Here is another: How would you react?

[It Aint Necessarily So]

How would you react if you were in a situation similar to mine?

She'd be out of my life, but maybe you don't have that freedom if she works with your husband. I'd say nothing to her about her opinions or what I think of her religion.

Is this another “Christian bad” thread?

Not if you consider the Christian in the OP a good person.

It sounds to me like a case of a toxic person and Christianity has nothing to do with it.

Who do you think taught her to be that way? Who taught her that non-Christians were indifferent to morality? Who taught her that SHE was a moral person, or failed to help her understand that she is unkind? If you're planning on pointing me to the book, you needn't. What it says is irrelevant. How Christians behave, which reflects how the religion is rendered, isn't.

When a group gets a large enough population, you are bound to have bad apples.

She's not an outlier. The American church generates such people by the millions. And I've never heard a humanist speak like that.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

When it comes to fundamentalists, the proportions are exponentially higher.

Anything can be taken to the extreme, especially when it's obscured to support political propaganda (in this case, extremist right-wing-ism). Fundamentalists are just an example of extremists, it says nothing about Christianity as a religion.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

She'd be out of my life, but maybe you don't have that freedom if she works with your husband. I'd say nothing to her about her opinions or what I think of her religion.

Not if you consider the Christian in the OP a good person.

Who do you think taught her to be that way? Who taught her that non-Christians were indifferent to morality? Who taught her that SHE was a moral person, or failed to help her understand that she is unkind? If you're planning on pointing me to the book, you needn't. What it says is irrelevant. How Christians behave, which reflects how the religion is rendered, isn't.

She's not an outlier. The American church generates such people by the millions. And I've never heard a humanist speak like that.

I would equate humanists, people who give actual reflection into their way of life, to Christians who have actually studied and follow the Bible's teachings, such as Christian monks. There's unfortunately a large population of right-wingers who obscure Christian teachings and use the 'Christian' label to behave in un-Christian ways.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Not in my experience.

Okay.

I don’t put words into my mouth. I implied nothing. I asked two questions.

I was talking about your earlier post:


What happens when people become no longer incentivized to work to put a roof over the heads of themselves and their families?

You made a claim about incentivization. I pointed out that for the "incentive" (or more accurately coercion, IMO) to work, there has to be a threat of homelessness.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Your experience is very limited then.

Much more extensive than yours, I assure you.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I'm trying to imagine what that scenario would look like. Housing is a human right, no less important than the right to free speech or freedom of religion.

Where in the Constitution does it grant right to housing?

Would you ask what would happen when people are no longer incentivized to work for their free speech? Should people be charged $1000 a month to have free speech, and if they can't pay, no free speech for them?

How much material and labor is involved in free speech vs housing? Would you say they are equivalent?

 

[Koldo]

Much more extensive than yours, I assure you.

Considering that in your experience people only work when they need a roof above their heads and this is not the case AT ALL in mine, all I can say is that your experience on this regard is definitely a lot smaller than mine. I assure you.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I was talking about your earlier post:


What happens when people become no longer incentivized to work to put a roof over the heads of themselves and their families?

You made a claim about incentivization. I pointed out that for the "incentive" (or more accurately coercion, IMO) to work, there has to be a threat of homelessness.

There should be a concern for homeless, not a threat of.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Considering that in your experience people only work when they need a roof above their heads and this is not the case AT ALL in mine, all I can say is that your experience on this regard is definitely a lot smaller than mine. I assure you.

Care to rephrase? I'm struggling to parse your meaning here.

 

[Koldo]

Care to rephrase? I'm struggling to parse your meaning here.

Sure. You replied with: "Not in my experience."
to a post with the following content: "All of the normal things that motivate someone to work: desire for more or fancier stuff, the satisfaction of doing meaningful work, societal expectations about employment, etc."

To which I said your experience is very limited then. And then you told me yours is bigger than mine.
But since your experience doesn't match mine, since I have known a lot of people that work for reasons other than having a roof above their heads, it then follows that your experience is very limited on this area.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Sure. You replied with: "Not in my experience."
to a post with the following content: "All of the normal things that motivate someone to work: desire for more or fancier stuff, the satisfaction of doing meaningful work, societal expectations about employment, etc."

To which I said your experience is very limited then. And then you told me yours is bigger than mine.
But since your experience doesn't match mine, since I have known a lot of people that work for reasons other than having a roof above their heads, it then follows that your experience is very limited on this area.

