Respect for Religious Belief

[atiguhya padma]

I'd like to open up a discussion about whether we should respect all religious beliefs. I often hear people say that we should. But such people wouldn't give respect to all political beliefs. So why religious ones? And also, if a political or any belief is plain stupid, we would be foolish to credit it with respect wouldn't we? But it seems to me, some of the most ridiculous beliefs known to man are religious ones.

This brings me to a question that has bugged me for a while: why is it that this forum forbids political discussion because it might break rule no.1, when religious discussion is just as likely to break that rule too?

Atiguhya Padma

[star blue]

good point, atiguhya. what's so damn special about religion?

at least in politics, no one goes to hell.

[Admin]

This forum exists for people to discuss the works on this site. Normally I wouldn't allow religious discussion but the Bible is on this site and so I have to.

Also I do think religion is a safer topic.

[star blue]

you're ruining my education.

[subterranean]

I don't know why Admin said that religion is a safer topic. I mean what's the basis of saying that there were more conflicts happened based on religious reasons than because political ones!


Personally, I had eough with (international) politics, since my last 4 years in univ were spent talking, writing, arguing about this topic..

[crisaor]

Politics and Religion aren't the same. They're not even close. That's pretty easy to tell.
Of course we should respect religious beliefs. If not for opinion, out of cortesy at least.

[Isagel]

What do you mean? Why is politics and religion not close?

They both usually contain an agenda for changing the society or maintaining it. They both provide a view on the human nature and a framework for understanding human behaviour. They influence each other and merge.

[fayefaye]

I think people should be able to discuss their beliefs[political, religious, whatever], but they need to do it with respect for what other people believe also. People can share different views and not take out a gun and start ripping each other apart. if people didn't try to force their beliefs on each other, different views wouldn't cause conflict.

[atiguhya padma]

Fayefaye,

Would you discuss politics with neo-Nazi's and respect their beliefs? I mean, I find it difficult to respect a belief unless I can see some common ground for agreement. There are certain beliefs that I cannot find any common ground with. Belief in fairies, devilish imps, God, unicorns and other imaginary beings are just too delusional for me to show much respect. Psychiatric hospitals are highly populated with people who think that God is talking to them. I would be doing them no good at all, if I were to respect their deluded beliefs.

Crisaor,

You say that religion and politics are not even closely related. I would have to disagree with you there. It has always struck me that the pulpit and the preacher is very much a dictatorial political system. Here is a person (most often a man) who stands there and instructs you on what to believe. There is no discussion during this indoctrination.

Monotheism started life in the political system of ancient Egypt, under the rule of Akhenaten. The single God and the single political ruler. From there developed the idea of the Divine Right of Kings. Today, most states have a single leader, be it a president or a prime minister. Can you still not see much of a connection between politics and religion? And even if religion and politics are not close, my point was should a silly or stupid belief be respected? We should not choose to respect a silly religious belief, just because it belongs to that group of beliefs we call 'religious'. Some years ago, a department store in Tokyo, over the Christmas period, had a display in their window: Father Christmas nailed to a cross. Now this I think is quite funny, because it is silly and muddled, there has obviously been some misunderstanding. Now suppose a religious following developed from this iconic image. Should I respect this silly notion?

[star blue]

you're awesome, atiguhya.

[fayefaye]

I'm a hypocrite. I would have to be able to find common ground, that's true. But there aren't many people who are nazi's, or in cults, and nowadays that's not the sort of differences in belief that cause conflict.

It's stupid, really...... I guess we'll always get on with people who hold the same values, or beliefs we can respect, but it's practically innate that we try and alter the opinion of others whose ideas we don't... maybe because otherwise it could have some sort of detrimental impact on society. Now I don't know where I stand...

[Admin]

Here is the difference.

Society says that it is not cool to harass someone on basis of religion. However society has no problems with, and even encourages, political motivated harassment.

For instance if a newspaper printed a story about how religion x is evil/wrong/stupid it would cause an uproar. If a newspaper printed a story about how political party x is evil/wrong/stupid it would be business as usual.

As such, due to the current social climate, religion is a far less imflammatory topic than politics.

[psycojones]

atiguhya; you rock!!

