HelenM

Ok, is it moral to deliberately press someone's hot buttons? Which in this context (I think!) means, to deliberately set out to provoke, insult, offend, upset someone?

(Meaning, is it socially acceptable behavior?)

love
Helen

Darkside_Spirit

Ahhhh, David Mathews demonstrating the universal love for everyone that he's taken such pains to announce!

How touching

brighid

I do not think it is wrong, per say to deliberately attempt to push someone’s buttons in order to elicit a response. In some cases it can be argued to be necessary to help someone see the error of their ways. However, in the case of Mr. Matthews who, after 700 and some posts admits he is doing it for no other purpose then to enrage atheists because he has desires to reinforce his image of the “angry, hateful” atheist and then says – AH ….see you are angry, etc (and self-righteously and fallaciously declares victory). when he SPECIFICALLY took action knowing it would stir up trouble … well I consider this to be hypocritical and hypocrisy is the worst of all vices in my opinion. He is deflecting his own feelings of anger, intolerance and bigotry upon the atheist so he doesn’t have to look at this own actions and how they are responsible for how others react to him. It would be much more difficult to see the atheist as a human being, with all the same problems, joys and pains as Christian human beings. If he were to admit that we are just like everyone else it might cause him to reflect upon his own situation and perhaps discover a need to change and improve. This is often a very difficult and painful task for someone to undertake.

Your treatment on this board is the perfect example of how patience, understanding and tolerance between theist and atheist are possible, workable and real. You are treated with respect because you extend respect. One reaps what one sows and when one sows a crop of garbage filled with arrogance, discord, anger and disgust one cannot expect to reap a crop of sweet smelling roses, or to be treated with anything less then has been given. Although, as we know even when people do react calmly, rationally and respectfully those who do not wish to engage in civil discussion will find any excuse to dance around and ignore the issues, and continue in a manner not conducive to civil discourse.

I think the hypocrisy of this situation is worsened by the fact that Mr. Matthews claims to adhere to the alleged superior moral high ground of Christianity and desires to prove to himself, the atheist and any one watching that atheists are indeed depraved and sorry souls rebelling against his version of the Christian God. His words are hollow, superficial and obsequious. He says his God speaks to him and has given him personal dominion over the souls of those in this forum and by this proclamation you would think that this perfect God would have filled him with some integrity, dignity, respect and ability to see, think and act in a manner befitting one possessed of the spirit of the superior God. His actions have demonstrated that if is possessed of something it is most like the Deceiver of his faith and not a perfect, loving and merciful Deity. Arrogance and unkind action seems to be theme throughout the Bible and the punishments for such things seem to always be death! Why would a Christian, who claims to follow this faith and know the Bible EVER act in an arrogant manner or display such unkindness to strangers?

If this God does indeed exist I would think He is testing David right now. If he cannot provide more then a superficial love (and surely Jesus is able to see into his heart and past his rationalizations) then he has already failed the test of loving ones enemies and loving ones neighbor as His so loved His only son. I would also think that this God would come to David in a form that he most detests, such as the atheist and when David turns away the atheist (as he has done so many times) he will have demonstrated his true nature. Really, what better test? If I can conceive it surely an omnipotent God can?

I am disgusted by David’s display of arrogance, ignorance, bigotry and lack of empathy other then for those who agree with him and praise him and not because he is a Christian, but despite of it. His claim of a Christian moral high ground only adds salt to the wound.

Brighid

What makes it so plausible to assume that hypocrisy is the vice of vices is that integrity can indeed exist under the cover of all other vices except this one. Only crime and the criminal, it is true, confront us with the perplexity of radical evil; but only the hypocrite is really rotten to the core."
- Hannah Arendt

DRFseven

You mean, is it good to do that? Well, as always, it depends on what you mean by good (good for what?). In this case, it's good for David Matthews agenda. To his consternation, it could be good for those he opposes, as well, if you catch my drift. I think provoking and upsetting within a certain context (such as a message board) often lead to learning experiences, and, to me, that's often good. Of course, some people consider learning things they don't want to know a negative experience.

99Percent

I suppose what David Mathews is doing is to elicit an emotional response so we stop thinking rationally and instead act impulsively and irrationally, being his religion based completely on sheer faith and "love".

Very typical of Christians who seek to convert others.

I would say it is neither good or bad. However if David Mathews does indeed provoke an emotional response in you, you should strive to find out what exactly is it that is provoking in you and why. Emotions need to be understood.

[ July 25, 2002: Message edited by: 99Percent ]</p>

HelenM

I'd say that's great advice.

Typhon

I think it is perfectly, socially acceptable behavior. People do this all the time, for various reasons. Normally people do this, in the case of those who are deliberate about it, for a reason or with an agenda. A few may do it purely out of emotional reasons or over issues that they're not entirely conscious of, but this is more just lashing out in a way they know will get a response, attention, or hurt the other person.

A person might press someone to get them angry, or trick them into doing something they wouldn't normally do, or even reveal information they might otherwise keep secret. People will do so to evoke jealousy, attraction, or fear. Some may do so to cower, injure, or disadvantage others. Sometimes sensitive issues will make us say things we later regret, or embarrass ourselves.

Pushing people's hot buttons is very commonly seen in politics, law, debate, personal relationships, and in business.

I don't believe in abstract morals, beyond the social compact and the natural and evolutionary based altruistic behavior of our species, so I can't say that this is in all cases, immoral. It is however, normally sneaky, often mean-spirited or petty, and isn't behavior that is generally altruistic or beneficial to others.

From a Christian, who claims to have a moral code, where much of the above behavior is generally held to be immoral, I would say it is hypocritical at the least.

In David Mathews' particular case, what it has done is not anger me, insult me, or otherwise trigger an emotional response. I simply no longer have any interest in the person. I have for the most part lost any and all respect I might have once had for this person, and I just ignore their comments now as they have proven themselves to be unworthy and uninteresting in a debate of any kind (shrug) in my eyes. There are a lot of people on the board who are more honest and much more engaging, and I prefer to talk with them over David.

Does any of that help Helen?

.T.

[ July 25, 2002: Message edited by: Typhon ]</p>

HelenM

Yes thanks

Typhon

Oh one other thought Helen.

I don't know if this is the case with DM, but it may be that he honestly is trying to make a point or "breakthrough" by getting people "worked up." It doesn't make much sense to me, and it is not how I would try to make my point or help people, but I really can't speak for his own intentions. I simply don't know what they are in truth.

I really want to say as an aside, and in comparison, how appreciative I am of posters like yourself Helen, who while may disagree with me about our take on the universe, are otherwise cheerful, delightful, honest, and considerate people. You do a wonderful job of setting an example at least of the positive virtues of your faith.

I hope you forgive me however, if I strongly suspect that this is really a laurel to be laid at your feet, rather than your religion's. I would wager that you would be just as nice a person in all likelihood whether you were a Christian, a Muslim, an atheist, a Buddhist, a Wiccan, or anything else.

Religion doesn't necessarily make someone intolerant and hateful, but it does often give people an excuse for their intolerance and hate. I'm glad this doesn't appear to be so in your case.

Cheers,

.T.

[ July 25, 2002: Message edited by: Typhon ]</p>

HelenM

Thanks Typhon

My goal is to be discerning so I don't pick up anything hateful through being a Christian.

love
Helen