Ending Hate Against People of Faith on this Forum

Post Reply New Topic

There are a few instigators whom I have happily pointed out. There are those who just love to antagonize and instigate, these are the pathological arses..

There are those of faith whom do also discriminate but that is a coincidence. There are many who are of faith who do not. Ending discrimination begins with not doing it, not supporting those who do so and not laughing at put downs like some people do here.

When speaking about religion and those of faith it is always respectful by my readings to be balanced. IF you have a negative opinion, try to balance it out with a positive.

Blaming all Christians for one or more deeds and or discriminations is just as bad as discriminating against them unjustly for the acts of a few. Why not be subjective, I believe it's time for people to at least try to be less hateful and those who refuse because of hate knowing them as haters and even cowards.

Cowards are people who sit behind there screen a purposely try to make fun of others without good cause, just to cause problems.

So enough with it.. I've spent enough time trying to point out the social injustices on this forum having to do with this the last few days, now it's other peoples turn to make the change so everyone can feel welcome. People of belief have left this forum due to a few people here just consistently antagonizing them. As I said and as I now ask kindly, enough with it, stop putting down your peers for believing certain ways.

A few things.

First up I agree that there is a fair amount of christian bashing. And I think it's stupid.

Second, I'd hardly call the Christian side completely the victims here. I've heard that side say some antagonistic things as well.

Third, a significant number of the people hacking down the Christians are only doing it to provoke a reaction. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't even care one way or another, they just like making people angry. Don't buy into it.

Fourth, this seems to primarily be a Christian vs Athiest thing. There are more faiths, and in less binary forms. On the other hand, the argument seems to be between two sides that are absolutely convinced they are right, and that this rightness justifies using "The Truth" as a hammer. Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Arabs, Pagans, Followers of Squiggy, groups I've missed, they don't seem to get involved in these issues here on the forums. That's probably though that there aren't that many, and those that are here are either more open minded or smart enough to realize that it's a pointless debate.


I mean really, all these things ever end up being is "God Exists!" "No he doesn't!" "You're an idiot!" "No you are!"

Next time this comes up, I want to see something strange and interesting come in there. Like God as String Theory, The Universe as God, Humanity as God, or the Superiority of Squiggy to all other faiths.

Actually you know what, I'm just going to go with that last one. This is such a farce that I may as well throw in farce religions. And to whatever twits are going to post that all religions are a farce I just want to say congradulations, not only are you being offensive and stupid, but lazy. Because come on, that's a pretty easy cheap shot there folks.

Yes, I've seen this. It doesn't take long to recognize the offenders, and it's pretty simple not to take the bait. No one is going to abandon belief in either religion or science as a result of a few words exchanged on a forum.



I agree. Meaningful dialogue can't exist where there is no agreement on fundamental premises, or the basic rules of logical arguement As long as either side believes completely that they know the Word of God, or that science has disproved that there is such a thing, such discussions will inevitably deteriorate into insult; there's simply no where else to go.

i thought this place was meant for discusions of AS and autistic characteristics,making friends with people and life in general, in fact this place is for NT'S too, fair enough give your opinions but not on religion ! ! it causes too much trouble and hurt, i'm agnostic , but i really couln't care less what religion a person is , wrong planet is not the place to discuss religion in my opinion .
Some advice to anyone who is being antagonised by a certain individual for no apparent reason: be the better person, turn the other cheek!

The argument that God does not exists is entirely invalid. God exists in the mind at least, as a conditioned or "programmed" existence sub-consciously. So to a believer God exists and plays an active role in what has been consumed \ processed \ learned with teachings.

Well, that's an over-easy dismissal, surely!?

The *idea* of God may exist in the mind, But that does not necessarily convey any existence to the entity conceived. I can imagine any number of things that do not exist.

(and to even this out, that I cannot conceive of something does not refute its existence.)


Two points, or three.

Before entering a debate likely to be polemic, check to see if there is a possible benefit to outweigh the inevitable negative elements.

The first person to shout, use insults or ad hominem attacks loses.

Be careful to separate out respect for the person from the standing of their views.
Why should a belief be sacrosanct because it is held?
But who has perfect beliefs on which to hang their dignity and whole being?
Anyone saying "I am absolutely right beyond any possibility of error"
is just asking for a world of trouble.



Chris, Ex-Christian, now atheist.

Second time I have written this reply due to a net stall.

I suppose to have A.S or a form of autism, why should you not be picked at for being the way you are. There are intellectual ways of speaking about it, then there is the trash talk from the instigators. There is a clear differentiation.

Ultimately I think of a God belief as beneficial to man-kind even with the negatives. So why not view this same topic in social evolutionary terms.

If a believer is taught to be good, neighborly and all that sort of stuff he is sort of self-policed. He or she is likely to get in less trouble, assist others and do community services which enrich the community as a whole.

The negatives are what others disagree with, this is where the hate seems to be respondent to. Still though what is disagreed upon is not relevant to the whole of them. There are liberal Christians as well, but not that they are much liked by right wingers beyond essential similarities presumptively.

There are gay Christians as well and Christians who disagree with certain churches that promote commonly disagreeable politics.


Does god exist or not exist?

Within the mind and the group of those whom it does, it does. I do not think God is supposed to be a physical thing, so really its a reality which is chosen by the individual to be part of there mind.

There is no validity in saying God does not exist totally, as what is manifested of a God or The God in idea is within the minds. It would be like saying you do not exist becuase your mind has no physical proof, it just is and thinks.

The hidden (what is not seen of God) is mind, just as you are within such physical atributes which manifest in the here and now. God then is a psychologically compartmentalized idea within the mind in some ways.

God must exist just as your mind thinks...Just differently then the literal assuption that "god, God" is an external thing.

