Does Non-Faith Deserve Respect?

[Willamena]

It was asked along with a video if faith deserved respect so I am going to post the other question:
Does non-faith deserve respect?

The opposite of faith is doubt, and yes, doubt deserves respect.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Good answer. People deserve respect simply because they are people. However ideas do not deserve respect simply because they are ideas (even though they are ideas of people). If upon due consideration you find that someone’s non-faith reasonable and well thought out and that it leads them to act in a reasonable manner, then I think that is deserving of respect. If on the other hand you honestly believe that someone’s non-faith is unreasonable and leads to unreasonable actions, then it is not deserving respect. Ideas must be evaluated, considered, judged. If we decide in advance deserve respect, faith ideas or non-faith ideas, then these ideas cannot possibly be judged as they should be.

Many people think that if we want to show people respect we must automatically respect their ideas. But the truth is just the opposite. If we want to show people respect then we should listen to what they have to say, consider and judge their ideas on the merit of those ideas. If we cannot do this then we cannot show people the respect they deserve.

Your name should be fantome profound. Well said!

 

[dawny0826]

My answer is simple: I do my best to give simple respect to all people.

Simple and beautiful. :hug:

 

[ThereIsNoSpoon]

It was asked along with a video if faith deserved respect so I am going to post the other question:
Does non-faith deserve respect?

Answer (to both questions) "no"

 

[Jeremiah]

It was asked along with a video if faith deserved respect so I am going to post the other question:
Does non-faith deserve respect?

All "religious" states must be respected to some degree for the greater good. This strengthens freedom of religion. Which ideally would work better if taken to heart instead of letter of law. To be religious or not to be religious both freedoms must be respected.

 

[ThereIsNoSpoon]

All "religious" states must be respected to some degree for the greater good. This strengthens freedom of religion. Which ideally would work better if taken to heart instead of letter of law. To be religious or not to be religious both freedoms must be respected.

I think you mix "respect" with "tolerance" here.

 

[ayani]

yes, it does.

i meet many people at work who have no faith- either in Christ of anyone / anything else. i would love to share my faith with them, and when the conversation has allowed, have done so. if i continued to preach to them all the time, even when they didn't feel like hearing it or are uncomfortable with it, that would be possible but very rude. non-belief should be respected, too, and there's a time and a place for everything.

my husband says "if you're always yapping about Jesus and can't talk about the weather, you're going to scare people".

 

[gnostic]

Non-faith deserves nothing, because it is the absence of belief.

Technically, you're wrong.

A person who don't believe in god, do have a "belief" that god doesn't exist.

Hence, there's a belief. The person just doesn't have the same belief as you.

Whether you think a person, who don't have faith, deserve respect or not, is really up to you. Respect needs to be earned, whether a person is a believer or not.

I am sure that you have friends who are not Christians.

Do have respect for any of your non-religious friends, who don't share your belief? Are they your friends regardless of their belief?

 

[Beckett]

A person who don't believe in god, do have a "belief" that god doesn't exist.

Oh yea just like a person who doesn't collect postage stamps, does have a "hobby" of not collecting postage stamps.

 

[Storm]

>sighs< The quote is "If atheism is a RELIGION, then not collecting stamps is a hobby." Nobody is arguing that atheism is a religion, so please, stop abusing the analogy.

A negative belief is still a belief.

 

[michel]

It was asked along with a video if faith deserved respect so I am going to post the other question:
Does non-faith deserve respect?

Everything in life that is well meaning, causes no harm to others, deserves respect.

 

[Beckett]

Nobody is arguing that atheism is a religion, so please, stop abusing the analogy.

Sorry. But I shall abuse the living crap out of that analogy for as long as it works. And nobody's arguing that atheism is a religion??? I'll quote again. He said: A person who doesn't believe in god (an atheist,) does have a "belief." Now I know you said "religion" but belief and religion is close enough for me.

A negative belief is still a belief.

Oh I agree. The belief there is no God is indeed a belief. But he said "a person who doesn't believe in God," not "a person who believes there is no God."

 

[Jeremiah]

I think you mix "respect" with "tolerance" here.

I most certainly did not. If you have something to say then use your own words. Don't piggy back off mine.

 

[ThereIsNoSpoon]

I most certainly did not. If you have something to say then use your own words. Don't piggy back off mine.

No need to raise your testosterone levels so fast my friend. No offense meant.
Perhaps i am simply wrong. But thats the way i understood your words here:

All "religious" states must be respected to some degree for the greater good. This strengthens freedom of religion. Which ideally would work better if taken to heart instead of letter of law. To be religious or not to be religious both freedoms must be respected.

The law doesnt say that you must respect, the law says you must tolerate. In my view respect can't be ordered anyway. It is something that has to be earned. So the "must be respected" doesn't work in my view. BTW i see no sense in respecting nonsense and surely you will agree that there is some nonsense in some faiths.

