• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Religious Joy: A Question for Atheists

I have no issue at all with commenting on religion if it comes from a place of commonality and respect.
??

You respect homophobes and misogynous people?

Why?

Love for all is likely endemic, but respect has to be earned.

If you respect evil morals and ethics, you are part of the evil.

Regards
DL
 
Abaddon's comment about over-generalization seems to apply here.

Would it be kosher, or even make sense, to broadly insult any group of people?
I disagree.

If you were with a bunch of thieves who were preaching thievery, would you -- generally -- say that all thieves who preach for thieving are evil?

Is this not what I am doing?

Regards
DL
Well, I certainly wouldn't. There is no benefit in leading with hypocritical judgement and condemnation of others for their sins, certainly no wisdom to be learned but no practical benefit either. Do you think thieves will stop thieving because someone lectured them? If someone is stealing, they need bread, not a smarmy internet post.
 
You're insulting and degrading an entire class of persons who are functional and every-day members of their communities, based on their belief system.
Do the religious deserve it?

The religious right is preaching homophobia and misogyny and that a father must hate his gay children and reduce the worth of his wife.

All while governments are preaching for equality.

Who are the ass holes. The religious who discriminate without a just cause, or governments that preach equality of opportunity for all?

Regards
DL
There is valid criticism, and then there is bigotry. There is valid criticism of Israel's settlements, and there is talking about 'Those Jews'.

I see ypu as hypocritical. You talk like those you attack.
Indeed.

Reciprocity is fair play is it not?

Why do you resent my playing fair?

I am not a bigot.

I hate all homophobes and misogynous, regardless of other racial considerations.

Don't try to label me what you likely are.

Regards
DL
 
Abaddon's comment about over-generalization seems to apply here.

Would it be kosher, or even make sense, to broadly insult any group of people?
I disagree.

If you were with a bunch of thieves who were preaching thievery, would you -- generally -- say that all thieves who preach for thieving are evil?

Is this not what I am doing?

Regards
DL
Well, I certainly wouldn't. There is no benefit in leading with hypocritical judgement and condemnation of others for their sins, certainly no wisdom to be learned but no practical benefit either. Do you think thieves will stop thieving because someone lectured them? If someone is stealing, they need bread, not a smarmy internet post.
What hypocritical judgement?

Quote it or go away, stupid.

Regards
DL
 
Would it be kosher, or even make sense, to broadly insult any group of people? And even if we assume that every single religious person is homophobic, that doesn't make responding in kind right. How can we justify combating hatred with .. more hatred?
Point taken. But that hardly means the best course of action is "hands off." It isn't an all or none situation. You can't just write off criticism. You are criticizing here. Why wouldn't you do it with someone who is religious? Why wouldn't you comment on the irrational aspects and behaviors of their religion? Why would you think you'd be hurting them?

Some people are fragile. Treat that person with kid gloves but don't enable the behaviors that are clearly wacko. Be honest. There isn't anything sacred about religious belief and practice. It's as open to comment as anything else despite perceived cultural taboo to the contrary.

It makes perfect sense to broadly comment on irrational and destructive behaviors within groups of people. If persons in that group see that as disparaging or insulting there isn't anything you can do about that.

I have no issue at all with commenting on religion if it comes from a place of commonality and respect.

My main issue with the atheist approach is this idea that there is nothing sacred about religious belief. The equation is more complicated - spiritual approaches were devised by us, and they survive because many of us like them. If it was all negative impact to practitioners all the time, these people would be leaving religion in droves. But the objective reality is that for many religious followers belief is a net benefit, at least for the period in which they believe. Sure, some sects might be more predatory than others, but you can't generalize what is an incredibly diverse set of religious groups.

If a hardline atheist takes nothing else from this thread, it would be to at least take a few minutes to consider that some religious people follow religion for a reason, they benefit from their belief, and that their perspective can be valid. It doesn't have to be logical, rational, scientific. Take a moment to show acceptance that some religious people derive joy and happiness from their belief systems, and that doesn't necessarily need to be fixed.

