Understanding/Sympathizing/forbearing people

[Cosmic Ape]

I think many people have a problem when they have a view point they feel strongly about, to really condemn zealously people of opposing views.

Most people grew up looking for the answers with their parents. The bond family, the effect of culture, nationalism, and other factors, influence what person will believe.

I didn't need any of that growing up, it's not a necessity to follow your parents like a robot; bonding with your family is optional; being effected to much by your culture can be a bad thing (see islam), nationalsim is the cousin of racism and again is not a necessity just pride (again, optional). It's the kids responsibility to mature enough to eventually stray from their parents ideology and form opinions/views of their own (even if only slightly different). It's also their responsibility to care what is true and be skeptical of everything, every great mind was a skeptic, religious or not.

People develop a bias. Some people change their minds, and when they do, even if their reasoning isn't perfect, will feel very strong about it.

Whenever I get ready to talk to a deist I know they have been seeded roots of religion somewhere in their family and they wanted to somehow rebel against the primitive religions and still believe in a god somewhere. We can measure whats in the universe through science and all it's shown us is that life forms naturally, an infinite god would still have to have been created. The kind of god youre hoping for at best is a highly advanced alien lifeform way above where we are. And you would probably call that thing god because of what it could possibly do.

What I realize now, is most people are riding some tide, and will never go against it.

Will you ever reconsider your faith? think about that before you answer.

Sometimes a person goes against a viewpoint he held, and then becomes passionate against the people whom hold that view.

I knew it....

I think we need to understand that people don't know why they believe what they believe. People reasoning are not perfect, and they hold beliefs on irrational basis all the time. I see no reason to be upset at these people. I see no reason to disrespect these people.

Then they shouldn't believe things that havn't been proven to be true or even been able to be tested. In Science we dont say that magic fairies made the water on the planet if we dont have it peer reviewed and accepted in the scientific community, and until then its supernatural hogwash until it has demonsterable evidence to support it. If you have no proof of your deist-god you have to submit that you are an Agnostic Deist.

I think we need to sympathize with each other and realize humans in general have not been able to escape illogical irrational thinking.

We can sympathize all you want but if you aren't willing to re-evaluate your beliefs and consider other peoples points of view (not saying youre not) then we wont get anywhere. The best thing to do when you run into an argument with an Atheist that is getting the better of you, just say "you know what, i will study up on this despite my faith and give it a real chance" otherwise you're going to get backlash for things you might say here.

I think we also need to try put ourselves in other people's shoes, try to understand their thinking, even if your ideas are against, and sympathize with people, even if they are enemies of our people.

Religions are my enemy and they are the enemies of their own subsevients as well as the other religions. Sorry to disappoint you but a lot of us want to see religion boil down to a point where it's a campfire tale thats taken as seriously as bigfoot is today.

Everyone naturally when they pick view tend to believe they are right, but I see no need to be so zealous against others. Everyone is experiencing the world in their own way, and we shouldn't look down upon people, but sympathize and forbear them.

I will never claim I am 100% right, I have a problem with the people who claim they are 100% right that a supernatural deity exists with no physical proof, no contemporary proof based from religious texts, and opposing proof from Science that we evolved naturally in the Cosmos.

People don't try to be stupid, don't try to be irrational, don't try to be immoral. In fact, people tend to try the opposite.

Then they lack critical thinking skills and it needs to be corrected.

A Muslim or a Christian may condemn a person for their beliefs, not sympathize with a people holding a wrong cosmology, or failing to believe in the "right religion" and "true path", because this is what their scriptures teach, but what reason do Atheists have of being so zealous against people for wrong views?

They both fail to even comprehend Cosmology, don't even put Christian or Muslim in the same sentence with Cosmology. And if there was a true path everyone would have it and there wouldn't be 1000's of other mutually exclusive religions teaching different answers about different important questions.

I am actually quite disgusted by how little compassion/respect/love/forbearance is shown to non-atheists on this forum. I hope most atheists are not like the people on this forum.

If you've met Zakir500 or Godschild, me thinks you'd have a different opinion.

[tackattack]

I'm not confusing the two. I know a lot of people who also feel it needs to be earned by default. I have certain idealistic hopes for society though. I belive we should all have the right to believe what we like, live how we like (so as it's not affecting anyone else negatively), and love who we want. I try and show deference to those rights to everyone, which is basic repsect to me. Of course some are more respected than others, because they've earned more. My base value isn't 0 respect though.

