Paris

[Roy1983]

Ive said it before if people want to believe in religion let them. If they don't let them. So long as it doesn't intrude on anyone else and ideas aren't enforced all good.

 

[DTA]

Just to be clear, what you're advocating is not saying anything that could potentially offend people that are in the target group for extremist recruitment?

No what im advocating is to not go out of 'your' way to be deliberately offensive to a whole group of people which have nothing to do with the extremists.... this wont stop extremists but it will make it harder (slightly) for them to recruit.

 

[scaramanga]

Ive said it before if people want to believe in religion let them. If they don't let them. So long as it doesn't intrude on anyone else and ideas aren't enforced all good.

Most religions contain a bit of viral code that insists its followers spread the word.

At the very least, Christianity and Islam couldn't exist under the conditions you've described.

 

[Roy1983]

Most religions contain a bit of viral code that insists its followers spread the word.

At the very least, Christianity and Islam couldn't exist under the conditions you've described.

Scara I couldn't care less about your views on religion with respect buddy. I find myself agreeing with most of what you say apart from religion. I'm not religious by the way either it's just your outright dismissive tone. I'm not interested in continuing it by the way rather making a point.

My only point on this is that if people want to pray, believe in a higher power, read and or believe in the bible that's their right to do so as long as it's not oppressed onto others.

 

[milo]

No what im advocating is to not go out of 'your' way to be deliberately offensive to a whole group of people which have nothing to do with the extremists.... this wont stop extremists but it will make it harder (slightly) for them to recruit.

Do you think that it should go the other way too and religions should avoid espousing beliefs that many people find offensive?

 

[scaramanga]

No what im advocating is to not go out of 'your' way to be deliberately offensive to a whole group of people which have nothing to do with the extremists.... this wont stop extremists but it will make it harder (slightly) for them to recruit.

I disagree.

Ridicule may make it easier to turn believers into extremists (although I think the net effect would be incredibly small) but it massively reduces the ability to turn sane people into believers. Extremists will always be able to turn some believers, by restricting their pool of targets (hopefully to none) we both reduce extremism and make the world a massively better place.

 

[DTA]

Do you think a similar approach is warranted for those who potentially could be recruited into violent groups not connected to Islam? Am I supposed to stay away from offending neo-nazis, other right wing extremists, left wing extremists etc for the fear of tipping them over the edge to violence as well? How about the violent biggots that respond to violence against innocent Muslims after a situation like this? Am I supposed to stay away from offending them?

Ok let me try yo explain it to you using your own example:

Far right in uk: take the tinkle out of what they find precious is fine except if it deeply offends the rest of the uk for example calling whoever it is leading them now a cu#t is fine (as an example) Taking the tinkle out of armistice day is definitely not fine.

One offends just those in the far right, the other offends the whole nation. Whats the point of offending the whole nation? just so the far right can be offended as well?

Same principle.

 

[scaramanga]

My only point on this is that if people want to pray, believe in a higher power, read and or believe in the bible that's their right to do so as long as it's not oppressed onto others.

If you're a Christian you have to spread the word, the Bible says so. So how can anyone be a good Christian and leave others alone?

I haven't checked the sauce yet but I found the following within seconds of Google searching:

Mark 16:15-16 ESV / 440 helpful votes
And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Matthew 28:19 ESV / 219 helpful votes
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit

The second one sounds particularly unappealing.

 

[DTA]

I disagree.

Ridicule may make it easier to turn believers into extremists (although I think the net effect would be incredibly small) but it massively reduces the ability to turn sane people into believers. Extremists will always be able to turn some believers, by restricting their pool of targets (hopefully to none) we both reduce extremism and make the world a massively better place.

Show proof that your riddicule stops people from developing faith. I disagree with your premise.

 

[monkeybarry]

Don't make excuses for them
People insult prophets,religions, countries and many more things in this world. It is not an excuse to commit murder?

Isis is nothing more than a cult. Unfortunately they have harnessed the Internet to attract the young disinfranchised under the banner of (faith) Islam in this case. There have been many others in the past - it's a sham.

I agree it is not an excuse and it comes down to personal belief systems - the human default to that is violence unfortunately.
For westerners if someone insults your football team you laugh it off, maybe have an argument if your an idiot.
If someone insults your wife, someone with whom you have a strong emotional bond, many people would respond with level of anger and possibly violence.

Without wanting to trivialise anything - many humans are an angry bunch that cannot cope with others being different. And religion is used to perpetuate that - indeed some of it was created to perpetuate that.

 

[DTA]

Do you think that it should go the other way too and religions should avoid espousing beliefs that many people find offensive?

If a religious person is being offensive then yes, for example i have an issue with how many religious people (but not all) treat the LGBT community, for me its about live and let live, and i argue just as hard about that as im arguing with @braineclipse now.

 

[Baleforce]

No what im advocating is to not go out of 'your' way to be deliberately offensive to a whole group of people which have nothing to do with the extremists.... this wont stop extremists but it will make it harder (slightly) for them to recruit.

is it offensive to the moderates though?

if it is that would suggest they are not moderate enough

 

[scaramanga]

Show proof that your riddicule stops people from developing faith. I disagree with your premise.

Why wouldn't it?

Religion is so protected that only religious people get to talk about religion.

What if, by the time a kid is old enough to make up their minds, they've heard millions laughing at what is, essentially, a ridiculous way of thinking and only a handful of people telling them that some silly fairy stories are real. How can that not reduce the number of people that belive in nonsense?