But what we're seeing, I think, is atheists holding the belief that if everyone became an atheist and started thinking rationally, the world would be improved. So what's happening is that atheists invalidate the beliefs and desires of the religious to further the secular agenda. Rightly so? Maybe, but I'm not convinced about the premise that people seeing the light of reason will make things in any way better. I'm also not convinced that we will ever be able to think logically across the board, it amounts to a fantasy. So personally I see more benefit, and it brings more joy to my life, to include the religious in my circle and observe our commonality, rather than thinking of them as irrational, incompetent people who need to be corrected. You can even model positive social behavior without undermining their ontology.
Your recent post sequences is very good and expresses my general views. Power corrupts. If the atheist theist power roles were reversed would atheists in power be any better? The experiments in communism would say no, and maybe worse.

I call out abuses of religion, and zealots of any kind. Even a self anoited Agnostic Christian Bishop who thinks he is Moses down from the mountain handing own the 10 Commandments..
Less personal garbage would show less of your stupidity.

As to communism -- and fascism.

All Christian and myriad of Abrahamic based cults and religions, including Islam, are slave holding, fascist ideologies, and have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions.

Both of our mainstream religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them the moral ways.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations.

Gnostic Christians did in the past, and I am proudly continuing that tradition and honest irrefutable evaluation based on morality.

Is religion an ideal barometer of Western values or merely an oppressor of them? The conclusions set forth in the documentary The Theft of Our Values...

The Theft of Our Values

Humanity centered religions, good? Yes. Esoteric ecumenist Gnostic Christianity being the best of these.

Supernaturally based religions, evil? Yes.

Islam and Christianity being the worst of these.

Moral people will agree.

Regards
DL
 
Abaddon's comment about over-generalization seems to apply here.

Would it be kosher, or even make sense, to broadly insult any group of people?
I disagree.

If you were with a bunch of thieves who were preaching thievery, would you -- generally -- say that all thieves who preach for thieving are evil?

Is this not what I am doing?

Regards
DL
Well, I certainly wouldn't. There is no benefit in leading with hypocritical judgement and condemnation of others for their sins, certainly no wisdom to be learned but no practical benefit either. Do you think thieves will stop thieving because someone lectured them? If someone is stealing, they need bread, not a smarmy internet post.
What hypocritical judgement?

Quote it or go away, stupid.

Regards
DL
You're decrying the immorality and political violence of religion, while advocating "raising hell" against anyone not like yourself, proclaiming your own religion to be faultless, claiming rather dubiously that other groups call you "the only good Christian", and claiming to be a bishop?
 
Abaddon's comment about over-generalization seems to apply here.

Would it be kosher, or even make sense, to broadly insult any group of people?
I disagree.

If you were with a bunch of thieves who were preaching thievery, would you -- generally -- say that all thieves who preach for thieving are evil?

Is this not what I am doing?

Regards
DL
Well, I certainly wouldn't. There is no benefit in leading with hypocritical judgement and condemnation of others for their sins, certainly no wisdom to be learned but no practical benefit either. Do you think thieves will stop thieving because someone lectured them? If someone is stealing, they need bread, not a smarmy internet post.
What hypocritical judgement?

Quote it or go away, stupid.

Regards
DL
You're decrying the immorality and political violence of religion, while advocating "raising hell" against anyone not like yourself, proclaiming your own religion to be faultless, claiming rather dubiously that other groups call you "the only good Christian", and claiming to be a bishop?
Get all the quotes to prove you lies.

There is no one like me, so, one of how many of your statements are wrong?

Regards
DL
 
Would it be kosher, or even make sense, to broadly insult any group of people? And even if we assume that every single religious person is homophobic, that doesn't make responding in kind right. How can we justify combating hatred with .. more hatred?
Point taken. But that hardly means the best course of action is "hands off." It isn't an all or none situation. You can't just write off criticism. You are criticizing here. Why wouldn't you do it with someone who is religious? Why wouldn't you comment on the irrational aspects and behaviors of their religion? Why would you think you'd be hurting them?

