Religions Can Criticize Each Other, so Why Isn't It OK for Atheists to Criticize Religion?

[cbayer]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roy-speckhardt/religions-can-criticize-e_b_4959019.html

Roy Speckhardt
Executive Director, American Humanist Association

Posted: 03/17/2014 3:53 pm EDT Updated: 03/17/2014 3:59 pm EDT

Nonbelief is on the rise in America and around the world, and with that rise we see more questioning of the core tenants of major religious traditions. But critical analysis of religious belief isn't something that people do only when leaving a faith. They also do it when trying to firm up and defend one, and when preparing challenges to competing religions.

Many Jews state their belief that Jesus Christ is not the messiah, just as many Christians dispute the holiness of Mohammed. While this difference of opinion has caused violence and oppression worldwide for as long as these faiths existed, there's a growing prevalence in modern cultures where religious people of one faith accept the fact that people of other faiths don't believe the same things they do. In fact, this disagreement about the validity of theological teachings hasn't stood in the way of increased interfaith cooperation, as witnessed by the recent outreach between the Jewish, Catholic, and Muslim communities.

By contrast, when humanists challenge these very same beliefs they are often viewed by the religious community as disrespectful and even outright hurtful. Why is this?

One explanation is that we're seeing religious people of all stripes on the defensive, circling their wagons around religious belief considering the strides being made by those whose morality doesn't come from faith.

more at link

[upaloopa]

1. I think it shouldn't matter to you of you

are truly secure in your beliefs and the same goes for religious.

[cbayer]

3. Do you mean that being criticized shouldn't matter if you are secure?

I agree, it that is what you mean.

And there is potentially real value in hearing criticism, of course. But it needs to be framed in a way that it can be heard and delivered in a situation where there is some trust that it is being done in good faith.

[upaloopa]

10. Yes that is what I mean.

For myself I try to practice Buddhism and I don't call it a religion but more a path to where I'd like to go and be.
I don't care what other people think about Buddhism and I don't care what others believe. I don't try to make Buddhists out of people and I won't put up with others preaching to me.
I don't want the religious putting their beliefs into our laws. If that is criticism then it is. As far as being anti gay, that is people talking. I don't think it is dogma somewhere. I can criticize a person for being a bigot but that is not criticizing a religion.

[cbayer]

12. Well, you approach is very consistent with what you ascribe to.

I have found some of the tenets of Buddhism to have been extremely helpful to me at several points in my life. I review them from time to time when I am feeling stressed or experiencing anxiety for which I can't pinpoint the source.

It has meant a lot to me.

I agree with pretty much everything you say here. Criticizing bigotry, what ever it's source, is not the same thing as criticizing religion. And ascribing things like bigotry to all believers of a certain faith is generally wrong at it's core.

Buddhism, not surprising, leads to a much more "live and let live" way of seeing the world.

[trotsky]

4. Are you saying that no ideas should ever be challenged?

Or just religious beliefs?

[upaloopa]

11. I am saying you don't need to challenge a belief system

as a means of supporting your beliefs if you are truly secure in your beliefs. If you are secure you don't need support.

[trotsky]

13. So belief systems like those of the soon-to-be-late Fred Phelps and his church

shouldn't be challenged?

[upaloopa]

18. I said they don't need to be challenged as a means

of supporting your beliefs.

[trotsky]

19. So what is the difference...

between someone challenging Fred Phelps' beliefs because they are hateful and wrong, and someone challenging them because they aren't secure in their own beliefs?

[upaloopa]

21. Not much

[AtheistCrusader]

2. Submitted without comment?

Did you have a position or a thought on the material linked?

[cbayer]

8. I don't see the clear dichotomy he does about reactions being

different depending on the source of criticism. I think it has much more to do with the way the criticism is delivered.

But I wholehearted agree with this:

Such a divide is a tactical oversight by religious people, as there are many issues on which the nonreligious and religious communities can work together, such as the struggle against poverty and other social ills. While these communities may never agree about the existence of a deity or the value of the supernatural, they can agree that vulnerable people shouldn't starve or be oppressed and that all human beings have an obligation to help those in need.

I would suggest that this divide is a tactical oversight by everyone involved in promoting it. We all, as liberal/progressive democrats, have strength in collations and mutual goals to pursue.

[mike_c]

5. "While this difference of opinion has caused violence and oppression worldwide...."

Thousands of years of religious bigotry dismissed with a single subordinate clause.

[cbayer]

7. How do you see that as a dismissal?

I am surprised that you found something to criticize in this article that essentially supports your position.

Or maybe I shouldn't be surprised.

[el_bryanto]

6. Humanist criticism is a different category of criticism

Basically, yes all religions believe that they have the correct answer when it comes to matters of faith; they naturally believe that all other religions are wrong. But they are all playing the same game, and often times can see positives in other religions even if they don't agree that they are correct.

Humanist criticism is a criticism of the question itself, not a criticism of who has the best answer. Yes, many believers (including myself back in the day) see Atheism or Humanism as just another stance on God and as such it's just another player in the game; but that's not really accurate.

As an analogy, consider a debate over what the best steak house is in town. Each Steak house positions itself as the best; and talks about it's various benefits and values. "Well we have the best quality meat in town." "Yes but our grilling technique is superior." "Have you checked out all of our sides." They can have a spirited debate amongst themselves, and their patrons can share the debate.

Atheism, in this flawed analogy isn't another steak house - rather it's a vegetarian/vegan coming on the scene and pointing out that steaks are terrible for the body and do lasting harm to the environment and are immoral. The style of critique is categorically different.

Or that's my thoughts, anyway.

Bryant

[cbayer]

9. I guess I don't see the differences he describes and that you also see.

What you describe with your steak house analogy is anti-theism, imo, and not atheism or humanism.

The criticisms and debates about whether there is a god or not or who holds the superior position are divisive. I absolutely agree with him that they should be set aside when there is an opportunity for people to work together for shared goals.

[skepticscott]

15. Um, no..that's anti-theism

Atheism would be saying, "you can't even show convincing evidence that these steaks you say are so wonderful even exist".

[el_bryanto]

20. Fair enough; I said it was a flawed analogy.

In either case though the basic premise that believers of different religions are debating has been called into question.

Bryant

[hrmjustin]

14. I have gotten used to being questioned by non-believers.

My parents question my all the times about why I believe.

[cbayer]

16. Are your parents genuinely interested?

I think that makes a huge difference in what kind of response one might get.

I do discuss these things with people I know and respect and who I know respect me. I also like to discuss people's ideas about marriage - what it means, why people do it, if it's necessary, etc.

[hrmjustin]

17. Yes they are. While they will give me a hard time at times because we like to argue, they are

respectful of my beliefs.