Religion

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)

194. You say...

Mon Mar 3, 2014, 09:01 PM

Mar 2014

"There is no denying that comparing religions to those called mentally ill is rude and inaccurate".

Why is there no denying it? I don't doubt that it offends many people in a society where religion is socially normative. But so what? That doesn't make it inaccurate. Most people that identify as religious in the US are barely so. They already engage in a lot of cognitive dissonance and intellectual dishonesty to avoid the maladaptive aspects of religious beliefs. It's the most consistent believers that are seen as "crazy", even by other believers.

You don't have to be in the field of psychology to disagree with what most psychologists think is a "disorder". It's something that is subjective and changes all the time, it's not based on science, but preferences. Psychologists tend to hew to what is socially normative. Not all do, of course. If they said something that was socially normative was a disorder, could you imagine the backlash they would face as a community? So it's no surprise they don't.

I have seen no good reason for why religious beliefs that fit the definition of certain mental illnesses are not indeed a mental illness. So far I've heard that it's offensive, but that's not an argument.

I've had mental disorders before, I don't think it should be a point of shame or used as an insult. I think it's something that needs to be discussed honestly. Religion has so much privilege in our society that that is hard to do.

There are millions of Americans who believe sincerely that there is a hell, and that if they don't do certain things, they will burn eternally. There is no good evidence for this. That is a mental disorder, IMHO. It is maladaptive and creates all sorts of untold suffering. People are afraid their loved ones are burning in hell. They change their lives to avoid certain normal behaviors to avoid it. That's just one of many examples I can think of. Why isn't that considered a mental disorder? Because it's socially normative. It's so socially normative, that children are indoctrinated in this same belief and many end up struggling with this same disorder into adulthood.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

464 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Religious Belief = Mental Illness: A More Venomous Response [View all] cbayer Mar 2014 OP

Lame and idiotic skepticscott Mar 2014 #1

You have an ugly penchant for using mental illnesses as insults. rug Mar 2014 #2

Which is pretty ironic, considering he talks to himself so much of the time Starboard Tack Mar 2014 #368

1000+ on point Mar 2014 #80

And one does not have to be a mental health professional to recognize Fortinbras Armstrong Mar 2014 #82

Bigotry it is for sure, but I wouldn't call it "atheistic bigotry" Starboard Tack Mar 2014 #369

Delusions can be religious in nature, but it does not follow that all religious-ness is delusional. yodermon Mar 2014 #298

It's hard to believe that in the 21st century people use mental illness as a perjorative. Jim__ Mar 2014 #3

It's harder to believe they are allowed to post on DU. rug Mar 2014 #4

I agree. Jim__ Mar 2014 #6

One need not be using it as a perjorative skepticscott Mar 2014 #7

Really? As what then? A diagnosis? Jim__ Mar 2014 #20

Sorry, horseshit skepticscott Mar 2014 #21

If you're at work counting how frequently other people wash their hands ... Jim__ Mar 2014 #27

! rug Mar 2014 #28

Is that lameness the best response you could come up with? skepticscott Mar 2014 #31

It is called context. TM99 Mar 2014 #34

Who defines what is mental illness? MellowDem Mar 2014 #36

Belief that defies reality, eh? TM99 Mar 2014 #37

Mental illness is subjective? Dorian Gray Mar 2014 #151

For real! MellowDem Mar 2014 #190

In THAT case, it would be wrong, which is why I qualified my statement skepticscott Mar 2014 #39

You are just throwing out a barage of words TM99 Mar 2014 #41

So you're saying it's NEVER appropriate skepticscott Mar 2014 #69

Again TM99 Mar 2014 #72

Did I or did I not say very clearly that I was NOT talking about "diagnosing" people? skepticscott Mar 2014 #76

You keep moving the goal posts and TM99 Mar 2014 #83

Since you've reached the point skepticscott Mar 2014 #146

Internet bullies are always the same. TM99 Mar 2014 #161

A precise dissection. rug Mar 2014 #175

Exactly. okasha Mar 2014 #348

TM99 Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #44

Why should I provide you with private information TM99 Mar 2014 #47

I understand. I do the same thing. But if you wish to speak as a professional? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #51

Others speak here as professionals in a variety of fields TM99 Mar 2014 #55

Of course. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #58

1000+ on point Mar 2014 #78

Particularly when those people describe themselves as liberal or progressive. cbayer Mar 2014 #9

The Bible itself often warned about false things in religion; including "delusions" Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #40

