Respect for other people's beliefs

komodosp

In religious conversation its quite common to come across someone who doesn't believe what you believe, but respect your beliefs... I was in a conversation with a Muslim who professed to respect my Christian friend's beliefs for example.

But how can you respect someone's beliefs if (according to you) they are wrong? Like for an atheist to respect the beliefs of a Christian is like any other person to respect the beliefs of someone who thinks the world is flat. If you know that they are wrong, in what sense do you respect their beliefs?

Conversely for a religious person to respect the beliefs of an atheist or another religious person is even worse. Like for a Christian to respect the beliefs of an atheist is an act of sabotage of the worst kind. If you are Christian and you "tolerate" atheists, what you are really doing is simply letting them go to hell. Any Christian who is proud of the fact that they don't try and cram their beliefs down the throats of atheists is in fact doing them the greatest disservice ever, just like respecting the beliefs of a blind man who thinks that he is not about to walk off the edge of a cliff...

Scofflaw

In religious conversation its quite common to come across someone who doesn't believe what you believe, but respect your beliefs... I was in a conversation with a Muslim who professed to respect my Christian friend's beliefs for example.

But how can you respect someone's beliefs if (according to you) they are wrong? Like for an atheist to respect the beliefs of a Christian is like any other person to respect the beliefs of someone who thinks the world is flat. If you know that they are wrong, in what sense do you respect their beliefs?

Conversely for a religious person to respect the beliefs of an atheist or another religious person is even worse. Like for a Christian to respect the beliefs of an atheist is an act of sabotage of the worst kind. If you are Christian and you "tolerate" atheists, what you are really doing is simply letting them go to hell. Any Christian who is proud of the fact that they don't try and cram their beliefs down the throats of atheists is in fact doing them the greatest disservice ever, just like respecting the beliefs of a blind man who thinks that he is not about to walk off the edge of a cliff...

Christians believe Muslims are wrong, and going to Hell - and the same for Buddhists, atheists, Shinto, Hindus, Zoroastrians etc. Each religion believes the adherents of the others (and none) are wrong - rejecting the true God, rejecting true morality, and destined for Hell. In certain cases you can add "deluded by Satan" and "mired in sin" to that list.

There is a polite agreement not to mention this, in order to avoid raising religious tension between communities. Atheists are exempted from this general politeness, because they are not thought to have communities.

Atheists respect the beliefs of theists rather more than theists respect each others' beliefs, since my belief that a theist is wrong does not include any suggestion that they are thereby: (a) rejecting the true God; (b) rejecting correct morality; (c) going to be punished for eternity. I don't believe that theists are being deluded by Satan, and I don't believe they are any more sinful than the next person.

In a nutshell, theists believe that atheists and other theists have beliefs that are wrong and wicked which they should give up as soon as possible, whereas atheists merely believe that theists have silly beliefs to which they are completely entitled as long as they don't force others to join them.

Which is more respectful?

cordially,
Scofflaw

XJR

Scofflaw wrote: »

In a nutshell, theists believe that atheists and other theists have beliefs that are wrong and wicked which they should give up as soon as possible, whereas atheists merely believe that theists have silly beliefs to which they are completely entitled as long as they don't force others to join them.

good summary but doesn't address the initial question.

Zillah

Sam Harris has a refreshing out look on this. He essentially says that we don't respect other people's beliefs, that ideas are contagious, and if someone has a convincing argument you will agree with them, and if they don't, you won't. This notion of "respect" for the beliefs of others is a strange pseudo-liberal notion that is only applied to faith.

No one would claim to "respect" someone's beliefs in terms of quantum mechanics or biology; you either think they're right or wrong.


My personal view is that respect for belief is a sort of cowardly cold war. A Christian can't argue against the beliefs of a Muslim because he uses the exact same faulty logic to prop up his own bad position. Its mutually assured destruction, so neither side fires off their nukes. They just dress it up in this elegant veneer of civility.

Hence why atheists are often seen as overly critical, condescending or whatever other ad hominem attacks people use against those who point out that they're wrong. An atheist does not use the faulty book/faith/intuition based arguments for his world view. To round off my nuclear metaphor, an atheist has an anti-missile system ^_^

It is however quite important to note the difference between showing respect for someone's beliefs and showing respect for their right to have said beliefs. Its also important to note the existence of traditional social respect...in many occasions it would be considered as innapropriate to start a personal discussion of that sort. Its not because you respect what they believe, its that you are showing respect for their social/emotional situation.

