Why aren’t they all just considered ridiculous?

I agree Phoenix that some people do take umbrage when their faith is critiqued. And those who do should indeed stay away and not post.

There is certainly a difference in critique/discussion and making fun of something. Some people cannot tell the difference and get offended way too easily.

I resent that.

It should make the opponent present his ideas and facts to back up his position.

You want an example?

The Christian religion is just as irrational, and ridiculous as the pagan religions of ancient Greece and Rome.

Now if you want evidence of that I can go into the Bible and give you verse that will show its God to be cruel, muderous, vain, jealous, selfish,and very vengeful; not to mention unjust and unfair. And this applies to the OT as well as the NT.

I not going to do that, I've done it enough in the past, but if an opponent doesn't like what I said, present the evidence to show me I'm wrong.

It's called debating. It's also called exchange of ideas.

And that type of post is not what I would refer to as ridiculing someone's ideas or faith. That is called you having an opinion based on your reading of the Bible. And yes, I know some more sensitive Christians may think that is ridiculing and take offense, but I would not. I would give examples of what I would call ridiculing and demeaning and childish, but I think I'll take a pass for now.

xingu- In debating, I think that there is that "indefinable something" that varies amongst people. In the "real" world, we relate differently to various people, based on not only who we are, but how we perceive the person with whom we are communicating.

For instance, if I know that a person is very religious, and is also very sensitive, I will not get into a deeply emotionally charged discussion about religion with him/her. There is no point. With someone else, I might go head to head, knowing that the person can give it out as well as take it.

On the internet, we are dealing with persons of various ages, backgrounds, and education. It is very difficult to "fine tune" comments that will sit well with all the members who frequent a certain thread.

For that reason, I think that it is important to be aware of the sensibilities of some people, and couch responses in a way that would not be offensive to MOST of the members. There are many ways to say the exact same thing, without creating anger and defensiveness in other people.

I don't know enough about the people on this site to know what their feelings are about religion or how to say something in a way that will not offend them (I believe that is an individual talent that or art form some of us don't have). What you say may work well for friend, co-worker, etc., but here, on A2K, what we present is not something that is directed at just one person. There are many people of many different beliefs that look in and see what we contribute. There is no possible way to talk about religion that will please everyone or not offend someone. This is not a one on one private discussion. This is a community board.

If someone is offended by what is said than they should not get into the debate or simple leave the thread. But to say we can't say something because it may offend someone beliefs is to impose censorship. We may as well not say anything at all.

I don't see why it should be considered reasonable to contend that there is anything wrong with ridiculing someone's religious belief. The only justification for that attitude, the only excuse for such an attitude which i would consider reasonable would be that at one time, ridiculing someone's religious belief could get you killed.

Then again, at one time, if a church said the sun revolved around the earth and not vice-versa, arguing with that position could get you killed. We have gone beyond the point in human affairs in which people can be browbeaten into believing something (or, if we haven't, we ought to have done).

Once again, these all sound to me like appeals to special pleading. If a grown man or woman came to us to insist that he or she believes in fairies, elves and brownies, and says that he or she cannot prove it scientifically, but you need to have faith, they'd get laughed off the board. But we're expected to accord some kind of respect to someone who comes to us with a goofy story about gods and devils and angels, for which they haven't any proof, but which we are urged to take on faith?

Give me a break. If i say something stupid here, people are going to be all over me. So, if someone seriously expects me to take the Garden of Eden or the Noah's Ark story seriously, i'm going to laugh my ass off and ridicule them as they deserve. If someone says to me that i should respect that scumbag Mohammed, i'm going to laugh my ass off and ridicule them as they deserve.

I do not agree with the author of this thread adherents of religious superstition should be considered eccentric, crazy and ridiculous. After all, perfectly reasonable, intelligent and well-educated people vote for loons like George Bush, and spout the most egregious political horseshit--but we don't condemn as eccentric, crazy and ridiculous. But we do brand their political beliefs eccentric, crazy and ridiculous; it is just as reasonable to brand people's imaginary friend superstitions eccentric, crazy and ridiculous, without necessarily vilifying the self-deluded people who believe in them.

