Respect and Religion

As I was saying before, its because Satanism, in the Leveyian sense, is not a religion at all, but the opposition of everything biblical and Christian. They don't believe in a Satan or a God, but choose the title "Satanism" because of its polar opposition to Christianity.

Quote:

---

originally posted by IWilKikU... thats me :D
I think we are confused about the term satanism. There is a Church of Satan founded by Anton Levey, but they arn't actually a Satan-worshiping organized religion. Levey's Satanism as is outlined in his Satanic Bible is all about the opposite of Biblical and Christian teaching. Members of the Church of Satan don't believe in a God OR a Devil. People who do believe in a Devil and actually worship him... Well I've only heard of people doing that for shock value, or because they really want to be "evil".

---

<Does the term "tolerant" apply in Atheism?>

Tolerance shouldn't be a value-free attitude. There are things I'm sure most of us would, and should choose not to tolerate, such as racism or sexism. In fact, I would suggest any form of elitism should be discouraged. Most religions fall into the latter category.

I am not sure that Satanism is just local to the US. Aleister Crowley was a satanist, (maybe the most famous of satanists), as were many others in the UK and in Europe. Crowley believed in demons and in the devil. Should a Christian respect someone like Aleister Crowley? Or Dion Fortune?

The Cambridge Online English Dictionary has this for respect:
respect (ADMIRATION)

admiration felt or shown for someone or something that you believe has good ideas or qualities:

respect (HONOUR)
noun [U]
1 politeness, honour and care shown towards someone or something that is considered important:
You really should treat your parents with more respect.
She has no respect for other people's property (= She does not treat it carefully).

2 when you accept that something which is established or formally agreed is right or important and do not attempt to change it or harm it:
In their senseless killing of innocent people, the terrorists have shown their lack of respect for human life.
She grumbled that young people today have/show no respect for the law.

3 when you accept that different customs or cultures are different from your own and behave towards them in a way which would not cause offence:
She teaches the students to have respect for different races and appreciate the diversity of other cultures.

I wonder how many religions allow this kind of behaviour towards its competitors?

Elitism should apply to religious authorities not to the whole religious followers. Sorry, but I think you're poiting your "dislike" to the whole religious communities, when actually it's mostly the attitudes of the authorities that you have problems with. I think you don't want to or fail to acknowledge the many religious believers who show their respects towards others, who also contribute for the good of society as a whole, humble and moderate, and of course are worthy to get our respect, instead of just negative views and opinions that they or their beliefs and acts of religious practices should be discourage.



It's like trying to burn the whole barn , just to catch the few mice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by atiguhya padma

<Does the term "tolerant" apply in Atheism?>

Tolerance shouldn't be a value-free attitude. There are things I'm sure most of us would, and should choose not to tolerate, such as racism or sexism. In fact, I would suggest any form of elitism should be discouraged. Most religions fall into the latter category.

---

And my question about whether the term tolerant apply in Atheism is much related to your comment that "Maybe the truly tolerant would have very little to say." I mean personally I don't see you being tolerant to religious followers. Like I posted before, you seem to put the same "negative" judgement towards all religious believers.

That's why I wonder whether all Atheists are like that??? Or whether all atheist have that kind of view towards people who choose to believe in a supreme being??

Hmm, yes I have come across a few atheists that have been rather condescending towards people who believe in God or follow a particular relgion. Im not generalising that all atheists are like that, but I find that the ones that I have met have basically said that people who believe in God are stupid. Its okay to believe whatever you think, as everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, but I believe that you should respect other people and their beliefs and not be condescending in speech when exchanging views and opinions :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by atiguhya padma

I am not sure that Satanism is just local to the US. Aleister Crowley was a satanist, (maybe the most famous of satanists), as were many others in the UK and in Europe. Crowley believed in demons and in the devil. Should a Christian respect someone like Aleister Crowley? Or Dion Fortune?

---

Does an athiest respect someone like Aleister Crowley? Or Dion Fortune?

I always thought that Satan was the most famous of all satanists, and the famous drama was the temptation of Christ in the wilderness. Satan asks Christ to bow down and worship him. Perhaps human kind asks God to bow down and worship humanity. For millennia, we speak and act and write as though the human race is at the very center of God's attention.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Atiguhya PadmaI am not sure that Satanism is just local to the US. Aleister Crowley was a satanist, (maybe the most famous of satanists), as were many others in the UK and in Europe. Crowley believed in demons and in the devil. Should a Christian respect someone like Aleister Crowley? Or Dion Fortune?

---

I'm not sure, but I think that Crowley predates Levey, and I don't think that Satanism was an organized religion at the time he was around. I may be wrong, so if you know more about Crowly and Satanism(which I'm sure you do, cause you know freakin' everything :rage: ), please enlighten us a bit. As for the question, When I was a Christian I respected Levey and Crowly in your third sense of the word:

Quote:

---

when you accept that different customs or cultures are different from your own and behave towards them in a way which would not cause offence:
She teaches the students to have respect for different races and appreciate the diversity of other cultures.

---

The other 2 deffinitions include the words 'right' or 'important'. I'm sure a Christian wouldn't allow Satanism those types of respect, but wouldn't expect it return either. Similarly you don't show Christianity those types of respect do you? But you usually claim to debate religion respectfully. I can only asume that your allowing it respect numero tres, since you don't seem to find Christianity 'right' or 'important'.

