Should We Avoid Criticizing or Satirizing Minority Religious Doctrines?

[Katzpur]

Hey Katzpur, I think you took my comment out of context. My only point was that no one is qualified to be a censor of other's critiques.

Yeah, I guess I did. Sorry about that.

 

[Aquitaine]

I don't see all "rights" as being "right." I see ridicule as a cop-out. It's what people do when they've exhausted all of their more mature options. (Some people seem to get there right away.)

Meh, I think when people continue to stubbornly make extraordinary and bizarre claims (which can sometimes be a cop-out "justification" for their odd behaviour), even after attempts at rational debate - then ridicule is pretty justified.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the merits of ridicule here.

 

[Katzpur]

Meh, I think when people continue to stubbornly make extraordinary and bizarre claims (which can sometimes be a cop-out "justification" for their odd behaviour), even after attempts at rational debate - then ridicule is pretty justified.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the merits of ridicule here.

Actually, I wasn't even really thinking about the "merits" of ridicule, but whether or not it's right for us to be using it. Since you put it that way, though, would you mind telling me what you believe the merits of ridicule are? I'm assuming you're thinking that ridicule actually accomplishes something beneficial. What I'm looking for is what that might be, what you think its ultimate benefits are.

 

[Aquitaine]

Actually, I wasn't even really thinking about the "merits" of ridicule, but whether or not it's right for us to be using it. Since you put it that way, though, would you mind telling me what you believe the merits of ridicule are? I'm assuming you're thinking that ridicule actually accomplishes something beneficial. What I'm looking for is what that might be, what you think its ultimate benefits are.

You know what, that's a good point. I shouldn't have used the word "merits", instead I was thinking about the inevitability that eventually ridicule will be a response to the constant sturbborness of clinging to (and making) stupid claims. Once all other genuine debate attempts have been exhausted, the only other results will be either ridiculing or ignoring.

However, I do think there is some "merit" to ridicule: it's a form of expressing criticism (e.g satire) and who knows: maybe it'll work on some people after long enough.

 

[icehorse]

To elaborate, some harsher forms of criticism are sometimes more effective communication. Too much soft-pedaling can lead to confusion.

 

[Katzpur]

You know what, that's a good point. I shouldn't have used the word "merits", instead I was thinking about the inevitability that eventually ridicule will be a response to the constant stubbornness of clinging to (and making) stupid claims.

Oh, I'm sure it will elicit a response, and probably not a positive one. From personal experience, I'd have to say that ridicule is not likely to make the individual being ridiculed change what he believes. But who knows? It's not as if I've never been wrong before.

 

[psychoslice]

I don't think any group should be dissed for their beliefs, so long as their beliefs don't morph into public policy or entitlement. JWs can believe what they want to, and I support their right to hold those beliefs. But the minute they begin broadcasting how God doesn't love me, and how I'm going to hell, and begin publicly disrespecting my beliefs, I'll ridicule them till the cows come home. Same with the wacky fundigelicals: if they don't want to "believe" in homosexual marriage (even though it exists), they don't have to -- but the minute they try to curtail others from practicing it, I'll ridicule them to death.

I'm with you on that.

 

[psychoslice]

I don't have a real problem with people who laugh at my beliefs. It's when they laugh at what they inaccurately perceive to be my beliefs that I get annoyed. I mean, if you're going to make fun, at least get your facts straight first.

Yes I do know quite a bit about most religions, so when I ridicule their beliefs, I know what I am saying, your right If I didn't then I should shut my mouth up.

 

[Katzpur]

I just thought of something that we probably ought to address. The title of this thread is, "Should we avoid criticizing the religious doctrines of minority groups?" Just how much difference should it make if the group is a minority? Most people who have voted, voted "no." Just as a thought... The population of the United States today is about 320.6 million. Of these 320.6 million people, Mormons number about 5.5 million. According to the poll, we should then be subject to ridicule. Suppose we numbered 150 million and had exactly the same doctrines as we do with just 5.5 million. Would that change things? At what point do we become large enough that we are no longer fair game in people's eyes? I don't understand what size has to do with it. To me, the question itself is like saying, "Is it okay to bully the little guys because you can get away with it?"

 

[gsa]

I just thought of something that we probably ought to address. The title of this thread is, "Should we avoid criticizing the religious doctrines of minority groups?" Just how much difference should it make if the group is a minority? Most people who have voted, voted "no." Just as a thought... The population of the United States today is about 320.6 million. Of these 320.6 million people, Mormons number about 5.5 million. According to the poll, we should then be subject to ridicule. Suppose we numbered 150 million and had exactly the same doctrines as we do with just 5.5 million. Would that change things? At what point do we become large enough that we are no longer fair game in people's eyes? I don't understand what size has to do with it. To me, the question itself is like saying, "Is it okay to bully the little guys because you can get away with it?"

