Religion Discussing Religion

[No-name]

I am interested in what kind of ground rules could lead to more fruitful and respectful discussions regarding religion. (And yes, I know that I am one of the offenders in this area.) What kind of limits should be placed around the discussion of religion to keep it on topic? How do we seriously discuss belief systems that some are deeply attached to and others deeply hate without igniting the emotions that are just beneath the surface? What should be off limits?

 

[Revenant]

I don't know. I began on some very free-wheeling discussion forums, and simply got used to reading some very critical and often derogatory views of my beliefs at that time. I can only remember exchanging barbs once in all that time (it went on for two or three pages).

What I liked about this forum was that the discussions didn't get lost in ad hominems. An Atheist and a Christian could have a very civil discussion, and both strove to understand the other's point-of-view. At first I sort of attributed the more civil discussions to the demographics of this forum, and simply thought that it was the younger Atheists and less-well-thought-out Christians that made for the both boring and barb-filled discussions.

 

[No-name]

Thanks Revenent-
I appologize for my part in this mess. I seem to remember a forum where points of view were respected and honest discussion took place. I would like to do my part to clean it up. The $64,000 question is HOW? How do we limit or eliminate the critical and derogatory views? How do we get rid of offensive and rude behavior...the barbs, the ad hominem attacks...And return to some civil discussions where the goal is mutual understanding?

 

[nice gaijin]

I suggest a rule against obnoxious acronyms

I think a quality discussion doesn't base itself around the specifics of a religion, or even the validity of the claims surrounding its texts. I think I'd enjoy a discussion over the similarities of the different religions instead of why someone thinks they're all lies designed to control people.

 

[Reiku]

The problem is, some people genuinely find the beliefs of others to be offesive.

If I told you what I thought of the Christian god... :blush:

And it's not just a matter of casing prejudice aside, I have honest, well thought out opinions based on careful study of the information available to me that Christians would nevertheless find incredibly offensive.

It's like walking into somebody's fanclub and telling them why you don't like that person--you can't expect a tolerant reaction.

Maybe someday if I feel like dancing with the ban stick I'll explain my veiws on Jehova, but no matter how polite I am, it's going to offend the people who worship him.

 

[No-name]

Why would you feel the need to tell me what you thought of the Christian God if you knew it was offensive? I guess the question goes to motivation-- why do Athiests feel the need to "prove" God wrong? It is like some wierd reverse evangelism...There must be some way to discuss Christianity without offending Christians. We have to accomodate both sides... or else, how can Reiku be Reiku?

I do know quite a few Athiests and they don't generally offend me. Neither do their views or their humor. My brother and most of my sisters... a few really good friends-- we discuss religion all the time-- but they never ridicule or insult or say derogatory things...there is a respect there-- both ways.

The BIG question is how to accomplish this.

 

[Mars Man]

Well, I can't really say that I have any well thought out, rehearsed answer to this matter, although I would tend to think that we will always have some who can discuss such things in a mild, considerate manner (to the larger degree) and some who cannot--as humans are perhaps simply that way.

As to discussions on Jref, I would appeal for an academical approach. In that mode of discussion, regardless of the positions (pro or con) on a specific, the aim is more so to open the issue up and look at it from all the angles possible, reason on the make-up of it, and draw conclusions--and the conclusions drawn do not necessarily have to been framed so as to sentence a fellow discusser or the specific topic/matter being discussed.

What I have reasoned out, is what I have reasoned out, and is where I stand at any moment. I may be very convinced of the reality of my understanding, yet would not expect, nor attempt to force, it on those with whom the discussion involves--in most cases. (there may be a few, extinuation circumstances allowing my to do so for a particular person, with the agreement of that person, as best I understand it to be agreed to.)

This is what I would call an 'academic' mode of discussion, and is what I have been trying to apply most of the time since I join Jref--and I am not perfect either. I'd hope to hear other voices here too; and more from the Mods or Admin.