A site on Crowley that looks ok

Just something with links :blush: too lazy to check them properly

Kik, not too sure if you meant the same Lévi they're talking about or I'm just assuming it's a spelling thing...
from that site: It might be interesting to note at this point that Crowley believed himself to be the reincarnation of the occultist Eliphas Levi who died the same year that Crowley was born.

Another good looking site

Some works writtern by Crowley

Alternative religion site

Still want more? ;)

I find it extremely difficult to respect religious doctrine that seems to me pretty ludicrous. Unless I am willing to pay lip service (which I'm not), I cannot find it in me to publicly respect religious doctrine of any kind.

SubT complains that I disrespect or accuse communities rather than doctrines. This simply isn't true, or if it is in any way, it is merely unintentional. However, religious people who positively help society do not somehow earn protection for their beliefs. Their beliefs are just as open to criticism as the most corrupt preacher on TV.

SubT again:

<"Maybe the truly tolerant would have very little to say." I mean personally I don't see you being tolerant to religious followers.>

I think there is a world of difference between religious followers and religious doctrines. Unfortunately, some religious followers and others don't see that distinction very clearly. When a Christian feels that an attack on their faith is an attack on them, then, in their eyes, I am disrespectful of them, rather than their belief or doctrine.

Molko: I think one should always respect other people. To respect their beliefs is far more difficult. Again, I would not encourage the respect of fascist or racist beliefs. Some beliefs should not be respected. Many religious beliefs fall into this category.

Papayahed: I can't speak for all atheists, but I certainly don't respect the views of Dion Fortune or Alesiter Crowley. They seem to me to be as crazy as most other religious views.

IWilKiku said:

<Similarly you don't show Christianity those types of respect do you? But you usually claim to debate religion respectfully. I can only asume that your allowing it respect numero tres, since you don't seem to find Christianity 'right' or 'important'.>

I find it hard to respect Christianity in any of the ways defined. I think debate should always be conducted in a manner respectful of participants, that's if you prefer dialogue to monologue. But like I say, some views should not be respected. It should always be made clear that a viewpoint, a belief or a statement is being criticised, not the person. Maybe there is a difference between knowledge and belief when it comes to personal involvement. Knowledge should never be limited to first-person experience or subjectivity, but should be seen as something put on the table to discuss and dissect and criticise. Belief on the other hand hardly ever seems to escape from the first-person perspective. I believe we can distance ourselves and observe knowledge-claims from the third-person perspective, but can we do this for belief? I have met some extraordinary people who can, but they are few and far between. Knowledge thrives on editing, updating, revision. Belief on the other hand tends to become entrenched and conservative.

I agree with you AP, people should always respect other people and to respect other peoples beliefs are very difficult. I can see where you are coming from :) I guess it is always going to be hard to express or share your opinions with other people or have a debate with someone about their faith because no matter how diplomatic your reasoning and argument may be, people will always see it as an attack on them. I tend to stay clear from religious debates because I tend to get very passionate with my views and consequently angry towards the person I'm talking to (I know, its not very courteous), because no matter how hard I try to make my argument lucid and reasonable, the other person will never see eye to eye with me.

By the way, you said that "Some beliefs should not be respected", Im just wondering, how would you feel if a religous person said the same about atheism. Would you feel upset, or accept and tolerate their opinion? This is only out of curiosity :)

That's an interesting point Molko. I certainly would not be upset if someone I was debating with expressed the idea that atheism should not be respected. I would obviously disagree though, and therefore would not accept their opinion. I would tolerate it, provided it had a valid argument to back it up (if it didn't, I would probably just consider it too opinionated to deserve dialogue). I guess in a discussion where a believer claimed that atheism should not be respected, I would welcome a debate over these claims and see where that debate would lead.

AP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by atiguhya padma

I think debate should always be conducted in a manner respectful of participants, that's if you prefer dialogue to monologue. But like I say, some views should not be respected. It should always be made clear that a viewpoint, a belief or a statement is being criticised, not the person. Maybe there is a difference between knowledge and belief when it comes to personal involvement. Knowledge should never be limited to first-person experience or subjectivity, but should be seen as something put on the table to discuss and dissect and criticise. Belief on the other hand hardly ever seems to escape from the first-person perspective. I believe we can distance ourselves and observe knowledge-claims from the third-person perspective, but can we do this for belief? I have met some extraordinary people who can, but they are few and far between. Knowledge thrives on editing, updating, revision. Belief on the other hand tends to become entrenched and conservative.

---

When I disappeared last year this was the EXACT same thing that was going on in the great debates, and I guess the bottom line is some people are going to be able to disassociate themselves from thier beliefs, others are not. Consequently you are going to offend some people and make them feel under attack if you attack Christianity. If you want to respect these people, you've got to stear clear of knocking their religion. When it has come down to this in the past you've given the response that if they can't separate themselves from their beliefs for the sake of debate then that's thier problem, not yours. What about respecting someone inspite of this weakness? Or does not being able to separate yourself from your beliefs forfiet AP's respect?

Also, from days of yor, I seem to remember you getting very defensive and asking why the Christians who took offense to your posts resorted to personal attacks in response. Are you able to differentiate attacks on your person from attacks on your refusal to respect Christians?

Just as a PS, I've kind of switched sides since my departure. I'm not a Christian, but my family and lots of people that I admire and respect are.