Some people are fragile. Treat that person with kid gloves but don't enable the behaviors that are clearly wacko. Be honest. There isn't anything sacred about religious belief and practice. It's as open to comment as anything else despite perceived cultural taboo to the contrary.

It makes perfect sense to broadly comment on irrational and destructive behaviors within groups of people. If persons in that group see that as disparaging or insulting there isn't anything you can do about that.

I have no issue at all with commenting on religion if it comes from a place of commonality and respect.

My main issue with the atheist approach is this idea that there is nothing sacred about religious belief. The equation is more complicated - spiritual approaches were devised by us, and they survive because many of us like them. If it was all negative impact to practitioners all the time, these people would be leaving religion in droves. But the objective reality is that for many religious followers belief is a net benefit, at least for the period in which they believe. Sure, some sects might be more predatory than others, but you can't generalize what is an incredibly diverse set of religious groups.

If a hardline atheist takes nothing else from this thread, it would be to at least take a few minutes to consider that some religious people follow religion for a reason, they benefit from their belief, and that their perspective can be valid. It doesn't have to be logical, rational, scientific. Take a moment to show acceptance that some religious people derive joy and happiness from their belief systems, and that doesn't necessarily need to be fixed.

But what we're seeing, I think, is atheists holding the belief that if everyone became an atheist and started thinking rationally, the world would be improved. So what's happening is that atheists invalidate the beliefs and desires of the religious to further the secular agenda. Rightly so? Maybe, but I'm not convinced about the premise that people seeing the light of reason will make things in any way better. I'm also not convinced that we will ever be able to think logically across the board, it amounts to a fantasy. So personally I see more benefit, and it brings more joy to my life, to include the religious in my circle and observe our commonality, rather than thinking of them as irrational, incompetent people who need to be corrected. You can even model positive social behavior without undermining their ontology.
I'm in agreement with you. Most of my friends during this pandemic are Christian females, since our atheist meetups have fizzled out. Most of these Christians are also Black. I can give one excellent example of a Christian female who receives joy from her religion. She is very poor and has suffered with a medical disability since high school, yet she never complains or wallows in self pity. Her church is her foundation, but as I've "preached" before, it's also a lot to do with the relationships she has with her precious family and friends, many who also attend her small, physically broken down church, but it's not the church itself that brings joy. It's the rituals, the hope and the love that they give each other.

I've embraced this woman as a friend and done a few little favors for her. This has brought me joy. Sometimes I feel unworthy of her love and appreciation for the little things I do. Just knowing her and receiving her love is enough for me. That's what it's all about, regardless if your "spirituality" is attached to a religion or not. If it takes a religious community for some to experience joy, who are we to judge?
 
I have no issue at all with commenting on religion if it comes from a place of commonality and respect.
??

You respect homophobes and misogynous people?

Why?

Love for all is likely endemic, but respect has to be earned.

If you respect evil morals and ethics, you are part of the evil.

Regards
DL

It's more about sympathy and empathy for the person, than respect for the behavior. A person can commit abhorrent behavior, but responding with vengefulness won't make anything better.

.. an eye for an eye? Violence just begets more violence.
 
I have no issue at all with commenting on religion if it comes from a place of commonality and respect.
??

You respect homophobes and misogynous people?

Why?

Love for all is likely endemic, but respect has to be earned.

If you respect evil morals and ethics, you are part of the evil.

Regards
DL

It's more about sympathy and empathy for the person, than respect for the behavior. A person can commit abhorrent behavior, but responding with vengefulness won't make anything better.

.. an eye for an eye? Violence just begets more violence.
Your sympathy, instead of duty against harm, creates more harm, by you not calling it 9out in advance.

You sympathise more with the sinner than his victim.

Nice garbage ideology.

Regards
DL
 
.. an eye for an eye? Violence just begets more violence.
The non-believers turned to education, --- while rejecting practices that resembled inquisitions and jihads.

Your evil religion has produced good, because intelligent people do not call evil good the way Christianity does.

Christianity began as the best for it's day, with great potential, but lost it.

Regards
DL
 
I have no issue at all with commenting on religion if it comes from a place of commonality and respect.
??

You respect homophobes and misogynous people?

