A message of tolerance.

[Starboard Tack]

[trotsky]

1. Is Fred Phelps lost?

Was Osama bin Laden?

[Starboard Tack]

5. Aren't we all?

Those who are not lost don't ask questions? Lost is not such a bad place to be. It means you are still on the journey, still seeking knowledge, growth, fulfillment. I think the "good" zone is the "lost" zone. Fred Phelps and Bin Laden are/were not lost. They are examples of demagogues who are so invested in their beliefs that all else is irrelevant. The extreme/fundie atheist version of this is a demagoguery of a different flavor, insinuating that ALL people of faith are "delusional", "irrational", "ignorant", "enabling religious intrusion into the political and governmental arena".

The open mind recognizes that there are good people of all religious and spiritual stripes. I don't think we have any fundies here. Certainly nobody supporting Phelps or Bin Laden. Is it better to bring up those names than to bring up Stalin? It makes one wonder if your post may have been made to inflame. Have you been following your "I really must try to say something positive" program?

[darkstar3]

7. LOL..."the open mind"

I don't know how open your mind is, but your eyes are clearly closed.

[trotsky]

8. My my, such negativity.

Have you decided to take a new, civil tone yet?

This newage "every path is valid" vapidity runs into problems when we look at the real world and real politics. I was merely trying to point that out. Fundies like Phelps and bin Laden aren't "lost"? So returning to the quote in your OP, we have no right to tell them to take another path, to correct them? Are we to just let them continue on their path no matter where it leads?

I'd like to honestly discuss this in a positive manner so I'd appreciate it if you would leave the insults out of it. Thanks so very much.

[Goblinmonger]

10. Definitional point of order

To say that religion/faith is "irrational" is not an insult. It is a correct classification of that in the rational/irrational binary.

[bananas]

14. It is an insult, and it's not a correct classification.

"Rational" means it's based on reason.
Just because you don't like the reasoning, don't understand the reasoning, or disagree with the reasoning, doesn't mean it isn't based on reason.

[eqfan592]

16. I think your definition is a bit off.

Rational does indeed mean "having or exercising reason, sound judgment, or good sense." However, you are making use of the wrong definition of reason, which means "to think or argue in a logical manner" and "to form conclusions, judgments, or inferences from facts or premises."

By your definition, anybody claiming any reason is rational, which isn't, well, reasonable.

[Starboard Tack]

22. Rationality, especially when it comes to religious belief is totally subjective.

A rational decision is one that is not just reasoned, but is also optimal for achieving a goal or solving a problem. The goal of the religious is everlasting life, salvation, a bunch of virgins, catching up with old friends, whatever. Nothing irrational about that. The rational/irrational discussion is pointless and offensive and not conducive to intelligent, respectful discussion. What a boring world it would be if we all agreed about what is rational.

[eqfan592]

30. Insulting or no, offering a false definition doesn't really help matters.

I was not speaking to the nature of using rationality as an argument against specific theistic beliefs, but rather to the definition presented and why it was flawed.

EDIT: I'd also like to say that saying a belief is irrational is not the same as saying a belief is false. One of my very best friends happens to be a theist and recognizes the irrationality of his belief. It simply doesn't matter to him all that much, but he doesn't fault me for not being able to get past the irrationality myself. I have a great deal of respect for this man to say the least.

[Starboard Tack]

32. I can totally relate to that.

I have a very close friend who is an observant Jew. We have had many discussions on religion and beliefs, including circumcision, which I argued was child abuse. One evening, we were visiting another friend, who is an orthodox rabbi and the subject of circumcision came up. My friend pointed out to the rabbi that I considered it to be child abuse; and the rabbi agreed with me, saying it is child abuse, unless you are Jewish.
I may disagree, but I have a great deal of respect for both these men.

The problem I see with using the word irrational is the inference that the individual is an irrational (mentally unbalanced) person and the purpose of the word is to insult those who disagree. I have no problem with saying the thought seems irrational, or science tells us the earth is millions of years old. There are lots of facts we can debate with, rather than resorting to personal insults. You used the key word - RESPECT.

[darkstar3]

26. The poster thinks "irrational" is an insult.

Being wrong won't change that fact. It will only lead to repeated and desperate attempts to redefine "rational."