Scofflaw

XJR wrote: »

good summary but doesn't address the initial question.

Well, if the initial question is "how do you respect someone's beliefs when you think they're wrong" the answer is "you don't". Apologies if that wasn't clear.

As Zillah says, all one is respecting is the right to hold such beliefs - "agreeing to differ".

cordially,
Scofflaw

Dades

You can't choose to respect something any more than you can choose to (genuinely) believe something. You either do - or you don't. Like in every other application of the word respect must be earned.

So, as Zillah suggests, we take one step back to respect the "right" to hold beliefs.

Asiaprod

Dades wrote: »

So, as Zillah suggests, we take one step back to respect the "right" to hold beliefs.

Plus one

Dave!

Indeed. I think someone mentioned in AH how they have "great respect" for people with strong faith.

I don't see why...

So yeah, "I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say".

aidan24326

Zillah wrote: »

It is however quite important to note the difference between showing respect for someone's beliefs and showing respect for their right to have said beliefs.

That pretty much sums it up for me aswell. I definitely have no respect at all for much of what religious people believe, it's difficult to 'respect' someone's belief that the bible is literally true or that the story of Noah's ark is a historical account of real events. Anybody who believes stuff like that is an idiot in my opinion. However I do believe in the absolute right of everyone to hold whatever belief/view/opinion they want. The christian bible-literalist that I would call an idiot may equally call me an idiot for rejecting the true god. In that case we can agree to disagree and leave it be.

Komodosp makes a good point that christians who respect/tolerate atheist's views are standing back and letting us walk straight off the cliff. I had never really thought of it like that. Shouldn't they, in the christian spirit, be trying to save our souls from damnation?

pH

For me whenever we talk about respect, we fail to clarify what we mean by respect, and end up with people talking past each other.

In this context, the word 'respect' has 2 different meanings in common usage, one meaning hold in high esteem - in the way you respect your father for example. The other means " To avoid violation of or interference with", as in I respect the speed limit.

It's the 2nd meaning we're talking about here - ie tolerance for and avoiding interfering with - and in that sense most religions do seem to avoid any form of criticism of another religion like the plague.

Dawkins/Hitchens/Harris write a few books, and for example a gaggle of Christian fleas are written in response, but where are the Christian writers questioning the Koran?

If you're a Christian then you must have an opinion on the Quran ... either God gave these instructions to Mohammed or he didn't, if he didn't you've got to believe they're wasting their time and have been deceived by a man, if he did then how do you reconcile this with your faith? I guess you could go for some warm and fuzzy - God has given different rules/instructions to different peoples - we can all be right! but where does one draw the line? Judaism? Hinduism? Buddhism? The Mormons (did God really send another angel to Joseph Smith just for that small group of people?) etc.

I wonder how many Christians 'respect' Scientology or Satanism, or even forms of Paganism, witchcraft or Wicca in any meaning of the word?

Zillah

pH wrote: »

Dawkins/Hitchens/Harris write a few books, and for example a gaggle of Christian fleas are written in response

That is quite an arrangement! At first I was thinking I should read some of those and see what they have to say, but then I realised I'd probably be chewing the pages in frustration as they deploy the same old rotten chestnuts.

Scofflaw

pH wrote: »

For me whenever we talk about respect, we fail to clarify what we mean by respect, and end up with people talking past each other.

In this context, the word 'respect' has 2 different meanings in common usage, one meaning hold in high esteem - in the way you respect your father for example. The other means " To avoid violation of or interference with", as in I respect the speed limit.

Nice summary!

pH wrote: »

It's the 2nd meaning we're talking about here - ie tolerance for and avoiding interfering with - and in that sense most religions do seem to avoid any form of criticism of another religion like the plague.

Dawkins/Hitchens/Harris write a few books, and for example a gaggle of Christian fleas are written in response, but where are the Christian writers questioning the Koran?

If you're a Christian then you must have an opinion on the Quran ... either God gave these instructions to Mohammed or he didn't, if he didn't you've got to believe they're wasting their time and have been deceived by a man, if he did then how do you reconcile this with your faith? I guess you could go for some warm and fuzzy - God has given different rules/instructions to different peoples - we can all be right! but where does one draw the line? Judaism? Hinduism? Buddhism? The Mormons (did God really send another angel to Joseph Smith just for that small group of people?) etc.

