Yes, I understand how that comment could have been perceived in a negative way and I would have been happy to clarify and discuss it. What I *didn't* like is that the statement that offfended people was not what was discussed and instead there was direct hostility and condescension in response to other stuff I said, which is both out of left field and an attack on my *person* rather than my words. Not a productive discussion! I think that it's one thing to say "your words are condescending to these people for such and such reasons" than to actually *be* personally condescending and hostile to someone in particular.
What you're saying amounts to "religious people can be normal, productive and safe members of society because the batshit crazy nonsense they call religion doesn't come up much in their daily lives." That's like me saying you're a positive and totally nonthreatening member of society because you confine your cannibalism to dinner time, and restrict it to the privacy of your own home; can you see how that's a SOMEWHAT backhanded compliment?
You're not saying religious most religious people are rational, you're saying we're ALL irrational, but some of us are SO irrational that we can ignore fundamental contradictions between our core beliefs.
I'm not one to deny the importance of cognitive dissonance, but reducing rational religious people to that not only insults them but misrepresents reality to yourself as well as others. You're insisting on a conflict where none is necessary and explaining it as a mental weakness of the people in whom it exists. That's both hostile and condescending, yes, whether or not you recognize it as such.
What you're saying amounts to "religious people can be normal, productive and safe members of society because the batshit crazy nonsense they call religion doesn't come up much in their daily lives." That's like me saying you're a positive and totally nonthreatening member of society because you confine your cannibalism to dinner time, and restrict it to the privacy of your own home; can you see how that's a SOMEWHAT backhanded compliment?
You're not saying religious most religious people are rational, you're saying we're ALL irrational, but some of us are SO irrational that we can ignore fundamental contradictions between our core beliefs. I'm not one to deny the importance of cognitive dissonance, but reducing rational religious people to that not only insults them but misrepresents reality to yourself as well as others. You're insisting on a conflict where none is necessary and explaining it as a mental weakness of the people in whom it exists. That's both hostile and condescending, yes, whether or not you recognize it as such.
Given my own MB debates with the people who responded most, I doubt I could objectively analyze the responses of either.
Nonetheless, if two wrongs don't make a right, neither does one. It may be tempting to assume most religious people only SEEM rational because they ignore (and occasionally reject) the lunacy they share with the fundamentalist fringe when it conflicts with reality, but that kind of caricature isn't just insulting, it's inaccurate, even dangerous. It's a variation on the simplistic, monolithic, perspective of all atheists as heartless and immoral, or all Muslims as terrorists. It ignores everyone who doesn't take all (or sometimes any) of their religions statements literally or regard every members every statement as an article of faith. Most people are at least as nuanced as they are compartmentalized, and a multifaceted mindset isn't necessarily cognitive dissonance; more often it evidences precisely the kind of open mindedness social tolerance requires.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Jon Huntsman, the No-Drama Conservative (he speaks like a diplomat but he is no moderate)
- 03/09/2011 05:11:12 PM
2590 Views
I haven't had a chance to read the entire article yet
- 03/09/2011 09:00:22 PM
286 Views
Do we need two catholics in the race? *NM*
- 03/09/2011 11:24:19 PM
157 Views
I'd settle for one real one.
- 04/09/2011 09:44:03 PM
272 Views
Santorum is not a real catholic? Furthermore Gingrich converted to Catholicism *NM*
- 05/09/2011 12:39:38 AM
118 Views
Real Catholics, especially educated Latin-mass types should understand just-war morality *NM*
- 14/09/2011 12:47:28 AM
122 Views
Personally I think the left spends way to much time focusing on relgion
- 06/09/2011 02:04:54 AM
332 Views
Religion is an indication on whether or not a candidate is rational-minded or not.
- 06/09/2011 11:11:43 AM
416 Views
I agree the left does use religious prejudice to disqualify candidates
- 06/09/2011 02:04:02 PM
265 Views
How is it any different than Islam?
- 06/09/2011 05:00:30 PM
285 Views
Good point, they're all crazy.
- 07/09/2011 06:30:32 AM
274 Views
I am an athiest, but they are not all crazy
- 08/09/2011 02:19:38 AM
281 Views
The religions are crazy. The people believing in them are not necessarily crazy.
- 08/09/2011 06:33:46 PM
267 Views
I've yet to meet a rational sane atheist.
- 12/09/2011 10:01:59 PM
338 Views
Did you just call yourself irrational and/or insane? *NM*
- 12/09/2011 10:38:24 PM
124 Views
*NM*
- 12/09/2011 10:38:24 PM
124 Views
It's late, so you may have to spell it out for me: Did I claim to prove a negative in there?
- 13/09/2011 12:09:09 AM
269 Views
That's a good point!
- 14/09/2011 04:34:36 PM
262 Views
At the risk of extended tangent, that's a reasonable premise, but not one that leads to atheism.
- 21/09/2011 12:55:57 AM
395 Views
To cite a pop culture figure, Ken Jennings seems pretty rational
- 06/09/2011 10:09:25 PM
372 Views
They can compartmentalize.
- 07/09/2011 06:33:42 AM
307 Views
Everyone does that
- 07/09/2011 06:59:02 AM
275 Views
So, you don't think that religiosity in american politics is increasing?
- 07/09/2011 06:56:12 PM
339 Views
No, absolutely not
- 08/09/2011 03:25:49 AM
259 Views
Why the hostility?
- 08/09/2011 03:36:37 PM
263 Views
That would be my question for you
- 08/09/2011 05:01:42 PM
338 Views
Ay.
- 08/09/2011 06:27:17 PM
289 Views
Honestly, I had the same reaction as Isaac, which is why I responded as I did.
- 12/09/2011 10:12:36 PM
387 Views
Much better.
- 14/09/2011 04:49:38 PM
286 Views
Glad you liked it.
- 20/09/2011 11:17:35 PM
355 Views
why do you think America is becoming more religious?
- 07/09/2011 03:07:58 PM
271 Views
I said religiosity is increasing in american politics, and because it is. *NM*
- 07/09/2011 06:57:35 PM
120 Views
spoken like a true believer, who needs facts when you have faith and righteousness *NM*
- 07/09/2011 09:36:45 PM
123 Views
Just based on my observations. I haven't written a report on it.
- 08/09/2011 03:38:40 PM
263 Views
Gallup has looked into it
- 08/09/2011 04:44:25 PM
316 Views
Again, that's not what I said.
- 08/09/2011 06:04:13 PM
262 Views
There's an odd line halfway the article...
- 03/09/2011 10:39:42 PM
409 Views
Which lines are you referring to? *NM*
- 04/09/2011 10:03:06 PM
103 Views
This part:
- 04/09/2011 10:25:57 PM
309 Views
really? I didn't read this as a neutral article
- 06/09/2011 02:07:22 AM
270 Views
If you read it as a positive pro-Huntsman article, that only makes the contrast weirder still. *NM*
- 07/09/2011 10:26:30 PM
120 Views
I think the problem may be your prospective
- 08/09/2011 05:09:31 AM
267 Views
Seriously? That quote parodies and mocks things that matter to conservatives.
- 08/09/2011 08:39:21 PM
270 Views
That actually sounds like a joke conservatives would say to each other where no media could hear
- 14/09/2011 12:52:18 AM
286 Views
Well, I certainly like him better than any other Republican candidate I have heard about. *NM*
- 06/09/2011 10:34:36 PM
122 Views
That actually managed to alarm me a lot more than it reassured me.
- 12/09/2011 09:52:31 PM
345 Views