The Problem of Evil combined with the problem of Free Will

[Valyza1]

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.  

Are you talking about if we accepted that their sacred cows are sacred to them or accepting that those cows should be sacred to everyone? I see no issue respecting the fact that someone has their own personal sacred cow, and if I'm made aware of what that cow is, I have no issue with adjusting my behavior around them accordingly. That's practically second nature to me. I do have an issue if they are expecting me personally to have the same sacred cow. Mainly because while it's possible to act as if I do, it's not possible to actually have a scared cow I don't naturally have. So I'm not sure to what precisely you're referring when you say "if we applied it uniformly". Apply what uniformly?

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?  

Um, no, I did not belittle his position in the slightest. I told him it wasn't a subject I was interested in and for all I know, he could be right. That it would really take some time and thought to go over and this wasn't the time and place, blah, blah. You could say my initial internal reaction was that it was nonsense, but I recognize that for what it is: a reaction. It doesn't make ridicule an appropriate response. Likewise with any human reaction before thought and reflection set in, even if it's external. Just because you react one way, doesn't mean the wiser part of yourself finds it justified.

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?

Nope. Deference for someone else's beliefs does not mean changing yours. If you believe there's nothing wrong with eating beef, then eat your beef. If you think there might be something wrong with it, then work it out. If the other person believes that you shouldn't eat meat, then ignore or discuss. I don't see how ridicule would help things.

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?

All I mean by deference is respecting the fact that just because they believe something intangible and different than you doesn't automatically mean that they're "wrong". You have your beliefs and they have theirs. They don't have to be universally evident facts to be worthy of respect. That's the kind of deference I believe is due to everyone, theist or atheist.

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

Could be dangerous, but I don't think there's anything inherently disrespectful about it, unless your intention is to provoke them.