Why?

Love for all is likely endemic, but respect has to be earned.

If you respect evil morals and ethics, you are part of the evil.

Regards
DL

It's more about sympathy and empathy for the person, than respect for the behavior. A person can commit abhorrent behavior, but responding with vengefulness won't make anything better.

.. an eye for an eye? Violence just begets more violence.
Your sympathy, instead of duty against harm, creates more harm, by you not calling it 9out in advance.

You sympathise more with the sinner than his victim.

Nice garbage ideology.

Regards
DL

You can be sympathetic and still diligent against harm. Those things aren't mutually exclusive.
 
I have no issue at all with commenting on religion if it comes from a place of commonality and respect.
??

You respect homophobes and misogynous people?

Why?

Love for all is likely endemic, but respect has to be earned.

If you respect evil morals and ethics, you are part of the evil.

Regards
DL

It's more about sympathy and empathy for the person, than respect for the behavior. A person can commit abhorrent behavior, but responding with vengefulness won't make anything better.

.. an eye for an eye? Violence just begets more violence.
Your sympathy, instead of duty against harm, creates more harm, by you not calling it 9out in advance.

You sympathise more with the sinner than his victim.

Nice garbage ideology.

Regards
DL

You can be sympathetic and still diligent against harm. Those things aren't mutually exclusive.
Deflection ignored.

Regards
DL
 
I have decided that It's not religion or non religion that brings most of us joy, it's the "value and enrichment of interpersonal relationships." I stole that quote from the book I'm reading that compares the Nones and the Somes. Somes is the word used by the author to describe those who believe in one particular religion. It's lead me to believe that basically we all receive joy from the same kinds of things, and what we believe has nothing to do with that joy, unless perhaps what we believes keeps us from having the type of relationships that bring most of us joy. For example extremism of any kind probably prohibits joy.

Some of the things in the book reminded me of the wonderful buzz that I usually received after attending either the Atlanta Freethought Society monthly meetings, local atheist meetups etc. When you bring people together in friendship, who share similar values, there is usually a feeling of joy that occurs from being together and sharing ideas. I assume that's the type of joy that religious folks claim they feel from their churches. The same joy can be found in other ways, from pets, from a walk in the woods, from doing something charitable for others, from art, especially music, imo. etc. So, afaik, most healthy people who don't suffer from social isolation, mental illness, or perhaps deprivation of their basic needs like food and shelter are able to experience joy, no different from what believers experience from their religions. I personally doubt it's the religion that brings the joy. It's the relationships and the emotional buzz that comes from gathering together and sharing music and rituals.

I never experienced joy or at least not much joy from my childhood religious beliefs, that were basically forced on me. I did sometimes find a little joy by singing in the youth choir or with the congregation and I do love music of many genres so that makes sense to me now. But, during my early adulthood, after several years of searching for the one true religion, I suddenly realized that no gods exist, I felt a tremendous amount of joy at that realization. Perhaps that is similar to how religious people feel when they believe they have found god or gods. I used to hang out with Bahai's when I was young and married to a follower of that religion. Most of the people were very friendly and thoughtful and from what I recall, I received that same joyous buzz being with them, other than my ex. :confused: It had nothing to do with the religion per se. It was all about the "values and enrichment of interpersonal relationships". No gods required.

I enjoy having friends over for dinner, for doing things for others, especially when they appreciate it. I mentioned in the other thread about the woman who researched how Nones and Somes were asked what brought them joy or bliss or spiritual happiness, the top four answers were always, family, friends, food sharing and fido ( pets ). Some more explicit religious things were further down on the list. So, imo, religious people can experience joy, seemingly from their religion, just like the rest of us can. But, as I said before, it's probably not the religion per se that brings them joy, but the relationships and rituals etc. that make them feel joyous. That makes a lot of sense to me.

Maybe a little bit of both? Community and the idea of someone watching out for us, injecting meaning and reason into everything we do.

I wonder if that's exactly what makes non-belief so scary to believers - if God isn't real, then our lives are random, chaotic, and without objective meaning (at least in the eyes of a believer). That's not a trivial concern.
 