[Munro]

*raises a glass in toast*

Am I allowed to bring up what's happening in France right now? I'm not sure what to think, yet. A traditionally social-liberatarian government system legislating what appears upon first glance to be a fascist law . . . but I know there's more to it than that. If I said "everyone has a right to their own religion", it would be narrow-minded, lazy liberal preaching. It's easy to be scared of sounding like a fascist (say, by maybe supporting such a law), and abide by the psychological condition of PC.

[crisaor]

Originally posted by Isagel
What do you mean? Why is politics and religion not close?
They both usually contain an agenda for changing the society or maintaining it. They both provide a view on the human nature and a framework for understanding human behaviour. They influence each other and merge.
Politics doesn't provide anything to understand human behaviour. It just tries to confine it within certain parameters. I think they're not close because one deals with the things the other doesn't. If everybody sticked to a single religion (any) there would be no need for any government whatsoever. This has happened in the past, albeit with mixed results. The estate or the government complements religion at best (or religion complements the goverment, whatever way you prefer).


Originally posted by atiguhya padma
Crisaor, You say that religion and politics are not even closely related. I would have to disagree with you there. It has always struck me that the pulpit and the preacher is very much a dictatorial political system. Here is a person (most often a man) who stands there and instructs you on what to believe. There is no discussion during this indoctrination.
Maybe not, maybe yes. There are different teachers, and different students, as with all things. Some literally believe what the Bible says, others view it in a bigger context. To say that there is no discussion is to assume much.


Originally posted by atiguhya padma
Monotheism started life in the political system of ancient Egypt, under the rule of Akhenaten. The single God and the single political ruler. From there developed the idea of the Divine Right of Kings. Today, most states have a single leader, be it a president or a prime minister. Can you still not see much of a connection between politics and religion? And even if religion and politics are not close, my point was should a silly or stupid belief be respected? We should not choose to respect a silly religious belief, just because it belongs to that group of beliefs we call 'religious'. Some years ago, a department store in Tokyo, over the Christmas period, had a display in their window: Father Christmas nailed to a cross. Now this I think is quite funny, because it is silly and muddled, there has obviously been some misunderstanding. Now suppose a religious following developed from this iconic image. Should I respect this silly notion?
No. Egypt revered one god above all, but he wasn't the only one. The pharaoh was supposed to be his descendant on earth.
I still don't see them as close, because what you're implying to be the same is the way religion and politics are handled. In essence, there is little or nothing in common between the two. They're supposed to be different things, otherwise, one would replace the other completely. Why should a stupid belief be respected? Because what you consider to be silly might be wrong. That's why. You say that is stupid to believe in unicorns and imps, but you put God in the same bag. To me, that's a silly belief.
Sometimes, it isn't easy to tell where the line is. In politics, this separation is usually much easier to tell (e.g. nazis, fascists, etc.).
I don't follow your question. What's the notion you're asking me if you should respect?

[star blue]

crisaor, akhenaten did in fact revere one god above all: ra, the sun god.

[atiguhya padma]

Crisaor,

You say:

<If everybody sticked to a single religion (any) there would be no need for any government whatsoever.>

And yet you have said that politics and religion aren't even close. If they are not close, how could one possibly make the other redundant? How could religion provide for the needs of people who depended on politics? If everybody stuck to a single religion, and this took away the need for government, then the single religion would become a theocratic political system wouldn't it? There would still be a hierarchy that would govern.

<Why should a stupid belief be respected? Because what you consider to be silly might be wrong. That's why.>

So, Crisaor, you respect every single stupid belief in the world (just in case they are not wrong). Can't you see that this makes your respect completely worthless? It might be better to say that, with regard to stupid and silly beliefs, it would be better not to respect them until they are shown to be correct. Really Crisaor, you should respect yourself more, by valuing your respect, not dragging it through the mud of stupid beliefs. I mean, as it now stands, I wouldn't care a jot whether you respected my beliefs or not right now. I wouldn't know what value to give your respect.

[Lara]

I don't think we have to respect anyones religious beliefs because I think it is impossible to do so, for the simple fact that there will always be a difference of opinion. However, there are times when courtesy must be acknowledged, such as on forums like this, and it goes two ways.
There are many people who find comfort in their religion, however,
people should not preach their religion to others and should not use their religion to do cruel things to others.