So what? That is not the same thing as calling religious people delusional in general. cbayer Mar 2014 #48

"False Prophets" claimed to speak for God. Can we criticize their religion? The Bible told us to. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #50

What in the world are you talking about? cbayer Mar 2014 #56

My mistake. My scholarly citations on psych bad things in religion, weren't censored. They are here: Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #61

This link just goes to an OP, not to your citations. Who is our resident psychologist 99? cbayer Mar 2014 #63

This message was self-deleted by its author Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #66

Immediately above what? cbayer Mar 2014 #67

Woops! BELOW conversation between me and 99 Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #68

it's only pejorative in the eyes of the receiver, and unnecessarily so.... mike_c Mar 2014 #103

Yes, I know you have. It's almost quaint. cbayer Mar 2014 #105

yeah well-- if it swims and quacks... mike_c Mar 2014 #108

Or it might be a decoy with a hunter behind it. cbayer Mar 2014 #109

I have long held that selective observation that feeds a bias makes the observer appear ridiculous. rug Mar 2014 #125

of course.... mike_c Mar 2014 #136

New word needed Cartoonist Mar 2014 #5

It sounds like you're engaging in special pleading skepticscott Mar 2014 #8

Paging Son of Sam Cartoonist Mar 2014 #22

I would agree that the minds of believers and non-believers function in different ways. cbayer Mar 2014 #11

More of your nonsense skepticscott Mar 2014 #13

As my wonderful late Mom used to say yeoman6987 Mar 2014 #302

If there isn't a god and you live your life as if there is one skepticscott Mar 2014 #303

Thank you for your welcome. Cartoonist Mar 2014 #23

Burden of proof? What proof? cbayer Mar 2014 #24

Faith Cartoonist Mar 2014 #29

Mark Twain - offering one of so many views on religion. cbayer Mar 2014 #45

Yes...as someone who has researched Twain's views on religion for nearly 20 years deutsey Mar 2014 #297

As is often the case for those whose statements are used to make a point. cbayer Mar 2014 #300

It's always worth the time to read Twain, so ... just for grins. Jim__ Mar 2014 #307

That dream is one of my favorite passages of Twain's deutsey Mar 2014 #310

Unfortunately for you skepticscott Mar 2014 #30

And we believers are equally justified in asking for evidence there is NOT a God Fortinbras Armstrong Mar 2014 #91

Where have I insisted that there is none? Exactly where? Link to it. skepticscott Mar 2014 #92

OK, you probably have not said it explicitly Fortinbras Armstrong Mar 2014 #166

It's good that you admitted right up front skepticscott Mar 2014 #177

Notice the use of "...you BELIEVE there is no god..." cleanhippie Mar 2014 #179

^^^this^^^ malokvale77 Mar 2014 #202

I know that you want to call me a liar, but your slanders are themselves lies. Fortinbras Armstrong Mar 2014 #180

Oh, seriously, you are funny skepticscott Mar 2014 #184

"Because if not, you're not worth my time." rug Mar 2014 #186

So you think there is evidence for the existence of God. Good to know. Leontius Mar 2014 #182

Join the club skepticscott Mar 2014 #183

So you think there is no evidence for the existence of God. Good to know. Leontius Mar 2014 #185

Why are you so afraid to state without equivocation what you think? Leontius Mar 2014 #387

If you can point to skepticscott Mar 2014 #390

Given the chance you disemble and distract you just don't have it in you to be Leontius Mar 2014 #392

You've offered nothing to answer directly skepticscott Mar 2014 #393

Exactly Cartoonist Mar 2014 #117

I don't think we should make laws based on religion at all. cbayer Mar 2014 #118

Yes, you say that all the time skepticscott Mar 2014 #144

Allow me to point out that your logic has just taken a leap off a cliff. rug Mar 2014 #129

Twaddle? Cartoonist Mar 2014 #142

If you define Santa Claus, the definition sets its limits and it disproves itself. rug Mar 2014 #143

Santa Cartoonist Mar 2014 #145

And the Easter Bunny? Do you have an equally bullshit based explanation for that as well? cbayer Mar 2014 #172

Yes Cartoonist Mar 2014 #187

Oh, malarkey. You brought those things up in order to mock cbayer Mar 2014 #189

Mocking Cartoonist Mar 2014 #199

Yes, it is clear that you don't see a difference. cbayer Mar 2014 #206

Nearly all serious historians of Religion accept the Santa/Easter account that you seem to reject Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #210

