That's what I would expect, but across my five year tenure I've seen certain people dodge the accusation time and time again, Cheese being a prime example right now.
I'm not dodging anything, and I can't see where you're coming from with that accusation. This is my first post since you brought it up, so I can't see how I've even had time to do any dodging.
Tell me what you mean by "intolerant" and I'll be happy to own up to it, if it applies. Am I willing to respect false or unfounded beliefs that people hold? No. If that makes me intolerant, then I am right to be intolerant.
However, although I don't respect those beliefs, I do (in general) respect the people that hold those beliefs, and their right to hold those beliefs.
Religion isn't special. Saying a god exists is exactly the same as saying a ghost or a hot dog exists. If someone claims to have hot dogs, but doesn't, I'm just as intolerant of their claims as of any other.
If there were, say, a Christian god, and it were real...
Then we'd better fucking change everything. The government had better fully fund the priesthood. There should be religious advisors in all levels of government. That god's existence should be a primary part of all decisions. There is no reason to have anything less than a full Theocracy, and I'd fully support that.
Is there an eternal Heaven? If there is, then we should seriously redirect most of the US GDP toward ensuring that the maximum number of people go there. Eternal reward for non-eternal efforts? It is monstrous to not act/
Is there a hell? Then preventing people from going to hell when they die should be one of the biggest government initiatives in human history. We should be studying sin and hell the way we study disease, and focus most of the CDC's efforts on hell avoidance. Otherwise, we're monsters.
We should also make the correct church the official church of the United States and ban other churches from existing.
Rym, you repeatedly expand your disdain for the religious to the non-dogmatic and agnostic. You have again and again harassed me for not only my non-coercive beliefs but also for my secular opinion that religious institutions have done good things in addition to bad. You have often told me that I am wrong to do something that helps me. And every time this comes up, you ignore what I'm saying and use your old party lines that you say to everyone, despite the statements often being non-applicable to my arguments.
I can get along with a lot of people who I really disagree with on big issues. I've had friends who were fascists, friends who were genuine Theocrats, and friends who were armchair anarchists. Your opinions are actually ones I can get along with more easily, as I too held them during middle school. What I take issue with is the insistence that you respect my beliefs despite repeated accusations against me that contradict that. You know I'm fond of y'all (I mean, why else would I be here three years after my conversion?), but you need to own up to how you treat me.
ANY discussion about the positive effects of religion is immaterial to the veracity of religion. If you said "religion is a force of good for x reasons, but there is probably no supernatural basis for religion itself" then that's fine and can be debated separately.
You are welcome and free to believe in ghosts. But I don't believe in them. I won't pretend that I believe in them. I won't let an assertion that they exist stand unchallenged.
I'm dead serious in the above post. If gods are real, then they should be the primary aspect of all human existence every single day. I'd be a priest. I would join the priesthood immediately and without a second thought if I believed in a god. Not doing so would be ridiculous.
Rym, consider what you would do if you were satisfactorily convinced, indeed a large portion of the country were, and could through some scientifically sound method prove a deity/religion existed and was 'correct'.
What if others were not convinced? What if the other sides fought back legally, politically, or physically?
we should seriously redirect most of the US GDP toward ensuring that the maximum number of people go there.
What if the True God is fucked up, and says you should murder all black people or something? We should direct some GDP to subverting the heaven/hell mechanism despite God's all-powerfulness.
We're basically talking about The Mandate at this point, btw.
I'm not keen on a world with an all seeing all powerful One God to rule them all deal. I would much prefer a world set with a bunch of smaller gods. Like Neil Gaiman American Gods or Japanese shinto kami gods.
Rym, consider what you would do if you were satisfactorily convinced, indeed a large portion of the country were, and could through some scientifically sound method prove a deity/religion existed and was 'correct'.
What if others were not convinced? What if the other sides fought back legally, politically, or physically?
If there legit was a real god that was proven and wanted things?
Either I'd join the resistance/satan/whatever if that were feasible, or I'd side 100% with that god. If that god wants war against the heathens to save them, and that god is indeed a god, who are you to say no?
Rym, consider what you would do if you were satisfactorily convinced, indeed a large portion of the country were, and could through some scientifically sound method prove a deity/religion existed and was 'correct'.
What if others were not convinced? What if the other sides fought back legally, politically, or physically?
If there legit was a real god that was proven and wanted things?
Either I'd join the resistance/satan/whatever if that were feasible, or I'd side 100% with that god. If that god wants war against the heathens to save them, and that god is indeed a god, who are you to say no?
If Shin Megami Tensei games have taught me anything, it's that in the unlikely scenario where there is a war between angels and demons on earth, the best option is always to kick out both parties and have humans solve their own issues on their own.
There's no point in discussing what you would/should do if a deity really existed.
If an all-knowing all-powerful entity exists, then it follows that free will can not exist. At least not for any being that isn't the deity itself. Even if you felt like you had free will, that's only because the deity wants to to feel that way. If they can control and know everything, then they ARE controlling and knowing everything. Anything they do not control they are still intentionally not controlling. You have no choices. You will do as the deity wills.
If the deity is not all-knowing and all-powerful, then it's not much of a deity is it? If it's just like, Superman level of power, then fuck him. Get some Kryptonite and shove it up his ass. Don't let someone run the show just because they happen to be very powerful.
To make sure we're using like terms, can you elaborate on what you mean by respect?
In this context, to "respect" something means to hold it as having equal worth relative to other things in that same category.