I wonder how many Christians 'respect' Scientology or Satanism, or even forms of Paganism, witchcraft or Wicca in any meaning of the word?

Yes, it's kind of curious, isn't it? Certainly this board has never gone for long without a Christian poking his or her head in to point out that we're damned and foolish, and the Creationism thread appears to have degenerated (well, for a very odd value of degenerated) into mere conversion attempts from our Creationist friends. I don't see the same thing happening in the Muslim forum.

Perhaps that's why people like Dawkins are so keen for us to "come out" as atheists?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Hivemind187

I brought up a similar topic in this thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055108822

Basically my way of thinking (which seemed to raise a number of hackles) was that to respect another persons beliefs was an utter nonsense. You can, and some argue should, respect a person but their beliefs are a separate factor and do not deserve the same reverence.

Essentially, I respect you, but I think your beliefs are spurious.

fatmammycat

I don't respect their beliefs at all. I tolerate them as long as they don't unduly intrude on my well-being. Frankly I think anyone who takes the word of the qu-ran or the bible literally or believes in some invisible deity is nuts. All this talk of respect is just that, talk.

bonkey

komodosp wrote: »

But how can you respect someone's beliefs if (according to you) they are wrong?

By learning that english words often do not have unique meanings.....as pH already succinctly pointed out.

daveharnett

"I respect your beliefs" =
1) I respect your right to have your beliefs.
2) If I had the same life experience you did, I might share your beliefs.
3) Your irrational beliefs have equal merit to my irrational beliefs. - the OP's example is one of these, I think.
4) I respect you as a person in spite of your beliefs.
5) I respect the way in which you act upon your beliefs.
6) I respect the way you respect my right to disagree with your beliefs.
take your pick

biko

komodosp wrote: »

But how can you respect someone's beliefs if (according to you) they are wrong? Like for an atheist to respect the beliefs of a Christian is like any other person to respect the beliefs of someone who thinks the world is flat. If you know that they are wrong, in what sense do you respect their beliefs?

Well, if I visit a tribe in a jungle and they all worship a rock then I don't feel it's my place to start teaching them the errors of their ways. I am not a missionary. If they want to believe in the rock that's fine, until of course they start killing everyone else that don't believe in the rock. And then change the belief and form The Reformed Church of The Rock and kill their previous friends. And so on...

jtsuited

this thread has got me thinking of pretty fundamental ideas, namely:

1. Why in this age of reason and accountability, do we draw a line when it comes to issues of religion?
2.Why is religion exempt from all other areas of human enquiry?
3. Why should I respect the beliefs of theists? I don't respect the beliefs of other groups of people (because I think they are wrong) so why should I respect theists' beliefs.

Seems like as was said before a load of pseudo-liberal crap.

Ickle Magoo

Who said atheists respected theists beliefs? I don't know anyone that fundamentally disagrees with another's beliefs, yet holds those beliefs in high regard. As a kowtow to modern society, we can't go around telling people what we really think of them, especially if it involves their very personal choices regarding religion or spirituality, so we nod & smile & think "What a load of £$%&!".

I've met very few Christians who didn't try just a little bit to convert me.:)

orestes

I no more have to respect a persons religious beliefs than I have to respect a persons belief in the tooth-fairy. Just because it is a religious belief does not give it immunity to questioning or ridicule, if one were that way inclined

stereoroid

I used to have respect for Islam, back in the days when I knew very little about it. The more I've read on the subject... well, I've tried to treat it with respect, but they've not given me a lot to work with... :rolleyes:

PDN

I was brought up in an age when it was considered good manners to treat other people with respect. I have discovered that, if I respect somebody as a person, then it is also good manners to show some respect towards their beliefs. That may mean listening carefully to what they believe rather than just rejecting it out of hand. Of course, after listening carefully, I may still conclude that their beliefs are nonsense, but what is to be gained by stating that fact?

If you show some respect for the beliefs of others then you will find that they are more likely to listen to your beliefs. I guess some posters here have no wish to persuade theists of our mistakes, but simply enjoy venting in the most unattractive ways possible. Others are more respectful and, while I can't speak for any of the other theists, often cause me to re-examine my positions.

Zillah

PDN wrote: »

If you show some respect for the beliefs of others then you will find that they are more likely to listen to your beliefs.

So you don't have respect for their beliefs. You're just being manipulative by pretending to.

PDN

Zillah wrote: »

So you don't have respect for their beliefs. You're just being manipulative by pretending to.

