The Problem of Evil combined with the problem of Free Will

[The Grand Nudger]

How so?  I mean I think there's a basic deference due to every human being based both on the impact we have on each other and our own ignorance of each other's perspectives, and I hope I haven't unduly gone beyond that basic deference.

It would be irrelevant if this were true, since what we're discussing is affording a persons relifgious ideas undue deference, not affording a person basic or undue deference.

 But if I have, how does that make every idea harder to communicate to whomever I "over-respected", so to speak?  

I don't know whether or not you've ever done that, I only know that in this thread you offer a middling support -for- it.  Everyone who has a sacred cow thinks that their sacred cow should be sacred.  That some things are too rude or uncouth or uncivil..to say, about their sacred cow.  All well and good.  However, if we accepted this, and applied it uniformly...we'd find that all cows are sacred, to someone.  

Not knowing beforehand every specific of what a person believes would then put you in the unfortunate position of tossing the dice every time we opened our mouths to anyone, of being "too unkind, too rude, uncivil - of ridiculing people.....".  Ofc, this is all a massive red herring...we're ridiculing a belief....but never mind that, because a simple "Happy Holidays" is ridicule and sacrilege and heresy....to someone.

I don't think of myself as the nuttiest, no.  I worked with someone who told me the moon landing was a conspiracy.  I don't remember how the conversation went exactly, but I remember not caring enough about it to make much of an effort thinking about it.  And I think I told him that more or less, too.

So, essentially, you belittled his position as an inane irrelevance?  Some people take offense to that.  Should we show deference to such ideas, on the off chance that we are talking to such a person?  

 Were that posted in a forum, I might find it interesting to ponder, but it was in person at my job and I was too busy with other things to focus on a subject I didn't really care all that much about.  I'll back away from any conversation I don't want to have, regardless of the reason.  Can't say I've ever involuntarily laughed in someone's face.  I've laughed inappropriately a few times, but usually because I've either misunderstood social expectations, or couldn't get some sort of humorous feeling out.  I don't think the subject of it has ever been someone's beliefs, though.  

I think that moon landing conspiracies count as nutty beliefs.  Some of the nuttiest, actually..in my experience.

I know, I know...that people will generally say "well, I'm not talking about showing deference or undue deference to -that- idea or to -all- ideas....just this one, or that one." -There's your sacred cow. Take a number. Let;s talk about a specific religious idea. How about actual sacred cows? If a person who believes that cattle are sacred and not to be harmed is eating at a table...should some sort of basic deference for either the person or his ideas imply or insist that I should refrain from eating beef? Do the religious sensibilities of some nutter create a civil obligation on -my- diet? If they do...what sorts of things go the other way? What sorts of things should nutters not do...in the presence of an atheist? What deference is due to atheists, or atheist ideas?

How about drinking alcohol around a muslim..or for that matter.... in a muslim country?