[crisaor]

Originally posted by atiguhya padma
And yet you have said that politics and religion aren't even close. If they are not close, how could one possibly make the other redundant? How could religion provide for the needs of people who depended on politics? If everybody stuck to a single religion, and this took away the need for government, then the single religion would become a theocratic political system wouldn't it? There would still be a hierarchy that would govern.
If everybody behaves in the same way religion dictates, there wouldn't be any need to pass rules for people to follow. That way, religion fills that role, but doesn't assume the government's part (i.e. the head of the church wouldn't be the president). They'd still be different things. Anyway, it's a pretty rare situation.

Originally posted by atiguhya padma
So, Crisaor, you respect every single stupid belief in the world (just in case they are not wrong). Can't you see that this makes your respect completely worthless? It might be better to say that, with regard to stupid and silly beliefs, it would be better not to respect them until they are shown to be correct. Really Crisaor, you should respect yourself more, by valuing your respect, not dragging it through the mud of stupid beliefs. I mean, as it now stands, I wouldn't care a jot whether you respected my beliefs or not right now. I wouldn't know what value to give your respect.
Well, I don't come across people who worship unicorns, if that's what you're implying this time. Most of the religious people I know either practice catholicism, judaism, or islamism. All three of them respectable religions in my opinion. When I do come across a guy who worships his rat, maybe I'll think it over. But that doesn't qualify as religion anyway.
I respect myself quite a lot, thank you. You should care about you. And who says that I respect your opinion? If I don't, it's of no importance. If I do, I don't care what you think of that.
In the future, try to debate the topic instead of bashing people.

[star blue]

the difference between us and the islamic radicals is that they request seventy virgins in the afterlife everytime they blow themselves up . . . whereas, most of us would settle for eight hot, buttered cheerleaders.

all you can eat. ;)

[atiguhya padma]

Crisaor,

My post was a response to this statement by you:

<Why should a stupid belief be respected? Because what you consider to be silly might be wrong. That's why>

Now what am I to make of this statement, other than to assume that you believe that there is merit in respecting stupid beliefs. If that is the case, then I think my previous comments are valid.

[psycojones]

although i am fascinated by the reasons on why we think the way we do, religion(s) always seem to create turbulent and emotional debates. everyone belonging to a religion or belief is sure that their higher power is the one to believe. there is great passion and pride in what people believe, and that is why their has been great wars and battles through out history. my idea of god is quite simple at this point in my life, God to me is everything the human being can not explain. through out history, whether the old testament or the new, i obsereve people calling events acts of God or God himself. a horrible flood, a thunderous sound, ect.. because back then their was no explination or reason to why these things were happening, God was the reason. now that we have and are proving how and why things work, all of a sudden God becomes a little less real. we understand how thunder storms work, how our solar system works, what makes us feel warm and fuzzy inside at times. but in favor of those who believe in the new testament, it is one of the greatest love stories i have ever read.

[subterranean]

Originally posted by atiguhya padma
So, Crisaor, you respect every single stupid belief in the world (just in case they are not wrong). Can't you see that this makes your respect completely worthless? It might be better to say that, with regard to stupid and silly beliefs, it would be better not to respect them until they are shown to be correct.

Suppose I'm not lucky to live long enough to find out whether those followers of the 'silly' beliefs' are worthy enough to be respected, then I guess I'd spent my whole life spreading hostility towards them :rolleyes: .
I don't see what sort of basis can be really used to claim that some beliefs are too stupid to believe. I come from a country where there are many tradional beliefs exist (which I have to admit some of them are very stupid), yet I choose to respect them for the sake of humanity...

[star blue]

oh, you men.

[psycojones]

time teaches all things to he who lives forever but we have not the luxury of enternity. i must side with sub-t on this one. to respect ones wishes or beliefs does not mean to accept it. just as we share our ideas, thoughts and opinions here and we debate, and side with one another we can still show respect to those who think differently. i cannot imagine how boreing it would be if we all thought the same things. having different views and beliefs has advanced us in the way that we are today. if people did not philosophize or theorize on what could be or might be we would have nothing to work for. i may not believe in everything i hear or read, but i can respect in other peoples views and try to understand why they think the way they do... even if they are wrong. just kidding!!

[atiguhya padma]

Some comments I would like to make regarding people and their beliefs:

I think there is a clear distinction between a person and that person's belief. I feel that I can respect a person, whilst considering one or more of their beliefs to be silly.