No, it's just good manners. If I treat someone else's viewpoint with contempt then I have no right to expect them to listen to my viewpoint. However, if I listen carefully to what someone else has to say then I earn the right to share my opinion and to expect them to reciprocate by listening to me. It's this kind of give and take that makes civilised debate possible.

aidan24326

PDN wrote: »

No, it's just good manners. If I treat someone else's viewpoint with contempt then I have no right to expect them to listen to my viewpoint. However, if I listen carefully to what someone else has to say then I earn the right to share my opinion and to expect them to reciprocate by listening to me. It's this kind of give and take that makes civilised debate possible.

Ok, so how about I let the person explain their beliefs, and then say 'sorry I think that's the biggest load of nonsense I ever heard' ? Is that allowed?

PDN

aidan24326 wrote: »

Ok, so how about I let the person explain their beliefs, and then say 'sorry I think that's the biggest load of nonsense I ever heard' ? Is that allowed?

Anything is allowed, it's just not likely to win you a sympathetic hearing.

Why not try this approach? "Look, I hear what you're saying, and it's obviously important to you. But I just don't see the point of that particular belief or practice. Let me show you another way of looking at it that makes more sense to me."

That is less judgmental, much more attractive, and far more likely to produce a change of mind in the person with whom you are debating. It also shows that you possess at least a modicum of good manners and aren't just an ill-mannered little troll.

Dave!

Have you ever considered converting to atheism, PDN? We could use convincing people like you

Scofflaw

PDN wrote: »

Anything is allowed, it's just not likely to win you a sympathetic hearing.

Why not try this approach? "Look, I hear what you're saying, and it's obviously important to you. But I just don't see the point of that particular belief or practice. Let me show you another way of looking at it that makes more sense to me."

That is less judgmental, much more attractive, and far more likely to produce a change of mind in the person with whom you are debating. It also shows that you possess at least a modicum of good manners and aren't just an ill-mannered little troll.

PDN: changing the Internet's attitude, one ill-mannered little troll at a time. A worthy endeavour, with no end in sight.

amused,
Scofflaw

Dades

PDN wrote: »

No, it's just good manners. If I treat someone else's viewpoint with contempt then I have no right to expect them to listen to my viewpoint. However, if I listen carefully to what someone else has to say then I earn the right to share my opinion and to expect them to reciprocate by listening to me. It's this kind of give and take that makes civilised debate possible.

That sounds like, "no I don't have respect for their beliefs, but unless I pretend to listen, I'll never get them to listen to what I have to say".

Which is fine, btw! I mean lets face it, we all know we're not really going to hear anything new - we've all heard all the arguments (from both sides) before. So all that's happening is lip service. Respecting the believer - not the belief.

pH

I still think that we're confusing the 2 meanings of the word respect. I certainly do not hold religion in high esteem, but the 2nd meaning 'to avoid interference with', in that sense do I respect religion?

You won't find me outside a church on Sunday morning screaming at worshippers that they're deluded, and in no sense would I want to curtail people's ability to gather and worship any god/gods of their choosing. I also feel that if people want to impose additional morals on themselves and live their life according to those morals then fair enough - if you're unlucky enough to be a homosexual *and* believe that God has forbidden you to act on those desires the I think you should be free to live you life without succumbing to your homosexual desires - and I'll respect that (as in not interfere with it or force you to actually act on your homosexual desires)*.

What I do object to and certainly don't respect in any sense is their desire to project their morals onto me.

In fact historically most churches (those with a missionary component for sure) have shown a complete lack of respect (not interfering with) for other religions/non believers - what is evangelism and missionary work except the very definition of 'Lack of respect' in all senses of the word?

* - I used unlucky and homosexual in the same sentence - in no sense am I saying that gay people are unlucky - I'm only calling 'unlucky' those who are both Gay and believe that being gay is wrong.

PDN

pH wrote: »

In fact historically most churches (those with a missionary component for sure) have shown a complete lack of respect (not interfering with) for other religions/non believers - what is evangelism and missionary work except the very definition of 'Lack of respect' in all senses of the word?

Evangelism and missionary work are perfectly compatible with respect. For example, I am involved in missionary work among the Tiv and Idoma tribes in Nigeria. These people live in great poverty, the rate of HIV infection in many villages exceeds 80%, and they hold to a form of animism that venerates their ancestors.