I don't reject the historical roots of santa or the easter bunny. cbayer Mar 2014 #224

Na. Scholars say "Eostre, or "Estre," (SP?), godess related to spring, may be origin of Easter. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #226

You have apparently missed my entire point. cbayer Mar 2014 #231

Well, how about the apparent historical relation of Eastre to Christ? The Resurrection.... Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #233

What is the problem?? Where have I said that I reject that? cbayer Mar 2014 #234

Well, the next step might be to link popular myths too, to these religious forms Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #236

You've taken a completely different train. cbayer Mar 2014 #238

Discovering links between our religion, and other religions, even myths, can be painfully ... Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #239

Sorry, this is not about discovering links about anything. cbayer Mar 2014 #240

Check out "Judgement Day" and the "Day of the Lord" Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #245

No, thanks. I don't believe any of that and have no interest in reading more about it. cbayer Mar 2014 #247

Didn't you stand up for religious education? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #249

I stood up for religious studies. cbayer Mar 2014 #251

I believe in it as a metaphor: a "day" when suddenly things look different. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #256

We all have days like that, don't we. cbayer Mar 2014 #258

Well, how about a day when we see a much better sense of religion? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #260

It is my sincere hope that people will work together to achieve that. cbayer Mar 2014 #261

No they don't but you would know that if you knew anything about this subject. Leontius Mar 2014 #243

True. okasha Mar 2014 #267

Local Greco-Roman and many other "rebirth" myths existed in the area, long before Paul Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #273

The existence of a goddess named Ostara is not even generally accepted. Leontius Mar 2014 #311

Cf. Ishtar. Which sounds and looks rather like a precursor to either Eostre - and/or Easter Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #318

Wrong again. TM99 Mar 2014 #322

No way is that blog reliable. But what would I know? My PhD is only in the study of culture Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #326

Irrelevant TM99 Mar 2014 #338

Mythography has moved on since the brothers Grimm, 180 years ago. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #362

Linguistics is why. TM99 Mar 2014 #364

Referenced web site is not only source. Even it admits "eggs" and fertility symbols associated with Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #366

Folk etymology is such fun. okasha Mar 2014 #350

And linguistic "borrowing, " "cultural diffusion" from other cultures, never happens? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #363

And oh, my, water is wet. okasha Mar 2014 #370

English has links to very ancient Indo-European and other languages; 2,000 years old and more Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #374

Uhm, no. okasha Mar 2014 #378

The British Isles? Are you sure? Jim__ Mar 2014 #380

Thanks. okasha Mar 2014 #384

Today few people have experience in dozens of exotic languages to fully graph their interrelation Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #382

You can give up the smoke and mirrors act now. okasha Mar 2014 #385

Good advice. I doubt he will take it. Leontius Mar 2014 #386

It's been widely asserted. Possibly there is some good scholarship in German; Germans were the Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #388

Wrong again about the dates of language okasha Mar 2014 #391

Ishtar + Eos = Eostre, Easter, Estrous.Eastern Vernal Equinox, eggs, fertility,rebirth in the spring Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #395

No, again. okasha Mar 2014 #396

I suggest you stop consulting web sites, and consult my scholarly bibliographies Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #397

You have not cited your own credentials, have you? TM99 Mar 2014 #398

I've said I have a PhD in Culture Studies. One credential (given without ID to be sure) Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #400

This message was self-deleted by its author TM99 Mar 2014 #406

I deleted my first reply to you because TM99 Mar 2014 #407

I don't think I'd EQUATE Ishtar with Oestre. Rather it is all part of a far larger synthesis Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #411

Temper, temper. okasha Mar 2014 #410

Who is enormously self-important and smug, and feels adamant judgmentalism is scholarship? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #412

Surely a PhD in cultural studies okasha Mar 2014 #414

Want to spell it out for everyone? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #415

"Everyone" doesn't. need it. okasha Mar 2014 #417

So your libelous insults are clear to everyone. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #418

At the moment, okasha Mar 2014 #420

Denial. And projection. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #422

Please stop you're really embarrassing yourself. Leontius Mar 2014 #423

You're good at summary judgements and name-calling Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #424

My experience in the field has shown me TM99 Mar 2014 #431

Ishtar + Eos = Eostre or Easter is not quite etymology, or equation; but shorthand Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #432

"Ostara" is a alternate, Latinized version okasha Mar 2014 #349

The exsitence of a cult of Eostre/Ostara is still questioned as far as I know. Leontius Mar 2014 #371

