Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually I also agree people have the right to mock other people's beliefs. I was saying things against doing it, but that's a matter of what I think is proper or sensible or socially acceptable. I wasn't speaking of rights. It's like people have the right to celebrate if a politician gets assassination. And others have the right to think people who do that are scum to be shunned.
I mean I know what you, stillkit, probably mean I just know sometimes when "rights" talk comes in people can become confused. I don't deny that atheists are free to scorn or unfairly demean religions as it's free speech. The other side of that is theists have the right to disrespect or demean atheists. As long as neither gets to the point of threats or abuse or anything illegal.
(Granted this may not apply much outside the US as many nations have "hate speech laws" but I think in most of them for it to be "hate speech" it has to be more than just scorn.)
However having the right to a thing isn't the same as having to do it or saying it's a good idea. I think in most modern nations people have the right to smoke cigarettes, commit adultery with their mother-in-law, or tattoo a swear word on their forehead. Doesn't mean those are good or reasonable ideas.
Yes, on a philosophical and legal level, people do have the free speech right to be obnoxious and insulting. I would never deny anyone his free speech rights. But, as you point out, just because you can doesn't mean you should.
But, I'd have to somewhat disagree with you on this:
"The other side of that is theists have the right to disrespect or demean atheists."
I can't say about other "theists'," but Christian's don't have that right. We are commanded to love our fellow man as we love ourselves and insulting, belittling or condemning another person is not an act of love.
I find worrying this impression over the thread that is being given that Loving someone, and making a mockery of their opinions are somehow mutually exclusive. It is for the very reason that we do love and respect our fellow man that we very much should demean bad ideas and make a mockery of them. We have many faculties with which to deal with lies, bad ideas and mistakes, and humor is one of them. We have the faculty… the gift if you want… of humor. I very much intend to use it when effective or meaningful to do so.
So you think you should have the right to mock anothers beliefs? I wonder how that shoe would fit on your foot?
But, you go right on and do that. I think I'll pass.
If it is worth mocking, yes but I will admit, to spare the sensitive feelings of [even] people I don't even know, I try to be as tactful and diplomatic as I can be. The most I would probably do is toss in a little sarcasm.
Well, to be honest, I don't have too many wild, off the wall, faith based beliefs that I have no evidence for so I'm not sure about that shoe.
I find worrying this impression over the thread that is being given that Loving someone, and making a mockery of their opinions are somehow mutually exclusive. It is for the very reason that we do love and respect our fellow man that we very much should demean bad ideas and make a mockery of them. We have many faculties with which to deal with lies, bad ideas and mistakes, and humor is one of them. We have the faculty… the gift if you want… of humor. I very much intend to use it when effective or meaningful to do so.
There are plenty of calm, dispassionate, polite ways to refute a silly idea. Resorting to ridicule and mockery aren't two of them. When we stoop that level, the intent isn't to debate, but to shame and hurt another, or to make ourselves appear to be somehow superior. In reality, though, it's just self-righteous grandstanding.
However, it's not surprising it's common here. It's common EVERYWHERE these days. In fact, it seems to be the coin of the realm in political discourse, so why not here too?
There are plenty of calm, dispassionate, polite ways to refute a silly idea.
Not always. It depends on the idea. There is no general rule. You have to take each idea as it comes and formulate the best way to proceed with it. Sometimes mockery is the most effective and useful course of action.
With many ideas, dealing with them any other way could in fact have negative consequences such as to make it appear the idea you are dealing with is in fact more plausible than it actually is.
Take the debate between creationists and evolution for example. Creationists simply have no evidence, nor are they offering any. Their entire approach is to attack evolution on the false assumption that if evolution is wrong they are right be default.
Yet when a creationist and evolution scientist enter into a debate on stage or on some kind of media... it gives the very false impression that creationism is coherent or in some way valid... when all it actually is is ludicrous. It creates an impression of false equivocation between they positions. Catholic Scientist and Lecturer Kenneth Miller for example has realized this and now refuses to debate creationists because no matter how stupid their arguments... the mere fact they got into a debate with an esteemed scientists benefits them greatly.
Their ideas are comical. Mocking them is the best approach. Any other approach gives the impression of a false validity to their claims where none exists. In fact mockery is the ONLY approach given their lack of evidence. If they present no evidence.. there is nothing to discuss coherently. So discourse on the level you are touting is simply not possible.
If it is worth mocking, yes but I will admit, to spare the sensitive feelings of [even] people I don't even know, I try to be as tactful and diplomatic as I can be. The most I would probably do is toss in a little sarcasm.
Well, to be honest, I don't have too many wild, off the wall, faith based beliefs that I have no evidence for so I'm not sure about that shoe.
To clarify how this thread got started, here is Thinking-man's previous thread. The issue in question started with Boompa's, post, the last one on page 1
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
