Is it OK to make fun of religions?

[Jayhawker Soule]

And yet there are people who worship James Bond....

Perhaps if you were to meet some of the people who do worship James Bond you could "see it"?


OASN:
Other than the height of the pedestal, What is the difference?

Seriously?

 

[sojourner]

Sorry, but I just don't see how the distinction you're trying to draw has any greater basis than in mere semantics. The psychology of self-identification is both subtle and profound. It reaches beyond the consciousness into the subconscious mind. And it pervades how someone sees both themselves and the world.

To dismiss the self-identification of some people with a politics or political entity as somehow essentially different from the self-identification of some people (perhaps the same people) with a deity, religious ideology, or worldview strikes me as uncomprehending of what self-identification actually is.

The psychological self, for most people, is bound up in self-identification. Awareness, for most people, is entwined with self-identification. The very basis of normal consciousness in the division of the world into subject and object is the key support of self-identification.

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?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't see it. Jesus is a religious icon and is worshiped by people. James Bond is a character in books and movies. There is no comparison, in my opinion in comparing making fun of the two.

sojourner argued that the difference between making fun of religion versus making fun of other things was that religion is part of a person in a way that holding something external to you in high regard is not. My post was meant to point out that both Jesus and James Bond are external to the Christian or the Bond fan.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Close, but no cigar. We may identify closely with a political POV or philosophy. But we are not the party or the candidate -- or the issue. However, where religion is concerned, It's not something we "join," although that's the typical, bourgeois way of looking at it. Rather, religion is something to which we are called -- and called within our innate selves, not from without. It's not something that we "espouse," although, again, bourgeois attitudes understand "faith" as some set of beliefs or tenets that one "espouses," or "adopts" into a pre-existing "way of life," as opposed to an actualization of who we innately are created to be.

Please note that I didn't say "religious affiliation." This has nothing to do with denominational polity or church membership. We can tell Catholic jokes all day. What's at stake here isn't the claptrap of the polity, it's the self-identity of those who identify who they are by the faith-statements that arise out of self-awareness. That's "religion." And that shouldn't ever be made fun of.

I don't understand the distinction you're making. To me, religious affiliation is an aspect of religion, and ""telling Catholic jokes" could very well be making fun of someone's religion.

I think it would help me understand your point better if you could give an example of how a person could make fun of someone's religion without making fun of their religious affiliation.

 

[sojourner]

sojourner argued that the difference between making fun of religion versus making fun of other things was that religion is part of a person in a way that holding something external to you in high regard is not. My post was meant to point out that both Jesus and James Bond are external to the Christian or the Bond fan.

Your post is wrong. Jesus is not external to the Christian.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Au contraire! Christians are the body of Christ. It's a metaphysical distinction that is entirely cogent to the topic under debate.

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.

 

[sojourner]

I don't understand the distinction you're making. To me, religious affiliation is an aspect of religion, and ""telling Catholic jokes" could very well be making fun of someone's religion.

I think it would help me understand your point better if you could give an example of how a person could make fun of someone's religion without making fun of their religious affiliation.

Yes, it is. But it's an exterior aspect. Making fun of the pope is one thing. But to say that faith, itself, is worthless drivel is quite another. One's faith is wholly interior. Additionally, making fun of the pope is sometimes taking things too far, depending on who's listening.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Oh how utterly original! To insinuate that Jesus is a fictional character. Gee-whiz, none of us ever heard anything like that before. How shocking and controversial of you! How ever did you come up with such a radical idea?

You're missing the point. It's not about the fact that Bond is fictional. The analogy would still hold if we were talking about making fun of Ronald Reagan in front of a Republican instead of James Bond in front of a Bond fan. It's only about the fact that the person whose feelings are getting hurt holds the figure (whether Jesus, Bond, Reagan, or whoever) in high regard.

 

[HexBomb]

I think it depends on the spirit of the making fun. My friends tease me about my faith, but they do it in a spirit of friendly teasing, and I do the same. Me saying something like "Oh, you're going to have to go to confession for that one," or "Isn't gluttony a sin" to one friend in the same way I say something like "You suck," when they forget to get me brown rice instead of white in my Chinese order. It's just how we are as friends.