How does that translate from whatever your opinion is to actually what you say and do?
If someone says Bigfoot is real, that's a world-changing claim. I'm going to immediately ask for evidence, as an examination of said evidence would literally change my life.
That's the sum of it. Doesn't matter who makes that claim. Doesn't matter if it's Bigfoot or some specific Christian sect's god. Equally plausible assertions warranting equal scrutiny and merit.
If someone says Bigfoot is real, that's a world-changing claim. I'm going to immediately ask for evidence, as an examination of said evidence would literally change my life.
Why? Bigfoot people are gonna Bigfoot. Who's being hurt by someone's belief in Bigfoot? Why must they be challenged, rather than ignored?
Also, how is Bigfoot being real a life changing claim? Setting aside any metaphor, would you really do anything differently if there was a Sasquatch in Minnesota?
People who perceive profoundness in randomly generated but syntactically correct sentences are more prone to believing in bullshit.
"Those more receptive to bull**** are less reflective, lower in cognitive ability (i.e., verbal and fluid intelligence, numeracy), are more prone to ontological confusions [beliefs in things for which there is no empirical evidence (i.e. that prayers have the ability to heal)] and conspiratorial ideation, are more likely to hold religious and paranormal beliefs, and are more likely to endorse complementary and alternative medicine."
Is the afterlife inherently against atheism? Could it be that the Newtonian principal of conservation is applicable to human conscious, without any sort of supreme being to direct it?
Not inherently, just that they wouldn't believe in it for the same reasons they lack a belief in a deity. The problem is that as far as we know consciousness isn't a tangible thing so I don't know if that would really apply as it stands.
Not inherently, just that they wouldn't believe in it for the same reasons they lack a belief in a deity. The problem is that as far as we know consciousness isn't a tangible thing so I don't know if that would really apply as it stands.
Is there anything else in the universe that we know is there but is intangible?
Comments
Tell me what you mean by "intolerant" and I'll be happy to own up to it, if it applies. Am I willing to respect false or unfounded beliefs that people hold? No. If that makes me intolerant, then I am right to be intolerant.
However, although I don't respect those beliefs, I do (in general) respect the people that hold those beliefs, and their right to hold those beliefs.
If there were, say, a Christian god, and it were real...
Then we'd better fucking change everything. The government had better fully fund the priesthood. There should be religious advisors in all levels of government. That god's existence should be a primary part of all decisions. There is no reason to have anything less than a full Theocracy, and I'd fully support that.
Is there a hell? Then preventing people from going to hell when they die should be one of the biggest government initiatives in human history. We should be studying sin and hell the way we study disease, and focus most of the CDC's efforts on hell avoidance. Otherwise, we're monsters.
We should also make the correct church the official church of the United States and ban other churches from existing.
I can get along with a lot of people who I really disagree with on big issues. I've had friends who were fascists, friends who were genuine Theocrats, and friends who were armchair anarchists. Your opinions are actually ones I can get along with more easily, as I too held them during middle school. What I take issue with is the insistence that you respect my beliefs despite repeated accusations against me that contradict that. You know I'm fond of y'all (I mean, why else would I be here three years after my conversion?), but you need to own up to how you treat me.
ANY discussion about the positive effects of religion is immaterial to the veracity of religion. If you said "religion is a force of good for x reasons, but there is probably no supernatural basis for religion itself" then that's fine and can be debated separately.
You are welcome and free to believe in ghosts. But I don't believe in them. I won't pretend that I believe in them. I won't let an assertion that they exist stand unchallenged.
I'm dead serious in the above post. If gods are real, then they should be the primary aspect of all human existence every single day. I'd be a priest. I would join the priesthood immediately and without a second thought if I believed in a god. Not doing so would be ridiculous.
What if others were not convinced?
What if the other sides fought back legally, politically, or physically?
We're basically talking about The Mandate at this point, btw.
Either I'd join the resistance/satan/whatever if that were feasible, or I'd side 100% with that god. If that god wants war against the heathens to save them, and that god is indeed a god, who are you to say no?
If an all-knowing all-powerful entity exists, then it follows that free will can not exist. At least not for any being that isn't the deity itself. Even if you felt like you had free will, that's only because the deity wants to to feel that way. If they can control and know everything, then they ARE controlling and knowing everything. Anything they do not control they are still intentionally not controlling. You have no choices. You will do as the deity wills.
If the deity is not all-knowing and all-powerful, then it's not much of a deity is it? If it's just like, Superman level of power, then fuck him. Get some Kryptonite and shove it up his ass. Don't let someone run the show just because they happen to be very powerful.
Disagree.
That's the sum of it. Doesn't matter who makes that claim. Doesn't matter if it's Bigfoot or some specific Christian sect's god. Equally plausible assertions warranting equal scrutiny and merit.
Also, how is Bigfoot being real a life changing claim? Setting aside any metaphor, would you really do anything differently if there was a Sasquatch in Minnesota?
Apes. That's us. What we are. It'd be like if you found out you had a brother you never knew about living in your house.
"Those more receptive to bull**** are less reflective, lower in cognitive ability (i.e., verbal and fluid intelligence, numeracy), are more prone to ontological confusions [beliefs in things for which there is no empirical evidence (i.e. that prayers have the ability to heal)] and conspiratorial ideation, are more likely to hold religious and paranormal beliefs, and are more likely to endorse complementary and alternative medicine."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/01/the-kinds-of-people-who-confuse-total-nonsense-for-something-really-deep/
http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.pdf