Value Collector
Have courage, and be kind.
- Joined
- 13 January 2014
- Posts
- 12,238
- Reactions
- 8,485
Not quite what I am saying.
I am saying that the narrative provided to implement any moral system is based on symbolism, which is a human concept as distinguishable from underlying objective reality. Moral values such as we are all equal, treat others how you would wish them to treat you, economic growth at all costs, our duty is to the King / Queen, glory is in conquest (or any example you can think of) are all beliefs, and can be put in a variety or contexts and justified within many different narratives. Symbolism is everywhere that there are humans. Within overarching society it is always justified on a rational basis. And it is this disconnect that sows the seeds for its eventual demise. It can sit quietly under the surface for a long time (and the most successful societies in history thrive on this), but eventually when the narrative starts breaking down, it can be taken to extremes and becomes a mockery of its previous self. It will be replaced or refined and so we begin again. It is fairly cyclical over history, if you look for it.
My purpose here is not to judge, but to point out that it exists as a process. If you know something exists it is much easier to question it.
Do not presume to know what I or anyone else is thinking! If you truly believe what you've said here then you clearly haven't got even the foggiest notion of what I am thinking!I think what is happening here is that people such as yourself, pav and cbc, think that when I stand up for my own religious rights, and the rights of others, that I am some how oppressing you, when this is not the case.
Actually, the contents of a number of your posts strongly suggest otherwise!I fully support your rights to Have a religion, practice it in any non harmful way you want, build churches, have meetings, instruct your children, have faith schools, be free to not have others force their religion on you etc etc.
I also fully support the rights of people to be allowed to freely think for themselves, whilst respecting the right of others to enjoy the same freedom without judgment.
Again your criticism applies more to yourself than to those you've chosen to debate! (Try reading back through your posts on these religion threads.)However, other people also have these rights to their own religions or even no religion, So when people suggest Christianity should be forced through public schools or public policy, they are encroaching on the religious rights of every other religion and the rights of non believers.
It seems that you do not understand the meaning of the word "oppressed". Since when does issuing a compliment to a friend in relation to their wedding entitle anyone to commence a relentless assault on one's freedom of belief?I think you will find the only time you get "Oppressed"(it's not really oppression) is when your actively saying things that would suggest in some way you want to take other peoples religious freedoms away, for example suggesting your religion should be taught to all children in schools, you should be able to see that that wouldn't be you expressing a religious right, it would be you oppressing every other religion and non religious group.
Actually, the contents of a number of your posts strongly suggest otherwise!
Again your criticism applies more to yourself than to those you've chosen to debate! (Try reading back through your posts on these religion threads.)
It seems that you do not understand the meaning of the word "oppressed". Since when does issuing a compliment to a friend in relation to their wedding entitle anyone to commence a relentless assault on one's freedom of belief?
P.S. I am not against freedom of choice. I am perfectly willing to respect the rights of others in the formulation of their own views on theism, provided they accord others the same respect. I am also just as happy for them to hold no views whatsoever. What I am opposed to is the arrogant presumption by some that their personal view entitles them to claim intellectual, moral or factual superiority over those subscribing to alien beliefs. I find such bigotry offensive!
We've already played this game and you struck out three times!Such as? Please link a post where I have tried to deny your religious rights.
Again, please provide a link to so where that I have denied some ones religious rights.
What part of "relentless assault" do you not understand?I am not just using the word oppressed in relation to you, but also other forum members who have made suggestions Christianity is being attacked and they are being oppressed by suggestions that they can not teach their stuff in schools etc.
But in relation to your oppression at the hands of an atheist at a wedding, was it your friend who oppressed you?
What exactly did he say that made you feel oppressed?
Again you've contradicted yourself by arrogantly presuming a rightful claim to the moral high ground!Well, some of them may actually have superiority when it comes to intellectual, moral or factual debates. Are you sure your not just getting butt hurt because they are not feigning respect of your beliefs like society teaches us. If somebody openly spouts an immoral teaching, there is nothing wrong with some one openly disagreeing with them on a moral standing.
When it comes to claiming moral high ground though, I don't think its atheists that are the biggest offenders of making arrogant assumptions, the vast majority of atheists will just let you go about spouting whatever nonsense you want without saying a word in opposition, and they will tip toe around you being sure to never offend you.
We've already played this game and you struck out three times!
Re-read your own posts!
What part of "relentless assault" do you not understand?
I believe the fact that neither he nor his friends allowed me the space to utter so much as a single word during their 30+ minutes tirade counts as oppression in anyone's language!
I note that you are again indulging your habit of asking questions to which you're unwilling to receive answers!
Again you've contradicted yourself by arrogantly presuming a rightful claim to the moral high ground!
Those unwilling to receive answers shouldn't ask questions!
So now the self confessed atheist agnostic denies having posted anti theistic sentiments to the religion threads!
