Starboy

Biff, I agree with you. People who ignore the atrocities, lies and power grabs by Christians by rationalizing it as a matter of self-esteem have serious issues. If Anitra thinks that there is not something seriously wrong with the way that a large group of Christians are behaving today then she is in denial.

Starboy

Anitra

I think that is what is needed in all directions. I've found, talking with a lot of conservative Christians over the past few years, that they aren't a monolithic block either. I've found that friendly dialogue is in fact possible with a great many of them. There are a few that would bite the hand of St. Francis himself, with whom all you can do is calmly hold your ground, give up trying to have a social exchange. But it is possible to bridge the "culture wars."

We are never going to all agree with each other about everything. Personally, I don't think it would be good for human progress if we did. We do have to find a way to work with people we don't agree with.

Anitra

Have either one of you ever actually read anything I've said?
http://anitra.net/activism/fundamentalism/

Understanding why someone does as they do is a necessary part of solving the problem. It is not ignoring what they do. It is not minimizing it. It is not excusing it.

But to disassociate for what you disapprove of, to say, "Those bad people are nothing like me," and anathematize them (by long distance, anonymously, over the internet) is cheap virtue and cheap heroism. It doesn't take much work, and it accomplishes little either.

What have either of you actually done in the flesh to improve conditions in the world? For that matter, what would "improved conditions" be, to you? What are you FOR?

Starboy

I am glad for you. As I said, such conditions do not exist everywhere. But they do exist. There are many personal stories of victims of such Christian behavior on these boards just as there are many personal stories on these boards such as yours. The fact that even the president is behaving in an intolerant fashion in some cases in direct conflict to his oath of office to uphold the constitution should be alarming to everyone.

Starboy

Starboy

I guess that is the whole point Anitra. These bad people are not like me. I am not doing what they are doing. I am not trying to impose my beliefs on them. I am not ignoring the constitution. I am not scaring the shit out of people with the offer you can't refuse. This is the entire point. You want to see the good in everyone. That is a very maternal point of view. Don't get me wrong, if it will work, great. But guess what, it is not working. Maybe it will take ridiculing and belittling and harassing them back to open their eyes to the ridiculing and belittling and harassment they have been dishing out for millennia. These are not live and let live people Anitra. They (you know what).

Starboy

Anitra

What I consider hysterically funny is that I don't believe a damn thing you just credited to me, I argue with conservative Christians about those very things at great length, and therefore you have just been spreading "fraud and delusion" yourself.

It's as good as any irony-joke on Frasier.

If you consider those sentiments are offensive and demeaning, then even if I did believe them, you would still be morally culpable if you practiced them yourself. The actions of anyone else do not let you off your own moral hook. You are not responsible for the way other people act. You are ALWAYS responsible for the way you act.

Anitra

Thanks. I'm glad somebody does.

Of course. And I did not say that you shouldn't share your perspective. But there is a difference between saying, "This is the way it looks to me," or "I was in a situation like that and this is what I did," and saying, "You aren't thinking straight and you can't see what's in front of your nose. I'm going to tell you what's what and what to do and you are going to do it. It's for your own good."

I think that all we need is to remember that our understanding of reality is not reality-itself. All that any of us has is a model inside our heads. All that any of us can say is, "This is what I perceive; This is what I think." If we stick to that, we are always being honest. If we stick to that, we are always providing each other feedback, yet allowing each other to make our own decisions.

We are all standing in the same room, seeing it from different perspectives, comparing notes.

I agree. I am a freethinker; that's why I am on this forum. Never be afraid to perceive, think, feel, or say anything at all; and never make anyone else afraid to do so.

My husband likes to say that intelligence is the proper management of stupidity. The more you know that you don't know, the smarter you are. To passionately seek truth is to passionately seek your own error and ignorance, all the things you know that ain't so.

In traditional Judaism, doubt was the greatest servant of God.

Anitra

Everybody in the world is like you, Starboy. We are all capable of the greatest good; if we were not, we could not be held accountable for doing wrong. Is the tornado morally culpable for tearing up houses? We are all capable of the greatest evil; if we were not, we would get no credit for doing good. If you gave no choice but to be tolerant, do you have anything to be proud of when you are tolerant?

But none of us is either good or bad as persons. Our ideas, our values, our actions can be good or bad. Not people. people just are. We are not our ideas, our emotions, or our actions. If we were, we could not change them. We would be locked into them, and therefore not responsible for them.

If you want somebody to change, you have to consider them capable of changing. You have to not identify them with their actions, and lock them into that pattern. You have to see an opponent as an ally-in-process, in order to have a chance if making him an ally. You have to see yourself in him, and him in you.

You seem to think that if I deny that everyone in a group is destructive, I am denying that anyone in the group is destructive. That if I deny that a person is 100% outside-the-pale, I am saying that they are 100% acceptable. That if something is not 100% wrong, then it is 100% right. That is black and white thinking. It is irrational.

Nobody on earth has been dishing out ridicule and bellittling and harrassment for millennia. None of us live that long.

Nor does ridicule and harassment and belittling work well in changing people. There is a use for humor and satire, but that isn't what you are using. The usefulness of sarcasm, insult, and rant is pretty much for its effect on the people who already agree with you.

Ridiculing your opponents is simply laziness. Dialogue takes some real emotional and intellectual effort. Results vary in proportion to the effort.

Godless Wonder

How else to increase the number of athests? Deconversion? Good luck. Killing the theists? No, of course not. So what's left? I suppose cloning could be one non-obvious answer.
No, it's exactly the same. Lack of evidence. The cause for deconversion may different, but for someone raised without any indoctrination, religion is just silly. As silly as leprechauns.

Starboy

I am not asking you to deny anything. I am wondering why you are defending it.

Anitra, ever heard of tradition? If Christians published a radically new bible every year you might have a point. There are core traditions and practices that have been passed on for millennia and some of these traditions are awful. The thing you must come to grips with is that it is not the kind practices that condemns a tradition, it is the awful practices.

Starboy