Some people cannot distinguish between themselves and their beliefs: it is as if their belief is their life. One without the other is too terrible for them to contemplate. I would say this is a rather immature and unhealthy position to hold.

I know a monotheist who says that there are no circumstances under which they would abandon their belief in God. I think this is extremely silly. It doesn't stop me respecting her though.

In being able to step outside your belief and take the perspective of 'the view from nowhere', as Nagel put it, you maintain a healthy position for yourself and your belief. It helps you to grow.

As I have said before, it does no good to respect the belief held by the mentally delusional that God is speaking to them. I consider this to be a religious belief.

All beliefs should be critically addressed. There should be no monopoly of courtesy towards religious belief.

Finally, I am glad to see that the UK is waking up at last, to the benefits of teaching atheism in schools. Hopefully, if this does occur, it will bring some reasoned argument into religious education.

[subterranean]

I agree with the last point though..followers of (specially) established beliefs/religions somehow afraid with atheism or stuffs like that. But surely, it would really help them out to see the world and life more clearly.

AP, do you happened to know some good literatures about Agnosticism/Atheism/Nihilism?

[Yeroptok]

I think it is kinda funny the way on this message board political discussion is banned from being discussed. However at the other message board I frequent I am the moderator of a debate forum where religious debate has been banned.

There are many political texts that I personally wouldn't mind discussing. It is not like these books don't exsist (the communist manifesto, das kapital, the prince). They often contain important philosophical truths about societies just as religous texts do.

I believe that religous debates cause more problems in general. The instant you get an athesist in the room with a classical sect christian. Debating religion, especially christianity is nearly impossible to do with any logic because the idea of faith can be used to refute anything.

The main problem is not debating one or the other. The problems arise when people of religious backgrounds try to argue a political point on the basis of religon. When this happens it is always implied that ones beliefs of religion are somewhat more correct then anothers. Which causes debates upon the validity of ones religion. Most religions now are based a lot on degree's of faith meaning any debate on validity can be refuted with ones faith. This means that if two people debate a religion they can cancel out eachothers arguements with the same idea. Which is "I believe it to be so" etc etc.

As for respecting all religious beliefs, I think not. I do not need to respect a religious belief that states "All who do not believe in my god shall burn in the fires of hell". That is nearly every religious belief other then my own personal ideas. I am not going to bash religions here, but I do not need to respect something that is either disrespectful to me or just plain stupid. I don't think I should respect those cults that think Jesus is coming on a UFO, it doesn't even make sence to religious texts.

However the entire idea of a religion is based upon texts written by mortal men. With failings and biases of their own. So any actual religious written text also has to be taken with a grain of salt acknowledging that the only way of proving such documents validity is to assert faith in it. Which brings me back to the point of why religious debates always cause more trouble because there can be no middle ground.

Person A believes the bible to be a literal text and history. No matter what person B says using evidence directly against the the bible as a literal text Person A can deny on the ground of faith. This type of debate leads no where and is the main stand off in the creationism debates.

(it is entirely too late I probably made no sence with this post so... w/e)

[atiguhya padma]

Subterranean,

Unfortunately, there aren't that many books around on these subjects. A good starting point might be Bertrand Russell's Why I am Not a Christian and Other Essays and Richard Dawkins' A Devil's Chaplain (Dawkins' book has some articles concerning atheism but is about many other things too).

Ludovic Kennedy's All in the Mind: A Farewell to God is very readable, but less rigorous in its arguments.

Atheism: The Case Against God by George H Smith is good, and Michael Martin's Atheism: A Philosophical Justification is less easy to read, but worthwhile.

Julian Baggini has published a book entitled Atheism: A Very Short Introduction. I haven't read this yet, but Baggini is a populariser of philosophy and writes for and edits The Philosopher's Magazine and is easy to understand and read.

Anthony Freeman appears to me to be an atheist and his book God In Us argues for a humanist interpretation of God as the sum of our opinions and beliefs, rather than as a real existence.

http://www.philosophers.co.uk/portal_article.php?id=583 (http://) this is a good artcle short article on atheism by Michael Martin.

http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/god.htm (http://) this is a game that helps you to understand how your beliefs about God measure up to your other beliefs.

