Why Are Opinions That Favor Religion OK, While Opinions That

[MineralMan]

Call Religion into Question Are Not OK? In this group, of course, I mean. According to "some few" here, I mean.

We all post opinions here. Pretty much everything anyone writes themselves in this Group is an opinion. I state clearly that everything I write is my opinion in every post. It's in my signature line, and has been for years. There's no need to post that I have given my opinion. If I wrote it, it is my opinion. It's redundant to restate what I state in every post.

It wastes time and bandwidth, frankly, to do that.

[WhiteTara]

1. One word. Fear.

[trotsky]

6. Another word: control.

Throughout history we've seen religious groups and religious people have the need to control others, and they can use religion to justify it all.

[WhiteTara]

16. behind the need to control is fear.

Ignorance is probably behind fear. Ignorance is the first link of karmic generation.

[zipplewrath]

2. Opinion based in knowledge

Opinions that are based in a demonstrated context of knowledge of the subject are rarely criticized.

Those that merely demonstrate a lack of any depth of knowledge are going to get quickly hammered.

[Act_of_Reparation]

17. O RLY

A utopia where hard work and diligent research are always recognized and only the lazy blusterings of the pompous are ridiculed? Sounds nice.

[zipplewrath]

19. Post truth

Part of the post truth phenomenon is that it is no longer considered important to be even mildly knowledgeable about a topic in order to have very strong opinions, much less express them. Worse, it is often considered a sign of bias, or of being an "elite" to actually be experience and/or knowledgeable on a topic.

[Major Nikon]

3. Because religion must be allowed to promote itself without worrying about dissent

The same thing has been going on at least since recorded history. The only thing that changes is the level of punishment for infraction.

[MineralMan]

4. Well, thank goodness, then, that we have this discussion group,

where religion can be discussed openly and even challenged without fear of punishment. Some people would rather that were not the case, of course, but this is not their open forum, so they can't just tell us to shut up and expect us to obey.

Just today, I wrote a new post that expressed some rather inoffensive opinions. It was dismissed without even a comment on its content by another member of this Group. Personally, I found that insulting and rude on that person's part. It's too bad that people have to experience such behavior. I'm perfectly capable of coping with such nonsense, but I fear that it might keep others from participating in discussions.

That would be a shame.

So, I'm venting a little about the behavior of some few members here. Most people are just fine with the kind of discussion that happens in this group. A few, however, seem to think they can set up rules here and enter discussions, not to participate in the topic, but to scold other members with whom they disagree.

That's very unfortunate, and gets in the way of open discussion. This is not the "Religious Group." It is the "Religion Group," where all points of view are welcome, and should not be subject to poor behavior and dismissal.

And, with that, I'm done.

[Major Nikon]

5. It would be like selling the bible on Amazon where no negative reviews are allowed

A 5 star rating wouldn't be surprising or accurate.

[NeoGreen]

7. While much reduced...

...when compared to historic methods, there isn't an absence of punishment for dissent or 'heretical' observations:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218272159

[MineralMan]

8. Well, this group, like all places on DU, is subject to

moderation by its members, via the alert and jury system. Although not perfect, it does work.

[NeoGreen]

9. Yes, but then the 'pearl clutchers' tend toward overreach...

...into 'protected' forums:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1230&pid=56026

[MineralMan]

10. As I said, it's not a perfect system.

[NeoGreen]

11. I'll only reflect on the notion that maybe it's not...

Last edited Mon May 14, 2018, 03:08 PM - Edit history (1)

...the imperfections of the system that are the problem.

[trotsky]

12. It's so important to stifle criticism that some feel the need...

to add an "11th Commandment" to try and mock/shame others into silence.

That really says it all. The ONE forum on DU where criticism of religious beliefs is allowed, and they can't stand it.

[Mariana]

20. The "11th Commandment" is a lie anyway.

Criticism isn't prohibition.

This is the kind of "dialog" I think some participants in this group want, based on an actual OP in this group from awhile back.

OP: "The human mind is a pale reflection of the Creator..."
Good: "You're absolutely right!"
Good: "That's so profound!"
Good: "Praise the Lord!"

These kind of exchange is unacceptable:

OP: "The human mind is a pale reflection of the Creator..."
Bad: "Please describe this creator."
Bad: "Which human mind?"
Bad: "How do you know this?"

There are groups on DU that were set up specifically so religious people can have the first kind of conversation, and avoid the second type altogether. This one lone group permits the second kind, and they don't like it one little bit.

[MineralMan]

21. +100!

Yes, exactly. It gets very tiresome.

[Mariana]

23. It is tiresome.

That is probably the intention, to prevent discussion by disrupting any thread in which an interesting conversation appears to be taking shape.

[trotsky]

35. Nailed it.

This post is going right into my bookmarks.

[Docreed2003]

30. See #28

That's what I think of when I see "11th commandment"...lol, I know that probably equates me as being a troll in some minds but damn, it makes me laugh!!