This is not an accurate interpretation of the purpose of this debate. Quite the opposite, in fact: Islam is not a minority religion in a global sense, while Mormonism clearly is, and Scientology is one of the smallest religions out there. The criticism is directed at the idea that such things matter at all when it comes to debating doctrinal positions.

Just to be clear, Mormonism is fair game to me because I think it is not true, even absurd. The only thing that most of the other religions have going for them is that their claims are ancient so the evidence is not quite as easy to dismiss, or at least not as quickly. But do I think that Joseph Smith's revelations are any more probable than Muhammed's? No.

I referenced the global numbers of Islam for a reason: The size of the group has nothing to do with it, and the quality of their claims has everything to do with it.

 

[psychoslice]

I just thought of something that we probably ought to address. The title of this thread is, "Should we avoid criticizing the religious doctrines of minority groups?" Just how much difference should it make if the group is a minority? Most people who have voted, voted "no." Just as a thought... The population of the United States today is about 320.6 million. Of these 320.6 million people, Mormons number about 5.5 million. According to the poll, we should then be subject to ridicule. Suppose we numbered 150 million and had exactly the same doctrines as we do with just 5.5 million. Would that change things? At what point do we become large enough that we are no longer fair game in people's eyes? I don't understand what size has to do with it. To me, the question itself is like saying, "Is it okay to bully the little guys because you can get away with it?"

I think when we believe in odd beliefs we are bringing ridicule upon ourselves if we like it or not, not being judgmental, but beliefs of weird underwear, the beliefs of three heaven and all the rest, being true or not, its still and odd to the main population, also take Scientology for example, just weird and hence ridicule.

 

[Aquitaine]

Oh, I'm sure it will elicit a response, and probably not a positive one. From personal experience, I'd have to say that ridicule is not likely to make the individual being ridiculed change what he believes. But who knows? It's not as if I've never been wrong before.

Right. Also, if the person is spouting hateful nonesense using their beliefs as a "justification", then all the more reason to ridicule in my opinion.

Admittedly - like you pointed out - ridicule may not be effective, but I certainly don't think it's unwarranted or unethical.

I just thought of something that we probably ought to address. The title of this thread is, "Should we avoid criticizing the religious doctrines of minority groups?" Just how much difference should it make if the group is a minority? Most people who have voted, voted "no." Just as a thought... The population of the United States today is about 320.6 million. Of these 320.6 million people, Mormons number about 5.5 million. According to the poll, we should then be subject to ridicule. Suppose we numbered 150 million and had exactly the same doctrines as we do with just 5.5 million. Would that change things? At what point do we become large enough that we are no longer fair game in people's eyes? I don't understand what size has to do with it. To me, the question itself is like saying, "Is it okay to bully the little guys because you can get away with it?"

I agree that size is irrelevant in this context. All doctrines and beliefs should be fair game.

 

[Katzpur]

This is not an accurate interpretation of the purpose of this debate. Quite the opposite, in fact: Islam is not a minority religion in a global sense, while Mormonism clearly is, and Scientology is one of the smallest religions out there. The criticism is directed at the idea that such things matter at all when it comes to debating doctrinal positions.

Just to be clear, Mormonism is fair game to me because I think it is not true, even absurd. The only thing that most of the other religions have going for them is that their claims are ancient so the evidence is not quite as easy to dismiss, or at least not as quickly. But do I think that Joseph Smith's revelations are any more probable than Muhammed's? No.

I referenced the global numbers of Islam for a reason: The size of the group has nothing to do with it, and the quality of their claims has everything to do with it.

Well, it's your thread. If I misinterpreted the reason behind it, I apologize.

 

[Katzpur]

I think when we believe in odd beliefs we are bringing ridicule upon ourselves if we like it or not, not being judgmental, but beliefs of weird underwear, the beliefs of three heaven and all the rest, being true or not, its still and odd to the main population, also take Scientology for example, just weird and hence ridicule.

Well, to each his own. To you, "different" means "open to ridicule." And that's where bigotry starts. If you're the big guy and you can safely bully the little guy, why not? I'm sure there is absolutely nothing I can do to change how you feel about that. I do want to respond, though, to your specific comments on Mormonism. (1) "Weird underwear": I haven't seen anywhere on RF or any other forum where people ridicule the Jewish tallit katan, which is a white garment worn under the clothing in remembrance of the Lord’s commandments (see Exodus 19:6, Numbers 15:38 and Deuteronomy 22:12). I find this interesting, since the reasons for wearing the Mormon temple garment and the Jewish tallit katan are really very similar. Of course, it's not considered politically correct these days to be anti-Semitic but being anti-Mormon is totally cool. (2) Three heavens: How weird is a belief in something specifically mentioned in the Bible? If someone was caught up into the "third heaven," how can you suggest that a belief in a first and a second heaven is weird?