As well as providing humanitarian aid (medical missions, clinics, schools, digging wells, providing condoms, health education etc) we share our Christian faith with these people. At all times we show respect for their beliefs, because their desire to honour their ancestors and show respect for the elderly is a good thing. We also point out areas where their beliefs are causing physical harm (eg where certain religious practices increase HIV infection). We also believe that we can show them a better way, resulting in many of these people making a free choice to embrace Christianity.

I think the confrontational nature of these boards causes people to fall into the line of thinking that says, "My beliefs are correct and therefore everything else is rubbish." But life is not actually like that. Many people (in all areas of life) are doing things to the best of their ability, but could benefit from education that will help them to do things better. For example, you can teach parenting skills to people without implying that they are rubbish parents. You respect what they have been doing so far, but teach them something extra so they can improve. Why should religion be any different?

It is certainly true that much evangelism and missionary work has been carried out in the past in ways that showed a lack of respect and involved bullying and coercion. The same, of course, has been true of many of those who have attempted to propagate atheism. However, it would be incorrect and illogical to claim that missionary work and evangelism, or indeed the propagation of atheism, cannot be conducted with respect.

PDN

Scofflaw wrote: »

PDN: changing the Internet's attitude, one ill-mannered little troll at a time. A worthy endeavour, with no end in sight.

I doubt very much that any real change of hearts or minds, on any subject, takes place on these fora. They tend to attract those who are entrenched in their opinions (myself included). However, in the real world most people are actually much less convinced of what they believe. My experience is that showing a bit of good manners and respect for others produces many more conversions than mocking them. That is why I sometimes wonder how many of the atheist posters actually want to influence others. I am motivated by a biblical command to witness to my beliefs and a conviction that I am helping others by doing so. Perhaps if I was an atheist I would be happy to feel that I am right, have a snigger at those who are ignorant enough not to see things my way, but have no desire to enlighten others. That is not intended as an attack, but I am curious about this. Some atheists are very 'evangelistic' (for lack of a better word), but others seem unconcerned that their vitriol towards religion is counter-productive in winning hearts and minds.

pH

PDN wrote: »

It is certainly true that much evangelism and missionary work has been carried out in the past in ways that showed a lack of respect and involved bullying and coercion. The same, of course, has been true of many of those who have attempted to propagate atheism. However, it would be incorrect and illogical to claim that missionary work and evangelism, or indeed the propagation of atheism, cannot be conducted with respect.

No you're wrong - at the heart all missionary work of it is a strong conviction that whatever their existing beliefs are they are *wrong* and would be better replaced with *your* religious beliefs. It doesn't matter how nicely you do it - you are interfering with their beliefs - and hence by definition you don't respect them. It is illogical to claim that you do - it's nothing to to with force or coercion, just lack of respect - plain and simple.

And as for you atheist jibe - provide me a link to a secular/humanist organisation that is withholding aid/charity until a group of people renounce all their religious beliefs and become atheists.

Dades

PDN wrote: »

Some atheists are very 'evangelistic' (for lack of a better word), but others seem unconcerned that their vitriol towards religion is counter-productive in winning hearts and minds.

Of course as atheists are just people who don't believe in gods, there is no creed, doctrines or statements of practice, so you will encounter all of these different reactions. Much of vitriol is probably symptomatic of a release that has been building up since Mammy started dragging them to mass. But I like to think it's not all sniggers and jibes.

In short much as Christians cover every level of the scale - good and bad, so do atheists/agnostics/alatrist etc. And you'll find them all here.

nij

If somebody believes in absurd magic, why should that be respected? Respect provides a platform for all sorts of superstition and nonsense to thrive.

Sleepy

I'll respect the first theist I meet who can actually back up their beliefs with reasoned, logical argument.

I have to admit, I'm completely intolerant of religious views. I'll veil my disgust at those views because in this world I'd have very few friends if I only associated with other atheists/agnostics. I can agree to disagree with someone and will usually avoid the subject of religion around someone who I disagree with. That's as far as I can accomodate someone's religious views i.e. I'll pretend they don't exist in order to be friendly with that person.

toiletduck

I respect a persons right to hold a belief, no matter how ridiculous it seems to me, but I shall not indulge them by respecting that belief.

aidan24326

PDN wrote: »

We also believe that we can show them a better way, resulting in many of these people making a free choice to embrace Christianity

A free choice? How on earth is it a free choice? You've filled the minds of vulnerable and probably poorly-educated people with the usual fairy tales and unsurprisingly they may latch onto it, coming as it does with these saviours from the first world who are also bringing water, food etc. This is bribery, coercion, manipulation, and all-round preying on the weak and vulnerable. Something organised religions have always been good at with the RC church long-time masters of the art. Why not just bring them food water etc. and leave their religious beliefs alone?** This is deliberate conversion dressed up as something more noble.