!
Oh no it wasn't!We have played this game, and gave three examples of things You thought meant I was claiming to know Isaacs newtons mind. I then said that these were not my claims, but were taken from things Isaac actually said.
So your accusation that I claimed to know Isaacs mind was false
I already know what I have said, Your the one claiming I have said things which deny people their religious rights, If you think that prove it and post a link.
I don't discard decades long friendships over isolated incidents! Had the behaviour persisted beyond the day in question, my decision to persevere with such friendships may have been quite different.So you couldn't just walk away? Are you saying this guy was your friend?
We've played this game before!So far you haven't been able to provide valid answers. Lets make this very simple.
You claimed that in my posts I have said things that suggest I want to deny peoples religious rights.
I dispute this claim
Please provide one link to some thing I have said which would be taking peoples religious rights away. All you have to do is find one link, otherwise take back the accusation..
I am not claiming I have the moral high ground in all cases, however you said
"What I am opposed to is the arrogant presumption by some that their personal view entitles them to claim intellectual, moral or factual superiority over those subscribing to alien beliefs. I find such bigotry offensive!"
All I am saying is that in some cases they will actually have personal views that do have intellectual, moral or factual superiority over those subscribing other beliefs.
Oh no it wasn't!
As you are already only too well aware my claim was substantiated by three of your very own posts!
Are you sure about that?! You seem to be asking me for constant reminders of things that you've already posted!
I don't discard decades long friendships over isolated incidents! Had the behaviour persisted beyond the day in question, my decision to persevere with such friendships may have been quite different.
Whether it be in all or any cases you are claiming the right to moral high ground!
All I did was compliment one on the minister and her sermon from when I'd attended his wedding. The next thing I knew I was receiving the most relentlessly oppressive lecture I'd received since childhood
Um, cynic, going by your posts in this thread, I'm finding it a bit hard to imagine you passively standing by to meekly receive a '30+ minute tirade' about anything.What part of "relentless assault" do you not understand?
I believe the fact that neither he nor his friends allowed me the space to utter so much as a single word during their 30+ minutes tirade counts as oppression in anyone's language!
That's fine Julia, but I can guarantee you that is what happened nonetheless. In fact it was just shy of an hour, but I didn't want to be accused of exaggeration. I was waiting for the people present to allow me a space to actually speak! (As you've correctly noticed I'm not nearly so patient these days!)Um, cynic, going by your posts in this thread, I'm finding it a bit hard to imagine you passively standing by to meekly receive a '30+ minute tirade' about anything.
Again that's fine Julia.None of us have to listen to anything. Easy enough to politely say "let's agree to disagree on this".
So true!If we're determined to find a reason to feel aggrieved/oppressed/insulted etc etc, it's usually easy enough.
Things already are what they are.Perhaps better overall to allow some things to just be what they are.
Um, cynic, going by your posts in this thread, I'm finding it a bit hard to imagine you passively standing by to meekly receive a '30+ minute tirade' about anything.
None of us have to listen to anything. Easy enough to politely say "let's agree to disagree on this".
If we're determined to find a reason to feel aggrieved/oppressed/insulted etc etc, it's usually easy enough.
Perhaps better overall to allow some things to just be what they are.
Pope Francis has defended the Catholic Church's record on tackling the sexual abuse of children by priests, saying "no-one else has done more" to root out paedophilia.
"The Catholic Church is perhaps the only public institution to have acted with transparency and responsibility. No-one else has done more. Yet the Church is the only one to have been attacked," he said in an interview with Il Corriere della Sera daily published Wednesday.
The Sultan of Brunei, Hassanal Bolkiah, is to implement a form of strict Islamic Sharia law across Brunei next month, rejecting foreign criticism of the move.
New legislation will phase in a version of Sharia law that will introduce penalties of amputation for theft, stoning for adultery and flogging for homosexual acts.
He said that the laws, to be implemented next month, were a "great achievement for the country, and not a backward or old-fashioned step."
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/brunei-sultan-impose-strict-sharia-law-amputation-theft-stoning-adultery-1439332
Bring out the time machine boys, we're going back to time...
Brunei: Sultan to Impose Strict Sharia Law with Amputation for Theft and Stoning for Adultery
This has become quite long , and I thank you for staying with me this far . Do you agree ?
If we can work towards agreeing as a species , the whole human race , we move away from the conflicts .
We are one species , on one planet , who share one history , and we share one future .
Towards unity and prosperity , for all of our families , sincerely Ron .
+1Hi Ron09
Welcome to ASF. A long initial post - well done.
We can all dream for a better world but in my opinion it can't happen for two reasons:
1. Greed
2. Overpopulation
But the world needs more people like you (optimist) and less like me (pessimist).
Enjoy your journey at ASF.
dutchie
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?