Your point is spot on though...in this forum, as generic as you can get with a title like 'Religion', you'd think debate and discourse would be welcome....sadly, it seems, more often than not, to be a place for some people to "proselytize" and back slap.

I will say, I enjoy your contributions here Trotsky, because it does spur interesting debate, at least to me!

[trotsky]

38. Your post #28 is spot on!

And thank you for your kind remarks.

[bitterross]

13. They should be fine - according to the statement of purpose

I just checked the Statement of Purpose. Seems like opinions that do not favor religion should be tolerated - at the least. As long as everyone is polite and respectful then there should be no problems posting something that casts doubts on the validity or worthiness of religion.

Statement of Purpose
Discuss religious and theological issues. All relevant topics are permitted. Believers, non-believers, and everyone in-between are welcome.

[marylandblue]

14. The 12th Commandment

"Thou shall not say anything negative about religion."

Between the 11th and 12th Commandments, it's actually pretty hard to say anything at all in this group.

[MineralMan]

15. Well, such "commandments" are specious in nature

and unenforceable in practice. That, of course, does not prohibit rudeness or dismissal by "some few."

Personally, I find it easy to say almost anything here. I do try to be polite about it, and never suggest that opposing views be silenced. I do grow impatient when people dismiss people's points without commenting on their substance, but that only happens in some cases.

I'm not fond of people attempting to attempt to enforce rules for the Group that do not exist. If those people want a closed discussion area where no dissent is allowed, there are some of those available, nearby.

I value open discussion highly, and find attempts to prevent such discussion contemptible.

[marylandblue]

18. I agree with you

I try to keep my comments topical and non-judgemental, but I do get frustrated with the low level of discussion here.

[guillaumeb]

22. Why is the 11th Commandment followed so strictly by some few here?

That also wastes time, and I believe that the tactic is intended to suppress dialogue except that which is critical of religion.

[Mariana]

24. There is no 11th Commandment.

“When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.”

You can post as many positive stories about religion that you wish. They won't be removed for being positive stories about religion, and you won't be banned from DU or blocked from the group for posting them. You just don't like it that people who disagree with you are permitted to post here, too, just the same as you are. Equality feels like oppression to you.

[trotsky]

36. Hear, hear!

[guillaumeb]

40. The 11th Commandment is stronger than ever.

[marylandblue]

25. They have negative views of religion

Why is that so hard to accept? I am sure you wish they didn't, but they do. Having an actual opinion is not a tactic, it's an opinion. On the other hand, accusing others of following some fictional rule instead of addressing their actual opinion IS a tactic, because then the discussion is not about the topic, but about the fictional rule.

If you think I am wrong, and you are not using any tactics, then stop accusing others of using tactics. Or of having opinions.

[Mariana]

33. I don't think he minds that we have negative views.

He just wants us to shut up about them. DU has a dozen or so groups for theists in which expression of disagreement and criticism is not tolerated. This one group permits us to express those negative views in response to theists' posts, and Gil and his friends seem to think that is just one group too many.

[Docreed2003]

28. Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican??

Sorry, that's what I think of every single time I see "11th Commandment" dropped in conversation here!

[Major Nikon]

29. Because it's complete nonsense you made up and get to judge

[MineralMan]

34. Dude! That commandment does not exist, except in your imagination.

You invented it. You own it. You also appear to be very fond of it, since you mention it frequently. There is no such commandment.

[trotsky]

37. Because it's a bogus construct you came up with in order to try and stifle criticism.

You won't succeed, and I know that positively burns you up.

[RKP5637]

26. Well, IMO, religion sucks and has been the cause of most of the worlds' problems. n/t

[Docreed2003]

27. Insecurity

I'm a simple guy, so pardon my ignorant take, but is this not a forum to discuss "religion" in general and debate and learn from each other?? Far too many posts within this forum are geared towards one of two things: 1). Presenting a point that shines a light on how great a particular portion of a religion is, like the poster is rooting for their team above all else, or 2). Posting a perspective that is intentionally closed minded and so absolutist that, at least to any person who questions "religion" or has done a bit of studying, it seems illogical and laughable on its face.

The former is driven by the need to slap the poster on their back with positive reinforcement...the later, at least to my dumb country eyes, seems driven by a desire to troll and intentionally force a one sided debate where in the poster can have friends drop in to support their outlandish claims and spur on debate, no matter how ridiculous.

Insecurity seems to be the driver in both those scenarios MM. I'm no theist, or diest, or whatever...just riding this wave of life on my own journey trying to take in and absorb as much as possible and try, in the process, to use that knowledge to help folks. It seems that some people are so insecure they can't help but do what they do within this forum...

Just my 2c as a frequent lurker here... (love ya man!!)

[D23MIURG23]

31. Because criticizing religious doctrine is easily conflated with attacking the adherents...

and apologists know that making that conflation is an effective tactic for shutting down critics.

[trotsky]

39. +1000 n/t

[c-rational]

32. Because when you write a favorable opinion no one is threatened. However, when you write

a post questioning religion, in my opinion believers are threatened. You are not your beliefs.