In Preparation for August

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Yes, I think basically I do.

Excellent, then you and I, imo, have just had a model exchange of ideas within a debate forum without insulting each other's person.

🙂

Originally posted by josephw
I take you're apposed to the idea of extending a general rule of positivism and respect for fellow posters on the basis of having a different belief system?!

No one is saying you can't disagree with their beliefs. The main point is to not make personal attacks with rude and derogatory remarks about the person with whom you are debating.

Given that I hold that mocking a silly conception of God is not the same as mocking a person who has been indoctrinated into believing said God exists, then I argue that usually I am quite respectful to other posters.

If someone says something stupid then I will say it is stupid, and then try to show them why (intelligent people often believe in stupid things). The very essence of my stance towards your god is such that to expand upon it will undoubtedly be seen as disrespectful to someones notion of God.

Originally posted by vivify
I'm asking for ONE month on ONE forum. Would not flinging an insult on someone you've never met or even seen for 31 days really hurt that much?

You didn't just say insult someone though did you. You also said in so many words that we can't "insult God" neither.

Not insulting people is doable, not insulting a stupid idea is not.

Originally posted by JS357
On Will Durant:

quote:

A “reluctant” atheist, Will Durant’s conclusions on Christianity and religion, articulated in a gentle satirical style in his “Story of Civilization” and “Lessons of History,” provide a formidable and authentic view by which one may learn, and possibly understand, the atheistic “persuasion” regarding disbelief in God. This historic ...[text shortened]... eave their religious beliefs about history or science at the door when doing history or science.

It seemed to suffice that he was respected thus qualifying for googlefudges prerequisites of 'any respected historian'. What his religious disposition is is of little concern, its the content that is of interest. I did not include the full passage although it makes for compelling reading and for a reluctant atheist he seems possessed of an objectivity that would mark him as an excellent chess player, objectivity being paramount at all times.

If one is persuaded that the relationship that exists between religion and the state is an evidence for the non belief in God then it takes some explaining of why it should be considered so.

Originally posted by Agerg
Given that I hold that mocking a silly conception of God is not the same as mocking a person who has been indoctrinated into believing said God exists, then I argue that usually I am quite respectful to other posters.

If someone says something stupid then I will say it is stupid, and then try to show them why. The very essence of my stance towards your god ...[text shortened]... such that to expand upon it will undoubtedly be seen as disrespectful to someones notion of God.

Some do take offence when they hear things that are contrary to what they believe. I think that happens when that one is insecure in their beliefs.

Personally, although it grieves me to hear one say things about the one I love, I understand their point of view however misguided it may be. In such cases I consider it incumbent upon me to help them see the error of their ways. 😉

Insulting them isn't helpful.

Originally posted by Agerg
You didn't just say insult [b]someone though did you. You also said in so many words that we can't "insult God" neither.

Not insulting people is doable, not insulting a stupid idea is not.[/b]

I think you're right in as much as I must allow you that much room to express your thoughts and feelings about something you consider wrong.

It's certainly not an insult to me, but to the one you think doesn't exist. I say that knowing full well you don't believe it's true. I would assume you have the intelligence not to take offence at that. It's a strange debate!

Originally posted by josephw
Some do take offence when they hear things that are contrary to what they believe. I think that happens when that one is insecure in their beliefs.

Personally, although it grieves me to hear one say things about the one I love, I understand their point of view however misguided it may be. In such cases I consider it incumbent upon me to help them see the error of their ways. 😉

Insulting them isn't helpful.

Well then if they take offence at hearing things contrary to what they believe then the onus is on them to defend it, or question whether they are in fact mistaken. Not petition that we keep our mouths shut!

Originally posted by Agerg
Well then if they take offence at hearing things contrary to what they believe then the onus is on them to defend it, or question whether they are in fact mistaken. Not petition that we keep our mouths shut!

Of course! There's no debate when we keep our mouths shut, or when we are censored. Unless there are rules of debate that we can agree on. Like making any ad hominem type remarks or personally derogatory statements about one's character.

Let's hammer this one home!

Originally posted by Agerg
You didn't just say insult [b]someone though did you. You also said in so many words that we can't "insult God" neither.

Not insulting people is doable, not insulting a stupid idea is not.[/b]

Why? You can still say the same things about their deity without being disrespectful. You can point out all the murders in the bible without throwing an insult. Pointing out morally dubious actions is enough.

For example, if I say "God killed the first born of Egypt, even though those first born didn't do anything to deserve being murdered", or "even though those first born probably included children", that's not disrespectful, is it?

