A question of political correctness

Just a simple example to drive a point home.

'Hey. We've all agreed that everyone has the right to express their own opinion.'
'I'd like to say something.'
'Yes?'
'You're all going to burn in Hell if you don't accept my opinion.'

Is it that hard to agree something is wrong here? Is my attempt to discuss this topic the same as 'you're all going to Hell if you do not agree with me'? I think not.

a reply to: Rhaegar7

You have the right to your opinion. But that doesn't mean that people have to agree with it. And just as others have the right to their opinions, that doesn't mean that you or anyone else has to agree with them. Also:

1. No one knows who's really going to Heaven or Hell. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if most "believers" didn't make it to their religion's "Heaven" either. So why are you taking people seriously if they tell you that you're going to Hell for what you're saying? Most of them don't even follow their own books, so what does that say about them?

2. If you don't believe in a Hell, then why should that opinion matter anyway? If someone tells me that Zeus or Shiva are going to strike me down because I don't believe in them, then so what? I'd probably chuckle about it.

ETA: I actually like these kinds of conversations, so I don't mind the differing opinions at all. But that doesn't mean that I'll change my mind either.

a reply to: Rhaegar7

Religious proselytizing is not an incentive to violence. It itself is violence. From your own point of view, we might as well give up on trying to make a better world.

Preposterous. It's my religious beliefs that make me not lie, steal, cheat, cheat in relationships, etc. And charity is literally one of the 5 pillars of my religion. How is promoting charity the same thing as violence? LOL

One major problem with a lot of anti-theists is that you are actually just faultfinders. You don't care one bit about the positive actions of religious people/institutions or the positive ways that religious teachings have affected people. It's like you completely ignore the ex-gang member who gives up that life of crime after embracing a religion; the individuals who dedicate their lives to promoting charitable causes, etc.

And the faultfinders also seem to completely ignore any points that go against their anti-theism. For example, you still haven't addressed my point about the criteria for "right" and "wrong" that parents should teach to their children. And you completely brushed off the fact that humans are simply violent by nature and will use any pretext for wars and other forms of oppression. For example, the US has fought a series of wars, coups, and military interventions known as the freakin "Banana Wars" which had nothing to do with religion.

And there was literally an entire branch of science that's now known as "Scientific Racism" which included eugenics programs that killed &/or sterilized millions of people around the world. There were widely used economic theories like "social darwinism" that led to the deaths and oppression of millions more. Yet anti-theist faultfinders act like religion is the only key when clearly it isn't.

I'm curious about something. Would you agree with the phrase "Kill the theist to save the man"? Also, have you actually read the Qur'an (there's a link in my sig)?

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
I wouldn't be surprised if most "believers" didn't make it to their religion's "Heaven"...

Actually you would be correct, I know of several different people who were shown what the actual numbers are and it is not good...

Howard Pittman was told that only about 1 in 40 or about 2.5% goes to Heaven (he visited Heaven after he died on the way to the hospital).

BTW OP I just posted in another thread and I thought you might like to read it...

I think it totally relates to your topic because I believe it explains why so many no longer trust religion.

...the goal is to infiltrate it with their compromising philosophies and attempt to destroy the Church from within."

"What if there were people within the various Churches of God who covertly were guiding the members to slowly accept new ideas which are alien to the true faith and who were dedicated to destroying that faith at all costs?" JESUIT-JEDI MINDTRICKS

...most of our institutions are infiltrated and run by racists, satanists, perverts and criminals, often masquerading as devout and God-fearing Christians.

Did the Illuminati Exterminate Canadian Indian Children?

In the late forties the Illuminati wanted to infiltrate the churches because they understood the power of God within the structure of the church, and they had to find a way to infiltrate the church to break down that spiritual strength within the church, the power of the holy spirit that works within the church. They had to find a way to infiltrate that, and they wanted to bring the world into the churches so that the churches wouldn't be so strong spiritually. That was part of my father's job.

The method the illuminati used to infiltrate the organized church

a reply to: Rhaegar7

I don't have the right to get offended? Why do you feel the need to demean me in order to contest what I have to say? Did I try to demean you?

