Is it OK to make fun of religions?

[sojourner]

The problem is the inability to correctly evaluate the question being presented. Mestemia is not saying there is no difference between adoration of Jesus and adoration of Bond. And yet this is the position being argued against.

Mestemia is saying the difference is merely the size of the pedestal. And that IS a difference regardless of the significance of this difference to any particular individual (including Mestemia).

The arguments being presented in fact continually reinforce this specific difference in pedestal size, but are being presented as a refutation instead of an agreement.

Quite amusing, to be sure.

Problem is, it doesn't have anything to do with the "size of the pedestal," which is what I've been trying to point out. This isn't about adoration of Jesus. At. All. And to suggest that it is, is infantile.

 

[sojourner]

Well, so much for friendly discussion. Enjoy your continued willful ignorance.

Your post was certainly not representative of "friendly conversation." Or are you advocating for a double standard?

Enjoy your continued poor etiquette.

 

[sojourner]

Actually, I am flat out asking what difference is there other than the pedestal size.

I mean, if there really is this whole "world of difference" that is being claimed, why is it no one is willing to talk about it?

All this thread has seen is excuse after excuse why this alleged "world of difference" cannot be presented.

I've been more than willing to talk about it. See posts #242 and #269. They explain perfectly why the difference is not simply "pedestal size."

 

[steeltoes]

Problem is, it doesn't have anything to do with the "size of the pedestal," which is what I've been trying to point out. This isn't about adoration of Jesus. At. All. And to suggest that it is, is infantile.

The size of the payroll is a factor. Bond actors make much more money than do Jesus actors.

 

[Sir Doom]

Actually, I am flat out asking what difference is there other than the pedestal size.

I mean, if there really is this whole "world of difference" that is being claimed, why is it no one is willing to talk about it?

All this thread has seen is excuse after excuse why this alleged "world of difference" cannot be presented.

That's the thing. "the size of the pedestal" can literally mean anything you want. Whatever difference is presented can be equated to 'the size of the pedestal'. So you have no obligation whatsoever to accept any answer presented as anything but a reinforcement of your original statement.

Problem is, it doesn't have anything to do with the "size of the pedestal," which is what I've been trying to point out. This isn't about adoration of Jesus. At. All. And to suggest that it is, is infantile.

No. It isn't infantile at all. Its atheistic. If you can't think like those that don't think like you, then why bother arguing at all? Jesus IS on a bigger pedestal than James Bond. And that IS enough to consider it a different matter. Why you rail against such thinking absolutely boggles my mind.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I've been more than willing to talk about it. See posts #242 and #269. They explain perfectly why the difference is not simply "pedestal size."

So far, you haven't been willing to talk about this issue when this supposed difference is removed from the equation:

Since I don't want to get into a debate about the theologucal nuances of Christianity, let's just replace "Jesus" in my previous statement with "Mary". You do agree that the average Christian today and Mary are not the same person, right?

If someone was to make fun of Mary in front of a Christian who revered Mary, I woukd consider this to be making fun of religion. Would you consider this sort of behavior acceptable... or at least as acceptable as making fun of James Bond in front of a die-hard Bond fan? If not, why not? Both Mary and James Bond are external to the person.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Sooooo, is Christianity and Islam off limits, but the Jedi church is okay to giggle at? The Jedi church isn't a joke....it's an actual religion, yo.

I'd like to take this moment and say to everyone: May the Force be with you, always. As I grab my light saber.

With a straight face.

 

[Sir Doom]

Sooooo, is Christianity and Islam off limits, but the Jedi church is okay to giggle at? The Jedi church isn't a joke....it's an actual religion, yo.

I'd like to take this moment and say to everyone: May the Force be with you, always. As I grab my light saber.

With a straight face.

All things are fair game. And all consequences are fair game as well. Do what thou wilt. And reap what thou soetheth........

 

[MysticSang'ha]

All things are fair game. And all consequences are fair game as well. Do what thou wilt. And reap what thou soetheth........

With the power of the Dark Side of the Force! :sw:

Okay, I'm going to bed now.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Sooooo, is Christianity and Islam off limits, but the Jedi church is okay to giggle at? The Jedi church isn't a joke....it's an actual religion, yo.

I'd like to take this moment and say to everyone: May the Force be with you, always. As I grab my light saber.

With a straight face.

You could grab my...nevermind.

 

[Mycroft]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVm3-oIK3eo
This documentary sums it up pretty well.

 

[McBell]

See what I wrote to Penguin earlier, who observed that "Christians are not Christ." In fact, Christian theology teaches that we are, in fact Christ. Therein lies the difference. While we are not the political ideologies we espouse (even though those ideologies are espoused out of a sense of who we are), and even though we are not actors whom we adore, we are Christ, whom we espouse. There simply is, metaphysically, a much deeper level of self-identity present in religious faith than in political alignment.

But even with the lesser level of identity, I don't believe we should make fun of peoples' political philosophies, either. Sure, make fun of the candidates and state that you believe the policies, legislation and platforms are not what's best for us. That comprises freedom of speech. But don't disparage them. That helps no one, is poor form, and hurts people.

As Jay (I believe) said somewhere in the thread, it may be legal and our right to say what we want -- but why should we want to say harmful things?