Bede is the only written source we have. nt TM99 Mar 2014 #373

The only source on "Eostre." From there, we look to other sources: mythography and linguistics Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #375

See, you started your time here saying that you wanted to voice our opinions about religion, cbayer Mar 2014 #171

Look at your own posts Cartoonist Mar 2014 #188

So are you saying I am without the ability to critically think and are going to advise cbayer Mar 2014 #191

I'm beginning to think I am talking with a child. Cartoonist Mar 2014 #200

Yes, you are talking with a child who can't possibly figure out things you might say, lol. cbayer Mar 2014 #207

I'll try again Cartoonist Mar 2014 #244

You are probably both as you do not limit your negative comments to religion cbayer Mar 2014 #246

Like who? Cartoonist Mar 2014 #252

What makes you think I am religious? cbayer Mar 2014 #254

You still don't get it. Cartoonist Mar 2014 #313

Yes I still don't get it and I am a liar. cbayer Mar 2014 #324

Please put me on ignore. Cartoonist Mar 2014 #356

Nah, I think there may still be hope for you. cbayer Mar 2014 #357

I wish people just argued what they think of religion without saying believers are mentally ill. hrmjustin Mar 2014 #10

It is quite possible for one to make arguments against religion, criticize religion, etc cbayer Mar 2014 #12

I agree. I know plenty of non-believers and only one or two can get that nasty about it. hrmjustin Mar 2014 #14

Before DU, I had never really known any overtly hostile anti-theists. cbayer Mar 2014 #16

Yes DU really was my first real experience with people who were very anti-religion. hrmjustin Mar 2014 #17

Shouldn't we be hostile to an oppressive, harmful institution like religion? phil89 Mar 2014 #84

While we might want to be opposed to oppressive, harmful institutions cbayer Mar 2014 #89

More like the people skepticscott Mar 2014 #15

Then there is the 'bigotry line' EvilAL Mar 2014 #304

What is bigotry according to you? cbayer Mar 2014 #305

If it is directed at people for whatever reason EvilAL Mar 2014 #306

I agree with you, but not seeing the posts for cbayer Mar 2014 #308

I agree that it can in certain instances. EvilAL Mar 2014 #309

Maybe it's a compulsion. rug Mar 2014 #25

Hilarious you are. cbayer Mar 2014 #26

What would be wrong with allowing choice of religion or no religion? Those who argue for or Thinkingabout Mar 2014 #18

Totally agree. cbayer Mar 2014 #19

We already allow that..mostly skepticscott Mar 2014 #32

Yes, my point, it sbould not be a part of either side to call the other names, question their Thinkingabout Mar 2014 #33

Problem is, homosexuality used to be considered an abnormality... MellowDem Mar 2014 #35

Psychology is no more a soft science than medicine. TM99 Mar 2014 #38

Many of whom often said rather negative things on religion Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #42

As my daddy used to say - TM99 Mar 2014 #46

But if much of Psychology says negative things about religion... Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #49

Much of psychology says negative things about religion? No, that's not true cbayer Mar 2014 #53

Oh, and now you're presuming to speak skepticscott Mar 2014 #147

Much of psychology does not. TM99 Mar 2014 #57

Your cited APA article begins noting negative professional psych evaluation of religion... Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #65

Some not all. TM99 Mar 2014 #73

"Some" psychologists criticize religion, note, does not mean "none" Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #74

What counterhypothesis? TM99 Mar 2014 #75

Whose narrative, who frames the question, the rules, is a major matter in my own field (s) Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #77

What are your fields, by the way? cbayer Mar 2014 #79

The thread: is accusing religion (in general?) of psych disorders wrong? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #81

You are conflating too many subjects and ideas. TM99 Mar 2014 #85

There may be however, a Culture Studies basis to suggest that Religion is largely dysfunctional. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #95

Criminally insane? cbayer Mar 2014 #87

The phrase "criminally insane" once had legal standing; it refers to criminals who are also ... Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #93

I know what criminally insane is. cbayer Mar 2014 #94

The Bible says that nearly everyone in the world is to be found deceived in its worship (Rev. 13.9). Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #99

By the way, Rev. 13:9 says "Let anyone who has an ear listen:". That's it. cbayer Mar 2014 #97

Woops. Rev. 13.7-8. But how do you read that "ear" statement? What does it say? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #102

Er, those verses say this: cbayer Mar 2014 #104

This is part of the larger picture;"warring" adds to convincing with false arguments/delusions Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #110

