|
Post by goz on Feb 11, 2018 0:08:26 GMT
HOWEVEER Yes, phludowin has a problem when Christians try to exercise their freedom of speech, and rightly so. Well done for accepting a point which phludowin appears totally unable to admit to - you have my respect for that - but the " and rightly so" part is the bit where you and I could not possibly disagree more on a fundamental point of principle. In my ideal world, freedom of speech is a right that should be given to everybody - even to people you disagree with - and it is fundamentally wrong of anybody to have a problem with that. Let me get this straight. I fully support freedom of speech ( and freedom of religion ) in the broadest sense. However, 'the devil is in the detail'. I will leave freedom of religion for now as I don't want to make it a red herring in this particular discussion, however the freedom of speech issue is complex. As in most things in a civilised society in which both you and I live, with personal freedoms as part of our everyday existence, we also have personal responsibilities. Alongside freedom of speech and expression comes a responsibility not to needlessly and intentionally negatively affect others. Hence in my country we have 'hate speech ' laws due to their possible use in incitement to discrimination, bigotry and violence. I don't believe a prosthelytising Christian on a soapbox should be censured, unless they break other laws, as above, in their particular society. HOWEVER, I do think it is fair to call the utterances of a soapbox speaker, audible pollution though in this case the hearer can move away. The problem arises in such places as a movie theatre, public transport, or even your own doorstep, where you are a captive audience and the audible pollution is intentionally imposed on you. IMHO this is not acceptable. To have to order a trespasser from your property is not acceptable. To have to spoil a theatre performance and leave is not acceptable, neither is it acceptable to be caused to interrupt your planned travel journey etc etc etc not acceptable.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Feb 11, 2018 0:17:39 GMT
There is a difference: No gay person has ever tried to proselytize to me, in order to convert me to homosexuality. I have lost count about how many times religious people have proselytized to me in order to convert me to their religion. So the difference between religious propagandists and homosexual propagandists is that the latter don't exist. So you are not going to explain why you brought up the whole movie theater analogy even though it was a complete red herring, and you are not going to address my argument about the right to freedom of expression? Well, knock me over with a feather. What else was I expecting? At least goz agrees with me that you have a problem with the right Christians have to freedom of expression, even if you seem to be in complete denial about this yourself. In a previous post I provided examples for expressions of opinion where I don't have a problem with; where I am annoyed but don't think it should be restricted; and where I believe restrictions should exist. You started about the right to express opinions to unwilling audiences. I used the movie theater example to explain why I don't believe that people should have unrestricted rights to pester unwilling audiences. I have not yet made up my mind whether I was simply unsuccessful in explaining my opinion, or whether you deliberately misrepresent my standpoints as strawmen as an intellectually dishonest debate tactic. However, after reading your replies to captainbryce, I tend to suspect the latter. EDIT: Apparently I was right.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 12, 2018 13:16:01 GMT
That 'ilk' really got to you, didn't it? LOL
If, as you say, the Bible is 'very clear that we are commanded to judge' and yet, also very clearly, says that "God alone" can judge, then I guess we can just chalk it up to one of those various contradictions in scripture. Incidentally contradictions, or disorder, within the text inspired by, and reflecting, your favoured deity would of necessity falsify one of your original claims of 'order' as a hallmark of God. I doubt it will effect your ongoing credulity one jot, and look forward to the inevitable special pleading to explain things away - but just sayin'.
I am not going to spend time cutting 'n' pasting the several passages which appear to have passed you by or been evaded. I suggest that, if you are serious about answering, then you look back yourself and find those still-open questions asked of you by me - including those only addressed in vague, sweeping generalisations - and come back to me. [The exaggeration of "which of your 208 questions I haven't answered" just makes you sound offhand and impatient, when the ball is in your court, btw] It is enough, otherwise, for me to note that you have spent far more time on unrepentant personal insults here than being productive with the issues in hand. But then again, you 'don't care' so I ought not be surprised...
Also, your
"You say I am dodging some question " then "I am not going to start a whole other mass waste of time with you" ? Can you see what you have done there? I can.
