Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to I'd like to buy a few Americans
arGee - we are now speaking of two distinctly different realms of influence
At what point does an individual's attempts to "reeducate" the religious beliefs of others become a transgression? I would argue at the moment that a person thinks that they have the right to do so.
Deprogramming your own children, as in the example you give with your son is an entirely different matter and absolutely your right....But what right do any of us have to attempt the religious reeducation of other people's children? (which you suggest in your closing line)
I do agree with the principles of utilizing open communication and reason as a primary means of changing existing mentalities but our efforts to influence others can only be by example and must be benign in nature. Making both the boundaries clear and at what point those with whom we hold philosophical and religious differences have crossed the line. The only way this deal becomes completely equitable is if we establish and honor exactly the same boundaries for ourselves towards them.
posted by
gomedome
on February 2, 2007 at 7:43 PM
| link to this | reply
As I indicated, Gome...
My parents were very devout. My young son would visit them for a month or so each summer in Germany where they still lived. He would come home, spouting all their religious nonsense – I think they were trying to recover in him what they believed they had lost in me.
Finally, I had enough of the nonsense, so I sat down with my 12-year old and we had a long, in-depth talk about the Bible and what he "believed." We looked at specific passages (carefully chosen by me) that contradicted other specific passages, and we examined others that conflicted directly with modern scientific understanding. We discussed how some things can be taken allegorically, and how even some so-called prophecies could be stretched to encompass some happenings. Then we looked more carefully at the claims of his grandparents (and others), and simply discussed the implications. The discussion was honest and intense. It was also (without his being aware of it until years later) very carefully directed and controlled by me.
I noticed thereafter, that he no longer spouted things religious, and that he was significantly more skeptical about things people believed. This, I submit, is how to solve the problem: one-on-one, and in small groups, reeducating people. If they refuse to be reeducated, then we try, as much as possible, to reeducate their children. With time, the problem solves itself – which it probably will do anyway, but we can significantly accelerate the process this way.
posted by
arGee
on February 2, 2007 at 1:32 PM
| link to this | reply
Gome,
Thanks for your kind support of my word blog. I've been getting into words lately. 
posted by
Jenasis
on February 2, 2007 at 1:31 PM
| link to this | reply
arGee - I absolutely agree with that - the only real value of the debate
was its entertainment value.
I have no doubt that most of these people are well intentioned, they do truly believe that the message they are promoting is a good and helpful message. Unfortunately, at the end of the day it matters not what the intentions are, only the results and effects on society as a whole. Those that are enveloped in their message as targets of disdain, or implied to be inferior, or suggested to be sinners or whatever; are still being judeged by, subjected to, and asked to conform to the beliefs of others. No matter how much understanding and compassion is applied to examining these efforts, they are still inequitable in a truly free society. I would be the first one to admit that clubbing them over the head with their own scriptures is not the answer but I have no other answers. How does one go about finding a practical solution or means of making it clear to one group of people that they have no rights above and beyond what everyone else has?
posted by
gomedome
on February 2, 2007 at 9:55 AM
| link to this | reply
I take your point, Gome...
And I am not trying to be the "Nice Guy Next Door." I am suggesting that if we really want to rid our society of this silliness, clever debate tactics simply won't hack it. Unless we are willing to emulate the Nazis (which I know for certain that you are not), then we have to find another way to assimilate these folk into modern society. This requires that we understand, and not misstate, their motivations. And that we approach them from within their envelope.
The outside assault will continue to fail as it has for so long already. This is a case of being practical – something you, as the King of Junk, know better than most.
posted by
arGee
on February 2, 2007 at 9:09 AM
| link to this | reply
arGee - I agree with most of what you are saying - the underlying
principles of human understanding and courtesy are sound.
However, how much crap do we endure from these brainwashed folks in the name of extending them courtesies that we will never have reciprocated? I for one have no intention of living my life as a public tackling dummy to the delusions of others who derive their justifications from ancient and entirely redundant holy manuscripts. The point being that efforts in compassion and understanding are easier to extend when one is not the subject of their disdain. Instead, I offer these folks something they routinely deny others, I offer them equality. Complete and total equality with no conditions or caveates. ...and that is all they will ever get from me.
posted by
gomedome
on February 2, 2007 at 8:40 AM
| link to this | reply
Nobody on Blogit can argue, Gome...
That I am a Christian. I am a product, however, of a culture that is, itself, "Christian." Furthermore, I was raised in a devoutly Christian home before going out on my own. I say this to give my words a certain degree of authority.
The folks who use the Bible as their authority to do this or that, to believe this or that, are not typically bigots or filled with hate, as is so often stated here on Blogit. Yes, I know that they sound like that to casual listeners, and I well understand the argument that if it walks like a duck.... Generally speaking, however, the biblical literalists do not start out with the concept that they have a point of view and seek confirmation of that point of view within the pages of the Bible. Rather, they are raised with a point of view that already contains all of its biblical links intact and well rehearsed. Their education outside of their belief system consists of a smattering of this and that, where anything that conflicts with their faith is discounted as they learn it, and so it never reaches the level of thinking consciousness.