Now let's go a step further and imagine a beautiful world where we teach kids from a very early age how to think critically and Base opinion on evidence? How would they not end up ridiculing religion? It is, after all, ridiculous - the very dictionary definition of a thing that deserves ridicule.

 

[braineclipse]

No what im advocating is to not go out of 'your' way to be deliberately offensive to a whole group of people which have nothing to do with the extremists.... this wont stop extremists but it will make it harder (slightly) for them to recruit.

Where did you get the idea that I go out of my way to be deliberately offensive to a whole group of people from???

I really would like an answer this time.

Ok let me try yo explain it to you using your own example:

Far right in uk: take the tinkle out of what they find precious is fine except if it deeply offends the rest of the uk for example calling whoever it is leading them now a cu#t is fine (as an example) Taking the tinkle out of armistice day is definitely not fine.

One offends just those in the far right, the other offends the whole nation. Whats the point of offending the whole nation? just so the far right can be offended as well?

Same principle.

With Islam you're arguing that the reason I shouldn't offend is because the extremists can use that to recruit.

With these example you seem to be using different reasoning. Why?

Show proof that your riddicule stops people from developing faith. I disagree with your premise.

One of the most influential atheists of the last couple of decades (imo) was Christopher Hitchens. People still give him and his arguments as contributing reaons for leaving their faith behind.

That's more evidence than you've given for any of your claims in this thread.

 

[braineclipse]

Ive said it before if people want to believe in religion let them. If they don't let them. So long as it doesn't intrude on anyone else and ideas aren't enforced all good.

What exactly do you mean by "let them"? Do you mean no arguments against religion should be put forward?

 

[monkeybarry]

Show proof that your riddicule stops people from developing faith. I disagree with your premise.

Isn't it somewhat irrelevant?

Most religion preaches condemnation for non-beleivers (irrespective of how peaceful the religion is) so ridicule is merely the non-beleivers version of condemnation for those that choose to believe in fiction.

I take the view that people can believe what they want, and I'd quite happily stay away from religion - unfortunately that keep turning up trying to impart some kind of truth unto me. It's rather annoying. A bit like telesales really.

 

[monkeybarry]

Scara I couldn't care less about your views on religion with respect buddy. I find myself agreeing with most of what you say apart from religion. I'm not religious by the way either it's just your outright dismissive tone. I'm not interested in continuing it by the way rather making a point.

My only point on this is that if people want to pray, believe in a higher power, read and or believe in the bible that's their right to do so as long as it's not oppressed onto others.

I agree entirely with your sentiment - unfortunately (and annoyingly) the bit in bold doesn't apply as many religions actively contradict it.

 

[DTA]

Where did you get the idea that I go out of my way to be deliberately offensive to a whole group of people from???

I really would like an answer this time.

*Your Hitchens quote when you first entered this thread

With Islam you're arguing that the reason I shouldn't offend is because the extremists can use that to recruit.

With these example you seem to be using different reasoning. Why?

*No if you think that, then you miss the point completely of what im saying

Offend the extremists as much as u want, i will help. As long as it doesnt cause unnecessary offense to others

One of the most influential atheists of the last couple of decades (imo) was Christopher Hitchens. People still give him and his arguments as contributing reasons for leaving their faith behind.

*And others have claimed that proponents of atheism has led them to faith... or renewed their faith. So?


That's more evidence than you've given for any of your claims in this thread.

Sorry for the messed up format. My answers are with the star next to them

 

[elltrev]

I disagree.

Ridicule may make it easier to turn believers into extremists (although I think the net effect would be incredibly small) but it massively reduces the ability to turn sane people into believers. Extremists will always be able to turn some believers, by restricting their pool of targets (hopefully to none) we both reduce extremism and make the world a massively better place.

Why do you think the net effect would be incredibly small? I think the far more logical likelihood is that non-Muslim Westerners purposefully ridiculing the muslim faith will have quite a large net effect, particularly when coupled with Western military action in Muslim countries.

Chnage from believers to non-believers has to come from within the Muslim community - not from non-Muslims ridiculing 1.5 billion people. Jesus.

I can't see how you can possibly think that mass, purposeful ridicule from people of a different faith and culture and ethnicity, when tensions are already high, is going to lead to Muslims changing their beliefs. It's just going to make people even more entrenched.

Your beliefs seem very illogical and generally fudging ridiculous.

 

[scaramanga]

Why do you think the net effect would be incredibly small? I think the far more logical likelihood is that non-Muslim Westerners purposefully ridiculing the muslim faith will have quite a large net effect, particularly when coupled with Western military action in Muslim countries.

Chnage from believers to non-believers has to come from within the Muslim community - not from non-Muslims ridiculing 1.5 billion people. Jesus.

I can't see how you can possibly think that mass, purposeful ridicule from people of a different faith and culture and ethnicity, when tensions are already high, is going to lead to Muslims changing their beliefs. It's just going to make people even more entrenched.

Your beliefs seem very illogical and generally fudgeing ridiculous.

Reading fail, nice try though.

Believers are pretty much lost to the human race - we'll never convert more than a handful of them back.

The real targets are future generations. You have to create an environment where religion is seen for what it is and only a few cranks believe in it - that's the only way you can rid the world of such a disease. Immunisation rather than treatment.