On respect for the belief of others. Sorry for the long post

by StarTrekAngel 372 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Phizzy

  It looks to me as though this Thread has deteriorated into a "Let's bash Viv" thread, which is a shame.

  I enjoy her succinct way of showing the problem with a posters ideas. Same with Cofty, you can't get much more succinct and laconic than one of Cofty's recent replies, to wit, "Bollocks".

  I do think though, that we all can do with a gentle reminder now and again about the polite ways of debating, sometimes we are all inclined to shoot from the hip.

  As to a person's beliefs warranting respect, if you mean by "belief" an idea held to be true with no satisfactory evidence, then such beliefs deserve no respect.

  Those kind of ideas are what hold people in thrall to religions and cults, and keep them imprisoned within. Those ideas should be ridiculed mercilessly, and shown to be just plain nonsense.
• 

  Viviane

  That is some demand. Let's see that demand going through a court of law

  Court of law? I've no idea what you are talking about or why such a thing would be brought up.

  However, I do apologize to Eden for the "expect" hell comment. That was out of line in every way as you said.

  Could be used as evidence to support StarTrekAngel's OP

  The OP is about respecting others and their views. The OP (and, indeed no one here) has explained where they draw the line at at. NAMBLA? Antivaxxers? Religious parents that deny their children medical care?

  Also, as far as respect goes, people on this thread have called me names, I've been lied about multiple times, it was suggested I was cowering inside and to be pitied by the same people that are saying we should respect everyone and their idea. It kinda makes what their saying seem a disingenuous, or at the very least that their "respect" extends to the moment they decide to join on a dogpile.
• 

  truthseeker100

  I might disagree with your opinion ,but I'll defend with my life your right to say it.
• 

  bohm

  Viviane: "Also, as far as respect goes, people on this thread have called me names, "

  Do you feel it is wrong to call someone names? Do you feel it is not the right way to have a productive conversation?

  
  
• 

  LoveUniHateExams

  @Phizzy - As to a person's beliefs warranting respect, if you mean by "belief" an idea held to be true with no satisfactory evidence, then such beliefs deserve no respect - absolutely correct, but bluntly calling or implying people are mentally/ill stupid for believing in God (or wicked/Satanic for not believing in God) goes beyond the boundaries of civilized conversation, I'm sure you'd agree.

  @Viv - The OP (and, indeed no one here) has explained where they draw the line at at. NAMBLA? Antivaxxers? Religious parents that deny their children medical care? - correct. But is there a great need to "draw a line"? How many pro-NAMBLA supporters come onto this forum and start stating their beliefs?

  Besides, if you ask nicely, perhaps STA may state where the line is

  Viv, I don't know if you've been called names on previous threads, but if you're smarting because someone on this thread called you "a walking argument", then that is as nothing compared to how you've treated individuals who have the audacity to answer that they believe in God.
• 

  done4good

  I agree with the OP by and large, however this is a discussion forum. Debate is expected and should be encouraged. As some have pointed out, most of us would not even discuss many of these subjects in most other contexts, (our place of employment; a casual social visit; etc.). As long as the debate does not devolve into insult or name calling, it should be encouraged. This is an effective way to get to facts, albeit an indirect one. I personally have learned much over the years here because of this.
  

  On the other hand, I have mixed concerns about the "like" and "dislike" buttons since the they appeared. It seems those who cannot debate properly, or too lazy to debate properly, or simply feel threatened by lines of argument they have no response for, are too quick to hit the "dislike" button. That in of itself weakens their position significantly.

  d4g
  
• 

  bohm

  Viviane: it was suggested I was cowering inside and to be pitied by the same people that are complaining about how they are treated

  Is this related to the question i asked you the other day:

  "Viv, you asked for an example of a computer program that evolved and i provided a list.
  I really dont get why you interact the way you do with people on this forum. It appears you are only interesting in starting and winning arguments, not with superior arguments or facts, but with anger and rethoric. Are you a happy person?"

  Speaking for myself, I am slightly worried for you, or rather if I had your posting history I would *know* i was not in a happy place in my life. I tried to go over your past threads and you seemed a different person 2 years ago, much more happy and open to conversation with other people. In many ways you remind me of an atheistic version of a previous poster here, Brotherdan, who due to stressful life circumstances got pulled into a bad form of evangelism.

  
  
• 

  EdenOne

  I do apologize to Eden for the "expect" hell comment. That was out of line in every way

  As long as you keep the accusation of me of being a liar and an hypocrite, save your words - apology not accepted.

  Eden
• 

  Cota Samuel

  as long as you cannot prove something is indeed real such as the accounts in the Bible you are not allowed(or shouldn't be) to say that it is true. If you want to believe the claims you find somewhere which cannot be proven in no way you can believe them as long as you don't declare them "real" to others, especially children or handicapped persons who cannot rationalise as mature persons can. That is imo evil.
• 

  Viviane

  Do you feel it is wrong to call someone names? Do you feel it is not the right way to have a productive conversation?

  Depends on the conversation and the name, of course, of course :)

  In general, if you are having a discussion and someone uses name calling as a tactic, then it is not likely to be productive, of course.

  But is there a great need to "draw a line"? How many pro-NAMBLA supporters come onto this forum and start stating their beliefs?

  Whether someone is here from NAMBLA or not is irrelevant to the question. We HAVE had many antivaxxers here, a subset of people who deny their children life-saving medical, but that is also irrelevant. I am trying to determine whether or not it is truly felt that we should respect all views and have a conversation about that or whether if it felt that we should draw a line somewhere because, if we draw the line somewhere, the conversation should be about that line and where it is and why.

  Viv, I don't know if you've been called names on previous threads, but if you're smarting because someone on this thread called you "a walking argument", then that is as nothing compared to how you've treated individuals who have the audacity to answer that they believe in God.

  First, I'm not smarting from anything anyone online says about me. Personally, I find it quite amusing, kind of like when a kitten attacks a Rottweiler. It's JUST SO ADORABLE! However, it also allows us to see how forum members respond to personal attacks and give us a bit of insight into their perception vs. reality.

  Specifically, who did I call names for believing in god? What personal attack did I make upon them? Is it OK for someone to call me names because of the perception that I hurt someone's else's feelings? Is it now OK to call names as long as it's directed at the right person? Are there now degrees of personal attacks the forum members are thinking is OK?

  These questions will have interesting answers should anyone honestly answer them.