You have the right to be offended, but the question you should ask yourself is, WHY am I offended? If you don't believe it has any truth whatsoever, what do you care what they think or believe? In fact, tell them how you feel about them and their offense if you wish, just don't be surprised if they don't care what you think or have to say either. The best you can do at that point is move on and stay away from people and places where you think you'll be/get offended. That's what I do.

a reply to: Rhaegar7

Who said I advocated free speech? I don't. You think you have a 'right to your opinion'? Well, I have a right to not listen to your opinion if I find it offensive.

True. You have the freedom to walk away and move on if you find it offensive.

In my mind you have a 'right to keep your opinion to yourself' and you certainly don't have the right to teach your child that it will go to Hell if it doesn't kiss the feet of your imaginary messiah. That for me is child abuse.

That's your opinion, but it's only one that you're free to make a reality in your own home. That won't ever change. Some things we just have to learn to accept.

a reply to: Rhaegar7

I would like to live in a world where there was no violence of any kind (and to me religious proselytizing is violence). In my ideal world, parents should pass on their wisdom to their children, while being careful not to cross the line between advice and indoctrination.

I would like to live in a world where people aren't indoctrinating their children to believe that expressions of opinions that are disliked are equal to "violence".

a reply to: Rhaegar7

And, while I am offended, that is not the main reason for my stance. I want to live in a society where there is no violence, and where coercive behaviors are not tolerated. I am offended, because in my view our society is sitting idle, while demagogues and tyrants are abusing their 'rights' of 'religious expression' in order to profit, causing pain and suffering to sentient beings in the process.

That's not any different than what we just caught our own American government doing and it had nothing to do with religion. Corruption leads to true violence and we are capable of witnessing it anywhere.

a reply to: Rhaegar7

The current crisis in the ME is proof enough. Their violence started on the level of the individual. It was through aggressive proselytizing that this virus spread and eventually destroyed the lives of millions.

Not really. The radicalism in the Middle East has more to do with the indoctrination of power and control. They're just using religion as a cover and an excuse. It's mostly a political fight between the Sunnis and Shiites to see who will gain control over the region.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Hey. I had some work out of country, and then I got sick, so that's why I've taken my time in replying.

I've skimmed over the Qu'ran a few times. I thought it was captivating in the way it was written. It read more like poetry than prose. I give it more credit as a 'holy book' than I give the Bible for example.

I'm not a science proponent. My own stance is that since we have to live in society, we might as well accept it as a necessary evil and try to counter-act its inherent problems. The major one being that the many will inevitably try to force their agendas on the few. That's where I feel we should aim to counter-balance the equation.

a reply to: Murgatroid

Well, I find it quite strange that anyone would seriously entertain the notion that 99.99% of people will go to Hell. It's funny to be honest.

It reminds me of the saying that 'there can be no Christianity without Hell'. I personally cannot take seriously a religion that bases its argument on the various threats of Hell. And actually, I no longer feel so adamantly about my position towards 'proselytizing through Hell'. It can't be that offensive if it's so damn funny.

On a more serious note - I believe that there is one objectively existing pattern underlying all manifestation and that the various religions succeed in misleading people by feeding them various parts of this pattern, that are, however, slightly twisted and deformed.

In the case with Heaven and Hell.. It is true that the soul finds itself in a special place, which allows it free will - it is a place that balances all the forces of Creation, so that the soul can find itself by learning to exercise its freedom. So, in a way.. the soul hovers between Heaven and Hell, both being the idealized possible outcomes of its exercised freedom.

But I feel that humanity has misinterpreted the pattern once again, in imagining Heaven and Hell as 'the only two ultimate destinations'.. They are more like signposts and living metaphors that assist the soul in making informed decisions. In 'A course in Miracles' they say that there is only one choice and that is 'Heaven' and that it's inevitable for all souls to make that choice. I find that more enlightened than most other sources.

By the way, I had an OBE in which I supposedly met Muhammad and he showed me some visions of the Inferno, and how evil-doers eventually find themselves in it. It was quite a powerful experience, but this was not the usual vision of Hell - those who found themselves in the Inferno did not mind it, in fact they were laughing and felt victorious. So I suppose that Hell is simply the place of those who ultimately reject good, and willingly choose evil, but it is not 'everlasting punishment' but more like another destination, and those who find themselves there stay out of their own free will. 'There is evil in some of us, no matter what will never change. - Iron Maiden'