Exactly my point. I think that religion is a lot of horseshit, that has caused much more harm in the world than good. And I would feel free to say so (I just did). I also think that people have the right to be deluded in their beliefs, as long as it does not affect my life. I think that it is appropriate though to attack the ideas, but not the person espousing those views.

I am not convinced that one can separate the wheat from the chaff as easily as saying that the religions of Christians / Jews / Moslems / Buddhists are eccentric, crazy and ridiculous but through the religious process and to the extent of their religious beliefs, the people in question are somehow exempt from same.

Remember, I did not ask why aren't Christians / Jews / Moslems / Buddhists considered to be eccentric, crazy and ridiculous in all aspects, in all ways, and at all times as to their person. I asked "Why aren't Christians / Jews / Moslems / Buddhists etc simply considered to be eccentric, crazy and ridiculous?"

Unless one is willing to consider that someone who is a Christian / Jew / Moslem / Buddhist must mean that this encompasses all aspects, in all ways, and at all times as to their person I would think it's reasonably well understood that my considerations would apply to the related aspects, and not for example if they are sensible in their choice of footwear.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
The second part of my initial post seems to have elicited little response, despite the fact I figured it was the more interesting of the two.

"Even many people whom one would surmise would know better appear to take them seriously at least to some fair degree and at least in the context of the popular media and in many cases far beyond that realm too."

Certainly some here (those whom are not religious and presumably would know better) have tried to defend that position without giving what I would consider good enough reasons for doing so, given that those those whom are not religious and presumably would know better do not hold equal 'serious status' for the dark side of the moon being made out of Jell-O for 10 minutes once every 10,000 years.

Lemme ask y'all something...

Is your feeling that it's right to ridicule religions at all limited by the setting? I mean to say, I think there are things that are acceptable in a cyber forum that might seem otherwise face-to-face. Granted, as someone has just said - this is an internet forum, and pretty much anything goes and sissies take their marbles and go home. But would you approach the subject any differently with real ive people in - say, a classroom? Or would you be just as apt to barrel right into a bunch of people discussing their religions and say some thing like "Well I think you're all deluded and your beliefs are superstitions nonsense?"

Would it constrain or change your words if you had to look someone in the eyes and say 'your imaginary god/friend is hogwash, just like the tooth fairy and Santa'?

As you can easily guess, I ask because I don't think it would be as easy in person - and I think if that's true, then it begs other questions about what the ridiculing person is doing, and why.

First place, it is not my style to barrel into anything, although I can tend to be very direct. If I were with a group of religious people who were discussing their religion, I might just say nothing, or if I were asked, might say that I do not believe in the religion.

My response would be quite different in a mixed group of people who were discussing the pros and cons of their various religions. In that scenario, I would certainly state my views, although the focus would be on the belief, and not on the believer.

Thanks Phoenix - I 'preciate an honest answer...

I think that there are certain things, in a society, that are deemed by many to be sacrosanct, like motherhood and apple pie. Religions fall in this category. It is so much a part of the fabric of many people, that it has attained a place of reverence. Whether this reverence is deserved or not, is a question that might reasonably be argued. Like it or not, disparaging a person's faith is seen by many as a grave social gaffe, at the least.

I deleted that post, but it's cool you answered!

I wondered about that. I thought that something looked funny!

If I am to accept your view that questioning a person's faith is seen as a grave social gaffe it might then also be argued that it's the influence of religion that placed this type of questioning as socially unsuitable in the first place.

The circular equivalent of a snake eating its own tail!

Also are you truly convinced that it's a grave social gaffe to question when a believer claims the dark side of the moon is made out of Jell-O for 10 minutes once every 10,000 years?

Just reading

and weeping

It is not MY view, but I think that it is a view that is held by the vast majority of people. I respect a person's right to hold whatever views that they want, as long as it does not impact adversely on me.

I see no point, or sense, on going into a rap on negative perception of religion, unless there is a purpose to the discussion, that is agreed to by all. (The people don't have to agree with the conclusions, only to agree to have the desire to have such a discussion).

Just like I do not appreciate having the religious foist their views on me, I am sure that they feel the same way about me foisting my beliefs on them.

It's understood you did not disclose your view as per the above because I said "is seen as" in the context given. At least I think it should be understood!