Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: May 8, 2024, 12:19 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
RE: Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
So it's an anti-religion forum yet nobody ever gave me grief here for being a Unitarian Universalist, which I have been quite open about when the topic of religion comes up. I wonder why that is?
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
Reply
RE: Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
(March 13, 2020 at 12:24 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: So it's an anti-religion forum yet nobody ever gave me grief here for being a Unitarian Universalist, which I have been quite open about when the topic of religion comes up. I wonder why that is?

Have you heard about the U.U. terrorists? They go about burning question marks on people’s lawns.  Wink

Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
Reply
RE: Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
(March 13, 2020 at 12:24 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: So it's an anti-religion forum yet nobody ever gave me grief here for being a Unitarian Universalist, which I have been quite open about when the topic of religion comes up. I wonder why that is?

I guess today's a good day to start...but alas we can't gather the angry mob with their pitchforks and torches since we are supposed to be practicing social distancing.

You get a pass due to plague.
  
“If you are the smartest person in the room, then you are in the wrong room.” — Confucius
                                      
Reply
RE: Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
(March 12, 2020 at 11:34 pm)Rahn127 Wrote:
(March 12, 2020 at 4:20 pm)Belacqua Wrote: This isn't evident to me.

How do you demonstrate that this is the case?

I think the demonstration can be made with the letter B.

OK, Hitchens claims that the troubles in Belfast were religious in origin. So do some of the posters here, though they are unwilling to write anything other than pronouncements and insults, and don't make an argument for their claim. I say they are wrong.

The combatants in Belfast took sides along Protestant/Catholic divides. But their quarrels had nothing to do with Protestantism or Catholicism. Their fight was about political issues. 

If anyone were willing to have a conversation about this, there are a number of points I can make in support of this. No fights were had concerning theology. The two sides' members were not divided by religious belief, they were divided along the lines of the traditional dominant religion of the political faction. If one member of the Orangemen, for example, stopped believing in God, he would no longer be a Christian, but he would still be a Protestant, as the political battles labelled him. 

This is from the Wikipedia page on "The Troubles":

Quote:The conflict was primarily political and nationalistic, fuelled by historical events.[31] It also had an ethnicor sectarian dimension,[32] although it was not a religious conflict.[13][33] A key issue was the constitutional status of Northern IrelandUnionists/loyalists, who were mostly Protestants, wanted Northern Ireland to remain within the United Kingdom. Irish nationalists/republicans, who were mostly Catholics, wanted Northern Ireland to leave the United Kingdom and join a .

As I've been saying, religious labels were useful as an identity and a rallying point, but the fight was not a religious fight. 

This is from the Wikipedia page on the Good Friday Agreement:

Quote:Issues relating to sovereigntycivil and cultural rights, demilitarisation, justice and policing were central to the agreement.

All of these issues were political. None was religious. 
Reply
RE: Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
Welcome to the oversimplified interpretation blatantly done to absolve religion....  Dodgy
Quote:I don't understand why you'd come to a discussion forum, and then proceed to reap from visibility any voice that disagrees with you. If you're going to do that, why not just sit in front of a mirror and pat yourself on the back continuously?
-Esquilax

Evolution - Adapt or be eaten.
Reply
RE: Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
(March 15, 2020 at 5:25 am)Belacqua Wrote:
(March 12, 2020 at 11:34 pm)Rahn127 Wrote: I think the demonstration can be made with the letter B.

OK, Hitchens claims that the troubles in Belfast were religious in origin. So do some of the posters here, though they are unwilling to write anything other than pronouncements and insults, and don't make an argument for their claim. I say they are wrong.

The combatants in Belfast took sides along Protestant/Catholic divides. But their quarrels had nothing to do with Protestantism or Catholicism. Their fight was about political issues. 

If anyone were willing to have a conversation about this, there are a number of points I can make in support of this. No fights were had concerning theology. The two sides' members were not divided by religious belief, they were divided along the lines of the traditional dominant religion of the political faction. If one member of the Orangemen, for example, stopped believing in God, he would no longer be a Christian, but he would still be a Protestant, as the political battles labelled him. 

This is from the Wikipedia page on "The Troubles":

Quote:The conflict was primarily political and nationalistic, fuelled by historical events.[31] It also had an ethnicor sectarian dimension,[32] although it was not a religious conflict.[13][33] A key issue was the constitutional status of Northern IrelandUnionists/loyalists, who were mostly Protestants, wanted Northern Ireland to remain within the United Kingdom. Irish nationalists/republicans, who were mostly Catholics, wanted Northern Ireland to leave the United Kingdom and join a .

As I've been saying, religious labels were useful as an identity and a rallying point, but the fight was not a religious fight. 