Let's just face the facts, Gnostics were weak and lost to the superior power of the Catholic Church.

They could not compete and had inferior messaging. Poor organization. Poor leadership.
 
Let's just face the facts, Gnostics were weak and lost to the superior power of the Catholic Church.

They could not compete and had inferior messaging. Poor organization. Poor leadership.
Really? That's your measure of quality? Anything the Vatican rejects must be worthless?

Wait til you hear their perspective on atheism, it will rock your socks off!
 
Let's just face the facts, Gnostics were weak and lost to the superior power of the Catholic Church.

They could not compete and had inferior messaging. Poor organization. Poor leadership.
We had no inquisitions to use because we did not sell out to Rome.

Strange that you put the Christian murderers morally ahead of the murdered victims.

Strange that you like the murderers message more than the victims.

You might wonder why you venerate evil that kills the good.

Regards
DL
 
I have no issue at all with commenting on religion if it comes from a place of commonality and respect.
??

You respect homophobes and misogynous people?

Why?

Love for all is likely endemic, but respect has to be earned.

If you respect evil morals and ethics, you are part of the evil.

Regards
DL

It's more about sympathy and empathy for the person, than respect for the behavior. A person can commit abhorrent behavior, but responding with vengefulness won't make anything better.

.. an eye for an eye? Violence just begets more violence.
Your sympathy, instead of duty against harm, creates more harm, by you not calling it 9out in advance.

You sympathise more with the sinner than his victim.

Nice garbage ideology.

Regards
DL

You can be sympathetic and still diligent against harm. Those things aren't mutually exclusive.
You can also ignore the abusers while pretending to hold an attitude of some kind of equity.

Whatever goodness you see in religious groups - community, meaning, whatever - can be had without religion and without the abusive father figure paradigm that is so conducive to abuse.

There's also some specific harms and the manipulations that cause them that can be addressed while still holding an empathetic regard for the abusers (the religious beliefs are not people, but you're still free to regard them as entities that deserve respect, although that is part of what makes much of the abuse possible in the first place, fyi):
- Shaming is bad. Shaming should be reserved for the powerful, and NOT children, women in marriages that reduce her freedom, abused women, LGBTQ people, or any powerless or vulnerable person.
- Lying to sick or disabled people about healing.
- Lying to poor people about getting rich if they send what little money they have to rich religious authority figures.
- Failing to hold religious authority figures accountable - pastors, priests, junior pastors, the god damn Pope, etc., and looking away when they demonize or in some way make the vulnerable people they have abused seem more powerful or consenting than is really true.

There's lots more, as you know, @rousseau , so please stop ignoring actual harm and corruption enabled and encouraged by religious beliefs. OR STOP PRETENDING TO BE RESPECTFUL OF ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS. We see what you're doing, and it's despicable.
 
I have no issue at all with commenting on religion if it comes from a place of commonality and respect.
??

You respect homophobes and misogynous people?

Why?

Love for all is likely endemic, but respect has to be earned.

If you respect evil morals and ethics, you are part of the evil.

Regards
DL

It's more about sympathy and empathy for the person, than respect for the behavior. A person can commit abhorrent behavior, but responding with vengefulness won't make anything better.

.. an eye for an eye? Violence just begets more violence.
Your sympathy, instead of duty against harm, creates more harm, by you not calling it 9out in advance.

You sympathise more with the sinner than his victim.

Nice garbage ideology.

Regards
DL

You can be sympathetic and still diligent against harm. Those things aren't mutually exclusive.
You can also ignore the abusers while pretending to hold an attitude of some kind of equity.

Whatever goodness you see in religious groups - community, meaning, whatever - can be had without religion and without the abusive father figure paradigm that is so conducive to abuse.

There's also some specific harms and the manipulations that cause them that can be addressed while still holding an empathetic regard for the abusers (the religious beliefs are not people, but you're still free to regard them as entities that deserve respect, although that is part of what makes much of the abuse possible in the first place):
- Shaming is bad. Shaming should be reserved for the powerful, and NOT children, women in marriages that reduce her freedom, abused women, LGBTQ people, etc.
- Lying to sick or disabled people about healing
- Lying to poor people about getting rich if they send money
- Failing to hold religious authority figures accountable - pastors, priests, junior pastors, the god damn Pope, etc., and looking away when they demonize or in some way make the vulnerable people they have abused seem more powerful or consenting than is really true.