So like I already said, it is the pedestal height...
Only you put yourself up on the pedestal with Christ.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

As Jay (I believe) said somewhere in the thread, it may be legal and our right to say what we want -- but why should we want to say harmful things?

I don't believe that the Bible is the word of God. In fact, I consider it rationally unhealthy for people to view any body of words as somehow more Godly than any other body of words.

Sometimes I say that. I say it because I want to argue for my own truth over others, just as we all do. I think the world would be a better place if folks didn't believe in the sanctity of words.

But when I say it, I hurt many Christians, Jews, Baha'is and Muslims.

Should I then not say it?

I think we should all say what we think. 'Religious' folk should not have special protection.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I don't believe that the Bible is the word of God. In fact, I consider it rationally unhealthy for people to view any body of words as somehow more Godly than any other body of words.

Sometimes I say that. I say it because I want to argue for my own truth over others, just as we all do. I think the world would be a better place if folks didn't believe in the sanctity of words.

But when I say it, I hurt many Christians, Jews, Baha'is and Muslims.

Should I then not say it?

I think we should all say what we think. 'Religious' folk should not have special protection.

No, they shouldn't. It's been part of my point all along. Why should some religious beliefs be given more protection from mockery than others?

But I also want to point out another aspect that has caught my attention....it seems as if we're arguing in this thread the possibility of the extremes of behavior. And the argument tends to ignore the HUGE gray area in between. The "making fun of religions" is being taken to be equated to the big muscle-bound jock who kicks sand in the face of the smaller guy on the beach. When it can be something along the lines of lightheartedly cheering and winking to follow Christians this Sunday that we're looking forward to "Zombie Jesus Day."

To say that they're both the same is wildly inaccurate. There is a gulf of possibilities of humorous references in between the kick-in-the-teeth insult, and the walking-on-eggshells "I'm just kidding" apologetic humor.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No, they shouldn't. It's been part of my point all along. Why should some religious beliefs be given more protection from mockery than others?

But I also want to point out another aspect that has caught my attention....it seems as if we're arguing in this thread the possibility of the extremes of behavior. And the argument tends to ignore the HUGE gray area in between. The "making fun of religions" is being taken to be equated to the big muscle-bound jock who kicks sand in the face of the smaller guy on the beach. When it can be something along the lines of lightheartedly cheering and winking to follow Christians this Sunday that we're looking forward to "Zombie Jesus Day."

To say that they're both the same is wildly inaccurate. There is a gulf of possibilities of humorous references in between the kick-in-the-teeth insult, and the walking-on-eggshells "I'm just kidding" apologetic humor.

I agree. "Is it okay to make fun of religions?" doesn't imply "... in all situations" any more than "is running good for you?" doesn't imply "... even in traffic."

To me, "making fun of religion" mainly makes me think of stuff from comedians like George Carlin.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

No, they shouldn't. It's been part of my point all along. Why should some religious beliefs be given more protection from mockery than others?

Some have mentioned consequences. Joke online about the Church of the SubGenius, and no worries. Joke about the Prophet Mohammad on a streetcorner in Cairo, and spend a decade behind bars.

But consequences aside, the only reason we can joke about the Cargo Cult but not about mainstream Christianity is that people take the latter way more seriously. Me, I don't like that. I don't care much for cultural assumptions. I enjoy challenging and (yes) even offending them.

Free speech is lots more important to me than is the protection of current truth.

To say that they're both the same is wildly inaccurate. There is a gulf of possibilities of humorous references in between the kick-in-the-teeth insult, and the walking-on-eggshells "I'm just kidding" apologetic humor.

Yeah. Words can mean most anything at all.

 

[sojourner]

No. It isn't infantile at all. Its atheistic. If you can't think like those that don't think like you, then why bother arguing at all? Jesus IS on a bigger pedestal than James Bond. And that IS enough to consider it a different matter. Why you rail against such thinking absolutely boggles my mind.

No, the pedestal argument is not "atheistic." The atheistic position is: "god does not exist, therefore Jesus cannot be 'god incarnate.' The Atheist mind set refuses to argue from theology. The "pedestal" argument is, however, a theological argument, and it's patently infantile, because it argues from a very poor theological basis. If you can't think like those who don't think like you, why bother to argue at all?

I've shown time and time again that this is not about adoration (or "pedestal size") for the Christian.

 

[sojourner]

So far, you haven't been willing to talk about this issue when this supposed difference is removed from the equation:

When you remove Jesus from the equation, you have no religion left. It's -- as you say -- a straw man argument, and deserves no answer.

 

[sojourner]

So like I already said, it is the pedestal height...
Only you put yourself up on the pedestal with Christ.

Nope. It has nothing whatsoever to do with adoration. It has everything to do with deep self-awareness.

 

[sojourner]

I don't believe that the Bible is the word of God. In fact, I consider it rationally unhealthy for people to view any body of words as somehow more Godly than any other body of words.

Sometimes I say that. I say it because I want to argue for my own truth over others, just as we all do. I think the world would be a better place if folks didn't believe in the sanctity of words.

But when I say it, I hurt many Christians, Jews, Baha'is and Muslims.

Should I then not say it?

I think we should all say what we think. 'Religious' folk should not have special protection.

I don't believe that the bible is "the word of God," as that phrase is usually understood. And I'm a Christian. BUT -- I don't cross the line and further state that such a belief is "wrong," "stupid," or "unhealthy."