And answer came there none lol
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 12, 2018 16:49:43 GMT
tpfkar Okay, well if that’s what you meant then I agree. But let’s not just throw around that term loosely to apply to anyone who disagrees with you. Bigot and intolerance have specific meanings, and apply to specific ideologies. Don’t say that I’m a bigot because I disagree with Christianity and I won’t call you a bigot because you disagree with atheism. Being intolerant and bigoted does applies to anyone who opposes LGBT rights, regardless of what they personally believe or not. You're an intolerant bigot because you're on record as saying you would do away with religion entirely. I have nothing against atheists. I just think they're wrong. Wanting ignorance and sources of human nastiness to go away is not "bigotry". Religion is far from harmless. Science proven wrong yet AGAIN.
|
|
|
Post by Cinemachinery on Feb 12, 2018 16:55:01 GMT
There are plenty of religious adherents who have little to no effect on those outside their worldview. The knee-jerk "anti-religion!" stance is cartoonish in its simplicity, if for no other reason than that it feeds the sense of martyrdom that fuels so many of the more militant religions. It's a failed stance before it even gains momentum, serving little more purpose than to stroke the sense of superiority in the one outside the religion. It's like using a raw piece of steak to swat at flies. You're never going to hit a fly, you're only going to draw more.
Still, the worst of the religious as well as the worst of the non- do get something out of it, even if it's only ego-based.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 12, 2018 17:10:23 GMT
tpfkar captainbryce I meant the average religious person who happens to be a bigot. I'm not petty enough to deny that they exist. But you get bigots and intolerant people of all stripes from all walks of life, even atheists. Yes, there are in fact professed atheists who condemn abortion and oppose LGBT rights. The funny part is that the biggest nasties talk about it elsewhere among them. There's nothing "intolerant" about wanting religions to die out. That's not persecuting, refusing to serve equally, breaking the law or just voting to keep them from getting married, wanting to inspect assh!les nor dreaming of having them killed. There's just no equivalence regardless of how comforting it is or how smug it makes one feel to purport to float above it. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.Women shouldn't be presidents, prime ministers or chancellors.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Feb 13, 2018 1:58:43 GMT
I have not yet made up my mind whether I was simply unsuccessful in explaining my opinion, or whether you deliberately misrepresent my standpoints as strawmen as an intellectually dishonest debate tactic. However, after reading your replies to captainbryce, I tend to suspect the latter.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Feb 13, 2018 2:08:40 GMT
Okay, well if that’s what you meant then I agree. But let’s not just throw around that term loosely to apply to anyone who disagrees with you. Bigot and intolerance have specific meanings, and apply to specific ideologies. Don’t say that I’m a bigot because I disagree with Christianity and I won’t call you a bigot because you disagree with atheism. Being intolerant and bigoted does applies to anyone who opposes LGBT rights, regardless of what they personally believe or not. You're an intolerant bigot because you're on record as saying you would do away with religion entirely. That doesn’t make me an intolerant bigot! Again, that’s not what those words mean. Instead of just trying to throw back labels, learn what these words actually mean first, otherwise you sound stupid and your argument appears to be desperate. Christians want to do away with homosexuality entirely. By your logic that makes all of you intolerant bigots, but you try to fight that label tooth and nail don’t you? Wishing something would go away and believing it to be harmful doesn’t make someone intolerant or bigoted. Especially when it can be demonstrated that the something in question is often harmful to many people (like religion, and unlike homosexuality). Treating other people with different beliefs unfairly, or fighting to take their rights away, or condemning them as “sinners”, THAT is bigotry. I’ve never done anything like that to any Christian, but Christians do that all the time to gays, Muslims, atheists, and pretty much anyone else who isn’t a Christian. Muslims do it too by the way, and in most countries WORSE than Christians. But you want to pretend that I somehow single out Christianity. I have nothing against SOME Christians. I have problems with RELIGION and religious people who use religion to justify bigotry. I KNOW they are wrong.
|
|
|
Post by tickingmask on Feb 13, 2018 22:10:45 GMT
That doesn’t make me an intolerant bigot! Not only does it make you an intolerant bigot for saying you want to rid the world of religion as soon as possible, it also makes you a slimy hypocrite for then trying to kid us that you don't have a problem with 'Christians or Christianity in general'. What makes you think anybody is buying the crap you are trying to peddle here? Edit: I see you've now qualified this to 'SOME Christians'. Perhaps you are actually starting to realise what a hypocrite you are.