Sorry. You're right. Yours is bigger than mine.

Carry on.

 

[Koldo]

Sorry. You're right. Yours is bigger than mine.

Carry on.

No problem at all. Have a good day.

 

[Alien826]

 

[Stevicus]

Where in the Constitution does it grant right to housing?

I didn't say it was in the Constitution, but it's in the UDHR, and the US is a signatory to that document. It may not be legally binding as if it was in the Constitution, but it's still recognized as a human right, so my original point stands.

How much material and labor is involved in free speech vs housing? Would you say they are equivalent?

Does it matter how much it costs? Either we're a country that supports human rights, or we're not. If you think it's too expensive, then where else would you like to cut costs? What other human rights are too expensive or inconvenient to honor?

 

[SalixIncendium]

Does it matter how much it costs?

Yes, because the money has to come from somewhere. Who pays for this free housing?

 

[Stevicus]

Yes, because the money has to come from somewhere. Who pays for this free housing?

Who pays for our free highways and streets? Who pays for our free public schools? I understand the point you're trying to make, but let's face it, honoring human rights carries some expenses. Either we want to be a country that honors human rights, or we don't. Which path should we take? If we want to take the cheaper path, then we get what we pay for (which may be far more expensive in the long run).

 

[SalixIncendium]

Who pays for our free highways and streets? Who pays for our free public schools? I understand the point you're trying to make, but let's face it, honoring human rights carries some expenses. Either we want to be a country that honors human rights, or we don't. Which path should we take? If we want to take the cheaper path, then we get what we pay for (which may be far more expensive in the long run).

I am and have always been an advocate of personal responsibility. It's too easy in such a scenario you describe to expect others to provide one's basic needs while spending any money they have on frivolous desires.

I've spent a great deal of time in my construction years working in section 8/HUD housing. Their housing was dirt cheap and their homes filled with things I and my peers that worked for a living couldn't afford. Big screen TVs, top-of-the-line sound systems, the latest gaming consoles, etc. Most didn't work...just sat at home making more dependents to increase their income.

I'm entirely on board with helping those in legitimate need and providing housing. I've given the shirt off my back for such people. But there will always be many that take advantage of/abuse the system...because they can.

 

[Stevicus]

I am and have always been an advocate of personal responsibility. It's too easy in such a scenario you describe to expect others to provide one's basic needs while spending any money they have on frivolous desires.

I've spent a great deal of time in my construction years working in section 8/HUD housing. Their housing was dirt cheap and their homes filled with things I and my peers that worked for a living couldn't afford. Big screen TVs, top-of-the-line sound systems, the latest gaming consoles, etc. Most didn't work...just sat at home making more dependents to increase their income.

I'm entirely on board with helping those in legitimate need and providing housing. I've given the shirt off my back for such people. But there will always be many that take advantage of/abuse the system...because they can.

There's no denying that there's chiseling and corruption in the system. I consider that a separate issue, but one that should be addressed. But just because there are welfare cheats with big-screen TVs abusing the system, that doesn't mean that people (who don't have big screen TVs) should be left to die out on the streets.

We treat criminals better than we treat the poor in this country. At least criminals get to stay in prison with three hots and a cot, but if someone is down on their luck and can't afford it, they have to sleep in the cold.

The bottom line is, we can't just allow this problem to continue to spiral out of control.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

When a group gets a large enough population, you are bound to have bad apples. Christianity, being the most popular religion, is no exception.

100% true.

Ignore Christianity writ large for a moment, and imagine various Christian communities or church groups you've been exposed to.

They absolutely vary in terms of their attitudes to outsiders. Some are welcoming of outsiders, some are basically xenophobic. Their particular group dynamics and religious beliefs can be impactful on this, both for better or worse, beyond individual variance.

For some of us, we've been exposed to Christians whose religious belief drives common respect, but perhaps more whose belief drives a feeling of superiority and exceptionalism.

I think that's what we are commonly saying, in a more detailed sense.

Incidentally most of my family and my best friends are Christian, and good people.

 

[Wandering Monk]

"Why do you care about morality? You're not a Christian!"

This is the part that struck me. Just because someone isn't a Christian doesn't mean they don't care about morality.

It's as if there is no such thing as empathy in the world. What a narrow-minded bigot she is!