** undoubtedly you will say that some of their religious beliefs cause active harm, and I'm sure that's true. However all superstitious belief has the potential to be harmful, all you're doing is replacing one completely irrational belief with another, and some of the beliefs that christian missioaries have spread to poor disadvantaged areas have done much harm.

I think the confrontational nature of these boards causes people to fall into the line of thinking that says, "My beliefs are correct and therefore everything else is rubbish."

I've been browsing/posting on this board for about 18 months or so and I've never yet seen anybody say such a thing.

But life is not actually like that. Many people (in all areas of life) are doing things to the best of their ability, but could benefit from education that will help them to do things better...

...so long as it's the PDN kind of course. Giving them education is not enough, it has to come wrapped in religious dogma, which is the very antithesis of education.

For example, you can teach parenting skills to people without implying that they are rubbish parents. You respect what they have been doing so far, but teach them something extra so they can improve. Why should religion be any different?

You can teach people how to do things better without invoking religion at all.

It is certainly true that much evangelism and missionary work has been carried out in the past in ways that showed a lack of respect and involved bullying and coercion. The same, of course, has been true of many of those who have attempted to propagate atheism.

Examples? I know of no time in history when there was hordes of atheists travelling around the globe bullying everyone into abandoning the god de jour. Christian missionaries have been responsible for as much harm as good, and I'm not denying they've done some good. But take the issue of STI transmission in parts of Africa, the church teachings on contraception have been hugely harmful. Mother Teresa did more harm in India than good despite her saintly reputation. They're just a couple of examples.

I am motivated by a biblical command to witness to my beliefs and a conviction that I am helping others by doing so.

Well there you go, you've admitted yourself that conversion to 'the one true faith' as you might call it is undoubtedly your goal. If atheists don't go around trying to 'convert' everyone that's possibly because we do in fact have more repect for other people's right to hold belief x than what you. I may think what a particular evangelical christian believes is nonsense (and ususally with very good reason may I add) but you won't see me round on his doorstep handing out pamphlets about atheism, reading to him from the book of athesim on his doorstep or telling him he will burn in atheist hell unless he mends his ways. So who exactly is being respectful/disrespectful here?

PDN

pH wrote: »

And as for you atheist jibe - provide me a link to a secular/humanist organisation that is withholding aid/charity until a group of people renounce all their religious beliefs and become atheists.

It was not a jibe, just a statement of fact. Many attempts at propagation of atheism in the past involved force and coercion (eg in the Soviet Union) and it is still occurring in China. Is it time for the One True Scotsman argument yet? ("That's not fair. Communists aren't real atheists). There are professing atheists, and professing Christians, who have behaved badly in the past and still do so in the present. Both display lack of respect. How can such an even-handed comment be interpreted as a jibe?

Scofflaw

Hmm. What I mean when I say I respect PDN's beliefs is that I have no intention of trying to convert PDN to my beliefs. If PDN puts forward a practical implication of his beliefs that I disagree with, I try to change his mind within the parameters of his beliefs. I would consider it disrespectful (and pointless) to simply say "well, you're wrong, because God doesn't exist".

In those terms, however, I cannot see how an evangelist can meaningfully claim to respect the beliefs of others.

cordially,
Scofflaw

PDN

aidan24326 wrote: »

A free choice? How on earth is it a free choice? You've filled the minds of vulnerable and probably poorly-educated people with the usual fairy tales and unsurprisingly they may latch onto it, coming as it does with these saviours from the first world who are also bringing water, food etc. This is bribery, coercion, manipulation, and all-round preying on the weak and vulnerable. Something organised religions have always been good at with the RC church long-time masters of the art. Why not just bring them food water etc. and leave their religious beliefs alone?** This is deliberate conversion dressed up as something more noble.

Thank you for providing such a good illustration of how some are unable to enter into a discussion about religion witout using pejorative language. The only way our medical missionaries could do their work without sharing their faith would be to lie through their teeth. This is because people always ask, "Why are you doing this?" Since our compassion is firmly grounded in our faith in Christ, we explain that we are living out our faith. If you want to provide food and water for poor people while leaving their religious beliefs alone then please do so! I would love to see some atheists getting out there and helping these people. How about it Aidan?