I think you may be begining to understand this constant drivel for what it is. Leontius Mar 2014 #119

He starts out relatively understandable but seems to inevitably cbayer Mar 2014 #120

Well I'm no psychologist but I think... Leontius Mar 2014 #128

Bullseye. okasha Mar 2014 #133

I'm having trouble making sense out of this. cbayer Mar 2014 #134

That's precisely why okasha Mar 2014 #140

Your definition, unsurprisingly, is incorrect. rug Mar 2014 #130

Here's the American Psychological Assn quote, linking religion to Mental Illness, AGAIN: Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #212

Good for you. TM99 Mar 2014 #214

Let's look at the exact wording of the APA article a little more closely Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #216

Please give the exact quote where the article says "many psychologists" are condemning religion. Jim__ Mar 2014 #217

The word in THIS article is "some" shrinks link religion to mental illness; other's say 1/4 of them. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #218

In place of an exact quote - just more bullshit. Jim__ Mar 2014 #219

First? This particular article does note SOME psychologists link religion to mental illness Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #221

Still trying to find something to support your statements, eh? Jim__ Mar 2014 #223

I stated MANY times that THIS article is OVERALL, positive on religion. But... Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #225

I posted this article TM99 Mar 2014 #228

Please just stop. TM99 Mar 2014 #227

1) "Shrink" is the familiar, affectionate term! :) Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #230

By the numbers: TM99 Mar 2014 #269

He can't, because it doesn't. cbayer Mar 2014 #232

Actually we're not entirely disagreeing; it's just where we put the EMPHASIS Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #235

There is nothing even approaching a consensus. cbayer Mar 2014 #237

Let's allow atheists insults; Psychology articles note bad things in Religion. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #241

Allow atheists insults? What do you mean by that. cbayer Mar 2014 #242

Note the article abstracts that I've included above; they note bad things in religion Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #248

Your link requires a subscription. cbayer Mar 2014 #250

I think everything I've offered is pretty straight, as far as I know; no rhetoric, no lies. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #253

You just make up a lot of stuff. cbayer Mar 2014 #255

Pretty close. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #257

I think we can agree about their being a better kind of Christianity, or cbayer Mar 2014 #259

Seems possible. I emphasize the unexpected scientific side in religion. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #262

While scientists are more likely to be atheists, there are many who are both cbayer Mar 2014 #263

Which, also unsurprisingly, has nothing to do with the legal definition of insanity acquittee. rug Mar 2014 #264

A suggestion which I said "I'm using ... here a bit facetiously." Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #275

How exactly phil89 Mar 2014 #86

Not by the agreed upon definition of TM99 Mar 2014 #88

Since the actual professionals in the field completely disagree with your definition cbayer Mar 2014 #90

Funny that now you seem to think skepticscott Mar 2014 #106

Um, hello? That's why we are called mental health 'professionals.' DeadLetterOffice Mar 2014 #162

I am glad to see another professional TM99 Mar 2014 #164

Try reading my post again skepticscott Mar 2014 #165

OK, let's try another approach. TM99 Mar 2014 #168

Sheesh, read will you? skepticscott Mar 2014 #178

So you have nothing then? TM99 Mar 2014 #203

Ok. DeadLetterOffice Mar 2014 #169

My, such vitriol directed at a person tried in a science. rug Mar 2014 #174

Psychology is a soft science... MellowDem Mar 2014 #135

Do you also consider psychiatry a "soft science"? cbayer Mar 2014 #138

Yes... MellowDem Mar 2014 #148

You are really wrong on this MellowDem (see creationism). cbayer Mar 2014 #170

How am I wrong? MellowDem Mar 2014 #192

So if I look at some cancer cells under a microscope cbayer Mar 2014 #193

Yes, yes, and yes! MellowDem Mar 2014 #195

See, it's not inherently subjective. cbayer Mar 2014 #196

How is it not inherently subjective? MellowDem Mar 2014 #197

Have you taken a look at the DSM lately? cbayer Mar 2014 #205

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of mental disorders? Let's look at what a standard survey says: Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #215

A "standard survey" is not an uncited cut and paste from wikipedia. cbayer Mar 2014 #229

By your definition of "delusion" skepticscott Mar 2014 #222

Once you have a definition... MellowDem Mar 2014 #266

In general, something become a disorder when it interferes cbayer Mar 2014 #277

If beliefs cause a nation to attack and kill its neighbors, couldn't they be a "delusion"? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #278

