do that. I didn't think my comments were overly critical or disagreeing, but more as a means of clarification of beliefs. The final set of questions were purely to establish clarity and if I disagreed with that then I would have switched to PMs as per the original request of OP and the mod. So my apologies for apparently over-stepping.

 

I can edit my post to remove what I would feel would come off as the most disagreeing and keep the clarification section where I only ask for definition of terms. I feel that would be more agreeable, assumably. Whichever it is, it is never my intent to instill a fight of passive aggressive comments, but to impart a dialogue of collective understanding and tolerance, hopefully.

 

I sense a needlessly cynical tone, though you make a clear effort in trying to state that this isn't your intent.

 

Definition of militant:   "combative and aggressive in support of a political or social cause, and typically favoring extreme, violent, or confrontational methods."

I'm talking about the atheists who actively seek to demean, judge and harass people of faith;  the ones that seek to "kill religion" as a concept entirely, and are militant in their approach of doing so.  To be honest, I see more people parading the internet in the spirit of militant atheism than I see people parading the internet for militant Christian purposes.

[Suukorak 354]

I sense a needlessly cynical tone, though you make a clear effort in trying to state that this isn't your intent.

 

Definition of militant:   "combative and aggressive in support of a political or social cause, and typically favoring extreme, violent, or confrontational methods."

I'm talking about the atheists who actively seek to demean, judge and harass people of faith;  the ones that seek to "kill religion" as a concept entirely, and are militant in their approach of doing so.  To be honest, I see more people parading the internet in the spirit of militant atheism than I see people parading the internet for militant Christian purposes.

I can see both sides of this one. There are, certainly, more militant atheists online than Christians, but I get the impression that they feel like they're rebelling against the "real world" by expressing this stuff to their peers on the internet.

And it's true, we've seen a lot more Christians in politics, for example, than atheists. There are, sadly, militant Christians who make a bunch of religious issues into political ones (in the US, we have LGBT stuff, abortion, etc), and the atheists probably feel like they have to fight back.

Although I'm neutral on the question of religion, I'm usually with the atheists on political issues. 

[John 793]

I can see both sides of this one. There are, certainly, more militant atheists online than Christians, but I get the impression that they feel like they're rebelling against the "real world" by expressing this stuff to their peers on the internet.

And it's true, we've seen a lot more Christians in politics, for example, than atheists. There are, sadly, militant Christians who make a bunch of religious issues into political ones (in the US, we have LGBT stuff, abortion, etc), and the atheists probably feel like they have to fight back.

Although I'm neutral on the question of religion, I'm usually with the atheists on political issues. 

 

I don't think it's right to label Abortion as a strictly religious issue..  I see it as a moral issue, and I've seen it as that even when I've been atheist.

I could also care less about the LGBT stuff.  I don't care what other people do with their lives;  not my business.

 

Kopaka!

Edited April 19, 2015 by John

[Steel Accord 6,658]

I don't think it's right to label Abortion as a strictly religious issue..  I see it as a moral issue, and I've seen it as that even when I've been atheist.

I could also care less about the LGBT stuff.  I don't care what other people do with their lives;  not my business.

 

Kopaka!

@@Suukorak, 

 

Okay, okay let's keep this on track.

 

To introduce another topic within the thread's purpose, what is one religion you're not apart of but you have a fascination for and a desire to learn about?

Edited April 19, 2015 by Steel Accord

[John 793]

@@Suukorak, 

 

Okay, okay let's keep this on track.

 

To introduce another topic within the thread's purpose, what is one religion you're not apart of but you have a fascination for and a desire to learn about?

 

Druidism,

 

Also, ZOROASTRIANISM!!!  I love Zoroastrianism.  Too bad they don't allow converts in the traditional sense;  their population is dwindling... ... thanks to Muslim invaders killing them off :C

Edited April 19, 2015 by John

[Steel Accord 6,658]

Druidism,

 

Also, ZOROASTRIANISM!!!  I love Zoroastrianism.

 

Why those two though? What about them do you find compelling?

[Suukorak 354]

I don't think it's right to label Abortion as a strictly religious issue..  I see it as a moral issue, and I've seen it as that even when I've been atheist.

I could also care less about the LGBT stuff.  I don't care what other people do with their lives;  not my business.

 

Kopaka!

