Hate the belief, not the believer

[Losty]

Since I de-converted from Christianity, I kind of adapted my "hate the sin, not the sinner" ideals. I have been through some really terrible things at the hands of religious people, in the name of god, and justified by the religion itself.

I have been thinking a lot about personal responsibility, and versus impaired judgement due to childhood indoctrination.

I'm really struggling trying to find a cross over point. When do stop blaming the religion for a person's wrong doings and make take responsibility of their own actions. When is it okay to hate the believer for their beliefs?

[psychoslice]

I don't think many here actually do hate the believer, there is a lot here that say terrible things about their beliefs, but I don't think its the believe itself they point those words to, well I hope not, that wouldn't be very intelligent at all.

[vorlon13]

In regards to Joseph Smith, Pat Robertson, Joyce Meyers, Jimmy Swaggart, etal, I note the professed religious beliefs are not sincerely held.

I'd suggest folks, even the pew warmers, be subject to 'tests' of religious sincerity prior to parcelling out any 'breaks' to them.

I'll go get the strychnine . . . .

[Thumpalumpacus]

I detest hypocrites. If a Christian lives by his proclaimed tenets, I'm fine. But I find that there are quite a few of them who are not only hypocrites, but smug, sanctimonious, and preachy even as they commit crimes worse than anything I'd dared to have done, crimes of perversion, larceny, and obstruction.

Clean up your own back yard, I say -- and shut the fuck up while you're doing it. Humble believers who do their best are cool in my book. People who think of cancer as god's gift to children, who pray for illness to befall others at all, who justify evil done in the name of their faith -- well, fuck them.

[Losty]

I don't think many here actually do hate the believer, there is a lot here that say terrible things about their beliefs, but I don't think its the believe itself they point those words to, well I hope not, that wouldn't be very intelligent at all.

My point was that some people just have their beliefs and even though those beliefs are terrible it's none of my business, but some people use their beliefs to justify hideous actions. So, I wonder if at that point I am justified in blaming the person instead of just the religion. Should people be held responsible for their actions even when they were driven by well meaning religious intentions based on their personal beliefs?

[psychoslice]

I don't think many here actually do hate the believer, there is a lot here that say terrible things about their beliefs, but I don't think its the believe itself they point those words to, well I hope not, that wouldn't be very intelligent at all.

My point was that some people just have their beliefs and even though those beliefs are terrible it's none of my business, but some people use their beliefs to justify hideous actions. So, I wonder if at that point I am justified in blaming the person instead of just the religion. Should people be held responsible for their actions even when they were driven by well meaning religious intentions based on their personal beliefs?

Good point, and I agree with you.

[Cato]

If a Christian lives by his proclaimed tenets, I'm fine.

Fuck that! History has already shown us what happens when Christians live by their proclaimed tenets; wasn't pretty. I'm rather fond of the side of Christians that make them hypocritical in relation to their beliefs; same side that makes them humane.

[robvalue]

The way I look at it is indoctrination can produce a type of diminished responsibility. In severe cases it's equivalent to mental abuse. This leaves the person not entirely in their right mind, through no fault of their own.

So to me it's a matter of assessing how much responsibility lies with the person, and how much can be accounted for by indoctrination. Peer pressure, and even physical coercion, will also be factors in a heavily religious society.

Further to that, using religion as a general excuse for actions is unacceptable to me. You are still making the choice to act a certain way. Religious beliefs are arbitrary, and so to say it's ok to follow one kind of belief and act on it is to say that every possible action is ok. That is ridiculous, so I hold people accountable for their actions, regardless of belief, but minus any diminished responsibility factors. Just giving a reason that it's "part of your religion" is like saying its part of a fairy tale, I'm not interested.

[Jacob(smooth)]

Is very simples.

If they are an OK person with odd beliefs, hate the belief.

If they are an asshat, hate the believer. :l

[Violet]

Since I de-converted from Christianity, I kind of adapted my "hate the sin, not the sinner" ideals. I have been through some really terrible things at the hands of religious people, in the name of god, and justified by the religion itself.

Some sins cannot divorce themselves from the sinner committing them. I'm sorry that you've been through such awful things, Losty

I have been thinking a lot about personal responsibility, and versus impaired judgement due to childhood indoctrination.

I'm really struggling trying to find a cross over point. When do stop blaming the religion for a person's wrong doings and make take responsibility of their own actions.

People always need to take responsibility for their own actions. Whomever and whatever is most at fault for causing them: it's up to them to decide if they're going to own up to their wrongdoings and try to be better than they are/have been... or if they're going to live in blissful denial of their effect upon the world.

By the time they're an adult... they should be quite more than capable of making decisions that should be expected of an adult.

When is it okay to hate the believer for their beliefs?

When they start hurting other people with their beliefs. It's okay to hate them, Losty.