A delusion is a fixed belief that persists despite clear cbayer Mar 2014 #279

Here's a quote from a Psychiatric Journal, saying whole religious groups can be delusional Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #282

There is not doubt that religious beliefs can represent pathology, cbayer Mar 2014 #284

Recent data cited here suggests spiritual people experience 3 x more depression in UK Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #377

If you honestly look at the data conceding religiosity and mental health, cbayer Mar 2014 #383

My field, Cultural Studies, regards itself as a paradigm shift, generating new hypotheses Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #389

How many mental illnesses can you name skepticscott Mar 2014 #149

There is quite a bit to address in your reply TM99 Mar 2014 #167

You say... MellowDem Mar 2014 #194

And that's the real point that the skepticscott Mar 2014 #201

Why is it so difficult for you and several others in this thread TM99 Mar 2014 #204

This: trotsky Mar 2014 #208

I am not having any difficulty whatsoever. TM99 Mar 2014 #209

Well with that attitude it's a complete mystery why you are having difficulty communicating. trotsky Mar 2014 #211

Hardly a bogeyman, but a legitimate issue for adults TM99 Mar 2014 #213

Some now suggest elements of even "spiritual" liberal religion correlate to disorders in UK Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #220

I'm staying on topic... MellowDem Mar 2014 #265

Again, not a strawman. TM99 Mar 2014 #268

And now apparently skepticscott Mar 2014 #270

Whatever. TM99 Mar 2014 #271

Which was exactly the point I made above skepticscott Mar 2014 #287

Tiresome TM99 Mar 2014 #291

Yes, I'm accusing you skepticscott Mar 2014 #314

Congratulations. You've progressed from calling DUers deluded to calling DUers hypocrites. rug Mar 2014 #315

Time for an education TM99 Mar 2014 #317

Well, let's see now skepticscott Mar 2014 #347

I am more than confident TM99 Mar 2014 #359

I'm not accepting the word of some psychologists.... MellowDem Mar 2014 #272

So you are still cherry-picking TM99 Mar 2014 #274

TM99: you've misdefined "consensus." Worse, you are using it, using herd rule, as a bludgeon Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #276

You are simply wrong. TM99 Mar 2014 #280

Here, one journal suggests that a whole Religion, say, can be "delusional" Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #281

I just plain does not say that. Period. cbayer Mar 2014 #285

This nuanced article entertains many possibities - including religion as pathology Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #288

Did you actually subscribe and read the whole article? cbayer Mar 2014 #289

What am I cherry-picking? MellowDem Mar 2014 #312

Because it is all subjective TM99 Mar 2014 #316

What if MOST of Psych doesn't see religion as pathology; significant PARTS of it do Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #319

Significant parts DO NOT! TM99 Mar 2014 #321

The author is with the UCLA med school; his article in the Journal of Psychiatric Practice Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #323

You really never seam to fully read nor comprehend the posts you reply to. TM99 Mar 2014 #340

You do not seem to understand anything I wrote Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #342

You may disagree, but I think you are out of line to question this member's credibility. cbayer Mar 2014 #346

nt okasha Mar 2014 #351

I rephrase my objection to - Mr., not Dr.? - 99 Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #360

It would appear that this is a call-out TM99 Mar 2014 #365

No callout; though if you'd like to informally cite your credentials,without specific ID, feel free. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #367

No matter what data I present to you, TM99 Mar 2014 #372

Nothing spelled out in your post contradicts my point.I'll check links later. Agreeing on a "lot"? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #376

Homosexuality was once considered a mental illness, but that was abandoned a long time ago. cbayer Mar 2014 #52

What are the author's credentials in Psychology? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #43

What are yours? cbayer Mar 2014 #54

Looks like we are all mostly amateurs here in Psych; including the author. So.... Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #59

And her point is exactly that - if you do not have the education, training and experience in the cbayer Mar 2014 #60

So she herself doesn't know if what is said about religion, is wrong? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #62

What? She knows it is wrong because nowhere in the professional community cbayer Mar 2014 #64

Note APA citation above; by TM 99 Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #70

What about it? cbayer Mar 2014 #71

I hope this isn't a continuation of your attempt to make delusion and mental illness a synonym. AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #96

Oh, its' not. I long ago recognized that some people use the term delusion very loosely cbayer Mar 2014 #101

The term was being used very precisely. AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #114

The term is being very precisely by some members here to mean mental illness. cbayer Mar 2014 #116

