climbing of sacred hills

close
more_vert
Mustard M
Mustard Jul 11, 2013 14:04:41
Replying to moss

moss wrote:
what I do know however is that we should respect the individual and his/her belief even if we find it irrational and illogical.
This is the bit I struggle with. We don't respect such points of view unless they're labelled "religious". If someone insisted the world was flat in the face of all evidence to the contrary, I don't think it'd turn many heads if I labelled them an idiot. Whereas it isn't considered acceptable to label someone an idiot for believing that JC rose again on the 3rd day etc.

Which might seem a little off topic, but given the notion of some places as being somehow "sacred" or belonging to a specific group of people, it does seem kind of relevant.

R Rhiannon
Rhiannon Jul 11, 2013 14:19:28
Replying to Mustard

It wouldn't be polite to call them an idiot though would it, especially to their face. Isn't that the 'respect' bit, a version of politeness? Wouldn't you subscribe to that much? You can give them your reasons why they are wrong (or you think they're wrong). They can change their mind if they want. And anyone looking on can draw their own conclusions. You might privately think they're an idiot and roll your eyes and give up trying to change their opinion. It doesn't do much good to call them an idiot and start a punch up?

But it's not like the tma forum hoho, in real life should you not generally try to maintain politeness? Respect doesn't imply you agree with their crazy ideas. Just that you accept their right to hold them.

Your point about the number of people holding the idea though, that's relevant somehow isn't it. I can't quite work out how yet.

L Littlestone
Littlestone Jul 11, 2013 14:44:03
Replying to Mustard

I think you might have a point actually.

Religion remains one of the few (if not the only) areas of life where one thinks twice about saying to a religious person that you think their beliefs are a load of old cobblers. But why should that be, it’s not the case in politics or other walks of life so why should we not say what we think when face-to-face with a religious person.

Perhaps the answer is the great edifice that religions have built around their belief systems over millennia, terrifying the plebs witless with tales of brimstone and fire. They’ve even managed to create a law against criticising them – it’s called blaspheme, and that's seriously not right in any free society.

M moss
moss Jul 12, 2013 09:03:46
Replying to Mustard

Mustard wrote:
This is the bit I struggle with. We don't respect such points of view unless they're labelled "religious". If someone insisted the world was flat in the face of all evidence to the contrary, I don't think it'd turn many heads if I labelled them an idiot. Whereas it isn't considered acceptable to label someone an idiot for believing that JC rose again on the 3rd day etc.

Which might seem a little off topic, but given the notion of some places as being somehow "sacred" or belonging to a specific group of people, it does seem kind of relevant.

I can only answer this in simple terms, neither of us would go into a church or cathedral and scrawl graffiti (even Banksy would n't) on the wall or knock bits of stone out to take home as a souvenir, we respect the edifice though not the religion that it is dedicated too.
Rhiannon has covered the subject about respect, it is the social pact we make with the people around us to behave in a courteous fashion. That which is wrong in religion, and there is so much of course, we can speak out against.
I actually decided that there was no such thing as a god, at about 6 or 7 in Sunday school, that old man with a beard was just a fairytale, never changed my mind since.....