This is from the Wikipedia page on the Good Friday Agreement:

Quote:Issues relating to sovereigntycivil and cultural rights, demilitarisation, justice and policing were central to the agreement.

All of these issues were political. None was religious. 

Your original claim was that no one in NI was killing people over theological disputes.

Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
Reply
RE: Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
(March 15, 2020 at 6:16 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:
(March 15, 2020 at 5:25 am)Belacqua Wrote: OK, Hitchens claims that the troubles in Belfast were religious in origin. So do some of the posters here, though they are unwilling to write anything other than pronouncements and insults, and don't make an argument for their claim. I say they are wrong.

The combatants in Belfast took sides along Protestant/Catholic divides. But their quarrels had nothing to do with Protestantism or Catholicism. Their fight was about political issues. 

If anyone were willing to have a conversation about this, there are a number of points I can make in support of this. No fights were had concerning theology. The two sides' members were not divided by religious belief, they were divided along the lines of the traditional dominant religion of the political faction. If one member of the Orangemen, for example, stopped believing in God, he would no longer be a Christian, but he would still be a Protestant, as the political battles labelled him. 

This is from the Wikipedia page on "The Troubles":


As I've been saying, religious labels were useful as an identity and a rallying point, but the fight was not a religious fight. 

This is from the Wikipedia page on the Good Friday Agreement:


All of these issues were political. None was religious. 

Your original claim was that no one in NI was killing people over theological disputes.

Boru

What theological dispute were people being killed over?
Reply
RE: Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
If I'm a Catholic and you're a Protestant, and I beat you to death with a rock because you're a Protestant, that's a theological dispute.  If I beat you to death because you're a Loyalist who happens to be a Protestant, that's a political dispute.

Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
Reply
RE: Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
(March 15, 2020 at 6:47 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: If I'm a Catholic and you're a Protestant, and I beat you to death with a rock because you're a Protestant, that's a theological dispute.  If I beat you to death because you're a Loyalist who happens to be a Protestant, that's a political dispute.

Boru

No, it's tribalism. 

Quote:The conflict was primarily political and nationalistic, fuelled by historical events.[31] It also had an ethnicor sectarian dimension,[32] although it was not a religious conflict.[13][33] 

Theology is a field of study about the nature of God. 

If you beat someone over a disagreement about the presence of Christ in the host, that's a theological dispute.

If you beat someone because he is a member of a religion traditionally associated with the other side in a political dispute, it's a fight rooted in politics.

People in Britain have been known to beat supporters of rival football teams. According to Christopher Hitchens' logic, this is proof that sports are evil.
Reply
RE: Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
Because internal Irish politics explain the presence of Czechoslovakian Semtex explosive...

Because internal Irish politics explain the presence of 10,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles delivered by nuclear submarine...

Because internal Irish politics explain terrorist train camps in the People's Socialist Republic of Yemen...

You have no idea what was driving events in NI, or why certain groups wanted to tie large numbers of British troops down in NI instead of West Germany for example. But please feel free to continue with the internal politics line.
Quote:I don't understand why you'd come to a discussion forum, and then proceed to reap from visibility any voice that disagrees with you. If you're going to do that, why not just sit in front of a mirror and pat yourself on the back continuously?
-Esquilax

Evolution - Adapt or be eaten.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Agnosticism LinuxGal 5 876 January 2, 2023 at 8:29 am
Last Post: Anomalocaris
  Atheism, theism, agnosticism, gnosticism, ignosticism Simon Moon 25 2109 October 29, 2022 at 4:49 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal
  Two Undeniable Truths Why Theism is True and Atheism and Agnosticism are Not True HiYou 49 12338 July 21, 2015 at 6:59 am
Last Post: KUSA
  Enlightened [Elitist] Agnosticism Dystopia 92 9921 March 3, 2015 at 11:48 am
Last Post: robvalue
  In need of a more humbleness. Why condemning the Theistic position makes no sense. Mystic 141 24151 September 22, 2014 at 7:59 am
Last Post: Chas
  Question about atheism related with gnosticism and agnosticism Dystopia 4 2130 July 10, 2014 at 5:52 pm
Last Post: ignoramus
  Implications of the Atheistic Position FallentoReason 33 11474 September 2, 2012 at 9:42 pm
Last Post: Oldandeasilyconfused
  Atheism vs. Agnosticism EscapingDelusion 9 5489 August 28, 2012 at 2:25 pm
Last Post: pocaracas
  Both groups feel the other side is dishonest? Mystic 27 10921 July 18, 2012 at 6:43 pm
Last Post: Brian37
  Why Agnosticism? diffidus 69 27097 July 1, 2011 at 9:07 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)