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Feb 13, 2018 23:26:57 GMT
That doesn’t make me an intolerant bigot! Not only does it make you an intolerant bigot for saying you want to rid the world of religion as soon as possible I don't see it. If somebody says let's rid the world of religious people, that's bigoted. But to say let's rid the world of religion doesn't seem bigoted.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 14, 2018 0:57:37 GMT
Definition of bigot : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance That doesn’t make me an intolerant bigot! Not only does it make you an intolerant bigot for saying you want to rid the world of religion as soon as possible, it also makes you a slimy hypocrite for then trying to kid us that you don't have a problem with 'Christians or Christianity in general'. What makes you think anybody is buying the crap you are trying to peddle here? Edit: I see you've now qualified this to 'SOME Christians'. Perhaps you are actually starting to realise what a hypocrite you are. I think you are defensive and hence confused about what constitutes bigotry. IMHO noun [ C ] uk /ˈbɪɡ.ət/ us /ˈbɪɡ.ət/ disapproving a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who does not like other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life: a religious bigot He was known to be a loud-mouthed, opinionated bigot. or Definition of bigot : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance An opinion to do away with religion is not bigotry. To act on it and hate or be intolerant of religious people is bigotry.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 14, 2018 11:00:55 GMT
Definition of bigot : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance Not only does it make you an intolerant bigot for saying you want to rid the world of religion as soon as possible, it also makes you a slimy hypocrite for then trying to kid us that you don't have a problem with 'Christians or Christianity in general'. What makes you think anybody is buying the crap you are trying to peddle here? Edit: I see you've now qualified this to 'SOME Christians'. Perhaps you are actually starting to realise what a hypocrite you are. I think you are defensive and hence confused about what constitutes bigotry. IMHO noun [ C ] uk /ˈbɪɡ.ət/ us /ˈbɪɡ.ət/ disapproving a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who does not like other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life: a religious bigot He was known to be a loud-mouthed, opinionated bigot. or Definition of bigot : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance An opinion to do away with religion is not bigotry. To act on it and hate or be intolerant of religious people is bigotry. If I stated that I would like to do away with the religion of Islam completely, the first thing you would do is accuse me of being an intolerant bigot. So who do you think you're trying to kid here?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 14, 2018 11:53:48 GMT
Definition of bigot : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance I think you are defensive and hence confused about what constitutes bigotry. IMHO noun [ C ] uk /ˈbɪɡ.ət/ us /ˈbɪɡ.ət/ disapproving a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who does not like other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life: a religious bigot He was known to be a loud-mouthed, opinionated bigot. or Definition of bigot : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance An opinion to do away with religion is not bigotry. To act on it and hate or be intolerant of religious people is bigotry. If I stated that I would like to do away with the religion of Islam completely, the first thing you would do is accuse me of being an intolerant bigot. So who do you think you're trying to kid here? Not to get too drawn into this spat, but the dictionaries I have seen usually define bigotry in relation to people, not ideas and belief EG
Bigot : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance. [Merriam Webster]
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ . [Free Dictionary]
A person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions [OED]
A person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who does not like other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life: [Cambridge] etc.
Ideas do not have any rights, either to be heard or to be treated with kid gloves. It is people who should always have the right to be free from discrimination, intimidation and bigotry.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 14, 2018 12:00:59 GMT
If I stated that I would like to do away with the religion of Islam completely, the first thing you would do is accuse me of being an intolerant bigot. So who do you think you're trying to kid here? Not to get too drawn into this spat, but the dictionaries I have seen usually define bigotry in relation to people, not ideas and belief EG
Bigot : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance. [Merriam Webster]
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ . [Free Dictionary]
A person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions [OED]
A person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who does not like other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life: [Cambridge] etc.
Ideas do not have any rights, either to be heard or to be treated with kid gloves. It is people who should always have the right to be free from discrimination, intimidation and bigotry.