I didn't see Gome's show (I wish I had!), but from his description, I surmise that the black Christian was a genuine believer who really doesn't hate gays, but just as genuinely believes they are condemned unless they change. He doesn't hate them, but wants to help them change. He doesn't see the Leviticus passage as selective reading, but as words God has given to help him "maintain his faith."
You will never change these people by misunderstanding their motivations, and by using clever (cheap shot) debating techniques to undermine their arguments and make them look foolish. I make my enemy my friend by learning to think like my enemy, and then persuading my enemy from his perspective to become my friend.
That black Christian will never change unless you openly acknowledge his goodness, his Christian love, and his genuine dedication to his faith, and then using the same love and dedication gently persuade him to look beyond his blinders. It's not easy, and often just not worth the effort, but it is the only way I know to bring such people around.
Calling them hate-filled bigots does not just add fuel to the fire, it's just plain wrong...
posted by
arGee
on February 2, 2007 at 8:02 AM
| link to this | reply
kooka_lives - I find it surprising how many people still want to insist
that the bible is the word of God.
It doesn't matter if a person believes in God or not, if someone were to ever sit down and remove from the bible all of the things that are "no longer" true or relevant to a modern world, the book would end up being no thicker than a magazine.
I personally believe some parts of the bible to be true . . . the page numbers, the title....that's about it.
posted by
gomedome
on February 2, 2007 at 7:35 AM
| link to this | reply
Leviticus is the dumbest thing for believers to quote
With all the laws that were given there, they just are opening themselves up to look like fools. Seriously, all the stoning that Leviticus demands of people and how to treat women and so on, not to mention the promoting of slavery that is clearly there, more so than the anti-homosexual message.
But thinking is not one of the talents I expect to find in those bigots who just wish to use the Bible as a tool to promote hatred.
posted by
kooka_lives
on February 2, 2007 at 7:16 AM
| link to this | reply
That ws wonderful thanks
posted by
Shams-i-Heartsong
on February 2, 2007 at 4:44 AM
| link to this | reply
mysteria - and that is really all it is when you think about it,
a collection of words.
Most of which are so outdated that they hardly make any sense.
posted by
gomedome
on February 1, 2007 at 4:50 PM
| link to this | reply
Gomedome...Good stuff, thanks for sharing
The Bible this, the Bible that...Unbelievable the lengths and liberties that are taken after those few words.
posted by
mysteria
on February 1, 2007 at 2:59 PM
| link to this | reply
cantey_1975 - no I don't remember his name but my wife mentioned that
there was an article about the TV show in the paper today.
I'll see if I can find it.
posted by
gomedome
on February 1, 2007 at 2:34 PM
| link to this | reply
gome
do you remember the preachers name?
posted by
calmcantey75
on February 1, 2007 at 1:40 PM
| link to this | reply
SoloWriter - you lost me again
So one more time - thanx for stopping by.
posted by
gomedome
on February 1, 2007 at 12:14 PM
| link to this | reply
David1Spirit - I've never seen anyone ever adequately answer the challenge
that comes from claiming that the bible is the word of God.
Suggest that no one on this planet lives by this so called word of God and they have no answer. For someone to make such a claim, they are immediately self editing what suits them and what does not from the words found within. I don't feel there is anything wrong with using anything, including the bible, as a source of inspiration.....as we all derive our inspiration from where we can but to take selective passages to justify discrimination against others deserves the kind of brow beating the hapless preacher suffered.
posted by
gomedome
on February 1, 2007 at 12:13 PM
| link to this | reply
MoonSpirit - as long as it put a smile on your face
posted by
gomedome
on February 1, 2007 at 12:05 PM
| link to this | reply
Modern computer people need to slow down and listen (or read) their code:
"... it is an abomination." ---- It is an *A bomb I Nation.*
All natural relationships are adversely effected by the political attempts of those who COMPLETELY disrespect the honorable roles of the mother and father.
posted by
Jenasis
on February 1, 2007 at 11:46 AM
| link to this | reply
This is just another example of the problem with taking the Bible literally
I love when people say "...every word in the Bible comes from the mouth of God himself...." (or some variation of it). They have no idea what can of worms (and debate) they open themselves up to. For every passage they quote to give their argument fuel I can find 10 more to shoot it down.
Then of course there are those (like the preacher in your post) who seem to want it both ways. They take it as the literal word of God; but only if it fits their argument. They seem to want it both ways.
posted by
David1Spirit
on February 1, 2007 at 9:57 AM
| link to this | reply
First, I laughed. Now, I'm chuckling. That's all I'm going to say; that I'm laughing and chuckling. 
MoonSpirit 
posted by
syzygy
on February 1, 2007 at 9:55 AM
| link to this | reply