On the whole I'd agree with you. The style of the response is usually revealing.
Sometimes what is revealed is the difference in assumptions, which may be bridgable, but a gulf due to lack of respect is best simply walked away from.

This would be something close to what Levi-Strauss has proposed: "necessary myths"
It's not too difficult to see how it works within a given community PROVIDED there is a high level of consensus or belief. Good and evil are defined, and society's aims codified.

Here the requirement for the beliefs or values to be true, judged externally, is secondary, though ones that are too non-functional may be self-eliminating. (excessive celibacy, child sacrifice, or perhaps the rituals and warfare of the Easter Islanders)

But to work well, the beliefs need not to be taken as contingent ("we believe this, but the other lot over the mountain believe something else, that's how it is.") but as true. Why else would anyone commit to them, even when inconvenient or costly?
("This is what we happen to believe" is not a great rallying standard or battle cry)

And when one set of assumed values meets another set, conflict is almost inevitable.
Modern travel and communication has changed the scope of this problem immensely. Confined to one's familiar village/county/country, it was easier to feel that local beliefs were universal truths. This can still crop up, oddly, as "groupthink" in strongly self-reinforcing and policing organisations such as corporations or political parties.

That will do nicely as an example. Each sub-community of belief can exist in relative harmony, but not all the divergent beliefs can. And the degree to which tolerance of diversity is a virtue is itself a belief variably held!

Ah. (Different set of assumptions noted: bridging will be attempted. Let us see if common ground exists)

"I do not think God is supposed to be a physical thing" is exactly the reverse of what I would say. To believe in a God that did not exist external to the thought would be the very epitomy of a false belief. An assertion of something that was not so.

That the belief exists is something else, and if it exists commonly in a community it will have a value and a force. That, to me, doesn't mean the God exists at all. That would have to be determined on other grounds.

The believed culture and custom doesn't have to be theological for this to apply. The long-lived practice of blood-letting in medicine might be an example.

That has actually been proposed, one way and another... (From Bishop Berkeley to "the physical world as illusion" in some eastern thought)

I can take that as ONE concept of God, but would then insist there are others as well.
The idea that the essence of God is "The God who is there" is taken from the Christian bible.
The basic definition of the Judeo-Christian God is not a list of characteristics or preferences but "I AM", and that does not, surely, refer to just the idea in any individual or group's head.

It is an external concept, which is either true or not.

Noting the variance in beliefs, and the social implications of that, there I have no trouble.
(even, intellectually, with the concept that some would want me dead for apostasy.)
But to say God may exist in your mind, but does not in mine, is not (to my mind!) a particularly useful way of approaching that.

Intended with respect, and posted as fair game for criticism and rebuttal...
Yours,
Chris.

I could speak about how delusion as a concept is viewed when mind believes there are external hidden things. Delusion from my reading, which was extensive for about a week, will conflict directly in psychopathology with the core beliefs of the religious or simply spiritual minded supernatural believer.

The presentation of course left out some things of study and attempted to find a balance.

sc, I saw the rather rabid way you attacked emp. Granted, he provoked you with his talks of celebrating "Satan day", and should be taken down a peg or two. But shouldn't you turn the other cheek?

It may depend on which cheek you're thinking of. Personally, I take the view that one turns the other cheek in order to moon your enemy better.

I do not think you are deluded (and neither is emp), I just think you are reactionary to any suggestion of attack on your faith.

sc -- you talk about being respectful, but the fact of the matter is that Christians are NOT respectful. They publish thousands of copies of a book that call homosexuals an "abomination" and advocates that they be KILLED!! The book also denigrates women and treats them as second-class citizens, and it describes raping virgin girls and killing babies in a positive light, and it say hundreds of other clearly immoral things. What book is this? The Christian Bible. Demanding respect when you publish/support/revere such an obscene and unethical book... that is a farce.

Stop publishing such a clearly unethical book, and then maybe Christians would become worthy of some respect. Until such time as Christians stop revering this horrible immoral book, demanding respect is just being hypocritical.

Basically, it is like you walked up to a homosexual and said, "You're an abomination". Then the homosexual does not respect you, and then you complain about it!! It is your own fault. You bring it upon yourself. You cannot credibly demand respect when you are not respectful yourself.

Christians ought to be ashamed of themselves for their long history of depravity and unethical behavior.

Emp just attacks and attacks..

I do not do the cheek philosophy.. I am not a Christian, I just know words to fit in. It's like watching haters just attack people verbally and watching it happen, I spoke out and it was good.

Emp, go to hell.. Well he does want to...

Wally, that does not make sense. YOU created this thread attacking me and calling me a coward. I am just defending myself here. I have responded to your attack with logical and rational reasoning.


I do not know what to say to that because it is mostly incomprehensible / incoherent.

Stop playing dumb you doof. You know what your doing... Stop being silly dumb with your logic by convienance which is just consistant discrimination targeting people here.

People know about it, people have told me, your one dumb rock or some sociopathic vindictive individual.

Calling me "one dumb rock" is not going to be very effective in making people see your point of view.

As Emettman already said in this thread, "The first person to shout, use insults or ad hominem attacks loses."

According to a dictionary, "ad hominem" means "Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason".

You lose.

No you have, you have insulted people here for months...

Sorry manipulator, people know you for what you have done.

I'm just putting attention to it..

Social butt kicking begins with me and some common sense regarding the foe, not some social strategy to be light hearted against people like yourself which disgrace others so consistently.

Perhaps you should go join a club for the management of anal retentiveness concerning the majority of human kind.

Really you just make stuff up and expect people to believe your hate, like racial bigots do so convincingly to have so many people believe the hog-wash. What you need from people is a good harsh tone to put you in your place, ya silly wally wanker.


I hope your embarressed about yourself, enough to where you might apologise and explain your deep rooted hatred towards people.