Respecting someone's right to make a choice does not mean that you have to respect the choice itself.

Fine I agree with that

---

Respect is one of the most abused words. Respect needs to be earned.

Wouldn't that ultimately depend on who's giving out the respect?

Yes. Respect is a personal, individual thing.

I tend to respect everyone as a default. (even though it may not be readily apparent to them)
They don't need to earn my respect, it's automatically given to them freely.
Kind of like Jesus supposedly offers grace freely.
All they have to do is accept it.

However, my respect can be lost.
And when it is lost, then it will need to be 'earned' back.

Baseless respect is worthless. Fake. Hypocritical. Untruthful.
Respect is not something you have an automatic right to. Being treated with civility and basic manners is something you have an automatic right to (unless prior fuck-ups). Not respect.

---

You can use the word however you like RS, but according to my dictionary:
respect=deference to a right, privilege, privileged position, or someone or something considered to have certain rights or privileges; proper acceptance or courtesy; acknowledgment:

among other definitions. If you believe a person has any base rights that's some form of respect. Since you feel people should automaticaly treated with civility and basic manners, then that's respect in my book. Of course people can lose that, or earn more than that, but I grant them this also by default. My point was, without meeting, listening to, or knowing anything about soeone I grant everyone some level of respect. I'm sure there are some atheists here, that simply by putting some type of theism in their religious views section zero's out their respect. I don't wantto put words in your mouth, but would it be safe to assume that you agree with that view?

[Rokcet Scientist]

according to my dictionary:
respect=deference to a right, privilege, privileged position, or someone or something considered to have certain rights or privileges

Precisely: "deference to a right, a privilege." A right, a privilege that has to be earned. A right, a privilege that is not a given, not an automatic birthright.

[Whateverist]

according to my dictionary:
respect=deference to a right, privilege, privileged position, or someone or something considered to have certain rights or privileges

Precisely: "deference to a right, a privilege." A right, a privilege that has to be earned. A right, a privilege that is not a given, not an automatic birthright.

No, rights don't have to be earned. They are acknowledged to be innate or we don't call them rights. A privilege might have to be earned.

[Rokcet Scientist]

Precisely: "deference to a right, a privilege." A right, a privilege that has to be earned. A right, a privilege that is not a given, not an automatic birthright.

No, rights don't have to be earned. They are acknowledged to be innate or we don't call them rights. A privilege might have to be earned.

OK, so if we apply your definition respect is not a right, but a privilege. One that has to be earned.
(FYI: privileges can be innate rights too – e.g. by virtue of birth (think of a prince or king) – but not rights to respect. Only to proper manners.)

[RW_9]

No, rights don't have to be earned. They are acknowledged to be innate or we don't call them rights. A privilege might have to be earned.

You have to distinguish from rights in general or "human rights" if you are going to specifically refer to something you believe to be innate. Legal rights, civil rights, etc, all exist without being innate.

[tackattack]

My only point.. which is getting a bit muddled, is that I grant people certain rights (birthrights if you will) for just being human just like you do. You claimed you feel everyone should be automaticaly treated with civility and basic manners. That's a birthright you're giving everyone. I just add a few more things to that basic right. I also don't automatically take that right away from someone based on their religous belief. The question I believe the OP wishes each of us to ask is :
Do you dole out this birthright equally to everyone, or do you base it on whether they agree with your worldview?

[The Grand Nudger]

Is that the question? I dole out civility equally, and revoke civility based on experience.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

No, rights don't have to be earned. They are acknowledged to be innate

There's the rub;I do not recognise ANY innate rights.

The rights I enjoy and deeply appreciate are the result of an accident of birth. My rights have been established by custom and law and are maintained by custom and the rule law. Period.


A privilege maybe earned or simply ascribed. EG the privileges traditionally granted to say the inherited aristocracy. These privileges are ascribed due to birth,and in no ways earned. This after the initial enoblement of a forebear, which may or may not have been earned.


Diplomats are obliged to be civil to complete arseholes, drongos,dropkicks,fuckwits and diverse types of obnoxious twerps; I am not so obliged.

[tackattack]

and you're not alone in that and perfectly entitled to it pad