God commanded that women be stoned for not being virgins when they're married. That's an evil act.

^ See? I didn't insult their god, I simply pointed out something about their god's actions. This is a more constructive way to debate anything. Since when has throwing insults ever helped advance a discussion anyway?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It seemed to suffice that he was respected thus qualifying for googlefudges prerequisites of 'any respected historian'. What his religious disposition is is of little concern, its the content that is of interest. I did not include the full passage although it makes for compelling reading and for a reluctant atheist he seems possessed of an objectiv ...[text shortened]... dence for the non belief in God then it takes some explaining of why it should be considered so.

Go and find where I said "any respected historian" in my post.

When you fail to find any such statement from me, you might want to reconsider the effectiveness of your argument.

To help you out I'll even post the relevant sentence here again...

The historical evidence as properly analysed by a qualified historian indicates that the
stories were overwhelmingly likely to be entirely fiction.

Properly analysed means using Bayesian reasoning.

Only one historian has thus far done a Bayesian analysis of the evidence for a historical Christ.
And he started off believing that a historical Christ was more probable than not, and has no skin
in the result as it makes no difference to the validity of his atheism [or mine] whether Christ was
historical or not. As opposed to Christian scholars who have a great deal of motivation to find Christ
to be historical.
The result is a finding that Christ was very probably entirely fictional [mythical] and not historical.

YouTube&hd=1

Originally posted by vivify
Why? You can still say the same things about their deity without being disrespectful. You can point out all the murders in the bible without throwing an insult. Pointing out morally dubious actions is enough.

For example, if I say "God killed the first born of Egypt, even though those first born didn't do anything to deserve being murdered", or "even ...[text shortened]... ay to debate anything. Since when has throwing insults ever helped advance a discussion anyway?

Did you read Suzianne's post to me?

You cannot say that the god of the bible is evidently immoral and evil [as well as fictional]
without it being taken as insulting and disrespectful by someone.

As it is true that the god of the bible is immoral and evil and fictional, and that those are important
points in many of the discussions here, it is thus not possible to hold such debates without being
seen as disrespectful or insulting.

And frankly, I don't appreciate being told that it's wrong for me to be hostile to people who tell me that
their god is going to murder me or torture me for eternity and unless I 'repent' and kiss their gods ass
before that happens I will deserve it. When that is the message they give me, why the hell should I
be polite to those that think I deserve to die/be tortured????

I'm sorry, their beliefs are irrational, evil, dangerous, and fictional.

And the whole "lets not offend anyone" bit would prevent me from saying so.

Never going to happen.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Absolutely.

Then in my opinion at least, if you direct your statement at someone you've insulted them
be it directly or not. As I said we can go after ideas, but to tie them to someone as you
insult the idea would be just like calling them a name directly.

Originally posted by vivify
Checkbaiter, you someone who seems as genuine about their faith (peace, love, kindness, etc.) as you is great to see. You've been very a pleasant fellow.

Thank you, I give God all the glory...you didn't know me 35 years ago..😛
But just being civil is not , I hope, too much to ask of anyone.
I also commend you and Kelley for starting this, it has been long time coming.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Did you read Suzianne's post to me?

You cannot say that the god of the bible is evidently immoral and evil [as well as fictional]
without it being taken as insulting and disrespectful by someone.

As it is true that the god of the bible is immoral and evil and fictional, and that those are important
points in many of the discussions here, it is ...[text shortened]... he whole "lets not offend anyone" bit would prevent me from saying so.

Never going to happen.

I agree with you that with some topics it is going to be difficult not to insult since people
wrap themselves in some of them, me being one of them. That however does not stop you
from making the effort does it? Does trying mean as soon as someone else gets offended
that you now are off the hook or does it show them thin skinned? No one here is going to
be able to pull this off perfectly, should that stop us from making the attempt?

Originally posted by KellyJay
I agree with you that with some topics it is going to be difficult not to insult since people
wrap themselves in some of them, me being one of them. That however does not stop you
from making the effort does it? Does trying mean as soon as someone else gets offended
that you now are off the hook or does it show them thin skinned? No one here is going to
be able to pull this off perfectly, should that stop us from making the attempt?

Your post is dealing with a question of 'how' one might post without being 'offensive, disrespectful etc'

But doesn't deal with 'why' I/anyone should be respectful to people, and towards posts, who/that tell
me that I deserve to be murdered/tortured?

I have never had any satisfactory answer to that question.