Religion
Related: About this forumDiscussing Religion Can Be Very Difficult
Here in the Religion Group on DU, that difficulty is often quite visible. Some people are confused about the reason this group exists, and sometimes confuse the words "Religion" and "Religious." Discussions can sometimes look like active mine fields by the time a discussion finally winds down.
Part of the problem, of course, is that religious belief often carries a highly emotional load with it. When a person's closely-held religious beliefs are challenged, often that person reacts emotionally and negatively to such challenges. In other cases, abuses of individual freedoms or open bigotry are sometimes part of some people's actions, based on religious beliefs. While such things are not typical, they do occur and often even make the news. We often discuss such things here.
Since the Religion Group on DU is an open forum, anyone can post here, regardless of individual attitudes towards religious belief. Non-believers are officially welcomed here and can freely join the discussions in this group. Adherents to all religions are also welcome here, and are free to post about their beliefs. That, quite naturally, leads to posts and discussions that question the very validity of some religious beliefs.
Here's the thing: Religious beliefs and attitudes are a voluntary choice. Both belief and non-belief are valid options, and have equal weight. There's nothing sacred about believing in deities or in following a particular religion. It is simply a choice people make. Non-belief, too, is a choice, even though some people are simply unable to believe in supernatural things or entities. Non-belief is not inferior to belief, nor is belief inferior to non-belief. Both are acceptable here as topics of discussion.
We are all here, in an open discussion forum. We all have our own opinions. We needn't defer to whatever choices people make with regard to religion. Nor should we attack one another for those choices. We can discuss religion without resorting to anger, dishonesty, or untruths. Truly we can. We can disagree, even vehemently, without the use of ad hominem arguments or other illogical argument methods. We can. We should. We should, I think, make our opinions heard if we wish to do that, but we should do so without rancor, dissembling, or personal attacks.
Discussion of religion can be difficult, but it needn't be vicious.
That's my opinion on this Valentine's Day.
Sneederbunk
(14,308 posts)MineralMan
(146,333 posts)That can be a problem in many ways, affecting both individuals and those they encounter. I have no answer for that, really. If it's impossible for a person to hear anything other than praise for a particular way of thinking without becoming angry, probably discussion is impossible. Personally, I wouldn't expose myself to such discussion if I felt that way.
edhopper
(33,624 posts)but i don't think "choice" is correct. We don't choose to believe or not have beliefs. It is part of our formed world view.
It would be like saying we should start believing what Trump says aren't lies.
MineralMan
(146,333 posts)Some choose to accept what they are taught without questioning it. Others do not. Choices are available, and are made.
edhopper
(33,624 posts)I can't overlook all that I have seen and read and thought about to turn around and decide to believe in a God.
MineralMan
(146,333 posts)I doubt very much that I could unlearn what I have learned. It would be an extraordinary thing that could convince me otherwise.
However, there are atheists who have made the choice to believe. Generally, they write about it, and such writings are read because they are so unusual.
It's not a one-way street, but the traffic seems to come mostly from the other direction.
edhopper
(33,624 posts)we still disagree about the word. But it's semantics and I not as important to your larger points.
c-rational
(2,596 posts)bring to them.
MineralMan
(146,333 posts)that apply to our actions that can be seen as defining what is good or bad.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)It's so loaded with assumptions that MUST be true, it's loaded with vague definitions of abstract concepts, it's full of unspoken rules.
And on top of that, religion is not only intertwined with your image of yourself, it's also intertwined with the wider culture we share as a group.
That's why religion is not really a voluntary choice: If you change your religion, you redefine who and what you are. And maybe you don't want that redefinition.
For all these reasons, conflict is a natural byproduct when discussing religion.
EDIT:
This wasn't supposed to sound that mean.
MineralMan
(146,333 posts)Making choices can be difficult, especially if one is presented with a set of beliefs from childhood. However, the choice remains. Most people are also presented with alternatives to whatever indoctrination they receive. The fact that most atheists, for example, received some religious training early in their lives but made different choices later is evidence of that.
The choice to accept what you have been offered as truth without question is a choice. It's an easy choice, I suppose, but it is still a choice.
Rejecting all other information that differs from your current beliefs is also a choice. I'm not faulting people's choices, but they are still choices, I believe.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)You made an excellent point about self-image, and how it is constructed.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)as unable to think critically, or as being indoctrinated, or many other provocative and insulting descriptions.
Mariana
(14,861 posts)there can't be any real conversation, as it would interfere with the performance.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)Preaching to the choir?
trotsky
(49,533 posts)Perhaps the believers are not all innocent victims, as some pretend to be.
MineralMan
(146,333 posts)Will they be forgotten and neglected?
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)aka-chmeee
(1,132 posts)after reluctantly utilizing one of the DU features. As long as I make sure I am logged in, there are no longer burrs under my blanket!