 

[gsa]

Well, to each his own. To you, "different" means "open to ridicule." And that's where bigotry starts. If you're the big guy and you can safely bully the little guy, why not? I'm sure there is absolutely nothing I can do to change how you feel about that. I do want to respond, though, to your specific comments on Mormonism. (1) "Weird underwear": I haven't seen anywhere on RF or any other forum where people ridicule the Jewish tallit katan, which is a white garment worn under the clothing in remembrance of the Lord’s commandments (see Exodus 19:6, Numbers 15:38 and Deuteronomy 22:12). I find this interesting, since the reasons for wearing the Mormon temple garment and the Jewish tallit katan are really very similar. Of course, it's not considered politically correct these days to be anti-Semitic but being anti-Mormon is totally cool. (2) Three heavens: How weird is a belief in something specifically mentioned in the Bible? If someone was caught up into the "third heaven," how can you suggest that a belief in a first and a second heaven is weird?

Plenty of Jewish religious practices and beliefs are very bizarre. They're often not voiced because of recent experiences of Euro antisemitism, but they're as ridiculous as much of what you find in Mormonism.

How pc do you find us when it comes to Islam?

 

[psychoslice]

Well, to each his own. To you, "different" means "open to ridicule." And that's where bigotry starts. If you're the big guy and you can safely bully the little guy, why not? I'm sure there is absolutely nothing I can do to change how you feel about that. I do want to respond, though, to your specific comments on Mormonism. (1) "Weird underwear": I haven't seen anywhere on RF or any other forum where people ridicule the Jewish tallit katan, which is a white garment worn under the clothing in remembrance of the Lord’s commandments (see Exodus 19:6, Numbers 15:38 and Deuteronomy 22:12). I find this interesting, since the reasons for wearing the Mormon temple garment and the Jewish tallit katan are really very similar. Of course, it's not considered politically correct these days to be anti-Semitic but being anti-Mormon is totally cool. (2) Three heavens: How weird is a belief in something specifically mentioned in the Bible? If someone was caught up into the "third heaven," how can you suggest that a belief in a first and a second heaven is weird?

Yea, I'm not making fun of your beliefs, I'm just saying if you have a belief that is weird to most then you must expect ridicule, I get ridicule all the time with what I believe, and that is how I like it, lets face it, you yourself must think some other beliefs is weird, be honest now.

 

[Katzpur]

Sojourner said, "I don't think any group should be dissed for their beliefs, so long as their beliefs don't morph into public policy or entitlement." And to that, you replied:

I'm with you on that.

Then you turned around in your very next post and explained that you feel totally justified in dissing Mormons for their "weird underwear" and their belief in a three-tiered heaven. Last I knew, the LDS Church was not attempting to impose either of these beliefs on the general public. I think this is what you really meant to say: People shouldn't be dissed for their beliefs, so long as their beliefs don't morph into public policy or entitlement, or unless you find their underwear "weird."

 

[psychoslice]

Sojourner said, "I don't think any group should be dissed for their beliefs, so long as their beliefs don't morph into public policy or entitlement." And to that, you replied:

Then you turned around in your very next post and explained that you feel totally justified in dissing Mormons for their "weird underwear" and their belief in a three-tiered heaven. Last I knew, the LDS Church was not attempting to impose either of these beliefs on the general public. I think this is what you really meant to say: People shouldn't be dissed for their beliefs, so long as their beliefs don't morph into public policy or entitlement, or unless you find their underwear "weird."

Why don't you read what I say, I was using that as an example, don't get on your high horse.

 

[Katzpur]

Plenty of Jewish religious practices and beliefs are very bizarre. They're often not voiced because of recent experiences of Euro antisemitism, but they're as ridiculous as much of what you find in Mormonism.

Yup, there's your rationale: Recent Euro anti-semitism. We've picked on the Jews long enough. It's time to call off the dogs and sic 'em on somebody else for awhile.

How pc do you find us when it comes to Islam?

Who's "us"? You personally? I really have no idea. I don't pay all that much attention to what you've said about Islam.

 

[Katzpur]

Why don't you read what I say, I was using that as an example, don't get on your high horse.

Yeah, you used it as an example, I called you on it and now you have to deal with it.