You can teach people how to do things better without invoking religion at all.

Then do so.

Examples? I know of no time in history when there was hordes of atheists travelling around the globe bullying everyone into abandoning the god de jour.

Maybe you need to read some Twentieth Century history? The Soviet Union, China, North Korea etc.

But take the issue of STI transmission in parts of Africa, the church teachings on contraception have been hugely harmful.

I'm not quite sure of the relevance of this. I've already made the very even-handed statement that borth Christian missionaries and atheist propagandists have behaved badly. I'm not quite sure why you want to pick a fight over Catholic teaching on contraception with a guy who distributes free condoms in Africa.

I disagree with Catholic teaching on contraception, but I think a lot of the criticism they take on this is overblown rhetoric. Certainly if Catholic leaders tell lies about condoms being infected with AIDS (as happened in Malawi) or attempt to block other agencies or governments from distributing contraceptives, then that would be very wrong and I would oppose it vehemently. But if Catholics simply choose not to distribute condoms while they are helping the poor in other ways then that is their perogative. They are still doing far more than armchair critics who couldn't really give a damn about poverty or AIDS in Africa but like to seize on this as a stick to beat the Catholic Church. If the Catholic Church teaches their members in Africa to abstain from using condoms and also from all extra-marital sex then, if followed, such teaching would dramatically reduce HIV infection.

Well there you go, you've admitted yourself that conversion to 'the one true faith' as you might call it is undoubtedly your goal. If atheists don't go around trying to 'convert' everyone that's possibly because we do in fact have more repect for other people's right to hold belief x than what you. I may think what a particular evangelical christian believes is nonsense (and ususally with very good reason may I add) but you won't see me round on his doorstep handing out pamphlets about atheism, reading to him from the book of athesim on his doorstep or telling him he will burn in atheist hell unless he mends his ways. So who exactly is being respectful/disrespectful here?

I have 100% respect for your right to hold whatever beliefs you want. I also respect the rights of others to hold, change or discuss their religious beliefs as these are a basic human right. I don't come to your doorstep or hand out leaflets to you - so maybe you should try listening to what people really think instead of imposing your stereotypes?

Scofflaw

PDN wrote: »

It was not a jibe, just a statement of fact. Many attempts at propagation of atheism in the past involved force and coercion (eg in the Soviet Union) and it is still occurring in China. Is it time for the One True Scotsman argument yet? ("That's not fair. Communists aren't real atheists). There are professing atheists, and professing Christians, who have behaved badly in the past and still do so in the present. Both display lack of respect. How can such an even-handed comment be interpreted as a jibe?

While I accept your right to bring up Soviet atheism every time someone uses the Inquisition against you (since they're equally inapplicable, and both relate to state control of the populace) - China has an official state religion, not atheism.

PDN wrote:

I have 100% respect for your right to hold whatever beliefs you want. I also respect the rights of others to hold, change or discuss their religious beliefs as these are a basic human right. I don't come to your doorstep or hand out leaflets to you - so maybe you should try listening to what people really think instead of imposing your stereotypes?

You're engaged in missionary work in Nigeria? Are you, or are you not, trying to convert people there to Christianity? How exactly do you see that as 'respecting' their beliefs?

cordially,
Scofflaw

PDN

Scofflaw wrote: »

You're engaged in missionary work in Nigeria? Are you, or are you not, trying to convert people there to Christianity? How exactly do you see that as 'respecting' their beliefs?

I see it as similar to introducing any new insight in any area of life. For example, when a sports coach introduces a new improved training technique, that does not mean he lacks respect for the methods already in existence.

Anyone promoting a new medical breakthrough is not thereby disrespecting previous medical practices - he is simply saying, "Look, here is something even better."

I see my missionary work as acknowledging the good things people are trying to achieve through their culture and religion, but then saying, "Here's a new way of looking at things that can help you honour your ancestors in an even better way." If they choose to reject it then that is fine. Nobody is forcing anything onto anyone else and we continue to provide medical care and condoms and they have a well pumping nice clean water instead of stagnant disease-ridden sludge.