Regarding agnosticism: T H Huxley coined the phrase, if I recall correctly, and wrote an essay called Agnosticism.

Regarding Nihilism: I guess John Gray's Straw Dogs is fairly nihilistic and I found it very inspiring and revealing. Nietzsche is probably the ultimate nihilist. Schopenhauer is also worth looking at. Sartre, Camus, Heidegger all have things to say regarding nihilism.

Other writers you might look into are: Don Cupitt (although I find some of his ideas a little bit pointless) and Richard Holloway (regarding the separation between ethics and religion).

[atiguhya padma]

Subterranean,

I forgot to mention this website which you might find quite useful:

www.secularism.org.uk (http://)

[atiguhya padma]

Yeroptok,

Well said. Couldn't agree more.:)

[psycojones]

ap, i read your explanation about people and their beliefs, and i must apologize. i miss understood what you ment. i see what it is you are taking about, and i do agree. i was brought up under the christian belief, and when ever i questioned christianity through out my childhood, i was told to pray for the answer. after i left home and began my own life, i found that god was something to hide behind, and gave no real answer to the questions i was in search of.
a psycojones quote,"all of lifes greatest mysteries, is us, just not opening our eyes to the reality which surrounds us."

[subterranean]

Thanks AP, though I have to admit that I never heard some of the names you mentioned :)
The reason that I asked you cause I find some troubles finding good literature as reference. Please excuse my lack of knowledge ..

[Bleeding Pawn]

Some comments I would like to make regarding people and their beliefs:

I think there is a clear distinction between a person and that person's belief. I feel that I can respect a person, whilst considering one or more of their beliefs to be silly.

Some people cannot distinguish between themselves and their beliefs: it is as if their belief is their life. One without the other is too terrible for them to contemplate. I would say this is a rather immature and unhealthy position to hold.

I know a monotheist who says that there are no circumstances under which they would abandon their belief in God. I think this is extremely silly. It doesn't stop me respecting her though.

In being able to step outside your belief and take the perspective of 'the view from nowhere', as Nagel put it, you maintain a healthy position for yourself and your belief. It helps you to grow.

All beliefs should be critically addressed. There should be no monopoly of courtesy towards religious belief.


Exactly, you have raised many a good questions which should be clarified. Many followers ( with out any disrespect, it also includes me) are astute believers of their particular faith just because it was handed down the generations as a family heirloom ( pardon if i mentioned it earlier somewhere). The reason being that we have just stopped questioning ourselves and our credibility. Believing in something, or for that matter in Some One, is mentally and spiritually sedative ( in a positive sense) and many faithfuls consider that they are eligible, since they have spent their life earning, to a gratuity at the end of their existence in the form of permanent residency in Heaven. And why not since years of sacrificing their desires they earned the right to it but sometimes the destiny doesn`t work in proportion to our expectations.

Different followers, different mindsets. Nowadays we do not have an appetite for truth, some consider since they are following a certain faith they are on the right path to salvation and some claim that what we were served in a platter at childbrith is the nice and healthy truth and even though it might be but we do not search for any evidence which lends credence to that certain theologies (dogma?) other than just our passion and astuteness in implementing on the doctrines. It would be more worthwhile to know WHY is it that we believe that what we were brought up ( or programmed?) to believe because our quest for truth does not end when we know it rather it starts a whole new journey altogether where every step is an implementation of ones acknowledgement of it.
At the end of the day we have to utilise religion as a medium to find significance in our life by realising that the truth we know of, is really the reflection of The Eternal Truth. To rephrase a quote by D.Brown "Religion has become and will be a part of the fabric of reality.



As I have said before, it does no good to respect the belief held by the mentally delusional that God is speaking to them. I consider this to be a religious belief".

God? Speaking? in today`s world? Well that is out of context if we take into point the definition of talking 1) to influence, affect or 2) to converse as in interaction. If it is the former then God is known to speak through revelations as in the case of biblical apostles and in the form of inspiration through nature in ordinary folks but if it is the latter then that settles it since the last time GOD conversed with HIS creation was with the biblical apostle Moses as found in the abrahamic beliefs. Now it is no secret that some spiritual gurus of cults claim they are in direct contact with God but we must be aware that religion as of today has become a commodity with a certain monetary value tagged to it and who ever possesses it are eager to en-cash it at an appropriate time for their own benefit and increase their ever- burgeoning cash till.