[bananas]

27. Sam Harris is a rational atheist! He's a hero!

He even has a manifesto - just like the Unabomber!
http://www.rationalresponders.com/an_atheist_manifesto_by_sam_harris

[darkstar3]

28. Blatant fallacy is boring, and you've engaged in two of them here.

[eqfan592]

31. ...............

[Starboard Tack]

23. +1. Well said, well reasoned.

[skepticscott]

2. Diversity of opinion and belief

doesn't mean that everyone is right. Or even equally close to grasping the true state of things. People are certainly free to be wrong and deluded if that makes them happy, and if they didn't try to ram their beliefs and delusions down other people's throats, there would be no problem "tolerating" them, now would there? Too bad we don't live in that world, and never have.

[darkstar3]

3. This kind of open relativism is unimpressive, even dangerous.

John Wayne Gacy found happiness, after all...

[cbayer]

4. Wow! Dalai Lama bashing. Who would have thunk it?

[darkstar3]

6. Oh look, more special pleading.

Tell me, is the Dalai Lama infallible?

Is he immune from criticism?

Obviously, since the Dalai Lama is a man like all the rest of us, the answers are unequivocally "no" and "no." Therefore, have a Coke and a smile...

[trotsky]

9. Have you ever read much about how Tibet used to be? n/t

[Joseph8th]

11. Yup.

Dalai Lama -- let's see he's an unelected monarch who was supposedly born to be a religious leader. One should give a rat's ass what the Dalai Lama thinks, because.... ?

[trotsky]

12. I just realized something.

Where exactly is the Dalai Lama being "bashed" on this thread?

Can you point to the specific phrase or sentence?

You've made a claim. Time to back it up.

[Starboard Tack]

21. "I just realized something"

Congratulations! Keep up the good work.

[trotsky]

29. I hope one day you can move past personal attacks.

It will really help change the tone in this toxic group.

[skepticscott]

15. Boy, it's not enough that you

play the victim yourself on a regular basis. Now you have to play it for other people too. Sheesh.

You could have responded to the questions and criticism about what the Dalai Lama said in some substantial way, and tried to engage in a meaningful discussion about the points raised, but you chose not to do that. Instead you engaged in blatant intellectual dishonesty by accusing people here of "bashing" him personally, when you knew perfectly well that no such thing happened.

Where...EXACTLY where...was the Dalai Lama "bashed" in this thread? Put up, or post a damn apology. Or better yet, just go away, if you don't have the courage to do either. You really are getting tiresome.

[trotsky]

17. And to think it comes from someone who claims to dislike the

"toxic" nature of this group. Yet here she feeds it with a false accusation. A sincere apology and retraction would go a long way toward healing the toxicity in here, I think.

[laconicsax]

18. So why don't you apologize for being an "evul atheist?"

[skepticscott]

25. She still hasn't apologized sincerely

for calling a group of creationists "a bunch of dumbasses", so I wouldn't hold my breath on this one either. She spews bile, and then has the nerve to upbraid everyone else on the board for the same thing.

[skepticscott]

34. And yet another hit and run post

Throw out a smear and then run and hide. Must run in the family.

[pinto]

13. There are many paths to the top of the mountain, but the view is always the same - Chinese proverb.

[laconicsax]

19. Hasn't Tibet been home for all sorts of sectarian strife between Buddhists?

[Starboard Tack]

20. Not to my knowledge

But what bearing does that have on the OP? The Dalai Llama has been in exile since 1959.

[laconicsax]

24. You really don't see the relevance?

Religious sectarian strife is the result of people on different paths insisting that the other is lost.

I remember reading somewhere a long time ago that the Dalai Lama's sect had been involved in some kind of brutal Buddhist-on-Buddhist conflict. Had that been true, it would have seriously undermined his credibility on the matter of "let's all get along."

[Starboard Tack]

33. I am not an authority on the Dalai Llama

I just liked the message. I have heard him speak during interviews. Seems like a cool, level headed guy to me. I believe Rodney King had some conflicts along the way, but his plea for us all to get along, appears to have stuck with many.
I don't think we should shoot the messenger or the message. We should take the positive, wherever we find it, nurture it, spread it and hopefully watch it grow.

And let me say this about whatever you read somewhere a long time ago, that might have been true and if it had been etc. etc.
"Paper never refuses ink!"