However, when someone else comes along and kicks at a mound, and says "Anyone who believes in fairies is an idiot, you're too smart for this,' is not the same as a friend clapping when she does me a favor and picks up my offering plate on her way into the house.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

I think it depends on the spirit of the making fun. My friends tease me about my faith, but they do it in a spirit of friendly teasing, and I do the same. Me saying something like "Oh, you're going to have to go to confession for that one," or "Isn't gluttony a sin" to one friend in the same way I say something like "You suck," when they forget to get me brown rice instead of white in my Chinese order. It's just how we are as friends.

However, when someone else comes along and kicks at a mound, and says "Anyone who believes in fairies is an idiot, you're too smart for this,' is not the same as a friend clapping when she does me a favor and picks up my offering plate on her way into the house.

Well said.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes, it is. But it's an exterior aspect. Making fun of the pope is one thing. But to say that faith, itself, is worthless drivel is quite another. One's faith is wholly interior. Additionally, making fun of the pope is sometimes taking things too far, depending on who's listening.

Just based on the proportion of religious to non-religious people, making fun of religion is most often done by people who are religious themselves, so mockery of religion most often focuses on the differences in religion between the mocker and the mockee. Usually, faith in general is common to both of them. You do agree that religious people can make fun of religions, right?

Fun fact: the phrase "hocus pocus" was originally a corruption or mockery by Protestants of the Catholic eucharistic prayer in Latin ("hoc es corpus": "this is (my) body")

You said that making fun of the Pope is SOMETIMES taking things too far. Does this mean that you do agree that making fun of religions is sometimes appropriate?

 

[sojourner]

Just based on the proportion of religious to non-religious people, making fun of religion is most often done by people who are religious themselves, so mockery of religion most often focuses on the differences in religion between the mocker and the mockee. Usually, faith in general is common to both of them. You do agree that religious people can make fun of religions, right?

Fun fact: the phrase "hocus pocus" was originally a corruption or mockery by Protestants of the Catholic eucharistic prayer in Latin ("hoc es corpus": "this is (my) body")

You said that making fun of the Pope is SOMETIMES taking things too far. Does this mean that you do agree that making fun of religions is sometimes appropriate?

As I said in my first post in this thread (which you may have missed), I think we need to be careful to clarify what we mean by "making fun." As Hex said above, there's the lighthearted stuff that's meant to endear one to someone, and then there's the plain mean-spirited bullying. The first is OK. The second is not.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Are we suggesting that some aspects of religious beliefs aren't goofy? At all?

I used to catch the Black Supremacist groups preaching at the corners in NYC. They used to have pictures/drawings of a large black male holding chains that held a smaller white red-haired man who was on his knees. I'm absolutely sure that the preachers took their religious beliefs seriously, and that they considered being a part of the 12 tribes of Israel are real and tangible part of their identity and heritage and way of life. They were preaching to all the citizens, or at least who could hear them, that the world needs to prepare for the white man to go to his proper place as spiritual and temporal servant for the 12 tribes.

Many of the listeners were upset or would argue with them. Some would walk away and chuckle to themselves.

Are the chucklers wrong? Should they have instead confronted the preachers and gotten riled up?

Another example....back at Purdue, there was a guy named Brother Max who used to preach at the quad. One of his most memorable quotes about the Bible was - I kid you not - that if his wife got out of line, he'd hit her over the head with the Bible.

It would upset many people.

Others would also find humor and mock him for it.

Is it favorable to confront, fight, challenge? Were the hecklers more morally wrong for mocking Brother Max for his statement...which I would bet are his sincerely-held beliefs?

I know. I'm asking a lot of questions. But it seems as if the line that is drawn looks a little arbitrary based on the popularity of the belief. Apparently it's okay to giggle at Jedism the religion or planet Nibiru/Annunaki/Lloyd Pye believers, but it isn't okay to say Easter is Zombie Jesus Day. Is that correct?

I'm of the opinion that life is too damn short. I like having a sense of humor, because when I can laugh at myself, and my flaws, and how strange I am, and how strange my worldviews can be at times (oh, Ignorance is ever by my side)....life is much more enjoyable. Being the Fool is so much better than having to be right all the time.