Finally, I am glad to see that the UK is waking up at last, to the benefits of teaching atheism in schools. Hopefully, if this does occur, it will bring some reasoned argument into religious education.

I always used to wonder what were the consequences that led to the situation as portrayed in the movie Matrix.

In the end i do not want to start a debate or raise a new discussion but to just clear the air of certain doubts. Thank You.

[cafolini]

The belief is a parameter that brings together a congregation. Only a small percentage of people take their beliefs and place them against that of another congregation. Usually they know full well what they are doing. There aren't that many idiots in this world. By comparison, although also a small percentage, the one's that make so much noise about questioning beliefs are idiotic. No need at all. That's why they are not more than beliefs for anyone who has not lost his/her senses.

[Bleeding Pawn]

ap, i read your explanation about people and their beliefs, and i must apologize. i miss understood what you ment. i see what it is you are taking about, and i do agree. i was brought up under the christian belief, and when ever i questioned christianity through out my childhood, i was told to pray for the answer. after i left home and began my own life, i found that god was something to hide behind, and gave no real answer to the questions i was in search of.

Its the same case everywhere , when we used to question any misconception towards the teachings of Bible we were advised not to go digging around in the meanings of it. We always used to have that doubt concerning why Jesus wept and cried, why he bowed down to another Being and all that stuff.

[conman89]

I am a libertarian I respect other beliefs political or religious as long as it doesn't interfere with the liberties of others. Political beliefs often times interferes with the liberties of others more than religious beliefs do.

I have no problem if you are a Muslim and want to practice your faith but I do have a problem If that includes killing people of other religions because it infringes on their liberties.

Political ideals seem to effect us more such as wire taps innovation of privacy attack on constitutional rights taxes gun control and so on and so forth. They effect the persons liberties and I can not respect oppression and infringing on liberties.

I respect your belief as it affects you but not believes that unjustly negatively effect others

[Vota]

Double post.

[Vota]

Lately I've been having repeated discussions about religion with a friend of mine that considers herself a Buddhist. I don't consider myself devoted to any one religious system of belief, but I do enjoy reading the bible and find many of it's teachings to be compelling. Perhaps it's because Christ is the ideal father figure in my eyes, which I can relate to because of my own issues with my father. Maybe it's because I love the simplicity of what it says, but marvel at it's richness when explored, and it's depth of history.

My friend is fairly secure in her belief that Buddhism is better than all others. I disagree, and have a few reasons, but throughout our talks I've let her know one key difference between us. She feels her beliefs are correct, and therefore superior to all others; I do not believe any one religion is superior to any other, simply because all religions came from a specific place and culture that influenced their development. Many are off-shoots of previous religions and systems. Religions blossomed throughout different periods of history, therefore it seems faulty to believe one is greater than all others, because that thinking does not account for all the people that never had access to it. How can one be truly superior to another? Who says it's superior? Aren't these ultimately just opinions of fallible beings? I'm not a god. I'm not God. I'm pretty sure nobody else on this planet can claim that either. So if no one is omniscient and all-powerful, then how can anyone claim their way is THE way?

I feel that everyone has a right to believe what they want to believe, so long as it does not infringe on the rights of others, or harm others. I might believe that ants are sacred, and every ant you've every stepped on unknowingly, will cause you a karmic loss of 1 year. So you might be set back hundreds of lifetimes, if you believe in some form of reincarnation. Prove I'm wrong. You can't. You can make some very logical and rational arguments as to why my belief is faulty, but you can not empirically prove that my thinking is incorrect. Every thing we know, we have labeled in a way that we can understand it. That doesn't make it correct, no matter how right is may seem or how eloquently you can dispute it.

Shifting thoughts, "I" feel that politics is essential to human life, whereas religion is only essential to those that feel it is. As an example: If one were to raise a community of babies from birth to adulthood in some type of isolated, though nourishing environment, and never influenced their beliefs in any way, or introduced any concepts whatsoever beyond those required to survive, then a political system, however crude would form. Its likely that some form of religious or spiritual belief might form as well, but that is not crucial to the co-existence of human beings. It may be crucial to the mental health of some people, but it is not crucial to a functioning, healthy society or community. When I use the word crucial, I mean crucial in the sense that air, water, and food are required to sustain all humans. In this sense, political systems are inevitable if the species is to survive and flourish. Families are political systems. Politics is an inevitable result of human interaction.