True. Abortion actually seems to be more of a moral issue than either party lets on; it's a debate on what counts as life, but neither side is willing to put it that way. Maybe they think it sounds boring...?

Also, Kopaka indeed. And Suukorak (obviously).

 

 

@@Suukorak, 

 

Okay, okay let's keep this on track.

 

To introduce another topic within the thread's purpose, what is one religion you're not apart of but you have a fascination for and a desire to learn about?

Sorry, did I derail the topic?

To expand on my interest in Sufism, my father told me bits and pieces of their philosophy. I have no idea if what he said was accurate (or representative of the whole), but the ideas sounded fascinating. A lot of them revolved around the idea that much of life can be changed by how you approach it. Apparently, some believed that heaven and hell were something people made for themselves, on Earth, depending on their approach to life. Some even went farther, claiming that this power meant that they were God. Of course, that made them heretics and they were probably killed for it.

Again, I have no reliable source for this. It's what I heard, and I'd love to have a good source to confirm or deny this stuff.

[Steel Accord 6,658]

 

 

A lot of them revolved around the idea that much of life can be changed by how you approach it.

 

Sounds like my cup of tea.

 

 

 

A lot of them revolved around the idea that much of life can be changed by how you approach it. Apparently, some believed that heaven and hell were something people made for themselves, on Earth, depending on their approach to life.

 

 

Again, similar to what I was taught what Heaven and Hell really are. Namely, states of being. If a man gets up each morning to go to work, enjoys his job, comes home to his wife, and his grown children live happy lives because he taught them well, can he not say he's in a form of Heaven?

 

Just as much, can the condemned child killer who gets regularly beaten to near death but just short of it by the other prisoners for being a child killer truly say he isn't in Hell?

 

Those are two extremes admittedly but they illustrate the principal. Life is what one makes it.

 

 

 

Some even went farther, claiming that this power meant that they were God. Of course, that made them heretics and they were probably killed for it.

 

That's probably a gross misunderstanding. Just as much as someone who owns their house can justifiably claim to be "king of this castle" the conscious, disciplined, and wise can somewhat accurately claim to be gods of their own lives.

[Suukorak 354]

 

 

Again, similar to what I was taught what Heaven and Hell really are. Namely, states of being. If a man gets up each morning to go to work, enjoys his job, comes home to his wife, and his grown children live happy lives because he taught them well, can he not say he's in a form of Heaven?   Just as much, can the condemned child killer who gets regularly beaten to near death but just short of it by the other prisoners for being a child killer truly say he isn't in Hell?   Those are two extremes admittedly but they illustrate the principal. Life is what one makes it.

Yes, though I've seen a few examples of people creating their own hell without anything so drastic. Just coming into a room with the wrong attitude can do it. Or expecting every stranger they meet to be an enemy. I try to stay away from such people, because they bring little but misery to everyone around them.

 

 

 

That's probably a gross misunderstanding. Just as much as someone who owns their house can justifiably claim to be "king of this castle" the conscious, disciplined, and wise can somewhat accurately claim to be gods of their own lives.

 

Perhaps. I don't know enough to tell what they meant exactly - that's why I hope someone can enlighten me.

[Steel Accord 6,658]

 

 

Yes, though I've seen a few examples of people creating their own hell without anything so drastic. Just coming into a room with the wrong attitude can do it. Or expecting every stranger they meet to be an enemy. I try to stay away from such people, because they bring little but misery to everyone around them.

 

I did say that those were extreme examples. Certainly it doesn't take such a cartoonishly overt evil act to land one in their own personal Hell.

[Henny Penny Benny 936]

If a man gets up each morning to go to work, enjoys his job, comes home to his wife, and his grown children live happy lives because he taught them well, can he not say he's in a form of Heaven?

 

Just as much, can the condemned child killer who gets regularly beaten to near death but just short of it by the other prisoners for being a child killer truly say he isn't in Hell?

What about the man who does his best, works his hardest, loves his wife but never manages to provide enough, and she has an affair and leaves him and takes half of what little he has in the divorce?

 

Or what about the sadistic serial killer who never gets caught, who lives his entire life gleefully slaughtering, raping, and torturing for the sheer pleasure of it?

 

And I don't ask to be condescending. I'm earnestly interested to hear what you have to say.

[Suukorak 354]

What about the man who does his best, works his hardest, loves his wife but never manages to provide enough, and she has an affair and leaves him and takes half of what little he has in the divorce?