 

[Debater Slayer]

As I said in my first post in this thread (which you may have missed), I think we need to be careful to clarify what we mean by "making fun." As Hex said above, there's the lighthearted stuff that's meant to endear one to someone, and then there's the plain mean-spirited bullying. The first is OK. The second is not.

Do you think it is okay for followers of certain sects of Christianity to preach and read verses that condemn (in their interpretation, at least) non-believers and call them "fools" where non-believers can hear them? Why or why not?

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

It seems that in some societies it's ok to make fun of religions while it is not ok in other societies. So, what are your feelings about making fun of religions? Would a legal or informal prohibition on making fun of religions in your society amount to according religions a special status that few, if any, other institutions in your society are accorded? Would a legal or informal prohibition be a good thing? Why or why not?

Should there by any limits -- legal or informal -- on how much or what kind of fun can be made of religions?

Why don't you ask some of the Muslim countries that have laws about criticising religions? How much of your freedom of speech are you ready to part with so that people with religious beliefs are 'protected' from getting their feelings hurt? If I don't believe in god, would these laws include a ban on preaching, which constituts damnation of me? Would we be able to ban all religious discussion or only if someone finds humor in the discussion? If people are still condeming other religions, e.g. jew verses muslim, christian verses muslim, muslim verses jew, etc., then why on earth would we be concerned about a joke?

Take away the guns and the bombs for a start. Then work on the fires and the hate rallies. Then perhaps I could give a hoot about a child molestor, a penis modifier, and a ******* walk into a bar.

My favorite religious joke, "Haha, that guy believes in god!"

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

As I said in my first post in this thread (which you may have missed), I think we need to be careful to clarify what we mean by "making fun." As Hex said above, there's the lighthearted stuff that's meant to endear one to someone, and then there's the plain mean-spirited bullying. The first is OK. The second is not.

I read it... and actually replied to it but never got an answer. There are more ways to make fun of religion than just "lighthearted stuff" and "bullying". Earlier, I gave Tim Minchin's "Pope Song" as an example: it's certainly not lighthearted (the melody is fun, but I can't call a song with that much profanity or such a serious subject matter "lighthearted")... and I don't think it would be appropriate to call it "bullying" either, considering the power dynamics involved.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

I know. I'm asking a lot of questions. But it seems as if the line that is drawn looks a little arbitrary based on the popularity of the belief. Apparently it's okay to giggle at Jedism the religion or planet Nibiru/Annunaki/Lloyd Pye believers, but it isn't okay to say Easter is Zombie Jesus Day. Is that correct?

Yeah, and that bothers me. I mentioned the Cargo Cults earlier and tried to say that it's just how I feel about Christian beliefs. Many or most of them seem as bizarre to me as do the Cargo Cult beliefs. It's just that Christianity is more accepted.

But I would rather live in a world where Cargo Cultism (or Christianity) is not the accepted and sacred view of things. I don't make hostile fun of Christian beliefs, but I do try to resist, sometimes with humor.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Do you think it is okay for followers of certain sects of Christianity to preach and read verses that condemn (in their interpretation, at least) non-believers and call them "fools" where non-believers can hear them? Why or why not?

I've hardened my heart against the truth.

I'm a swine before whom pearls of wisdom should not be wasted.

I'm insincere in my search for God.

I am a fool who has said in his heart that there is no God.

I just deny God because I want to sin freely.

I live in my parents' basement and grow hair on my neck.

Etc....

Hey, I think all of that says more about the attackers than about me. I can't help seeing it that way.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I've hardened my heart against the truth.

I'm a swine before whom pearls of wisdom should not be wasted.

I'm insincere in my search for God.

I am a fool who has said in his heart that there is no God.

I just deny God because I want to sin freely.

I live in my parents' basement and grow hair on my neck.

Etc....

Hey, I think all of that says more about the attackers than about me. I can't help seeing it that way.

You're not the fuel for Hell?

You must not be atheist enough, then.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Long thread, have we reached any consensus yet?