I believe other religions represent man's best efforts to live at peace with God and with his fellow man. Some have worked better than others, but I believe I can bring something better. Now, no doubt a generous spirited Muslim or whatever may view my faith in a similar light, and that doesn't offend me in the slightest. I'm happy to discuss it with him in a respectful way and, so long as no-one rams their beliefs down anyone else's throat then we can respect one another.

Scofflaw

PDN wrote: »

I see it as similar to introducing any new insight in any area of life. For example, when a sports coach introduces a new improved training technique, that does not mean he lacks respect for the methods already in existence.

Anyone promoting a new medical breakthrough is not thereby disrespecting previous medical practices - he is simply saying, "Look, here is something even better."

I see my missionary work as acknowledging the good things people are trying to achieve through their culture and religion, but then saying, "Here's a new way of looking at things that can help you honour your ancestors in an even better way." If they choose to reject it then that is fine. Nobody is forcing anything onto anyone else and we continue to provide medical care and condoms and they have a well pumping nice clean water instead of stagnant disease-ridden sludge.

I believe other religions represent man's best efforts to live at peace with God and with his fellow man. Some have worked better than others, but I believe I can bring something better. Now, no doubt a generous spirited Muslim or whatever may view my faith in a similar light, and that doesn't offend me in the slightest. I'm happy to discuss it with him in a respectful way and, so long as no-one rams their beliefs down anyone else's throat then we can respect one another.

As you have explained it above, you have managed to leave out entirely the religious component of their practices. So, you would respect their worship of some genius loci in place of the Christian God? Or, a little further afield, you'd respect someone's belief in Shango as being on a par with your faith?



cordially,
Scofflaw

PDN

Scofflaw wrote: »

As you have explained it above, you have managed to leave out entirely the religious component of their practices. So, you would respect their worship of some genius loci in place of the Christian God? Or, a little further afield, you'd respect someone's belief in Shango as being on a par with your faith?

I would see it as being on a par with my faith in that they may be equally sincere, or that they have an equal right to hold such a belief. Obviously I believe them to be mistaken and I believe that I am right, but that is part and parcel of holding an opinion in any subject. Believing someone else's opinion to be wrong does not, for me, necessitate a lack of respect.

For example, I do not believe in the doctrine of Eternal Security (popularly known as Once saved Always Saved). But I respect those who hold to that doctrine and I respect their reasons for doing so. I interpret certain Bible verses differently, but I respect their interpretations as a valid point of view, even while engaging them in debate.

Scofflaw

PDN wrote: »

I would see it as being on a par with my faith in that they may be equally sincere, or that they have an equal right to hold such a belief. Obviously I believe them to be mistaken and I believe that I am right, but that is part and parcel of holding an opinion in any subject. Believing someone else's opinion to be wrong does not, for me, necessitate a lack of respect.

For example, I do not believe in the doctrine of Eternal Security (popularly known as Once saved Always Saved). But I respect those who hold to that doctrine and I respect their reasons for doing so. I interpret certain Bible verses differently, but I respect their interpretations as a valid point of view, even while engaging them in debate.

Hmm. Now, I would say that you do not in fact respect those beliefs, any more than I respect Creationist beliefs. I respect wolfsbane's sincerity, unquestionably, and I would fight for his right not to be oppressed for his bizarre beliefs, but I cannot allow him to hold those beliefs unchallenged.

On the other hand, I respect wolfsbane's Christian beliefs, so I prefer to argue with him on the basis of Christianity, and to frame my arguments within my understanding of his understanding of Christ's message, except when he asserts falsity about science.

So I would never say that I respect wolfsbane's Creationist beliefs, because I do not. I rather think the same applies to you and to non-Christian beliefs.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Dades

pH wrote: »

I still think that we're confusing the 2 meanings of the word respect. I certainly do not hold religion in high esteem, but the 2nd meaning 'to avoid interference with', in that sense do I respect religion?

This is probably the 'respect' most of us offer. An agreement to disagree, if you will.

And fwiw, PDN I'd much rather you kept up that work in Nigeria, even if it involves disrepecting their beliefs, which I have to say seems the case to me no matter how the words are mixed about.

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

For example, I do not believe in the doctrine of Eternal Security (popularly known as Once saved Always Saved). But I respect those who hold to that doctrine and I respect their reasons for doing so. I interpret certain Bible verses differently, but I respect their interpretations as a valid point of view, even while engaging them in debate.

I would agree with Scofflaw. You don't respect that belief, because you don't agree with it or believe in it. How then do you respect it?

You certain respect the people who do, but that is different.