 

[scieck]

Atheist don't try to prove God wrong simply because by definition they don' t believe in the existence of one. Mostly they try to prove wrong religions that worship one.
On the other side often Christians think that a life without God or Religion is an empty gray life, why is that ?
Religion maybe everything to a Christian but there are other things out there that make life the beautiful thing that it is.
While on one side Christians often make feel Atheists as they are missing on something, Atheists make feel Christians like they are stack in the past or somehow less developed.
To start with we should try consciously to never make feel the other person less then ourself.

At the base of everything there must be respect for each other, one way to do this could be to always assume the person you're are talking to knows more than you do.

 

[Tsuyoiko]

At the base of everything there must be respect for each other

I think this is the key to it. I think honesty is crucial. We should not avoid saying things that may be seen as offensive if we believe in them, but we should always recognise that other people might not like what we say. Whenever I write a post, I always ask myself "Is it possible this might upset someone". If so, I try to include some comment that that is not my intention. If I do not anticipate the offence, I am quick to apologise. I also think it's important to back up what you say with evidence, then it's much harder for someone to take offence - I think this is similar to MM's academic approach. It's also important to consider your wording carefully, which goes hand-in-hand with the need for evidence. If I say "Only idiots believe in the human soul and the afterlife is a fairytale for babies", it's pretty obvious someone is going to be offended, and it makes me sound mean-spirited and bitter. If I say: "Neuroscience has proven to my satisfaction that there is no such thing as the human soul and no continued consciousness after death. Here is an article and a study and a link as proof." surely I am less likely to offend.

 

[No-name]

Thanks for the input. Scieck, I agree with the respect issue. I believe it is why people are offended when people "evangelize" on the street or walk up and knock on your door. It often comes off as almost an assault and people are offended. It is that aire of superiority, that thought that they think they know something about your life and what they need.

Some Athiests DO however try to prove God wrong, or disprove the Bible or Q'uran or Koran. (Just read through the titles) It is just as disrespectful and offensive. Statement that religious adherents are ignorant, immature, uninformed, uneducated, or somehow a homogenous unthing block are also offensive. They think by providing information (or in some cases ridicule) it will help the believer come to the world of reality. It is that same offensive aire of superiority. That same assumption about what you need in your life.

There are issues, I would argue any issue, that we can discuss with respect.

 

[Mycernius]

People need to THINK before they post. Something that some people seem not to do when either starting a thread or posting a reply. I find the best thing to do is sit back and frame a civilised reply. Leaping straight in and saying exactly what is on your mind leads to the confrontations that we have seen. If I just let my emotions reply to every post that annoys me, I will probably have a lot of red dots and the word banned under my username. Mars Mans approach is one of the better ways, but some people haven't got the acedemical knowledge and speak from their hearts and experiences. Poor use of humour can also cause problems. Once again, think "Would this upset my parents, brother, best friend etc?" If the answer is yes, then don't say it, or try to put it in a way that will not cause such offence. The subject of religion can cause strong emotions, but we are all rational people and should be above snide remarks and petty squabbling.

 

[No-name]

Mycernius- I am one that doesn't think before I post. I usually keep a JREF window open all the time and click in from time to time. If I do comment, it tends to be off the cuff... I do leap right in and say exactly what is on my mind... but never do I intentionally harass or say things of a derogatory nature. I find it difficult not to comment when I feel that someone is intentionally being rude, offensive and denegrating a person's faith (or race, nationality, belief system...)-- especially mine. When they begin to cross the line by making broad statements about all members of a faith (such as Muslims are all pedophiles, Christians drink children's blood...) I believe it is crossing the line from prejudice to bigotry someone does need to say something about it. It seem wrong to me to let intolerance or bigotry stand unopposed.