 

Or what about the sadistic serial killer who never gets caught, who lives his entire life gleefully slaughtering, raping, and torturing for the sheer pleasure of it?

 

And I don't ask to be condescending. I'm earnestly interested to hear what you have to say.

You can make your own hell or heaven, sure. No one said it had to be just. In fact, there's no judgement at all, I imagine - just, are you happy?

Of course, the serial killer, spreading misery, is more likely to get some external misery back from the world. Just like the nice man is still likely to have good things (friends, maybe kids, etc) in the world, and if he's happy enough, can get over the incident.

It's not perfect. But it doesn't need to be.

[Steel Accord 6,658]

What about the man who does his best, works his hardest, loves his wife but never manages to provide enough, and she has an affair and leaves him and takes half of what little he has in the divorce?

 

Or what about the sadistic serial killer who never gets caught, who lives his entire life gleefully slaughtering, raping, and torturing for the sheer pleasure of it?

 

And I don't ask to be condescending. I'm earnestly interested to hear what you have to say.

 

What you removed from my quote was that I admitted those two were extremes. As in, not meant to be truly indicative of reality.

 

Of your proposed examples:

 

The good man's life is better spent trying to do good, even if little physical benefit seems to be made.

 

The killer will get his justice one way or the other.

Edited April 20, 2015 by Steel Accord

[Henny Penny Benny 936]

What you removed from my quote was that I admitted those two were extremes. As in, not meant to be truly indicative of reality.

 

Of your proposed examples:

 

The good man's life is better spent trying to do good, even if little physical benefit seems to be made.

 

The killer will get his justice one way or the other.

What if the killer doesn't get his justice one way or the other? What if he spends his entire life, until the moment he dies, joyful and at peace with his sins, never once showing remorse, never getting caught, never getting his comeuppance (so to speak)?

[Suukorak 354]

What if the killer doesn't get his justice one way or the other? What if he spends his entire life, until the moment he dies, joyful and at peace with his sins, never once showing remorse, never getting caught, never getting his comeuppance (so to speak)?

Then so be it. At least, one more person in the world is happy.

This is beginning to touch on the subject of justice. At the risk of derailing the topic, I'll put a quick summary of my views on that here.

 

 

Basically, I think that we shouldn't punish criminals, or "bad" people, but instead do everything we can to get them back into society as functioning members of it. In fact, our judicial system and many other parts of our politics are too preoccupied with the notion of deserving things. In a country as rich as the U.S., where there can certainly be more than enough for everyone, "deserving" things is a superfluous notion we can afford to do away with. We shouldn't ask what people deserve, but instead what they need.

So, in case you're wondering, basically communism. Real communism, not the horrible failures we've seen so far.

 

 

[NinjaPomeranian 143]

Im atheist(I do however believe in afterlife,just not that i has anything to do with heaven/hell).Im like this for many reasons,oh well

I want to apologise for my fellow atheists that make you feel bad you believe in what you believe and such.Exremists are bad no matter the religion,oh well.Not everyone of us is like that though and we definely arent demons from hell or something as some people label us.All some of us,at least,want is to dont get "You will burn in hell" messages when we state our opinions and views

And dont listen to our stereotypes either please!Everyone is different but I assure you that some of us dont hate all christians/religious people of any kind just because they are religious(this is the most common stereotype I've seen for my people)

Again,some of us just want acceptance.Sure,we have extermists too,but we also have some really sweet people that are being labeled in some of the most wrong and bad ways just because of their belief(or lack of)

 

I personally dislike just extremists when it comes to religion.

Again,dont listen to the stereotypes,some of us are really caring people if you give us a chance and dont judge us blindly by our lack of belief and views

[Steel Accord 6,658]

What if the killer doesn't get his justice one way or the other? What if he spends his entire life, until the moment he dies, joyful and at peace with his sins, never once showing remorse, never getting caught, never getting his comeuppance (so to speak)?

 

I can't help but feel you are fishing for a specific answer from me.

[Henny Penny Benny 936]

I can't help but feel you are fishing for a specific answer from me.

Nope, just looking for an answer. You say pretty confidently that the killer absolutely will get his justice one way or another (I'm assuming you mean in this life), but what about the killer who doesn't?

Edited April 20, 2015 by Henny Penny Benny