My girlfriend believes in God

Surely you are not serious? You must expect to be shamed if you are going to hold onto.......? So who gets to decide this stuff is archaic or not? Who gets to decide if it is for personal reasons or not? Other idiots? Wow. I don't really know what to say.

Don't you suppose the fact that you don't believe God exists might seem odd to others? Should you then also expect to be shamed for your personal belief?

No one should be shamed for anything. The only thing shame is good for is to make someone feel bad about themselves. or the shamer feel better about themselves. Either way, it's a shame.

Quote:

Surely you are not serious? You must expect to be shamed if you are going to hold onto.......? So who gets to decide this stuff is archaic or not? Who gets to decide if it is for personal reasons or not? Other idiots? Wow. I don't really know what to say.

That's the beautiful thing. The whole world gets to decide. Anyone who can prove anything at all can publish it and share this information.

Ok, how do we decide? Majority rules? Isn't it just a matter of you believe one thing and I believe another so we should just respect that?

Quote:

Don't you suppose the fact that you don't believe God exists might seem odd to others? Should you then also expect to be shamed for your personal belief?

Odd, no I don't believe it would sound odd, that person must be highly isolated if they have never even heard of that notion before. I would expect them to disagree with me if they disagree, of course. Do I need to say that? Should I expect to be shamed by people who don't believe in God...well, they can try, but they'd really only be making themselves look more foolish in my eyes (I'm sure the reverse is true).

Maybe odd wasn't the correct word. But those that do believe in God have a hard time understanding sometimes why others don't. But, it doesn't mean you should be shamed because of it. It's just a difference between people.

Quote:

No one should be shamed for anything. The only thing shame is good for is to make someone feel bad about themselves. or the shamer feel better about themselves. Either way, it's a shame.

Clever. But the world does not fit anyone's ideal of "what should be." I did not mean that people SHOULD be insulted, I meant that they must EXPECT and not be SURPRISED that they will be insulted for having such beliefs when they enter an environment of people with contrary beliefs. Just as I would not be surprised to be insulted for my beleifs were I to live in ancient egypt

ok

It's true the world does not fit into anyones ideal of anything. The point is, if each one of us individually treated each one of us with a certain amount of respect and dignity, I think we'd all be better off. I just don't believe insulting anyone is ever the right thing to do. I won't lie and say I have never done it because I have. But, it still does not make it right.

If a woman wears a miniskirt and halter top and looks sexy, should she expect to get raped? I realize that's extreme but it's along the same lines. The responsibility for our actions lies with us. Not with what someone else does or doesn't do that they should expect anything.

Ok, how do we decide? Majority rules? Isn't it just a matter of you believe one thing and I believe another so we should just respect that?

The point is, if each one of us individually treated each one of us with a certain amount of respect and dignity, I think we'd all be better off. I just don't believe insulting anyone is ever the right thing to do. I won't lie and say I have never done it because I have. But, it still does not make it right.

If a woman wears a miniskirt and halter top and looks sexy, should she expect to get raped? I realize that's extreme but it's along the same lines. The responsibility for our actions lies with us. Not with what someone else does or doesn't do that they should expect anything.

JC, Forget "materialism." Science is not dogmatic. If that's your definition, you evidently understand very little about science. Nothing is "absolute." We can only rely on science to explain by observation and evidence that their assumptions are true. Only religion can be termed dogmatic.

I can respect anyone's belief in anything at all if I see that they have a good reason for believing that something. If someone's reason is simply that "they feel like it" and they refuse to change their beliefs when they see evidence to the contrary, I cannot respect that lack of open-mindedness.

It sounds like that makes sense, but I find it difficult to practice in real life. It is possible to treat everyone with respect, but it is not possible to actually truly respect everyone. I truly respect people who demonstrate respectable qualities. for the most part religion seems to be a sign of belligerance and when I see this, and I just can't respect that.

If a woman dresses this way, of course she must realize that it is increasing her chances of being sexually "harassed" (or hit on) and possibly raped...as you say yourself, we must take responsibility for our own actions. We cannot ignore the worst in people. If you drive a nice car in the city, you must expect to be robbed if you don't lock it.

Hi Eva & John,

If stuh505 discounts the religious viewpoint, why does it follow that stuh505 is "piously sure of one's own righteousness; moralistic"?
Where is the pious surety of righteousness?
Where is the moralizing?

But who decides if they have a good reason for believing something? To you, there may not be a good reason. To them, there may be an excellent reason. I'm not sure too many people believe just because "they feel like it."

If a woman dresses this way, of course she must realize that it is increasing her chances of being sexually "harassed" (or hit on) and possibly raped...as you say yourself, we must take responsibility for our own actions. We cannot ignore the worst in people. If you drive a nice car in the city, you must expect to be robbed if you don't lock it.

Oh come on, we all insult people. We all giggle at the people who are dressed funny behind their backs, and we like to make fun of other idiots behind their backs and share this kind of talk with our friends and lovers.

Not necessarily. Sixteen years and it's still good.

(That Bear guy above has NO idea what I put up with proportionally to him, just for the sex.)

JC wrote:
So what would you call someone with little real knowledge of science, yet they believe everything scientists say just because they say so? I would call that dogmatic.

I would say that that individual understands nothing of science. Science is a self-validating system of checks and balances. Dogma is never a part of science.

JC wrote:
Science in itself is not dogmatic, but many people scientific-minded people are.

I agree 100 percent. When I first learned about that professor from Harvard that wrote why blacks did poorly in school, I knew right away he was not a social scientist by any stretch of the imagination.

Being a professor doesn't mean he's a credible source. Many professors are complete idiots that somehow managed to slip through the system.

JC, well it would be nice to have my special someone view eye to eye on me on all the MAJOR issues. But no I don't expect her to be in complete agreement with me on everything...I haven't left her for this, I'm just trying to deal with it.

Edit: Phoenix, it seems you basically just echoed what I said.

Not necessarily. Sixteen years and it's still good.

(That Bear guy above has NO idea what I put up with proportionally to him, just for the sex.)