"Ideas do not have any rights, either to be heard or to be treated with kid gloves." And yet criticism of Islam, the ideology, often gets conflated with bigotry towards Muslims as people by deranged leftists like you and Goz when it suits you.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 14, 2018 12:08:22 GMT
Not to get too drawn into this spat, but the dictionaries I have seen usually define bigotry in relation to people, not ideas and belief EG
Bigot : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance. [Merriam Webster]
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ . [Free Dictionary]
A person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions [OED]
A person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who does not like other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life: [Cambridge] etc.
Ideas do not have any rights, either to be heard or to be treated with kid gloves. It is people who should always have the right to be free from discrimination, intimidation and bigotry.
"Ideas do not have any rights, either to be heard or to be treated with kid gloves." And yet criticism of Islam, the ideology, often gets conflated with bigotry towards Muslims as people by deranged leftists like you and Goz when it suits you. I have merely noted you as an Islamophobe Cody. Is your conscience troubling you?
Incidentally your persistent insults towards atheists, liberals and all the others (as here, above) are wide personal attacks, showing intolerance towards the individual, which as I showed, is the very definition of bigotry. QED.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 14, 2018 12:19:16 GMT
"Ideas do not have any rights, either to be heard or to be treated with kid gloves." And yet criticism of Islam, the ideology, often gets conflated with bigotry towards Muslims as people by deranged leftists like you and Goz when it suits you. I have merely noted you as an Islamophobe Cody. Is your conscience troubling you?
Incidentally your persistent insults towards atheists, liberals and all the others (as here, above) are wide personal attacks, showing intolerance towards the individual, which as I showed, is the very definition of bigotry. QED.
Why on earth would you go to bat for the Muslims? They believe in a single and all-powerful deity, do they not? As I recall, you're opposed to belief in any supernatural deities. Do you also call out the Islamic rhetoric against Christianity? Or do you turn a blind eye to it?
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 14, 2018 12:19:23 GMT
"Ideas do not have any rights, either to be heard or to be treated with kid gloves." And yet criticism of Islam, the ideology, often gets conflated with bigotry towards Muslims as people by deranged leftists like you and Goz when it suits you. I have merely noted you as an Islamophobe Cody. Is your conscience troubling you?
Incidentally your persistent insults towards atheists, liberals and all the others (as here, above) are wide personal attacks, showing intolerance towards the individual, which as I showed, is the very definition of bigotry. QED.
"I have merely noted you as an Islamophobe Cody. Is your conscience troubling you?" Yeah you've already proven you have no idea what you're talking about. I've said it before and I'll say it again accusing someone of a nonsensical term is not an argument. It just makes you look foolish.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 14, 2018 12:27:08 GMT
Not only does it make you an intolerant bigot for saying you want to rid the world of religion as soon as possible I don't see it. If somebody says let's rid the world of religious people, that's bigoted. But to say let's rid the world of religion doesn't seem bigoted. You won't get the one without the other.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 14, 2018 12:36:57 GMT
Why on earth would you go to bat for the Muslims? They believe in a single and all-powerful deity, do they not? As I recall, you're opposed to belief in any supernatural deities. I would speak out in defence of any peaceful and hate-free minority Erjen, including of late UK Muslims (of whom some here have particular issues with). But I don't have a general brief for Islam worldwide; I would treat the purported existence of Allah, the associated arguments from scripture and credulity there, as I do any particular deity. (For instance. you were not to know it but a few months ago I had an extended dispute with a Muslim on a religious noticeboard about the effect of different readings and the claim that the Qu'ran lacks any variants.) I hope that helps. It depends what you mean by 'rhetoric'. If it is hate speech then I draw the line, from whatever source it springs. If you mean supporting the right to free speech generally, while of course always retaining the right to criticise or even ridicule what is being said, than the answer is always 'yes'. But we don't have many active Muslims here who make such objectionable noises as the Christian fundamentalists and right-wingers, which is why the traffic can seem one-sided. We don't have any Scientologists either, a particular shame since that would be real fun.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 14, 2018 12:41:59 GMT
Yeah you've already proven you have no idea what you're talking about. So you don't have prejudice against, hatred towards, or fear of the religion of Islam or Muslims? That is not the impression I ever get. Islamophobia is real word Cody, with clear definitions, and you can look it up. Or, like Arlon are you now going to argue with dictionaries and win? Thor at least is honest and has no issues with this label, saying it doesn't irk him, why should you?
|
|