Secondly i do not see how respect for someones faith would strengthen freedom of religion. I think tolerance strengthens freedom of religion. By the way i also think that it strengthens freedom FROM religion.

The term "greater good" is not in my vocabulary.

 

[Jeremiah]

No need to raise your testosterone levels so fast my friend. No offense meant.
Perhaps i am simply wrong. But thats the way i understood your words here:

The law doesnt say that you must respect, the law says you must tolerate. In my view respect can't be ordered anyway. It is something that has to be earned. So the "must be respected" doesn't work in my view. BTW i see no sense in respecting nonsense and surely you will agree that there is some nonsense in some faiths.

Secondly i do not see how respect for someones faith would strengthen freedom of religion. I think tolerance strengthens freedom of religion. By the way i also think that it strengthens freedom FROM religion.

The term "greater good" is not in my vocabulary.

"thats the way i understood your words here"

It's clear you did not understand my post. Your reply here makes me wonder if you even read it.

 

[ThereIsNoSpoon]

It's clear you did not understand my post.

This might be. After all nobody is perfect. And not everybody speaks english as a native language.

Your reply here makes me wonder if you even read it.

If i had not read it, I wouldn't have answered. I see no sense in idle talk.
If YOU are really interested in talk then perhaps you should try to do so without being so inapropriately snippy.

Its your decision.

You can explain to me where i supposedly erred and what you intended to say, or you can simply discard me as a fool and we need not talk any longer.

 

[frg001]

Faith / Non Faith


I don't respect either as a single viewpoint. It is irrelevant to respect.
Each person commands their own respect.

Some believers I respect, some atheists, I respect.

What I don't respect, and as the poster of the "silly" thread, is where religious groups DEMAND respect. Then not only do they get given leeway that no non-religious would ever achieve, they go on to try to tell people who could not care less about prophet A, or god B, that they must NOT shame their beliefs. Well I am sorry, but I live in what is for the time being at least, a free country, and I will continue to watch films like the Life of Brian, and Meaning of Life, read books like The Satanic verses, and laugh (or not) at cartoons in Danish magazines.

If we can ridicule a President, a political party, a nation! then we can certainly ridicule a religion, and any religious group worth a bean, would simply laugh it off, not become violent...leave that to the right wing knuckleheads eh? If they did that I personally would have A LOT more respect for them.

 

[Jeremiah]

This might be. After all nobody is perfect. And not everybody speaks english as a native language.


If i had not read it, I wouldn't have answered. I see no sense in idle talk.
If YOU are really interested in talk then perhaps you should try to do so without being so inapropriately snippy.

Its your decision.

You can explain to me where i supposedly erred and what you intended to say, or you can simply discard me as a fool and we need not talk any longer.

Consider my "inapropriately snippy" remarks an example of how far mere lawfully bound tolerance will get us.

 

[ThereIsNoSpoon]

Consider my "inapropriately snippy" remarks an example of how far mere lawfully bound tolerance will get us.

I don't think ordered respect will bring us any further.
And as long as we don't harm each other i have no problem with the way it is.

But perhaps i simply don't understand the term respect correctly. I see it like the definition here: "Respect is esteem for, or a sense of the worth or excellence of a person, a personal quality or ability, or something considered as a manifestation of a personal quality or ability."

So for me pure belief in something is something worthy. It depends on WHAT you believe.

For me it is rather simple.... i tolerate each ones belief and i think everyone has a right to his belief. I don't respect each ones belief just because it is a belief. Just as i don't respect each ones opinion while i tolerate it. It would amaze me if you really were different concerning the "respect" issue.

 

[Jeremiah]

Cwill bring us any further.
And as long as we don't harm each other i have no problem with the way it is.

But perhaps i simply don't understand the term respect correctly. I see it like the definition here: "Respect is esteem for, or a sense of the worth or excellence of a person, a personal quality or ability, or something considered as a manifestation of a personal quality or ability."

So for me pure belief in something is something worthy. It depends on WHAT you believe.

For me it is rather simple.... i tolerate each ones belief and i think everyone has a right to his belief. I don't respect each ones belief just because it is a belief. Just as i don't respect each ones opinion while i tolerate it. It would amaze me if you really were different concerning the "respect" issue.

Your failing may not be in the definitions of the words but in the structure and use of the words. When I said "must" I was not implying lawful subjection. I was outlining what is needed for a transcendence of freedom of religion (which by the way also mean freedom from religion; typically there is little need to point this out.) I am not talking about a movement towards law but a movement away from law. Also there is a difference here that I am talking about. Mere tolerance is what we have now and it just does not do the job very well at all.

"I don't think ordered respect will bring us any further."

Just so you know this is way off mark. Not even close to what I was talking about.