There's lots more, as you know, @rousseau , so please stop ignoring actual harm and corruption enabled and encouraged by religious beliefs. OR STOP PRETENDING TO BE RESPECTFUL OF ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS. We see what you're doing, and it's despicable.

Honestly? This sounds like you're either misunderstanding, or reading too far into my comments. I'm not doing anything, I'm not sticking up for the church or whatever. I'm pointing out that a person can be badly behaved, and I don't have to hate them or spit vitriol at them.

Two things can be true at the same time: the church as an institution can (in some cases) be self-interested and predatory, and people can still benefit from their beliefs. I can also not condone anti-social behavior, but not respond with more anti-social behavior.

I have plenty of relations that hold absolutely abhorrent views, some of them even religious, but I'm under no illusion that the situation is going to get better by othering and attacking them.
 
I have decided that It's not religion or non religion that brings most of us joy, it's the "value and enrichment of interpersonal relationships." I stole that quote from the book I'm reading that compares the Nones and the Somes. Somes is the word used by the author to describe those who believe in one particular religion. It's lead me to believe that basically we all receive joy from the same kinds of things, and what we believe has nothing to do with that joy, unless perhaps what we believes keeps us from having the type of relationships that bring most of us joy. For example extremism of any kind probably prohibits joy.

Some of the things in the book reminded me of the wonderful buzz that I usually received after attending either the Atlanta Freethought Society monthly meetings, local atheist meetups etc. When you bring people together in friendship, who share similar values, there is usually a feeling of joy that occurs from being together and sharing ideas. I assume that's the type of joy that religious folks claim they feel from their churches. The same joy can be found in other ways, from pets, from a walk in the woods, from doing something charitable for others, from art, especially music, imo. etc. So, afaik, most healthy people who don't suffer from social isolation, mental illness, or perhaps deprivation of their basic needs like food and shelter are able to experience joy, no different from what believers experience from their religions. I personally doubt it's the religion that brings the joy. It's the relationships and the emotional buzz that comes from gathering together and sharing music and rituals.

I never experienced joy or at least not much joy from my childhood religious beliefs, that were basically forced on me. I did sometimes find a little joy by singing in the youth choir or with the congregation and I do love music of many genres so that makes sense to me now. But, during my early adulthood, after several years of searching for the one true religion, I suddenly realized that no gods exist, I felt a tremendous amount of joy at that realization. Perhaps that is similar to how religious people feel when they believe they have found god or gods. I used to hang out with Bahai's when I was young and married to a follower of that religion. Most of the people were very friendly and thoughtful and from what I recall, I received that same joyous buzz being with them, other than my ex. :confused: It had nothing to do with the religion per se. It was all about the "values and enrichment of interpersonal relationships". No gods required.

I enjoy having friends over for dinner, for doing things for others, especially when they appreciate it. I mentioned in the other thread about the woman who researched how Nones and Somes were asked what brought them joy or bliss or spiritual happiness, the top four answers were always, family, friends, food sharing and fido ( pets ). Some more explicit religious things were further down on the list. So, imo, religious people can experience joy, seemingly from their religion, just like the rest of us can. But, as I said before, it's probably not the religion per se that brings them joy, but the relationships and rituals etc. that make them feel joyous. That makes a lot of sense to me.

Maybe a little bit of both? Community and the idea of someone watching out for us, injecting meaning and reason into everything we do.

I wonder if that's exactly what makes non-belief so scary to believers - if God isn't real, then our lives are random, chaotic, and without objective meaning (at least in the eyes of a believer). That's not a trivial concern.
You could be right. I've just been influenced by that book I'm currently reading about the Nones. I was surprised that so many people who believe in organized religion gave the same answers as the Nones when asked what brings them joy or meaning in their lives.
 
Back
Top Bottom