For consideration.... AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #121

Not bad and it resonates to some extent. In this case, cbayer Mar 2014 #123

one can note the self delusion of religionists without making "a diagnosis...." mike_c Mar 2014 #98

If you are going to use psychiatric terms in a way that denotes psychiatric illness, cbayer Mar 2014 #107

I think we might finally have found a point of agreement.... mike_c Mar 2014 #111

Yes, that's right, mike. Religionists are just like people with brain tumors or diabetes. cbayer Mar 2014 #112

How about "visions"? "Voices" from nowhere? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #320

Most religious people do not have actual visions or voices. cbayer Mar 2014 #325

Do you have any data or statistics to support that? trotsky Mar 2014 #328

The major religious texts claimed visions, voices. The Church claims them. Mentally ill people too. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #334

Modern liberal christians "claim" visions and voices? cbayer Mar 2014 #335

I was raised a modern, liberal Christian. But? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #339

Like I said, I don't think liberal, modern christians embrace voices and visions. cbayer Mar 2014 #341

I accept it might be partially good, to partially accept Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #343

One can accept parts of things without endorsing the whole. cbayer Mar 2014 #345

I think your pronouncements of what liberal, modern Christians do or do not believe... trotsky Mar 2014 #344

Interesting discussion, some of it beyond my educational pay grade, but suffice it to say pinto Mar 2014 #100

We are now moving beyond saying religious people are psychiatrically ill to saying cbayer Mar 2014 #113

Better call Animal Control, too. (Post 95) okasha Mar 2014 #137

Damn you, okasha! Now I had to go and read that yet another time cbayer Mar 2014 #139

Me, too. okasha Mar 2014 #141

It's an ugly slur used by hateful people. NaturalHigh Mar 2014 #115

I think the author demonstrates that it is not an either-or choice goldent Mar 2014 #122

Good point. Despite no scientific evidence to support them, there are still cbayer Mar 2014 #124

I love it! hrmjustin Mar 2014 #126

It's so ironic. cbayer Mar 2014 #127

I see a lot of conflation here Warpy Mar 2014 #131

I think zealotry is a good place to draw a line. cbayer Mar 2014 #132

I agree with you completely that humans are hard-wired for religious delusions.... mike_c Mar 2014 #152

Perhaps it has escaped you okasha Mar 2014 #155

of course.... mike_c Mar 2014 #157

This is always an entertaining debate el_bryanto Mar 2014 #150

you've raised an excellent point.... mike_c Mar 2014 #153

So anyone who genuinely believes - like myself - is not entirely sane. el_bryanto Mar 2014 #154

I didn't say anyone was necessarily pretending... mike_c Mar 2014 #156

Why would you leave it to me to decide if it's sane or not? el_bryanto Mar 2014 #158

oddly, I simply believe that I need to be less of a jerk.... mike_c Mar 2014 #159

I prefer it to be personal el_bryanto Mar 2014 #160

There were millions of Southerners okasha Mar 2014 #163

You really want to be less of a jerk? cbayer Mar 2014 #173

Score one for cbayer and her team! trotsky Mar 2014 #181

well at least she (inadvertently) indicated that "mentally ill" and "delusional" are not the same. Warren Stupidity Mar 2014 #198

Well, it's good to know that we are focusing on the real problem - rude atheists. trotsky Mar 2014 #176

Religious people are delusional. Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #283

Oh, horse shit. cbayer Mar 2014 #286

Nice counter argument. Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #290

It's really all it deserved. cbayer Mar 2014 #292

Uh huh. Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #293

People pray all over the earth and the vast majority of them are cbayer Mar 2014 #294

Yeah, and what if I told you I talk to an imaginary pink elephant many times a day? Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #295

Don't need hints from you, thanks. cbayer Mar 2014 #296

And here comes the "bigotry" word. Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #299

Not an illness. Deep13 Mar 2014 #301

Yes, anything that is explicable by culture alone is not a mental illness Distant Quasar Mar 2014 #353

schizoprenia is a mental illness. Deep13 Mar 2014 #358

So after 325 posts have we decided if we are mentally ill? hrmjustin Mar 2014 #327

Yes, some of the completely unqualified individuals who post in this cbayer Mar 2014 #329

I have to say while I found some of the responses insulting, I also hrmjustin Mar 2014 #330

What is amusing is that some of the positions taken here more closely fit the cbayer Mar 2014 #332

Good points. hrmjustin Mar 2014 #333

While there are some areas of Mexico that celebrate Shrove Tuesday, I am cbayer Mar 2014 #336