[Dark Star]

I am a libertarian I respect other beliefs political or religious as long as it doesn't interfere with the liberties of others. Political beliefs often times interferes with the liberties of others more than religious beliefs do.

I have no problem if you are a Muslim and want to practice your faith but I do have a problem If that includes killing people of other religions because it infringes on their liberties.

Political ideals seem to effect us more such as wire taps innovation of privacy attack on constitutional rights taxes gun control and so on and so forth. They effect the persons liberties and I can not respect oppression and infringing on liberties.

I respect your belief as it affects you but not believes that unjustly negatively effect others

I agree with most of this, but you have to keep in mind that religious beliefs often influence political beliefs. The battle we're having over the right to abortion and gay marriage (or gay soldiers being allowed in the military, etc.) are examples of that. The influence of religion on politics in the Middle East should also be quite obvious.

[kari]

I have the strong belief that we are different people, therefore, we can require differences in our religion or spirituality to keep us heading towards being the best we can be. I think respect should be given in that aspect. What you need to feel close to your god may not be what another needs, or another. As long as it is a belief system that keeps the person happy and inspires them to be better people, respect is due. Otherwise what are you portraying in your own belief system? Respect only if you agree? To respect does not mean you have to go along with anothers belief system, nor does it mean you can't speak your mind about what you disagree with. It simply means do all of that if you choose, but with respect. I also think, however, that needs to go both way...which it usually doesn't. Too many people think what they have set up for themselves that works great for the person they are, means it is right for all.

[Phocion]

I agree with most of this, but you have to keep in mind that religious beliefs often influence political beliefs. The battle we're having over the right to abortion and gay marriage (or gay soldiers being allowed in the military, etc.) are examples of that. The influence of religion on politics in the Middle East should also be quite obvious.Not only that. The enforced torture of the terminally ill is a clear result of Christianity. And the Christian fear of the intemperate mind had a big role in inaugurating and continuing the disastrous drug war that is still being fought and ruining lives on a daily basis. Homosexual sodomy was still illegal in some us states until (i think) 2003 - beliefs that have resulted in this kind of persecution for 1000s of years don't deserve my respect, no matter how dear some people may hold them. Religious ideas and religious morality has been throughout history perhaps the greatest threat to civil liberties, and if you want proof of this, look at the societies that are still run on religious lines. The liberty of others, or God's will - what do you think matters more to the truly devout?

The only way i will respect someone else's religious beliefs is if they keep them entirely to themselves. If someone feels the need to tell me about their beliefs then i feel the need to tell them why i think they are wrong. You cannot bring up something in a discussion and then get upset when someone rubbishes it.

[Foe]

As an atheist -- an apostate, really, who has devolved into atheism -- I have no problem respecting the religion of others. Religious beliefs are not laughable or empty to people like me, and here's why:

I live out in the country, a little over a mile from my hometown, on land that was once the farm my wife grew up on. The wind blows out here, rain and hail fall, snow flies, and the sun bakes us like thin-crust pizzzas in a Domino's oven. We have lived on this three acres of land for a decade now, and are just beginning to breathe life into it. I cannot calculate the millions of gallons of (expensive) water we've poured into the sandy clay here, or the tons of (expensive) powdered manure we've spaded into the ground, or the hours and calories I've expended building retaining walls, shoveling fill dirt, building porches and decks and patios and sidewalks, planting trees (often three or four in the same spot, year after year,) and installing thousands of feet of drip system ... and all the while the elements have tried their very damnedest to destroy what I have built, and more often than not they have succeeded. I can easily understand how perfectly rational men would begin to suspect that something, someone, has it in for them. I've wondered it myself a time or two.

It is actually a short trip from my experience to the unfathomable, self-contradictory mythology of an ancient tribe of militant goat herders that has become modern Western religion. And that trip has produced the bulk of the Western literary canon, beginning with the scriptures themselves. How can we not recognize the beauty of, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God?"

No, it is not difficult to respect religion and the literature that it has wrought. Any other discussion of religion, in my humble opinion, belongs in a different forum altogether.