Should we respect religious beliefs of others?

[trotsky]

http://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/commentary/20170508/michael-abrahams-should-we-respect-religious-beliefs-others

by Michael Abrahams

It is often said that we should respect people’s religious beliefs. Many persons adhere to this principle and avoid even commenting on the topic of religion, not wanting to cause offence. But, is there a valid reason to automatically respect all belief systems? If a belief causes harm to others, why should I respect it?

...

In my opinion, any belief system that allows a child to die is evil, and I have absolutely no respect for it. I have friends and patients who are Jehovah’s Witnesses, and I love them dearly. However, I have no respect for some of their religious beliefs.

Similarly, with the Roman Catholic Church’s stance on contraception, prohibiting its use, even in women in whom pregnancy could prove fatal, and its discouragement of the use of condoms, even in societies with a high incidence of HIV/AIDS, I have little respect for their belief system as well.

...

Every belief system should be questioned and challenged, and if any places people’s health or lives at risk, violates the rights of others, or stifles critical thinking, there is absolutely no rational reason to respect it.

[gibraltar72]

1. you mean

superstitions?

[trotsky]

7. Care, you'll offend someone by saying that!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. I'd say, respect the *right* to believe whatever hogwash they're into, but

we don't have to respect the belief itself.

[HAB911]

3. Do you think they respect mine?

[hrmjustin]

4. As a believer I try to respect other's beliefs but if it is a repressive or discriminatory

belief it is too much to ask to respect it.

[Thomas Hurt]

5. should probably define "respect"

Is "spreading the gospel" - proselytizing respecting religious beliefs?

Is apologism respecting others' religions?

[uppityperson]

6. People have the right to believe what they want. They do not have the right to hurt others

[trotsky]

8. Yeah the tricky part of that is who gets to define what "hurt" is.

In the context of the story the author related (a JW child was refused a blood transfusion and died), for the child's JW parents, their BELIEF is that the harm of a blood transfusion is worse than death itself.

So from the doctor's perspective, the JW parents don't have the right to hurt their child by denying a blood transfusion.

But from the JW parents' perspective, the doctor doesn't have the right to hurt their child by giving a blood transfusion and condemning her to being shunned and going to hell.

[Iggo]

9. Nope.

I'll respect their right to have religious beliefs.

But I'm never going to respect their actual beliefs.

[AtheistCrusader]

10. Only if their beliefs are respectable.

[MineralMan]

11. I respect people's rights to believe anything they're capable

of believing. That does not mean that I necessarily accept their beliefs. In fact, one's beliefs should probably be held privately, to avoid embarrassment. That's my opinion.

[Lordquinton]

12. It's like the respect around authority

The bit about "I'll respect you when you respect me" meaning "I'll respect you as a person when you respect my authority." It's not done in good faith. Believers want respect for their beliefs, and they wont' respect you as a person until you give it (Which usually involves acknowledgement in their higher power)

[Htom Sirveaux]

13. At least enough to give an explanation of them

that holders of said beliefs would recognize as a fair summary. To avoid strawmen.

[trotsky]

14. What would be a "fair summary" of refusing a blood transfusion to save the life of a child? n/t

[Htom Sirveaux]

16. I've never tried to discuss this issue with a JW, so I'm not 100% sure.

But if I had to speculate, it might go like this: JWs refuse blood transfusions because they interpret the Bible to say that God prohibited humankind not only from direct consumption of blood, but also from receive blood into their bodies in order to gain its benefits in another way, such as medical treatment. They find this prohibition both in the Old and New Testaments, and so believe it to be binding on Christians, not something that was changed by Jesus. It's a matter of valuing their eternal destiny with God more than the comparatively far briefer existence on Earth. Such concern would extend to their children's destinies as well.

There are, of course, a multitude of good objections to this doctrine, and offering a summary like the one above would only be a prelude to discussing them, once it's established that I understand what I am criticizing.

[trotsky]

17. So just like I said...

They believe that if they receive a blood transfusion, they'll be eternally punished.

To bring this back around to the topic of the thread: is that a belief that should be respected?

[Htom Sirveaux]

18. That's the question I thought I was answering.

What does "respect" entail for you that isn't covered by what I said?

[trotsky]

19. No, you didn't answer it.

Is the belief that one should be allowed to deny a child a blood transfusion, a belief we should respect?

Hint: The answer is yes or no.

[Htom Sirveaux]

20. My answer hasn't changed since post#13.

I was stating an answer for religious beliefs in general, so it would apply to the specific example you picked also.

[trotsky]

21. But you see, your "answer" doesn't address the core conflict.

In the case of a Christian who wants to refuse their child medical treatment that would save their life, should we respect that belief and allow the child to die, or do we disrespect the belief and treat the child?

[Htom Sirveaux]

22. In my post summarizing the belief

I said there were a multitude of good objections to the doctrine. Having read that, why would you think I wanted it to be legal? The free exercise clause isn't absolute, any more than the free speech clause is. I don't even think there should be religious exemption clauses for businesses that want to discrimnate against lgbt people, so why would I want one for parents who let their children die on religious grounds?

[trotsky]

23. But in your post all you said about those beliefs (that allowing a child to die was OK) was that...

"offering a summary like the one above would only be a prelude to discussing them."

Merely a prelude to discussing them? Perhaps you can understand why that may have caused some confusion?

[Bradical79]

15. I'll treat people respectfully

unless they show they shouldn't be respected. Religion itself isn't a person with feelings. Everything about any religion, like any other idea put forth, is open for harsh criticsm.