It was great! I don't get it often so I was happy to have it. hrmjustin Mar 2014 #337

If you could point to even one post out of hundreds skepticscott Mar 2014 #379

IMO, a "religious belief" is a personal notion, i.e. an assumed, subjective opinion and as such, ladjf Mar 2014 #331

It isn't mental illness. It may be intellectual lazines or deep-seeded insecurity issues BlueStreak Mar 2014 #352

Using "mentally ill" as a pejorative also exploits the stigma of mental illness Distant Quasar Mar 2014 #354

Welcome to religion, Distant Quasar. cbayer Mar 2014 #355

There'a another view above though: cf. the "criminally insane" were once held responsible, culpable Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #361

A more venomous response to this shit article... MellowDem Mar 2014 #381

CONCLUSION: "All" religion CAN be a "delusion" (Pierre, Jour. Psych. Prac., 2001). Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #394

YOUR conclusion, ONLY! TM99 Mar 2014 #399

Let's parse this. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #401

You really didn't read the full pdf did you? TM99 Mar 2014 #402

I'm reading it. Lets look at your own article, again. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #403

Your field does not apply science to religion. TM99 Mar 2014 #405

In general, my field does not apply much science. But I do Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #408

Much of the Internet is just a play field for verbal agression by people who want to be bullies Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #409

Yeah - that's why people post things "Religion Kills Yet Another Child." el_bryanto Mar 2014 #443

That phrase would be merely incendiary - if it wasn't simply true Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #446

? What? Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #404

No, that's not what she's saying. Jim__ Mar 2014 #413

"Raising rational criticisms will probably be far more productive than childish name-calling." Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #416

Lobbing �mental illness� as a pejorative is both ugly and unnecessary. Jim__ Mar 2014 #419

"Rational criticism has been fairly successful in keeping creationism out of the science classroom" Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #421

It was rational criticism okasha Mar 2014 #425

LOL! Right. People who are utterly illogical listened to logic. Right. nt Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #426

The campaigns and vote totals okasha Mar 2014 #427

So, people who are ignorant and illogical were simply swooning at logic? lol Not. nt Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #428

Let's be clear about this. okasha Mar 2014 #429

I'm saying that if it's got laws that reflect illiteracy, it's got a preponderance of illiterates.nt Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #430

Good grief. Did you read the post at all? okasha Mar 2014 #433

I think Creationists are a slew of illiterates. Having debates with them is pointless. nt Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #434

Irrelevant. okasha Mar 2014 #435

Surely you refer to your train of thought, no? nt Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #436

No, I refer to every one of your responses, okasha Mar 2014 #437

Here's another psychological article noting "delusion" in religion. Causing murders: Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #438

So how would you deal with this? hrmjustin Mar 2014 #439

You suggest that religious murders are based on psychological illness; but psychologists themselves Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #445

Well I never mrt anyone suffering from this. hrmjustin Mar 2014 #448

I've never met anyone who has bought "The Bodyguard" soundtrack... Act_of_Reparation Mar 2014 #449

Ok but my question becomes what is the solution to this issue? hrmjustin Mar 2014 #450

The claim is untrue and not worth arguing, imo. cbayer Mar 2014 #452

I know but I want to know what they think the cure is? hrmjustin Mar 2014 #453

There is no answer to a question about a false piece of information. cbayer Mar 2014 #455

Your right. hrmjustin Mar 2014 #456

De-programming. Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #458

Lol. Ok, let's put all psychiatric patients who have any kind of religious symptoms in camps cbayer Mar 2014 #461

Thank you for answering. hrmjustin Mar 2014 #462

In addition to addressing delusions, analysis would focus on deeper issues that motivated them Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #463

It doesn't note that religion is inextricably intermixed with mental delusion. cbayer Mar 2014 #440

The secret to the Bible is that its language is open to two readings: one is negative about holy men Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #441

The professional article just quoted here does not assign causal priority to mental illness Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #459

I already debunked that article and showed you how it doesn't say what cbayer Mar 2014 #460

For those NOT encumbered Feral Child Mar 2014 #442

SUM Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #444

Thoughtful post. Feral Child Mar 2014 #447

Post removed Post removed Mar 2014 #451

Excuse me? cbayer Mar 2014 #454

So what is the bottom line on the phrase "RELIGIOUS DELUSIONS"? Brettongarcia Mar 2014 #464

Yes - it's totally insane to post about religion in the religion forum of DU. el_bryanto Mar 2014 #457