In Defense of Insulting People and Ideas...

[Robert.Evans]

It's a tricky balance, but if it stops some religious nutter trying to blow me up on the London underground, well, OK.

He or she has to religious to be a nutter do they? I thought it was politics that created all this fighting. Religion is about belief in God, is it not

 

[LuisDantas]

I disagree. It is fine to say that you disagree, but not to insult. Perhaps you should define what you mean as an insult, considering you likewise are part of the moderation team that tells us what we can and cannot say. And if you don't I am goiing to insult you

Actually, maybe you should. Insults, I have come to learn, are necessary. They fill a needed - sometimes badly needed - role of making emphasis and passion clear, marking a contrast from simple disagreements.

In a nutshell, plain disagreement is fine when you feel that your life will simply go on without much change worth worrying about. Insults are necessary when you feel threatened - either because you truly are, or because you are mistaken about the actual importance of the disagreement at hand.

When correctly employed, they bring clarity to the table. People deserve to be aware when they trouble others, willingly or otherwise, to the point that they renounce graceful expression in order to underscore their passionate feelings.

The downside, of course, is that people tend to simply avoid those who insult them. That is often the very point, but that too can backfire.

 

[Sunstone]

I thought it was politics that created all this fighting. Religion is about belief in God, is it not

Are your thoughts on the matter really that shallow?

 

[LuisDantas]

But also relevant and important. But you don't believe in God Spiney, and this is a religious forum, not a gay forum. If it was , I would agree with you.
wahtdoya think?

I´m not Spiny, but I will say that you are commiting two very serious mistakes: assuming that disbelief in God matters for religious purposes, and that religion should not respect LGBT issues as a matter of course.

 

[LuisDantas]

He or she has to religious to be a nutter do they? I thought it was politics that created all this fighting.

Politics is a factor. Unquestioned, unchallenged theism is another, a particularly worrisome one.

Religion is about belief in God, is it not

No, it is not. I don't think it has ever truly been, either.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I´m not Spiny, but I will say that you are commiting two very serious mistakes: assuming that disbelief in God matters for religious purposes, and that religion should not respect LGBT issues as a matter of course.

posted on the wrong one, sorry.
But this is strange. First you seem to be saying we can insult people, and now we can't. What do you mean? Insult those you dont' like?

 

[Robert.Evans]

Are your thoughts on the matter really that shallow?

Richard Dawkins says the same of atheism, ask him.
Religion is about belief in God. The politics of religion, or atheism, or the secular world, is the start of all troubles never mind what the foundation is.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Please point out where I argued for unlimited free speech or against the rights of a privately owned forum to impose it's own limits on speech.

That's the impression I got

 

[Sunstone]

Richard Dawkins says the same of atheism, ask him.
Religion is about belief in God. The politics of religion, or atheism, or the secular world, is the start of all troubles never mind what the foundation is.

Thanks for the levity!

 

[Sunstone]

That's the impression I got

I'm sure you're intelligent enough to eventually grasp someday down the road maybe that you jumped to an unwarranted conclusion.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Actually, maybe you should. Insults, I have come to learn, are necessary. They fill a needed - sometimes badly needed - role of making emphasis and passion clear, marking a contrast from simple disagreements.

In a nutshell, plain disagreement is fine when you feel that your life will simply go on without much change worth worrying about. Insults are necessary when you feel threatened - either because you truly are, or because you are mistaken about the actual importance of the disagreement at hand.

When correctly employed, they bring clarity to the table. People deserve to be aware when they trouble others, willingly or otherwise, to the point that they renounce graceful expression in order to underscore their passionate feelings.

The downside, of course, is that people tend to simply avoid those who insult them. That is often the very point, but that too can backfire.

Insults are never right. Can I call you fat? would that not be an insult?

 

[LuisDantas]

posted on the wrong one, sorry.

You did? I thought it was me jumping into your exchange, but whatever.

But this is strange.

Now you are scaring me. This is really very simple and sort of basic. Everyone in civilized communities should have some proficiency on these matters.

First you seem to be saying we can insult people, and now we can't. What do you mean? Insult those you dont' like?

I don't see how you read those things in what I actually wrote, but anyway: of course we can insult people. But we should not be shallow about it. Most of all, we should accept the consequences. And we must accept the responsibility for what we say.

Which means, of course, that LGBT bashing is inherently immoral, and that valuing belief in God a lot is also inherently very wrong.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Politics is a factor. Unquestioned, unchallenged theism is another, a particularly worrisome one.

No, it is not. I don't think it has ever truly been, either.

No, it is the politics of it that is the problem, whether secular or religious, always is, always has been. Believing in something does not kill. The actions or politics of those beliefs do. Politics is about government, and that is about rule.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Thanks for the levity!

Got to be better than an insult hasn't it?

 

[LuisDantas]

Richard Dawkins says the same of atheism, ask him.

You don't much like being respected, now do you? You have quite a level of skill at devaluing your own words.

Religion is about belief in God.

Lie.

The politics of religion, or atheism, or the secular world, is the start of all troubles never mind what the foundation is.

Lie.

 

[LuisDantas]

No, it is the politics of it that is the problem, whether secular or religious, always is, always has been. Believing in something does not kill. The actions or politics of those beliefs do. Politics is about government, and that is about rule.

Are you pretending to be this dense? I'm honestly not sure whether I want to believe that you are, or that you are not.

 

[Riverwolf]

That is the reality. We face the choices of which battles we fight, & which we try to legislate away (eg, threatening speech). To publish cartoons which offend Muslims (& others) is worth the risk because the alternative is to send the message that terrorism can quiet any message.

Not necessarily. Another alternative is to swallow pride and engage in discussion. Another is to explore why these people feel the need to violently retaliate, and then approach them with that knowledge in ways they'll understand.

I don't believe in legislating away offensive cartoons at all. I will fight any intended law that does so. I thought I made that quite, quite clear.

But that doesn't mean I approve of bullying.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not necessarily. Another alternative is to swallow pride and engage in discussion.
I don't believe in legislating away offensive cartoons at all. I will fight any intended law that does so. I thought I made that quite, quite clear.
But that doesn't mean I approve of bullying.

We agree.
How boring is that?

 

[Robert.Evans]

I'm sure you're intelligent enough to eventually grasp someday down the road maybe that you jumped to an unwarranted conclusion.

You said:

''Please point out where I argued for unlimited free speech''

and the OP said:

It seems to me that censorship is one of the most common and dangerous ways in which governments and other institutions repress humans.

Like I say, that's the impression I got

 

[Robert.Evans]

You did? I thought it was me jumping into your exchange, but whatever.




Now you are scaring me. This is really very simple and sort of basic. Everyone in civilized communities should have some proficiency on these matters.




I don't see how you read those things in what I actually wrote, but anyway: of course we can insult people. But we should not be shallow about it. Most of all, we should accept the consequences. And we must accept the responsibility for what we say.

Which means, of course, that LGBT bashing is inherently immoral, and that valuing belief in God a lot is also inherently very wrong.

Well that last part insults me but you will say I can't insult the first group. Sounds like double satandards to me