Subject:
|
Re: False premise in this message needs to be identified as what it is
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 21 Sep 2004 18:17:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1433 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lee Meyer wrote:
> Hi Dave, the point I was trying to make was that when you deal with a topic
> that has moral/religious implications (such as homosexuality),
Just a quick aside, pretty much anything has implications in some religion or
other. Lego altogether is an affront to the Amish I'm sure, since they don't
even believe in using such technical marvels as buttons, let alone plastics and
the internet. And I'm sure some religious would find it appauling that we spent
any time whatsoever persuing our own hobby rather than worshipping God in every
spare moment. Homosexuality just happens to be an issue that came up.
> if before the
> discussion has even begun, you state that religious factors will not be taken
> into consideration on determining if something should or shouldn't be done,
> all I'm saying is that that is not a religion-neutral position - it is one
> that is hostile (equally hostile towards all religions) to religion.
Since it's equally hostile, isn't it religion-neutral? To put it another way,
would you accept anything as being religiously neutral? That is, isn't it by
your definition an oxymoron, and hence a completely useless term?
> You have to understand that people of faith cannot compartmentalize or
> separate their faith/morality from their decisions.
I'd probably disagree-- as others have already replied, even religious people
strive for "seperation of church and state" and the like. Heck, that was part of
the whole point of the founding of the US, and those people were mostly rather
devout Protestants!
> To say we actively make sure that religion has no place in the decision
> making process makes it a process that is inherently hostile towards all
> people of faith. ANd I'm not singling out LUGNET here, it;s just a specific
> example.
So... everything's offensive? Should some people put up a stink about Tropicana
selling orange juice to black people because it's against their religion?
I'd have to say that since you're saying that nothing is truly
"religion-neutral", and that it's a term that doesn't apply, your application of
the term 'religiously hostile' is also inapliccable to anything, because it
already applies to everything.
There's two options:
1) Religious considerations will not be made
2) Religious considerations will be made
As you've said, #1 = religiously hostile.
As for #2. If LUGNET made religious considerations for Hindus, wouldn't that be
equally hostile to you? If it made considerations for Christians, wouldn't it be
equally hostile to Hindus? Therefore, isn't #2 = religiously hostile?
Admittedly, it's differently hostile because it's not hostile to a particular
religion, but arguably (since you grouped atheists in with their own religion)
it's no different from #1 since it's the same as saying "Religious
considerations will be made with respect to atheism".
Realistically, I think you're grossly underestimating religious people. There
are religious people out there who are absolutely fine with being
"religion-neutral" (used as Todd implied the term). Lots who even advocate it
above making religious considerations for their own religion. We may never get
everyone to agree on a system, but being religiously neutral is the closest
we've ever gotten.
> It's a subtle thing that many people don't see. And as far as LUGNET is
> concerned, I am not surprised in the least that this is the attidtude they
> have adopted (or always had). You have to expect it from a society that
> separates things into 'secular' and 'religious'.
The question is, do you agree with that attitude? You seem to have been
nitpicking the phrase "religion-neutral" above insofar as that it is in reality
"religion-hostile", but do you agree that being "religion-neutral" is indeed the
best practice?
DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
151 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