 

[Thor]

We can't discuss religion without getting emotional about it. I feel like the people who devoutly follow a religion seem to be idiots. They say everything is god's will, and that sort of thing. It's really annoying when someone comes to your door trying to get you to go to their church. There is no logic in it. It's like how we all bash scientology. It's based off of a book like christianity is. People just need to be more mature about it. Just talking about religion is causing conflict. kashii:

 

[Mitsuo]

I agree with Scieck about the whole respect issue too. Just respect someones beliefs and understand that they believe it for a reason. I find it ridiculous to argue over a religion or lack thereof. Just accept that people aren't always going to see it your way in any given situation. That's life. We all just need to deal with it.

Be mature and choose words carefully. Because it can be too hard to tell what someone is actually trying to say because of our inability to see one another and our reactions. Especially facial expressions.

and be as rational as you can.

 

[No-name]

What about athiests who insist that people who follow a religion seem to be idiots?

I don't think you are being fair. Now have you ever heard me say "everything is God's will?" or anything like that?

 

[bossel]

Some Athiests DO however try to prove God wrong, or disprove the Bible or Q'uran or Koran. (Just read through the titles) It is just as disrespectful and offensive.[...]
They think by providing information (or in some cases ridicule) it will help the believer come to the world of reality. It is that same offensive aire of superiority.

Disproving a holy book is probably disrespectful to someone who believes in that book, but why should anyone respect a book? What's more: Why should I respect it, when it seems so full of lies & deception?
I can respect a person who believes in such a book, but this respect ends where someone tells me that this book is off limits & no criticism allowed. If you really believe in such a book you should be able to cope with criticism.

Providing information which contradicts your holy book is not disrespectful at all. Withholding such information is much worse, IMO.

I feel like the people who devoutly follow a religion seem to be idiots.[...]
People just need to be more mature about it.

Now, how mature was that comment?

Just because the practice seems idiotic, doesn't mean that the people who practice are idiots.

 

[Tsuyoiko]

We can't discuss religion without getting emotional about it. I feel like the people who devoutly follow a religion seem to be idiots. They say everything is god's will, and that sort of thing. It's really annoying when someone comes to your door trying to get you to go to their church. There is no logic in it. It's like how we all bash scientology. It's based off of a book like christianity is. People just need to be more mature about it. Just talking about religion is causing conflict. kashii:

At the risk of causing offence (ironically!), I think this post is a good example of how not to discuss religion - it includes generalisations (the people, they say, we all), pejorative language (idiots, bash) and it does not practise what it preaches (logic, maturity). I do think there is a good point made in the final sentence though.

 

[scieck]

Some Athiests DO however try to prove God wrong....

I know for Christians the Bible is the word of God, and therefore trying to proving it wrong is like trying to prove wrong God, but for an Atheist is really just trying to prove wrong a man made script.

I feel like the people who devoutly follow a religion seem to be idiots....

I totally agree with Bossel and Tsuyoiko regarding the above comment,
however what Thor maybe referring to is the fact that some time religious people come across as deeply in love people, and therefore slightly irrational when it comes to matters that regard their love.
The problem is the misconception that highly logic and rational people have in regard to the not so rational and logic people, often to logic people less logic people come across as less intelligent.
What highly logic people often overlook is that is from irrationality that the spark of genius is born.
Who would you say was more intelligent on Star Trek, Kirk or Spock ?

 

[Thor]

At the risk of causing offence (ironically!), I think this post is a good example of how not to discuss religion - it includes generalisations (the people, they say, we all), pejorative language (idiots, bash) and it does not practise what it preaches (logic, maturity). I do think there is a good point made in the final sentence though.

The words I chose in that post would have offended someone no matter how I put it. "The practice seems idiotic" would have upset someone just as much as what I posted would. It's all about how you interpret it. Like the bible is a religious object to one group of people, and it's a fictional book to another. In my personal opinion, the the contents of the bible are just guidlines to living your life. It's just common sense once you really think about it.

 

[Revenant]

'Some religioius beliefs seem highly irrational and illogical to me, such as......' as opposed to 'I feel like the people who devoutly follow a religion seem to be idiots....' In that, it is less personal, and more focused on the beliefs, and it doesn't use words that are quite so loaded with negative meanings.