Useless2015
Active Member
It's not my place to defend it.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Have you ever...
- Thread starter Quintessence
- Start date
It's not my place to defend it.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Yes, very often. Most people I live with are protestants and more than a hand full are against the Catholic Church. I still hold my experiences in the Church close and understand their positions on many misinterpreted issues; so, mostly if the other party is respectful, I'd offer corrections and my experiences. Sometimes scripture but not quotes.
Other than that, I'm pretty much distant. If someone is respectful in their disagreements about the Church, I won't offer a defense unless they ask me or we are talking about it already.
Yes, however if I fairly point out that I am not an authority on the subject then I consider it fair game, so long as I don't own the subject.Nobody has said "no" yet.
A follow-up question perhaps worth thinking about for those of us who have said "yes" - we can ask whether or not it is our business to be defending religions or theistic positions that aren't our own. In at least some cases, we might not be in a position to speak on the behalf of those who are not of our tribe, so to speak? We may not know it as well as we think that we do, yes? In that case, if our reason for defending is to correct misconceptions, at times we might add to it!
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Yes. You may be surprised there are quite a few that aren't harsh about others faith. Usually I find that in either pluralistic religions and/or religions or worldviews that cultivate diversity in thought.
I know I am not in the position to defend a Catholic's personal experience with the Church. I can only offer what the Church and Bible teaches, and my experiences. It isn't my place to defend an individual Catholic's position if John gives higher devotion to Mary to Jesus than to Jane who spends hours in front of the Eucharist.
I agree, we may defend (or unless been in that religion) what we think we know. That's why I get a little anzy when someone puts down Paganism, because I don't share the same beliefs that most Pagans share. So, all I can offer is my experiences and beliefs and let the other party interpret if it is "Pagan" or not.
That last comment is true. That's why I use my personal experiences. At least THAT I know is true and not a misconception. However others interpreted it, I can't control as long as they are respectful.
GoodbyeDave
Well-Known Member
I said "occasionally" but really it's not been so much a case of defending than of correcting. As some-one once wrote, most of the trouble "ain't so much what folks don't know, as what they know that just ain't so".
Yes, because I don't like seeing misconceptions (whether in favor of or against) any ideology repeated without being corrected.
I've defended positions that aren't mine but not nearly so often as I could. That is, I ignore a lot of the misrepresentation that I see. But then, I ignore a lot of misrepresentation of my own positions, too. Basically, I try -- but not always successfully -- to avoid extending arguments past the point that we're just repeating ourselves. And also to avoid arguing when doing so would only bore me.
Conversely, I often enough engage in fruitless debates for the sheer sport of it.
Now and then I do give "likes" to positions that are not my own, and that might even be opposed to my own, because they are thoughtfully or originally stated. There are several posters on RF who have a tendency to make intelligent, reasonable posts even when they are wrong, and I sometimes recognize them for it.
Conversely, I often enough engage in fruitless debates for the sheer sport of it.
Now and then I do give "likes" to positions that are not my own, and that might even be opposed to my own, because they are thoughtfully or originally stated. There are several posters on RF who have a tendency to make intelligent, reasonable posts even when they are wrong, and I sometimes recognize them for it.
For the purposes of this thread, we can consider cases of "correcting" to be the same as "defending." That's one of the things I meant by it.
In those cases, sometimes I might go "I'm not sure that's quite right... what do these people have to say for themselves?" It does feel odd sometimes to speak on the behalf of groups I don't identify with. It's not like I represent them.
Then again, it's not like I represent contemporary Pagans or Druids either. 'Tis better, perhaps, to remember each person technically only represents themselves.
I just want to say that I've yet to comprehend where such charges come from. If it's true, I am very upset about being left out of this conspiracy!
Jumi
Well-Known Member
That's why on a forum like this, it would be nice to tag people from that religion if unsure. In the real world such niceties have not always been available.We may not know it as well as we think that we do, yes? In that case, if our reason for defending is to correct misconceptions, at times we might add to it!
ThirtyThree
Well-Known Member
I have. My reasons are generally because someone is being incredibly ignorant about a religion and I could not just sit back and let that type of ignorance go unchecked.
Usually its a charge against the National Science Foundation, government, universities for being 'Too liberal', or scientists for being too political or irreligious. It presumes that Scientists are blind and unwilling to consider alternatives to natural selection or that Scientists are dogmatic, presumes that you could hide science from science, and its usually from someone who has not got an idea of how research happens. Its forgiveable because technologies have rapidly changed our lives, so they seem like a trick. They seem spontaneous and science gets associated with spontaneity.I just want to say that I've yet to comprehend where such charges come from. If it's true, I am very upset about being left out of this conspiracy!
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
In that case, if our reason for defending is to correct misconceptions, at times we might add to it!
There's always going to be that problem since I don't believe any of us is much expert on everything, or in my case, anything. If we screw up, and sometimes even if we don't, there'll always be someone here to "correct" us.
amorphous_constellation
Well-Known Member
Nobody has said "no" yet.
A follow-up question perhaps worth thinking about for those of us who have said "yes" - we can ask whether or not it is our business to be defending religions or theistic positions that aren't our own. In at least some cases, we might not be in a position to speak on the behalf of those who are not of our tribe, so to speak? We may not know it as well as we think that we do, yes? In that case, if our reason for defending is to correct misconceptions, at times we might add to it!
It might not be exactly be their business, but it may really help them to understand the differing positions. Such exercises at least promote a tolerant mind.
I just want to say that I've yet to comprehend where such charges come from. If it's true, I am very upset about being left out of this conspiracy!
Don't tell me you didn't get your set of steak knives for keeping quiet? I'm not even a scientist and I got mine back in '04. Probably just a paperwork problem, I'd guess.
I sure have, and fully intend to keep doing so.
I like to earn the right to criticize. To reach that goal, I must strive to be fair and to encourage clear, accurate understandings of both sides.
I like to earn the right to criticize. To reach that goal, I must strive to be fair and to encourage clear, accurate understandings of both sides.