Sign in to follow this  
cuchulain

speaking the truth

Recommended Posts

Why is the truth often perceived as politically incorrect?  In terms of this topic, the truth is as I see it, or as you see it.  Not worrying about how others see it.  If you are Christian, like Dan, why should speaking his truth be viewed as disrespectful?  If he says he believes I am going to hell because he honestly believes I am going to hell...why should I be offended by that?  He is not being disrespectful to me, he is not respecting my lack of belief in God.  Why should I require him to respect that I do not believe in God, if he believes in God and thinks he knows the truth?  On the same note...if I call his religion a myth because I honestly believe it is a myth, why should he take offense?  It is not an attack on Dan, just like it isn't disrespectful to me that he believes I am wrong.  It is an attack on his opinion that he believes to be true. 

Gnostic Bishop is often seen as disrespectful.  The thing is, he usually attacks people's beliefs.  Why is that wrong?  Why is it wrong to tell someone when you think they are wrong?  I don't think it is disrespectful to the person in question, merely to the opinion they hold as truth.  Sure, there are all sorts of reasons why people might get upset that you question their beliefs.  But it really boils down to respecting the right to hold their position.  I believe, truthfully, that Dan has a right to believe in God.  I believe, truthfully, that I have a right to not believe.  I don't see that as being hostile, attacking, or anything else.  I think I am telling the truth as I see it, and that should not be seen as being wrong.  Now, when someone attacks another person because of their beliefs, that might be crossing the line.  But attacking the belief?  Why is that wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, cuchulain said:

Why is the truth often perceived as politically incorrect?  In terms of this topic, the truth is as I see it, or as you see it.  Not worrying about how others see it.  If you are Christian, like Dan, why should speaking his truth be viewed as disrespectful?  If he says he believes I am going to hell because he honestly believes I am going to hell...why should I be offended by that?  He is not being disrespectful to me, he is not respecting my lack of belief in God.  Why should I require him to respect that I do not believe in God, if he believes in God and thinks he knows the truth?  On the same note...if I call his religion a myth because I honestly believe it is a myth, why should he take offense?  It is not an attack on Dan, just like it isn't disrespectful to me that he believes I am wrong.  It is an attack on his opinion that he believes to be true. 

Gnostic Bishop is often seen as disrespectful.  The thing is, he usually attacks people's beliefs.  Why is that wrong?  Why is it wrong to tell someone when you think they are wrong?  I don't think it is disrespectful to the person in question, merely to the opinion they hold as truth.  Sure, there are all sorts of reasons why people might get upset that you question their beliefs.  But it really boils down to respecting the right to hold their position.  I believe, truthfully, that Dan has a right to believe in God.  I believe, truthfully, that I have a right to not believe.  I don't see that as being hostile, attacking, or anything else.  I think I am telling the truth as I see it, and that should not be seen as being wrong.  Now, when someone attacks another person because of their beliefs, that might be crossing the line.  But attacking the belief?  Why is that wrong?

It is not wrong.  This is part of why blasphemy laws are a mistake.  Neither beliefs nor disbeliefs have rights.  People have rights.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

part of the terms of service we all agreed to to be part of this forum state that we do not attack persons because of their beliefs,or lack there of.i have seen threads shut down for less than what gb ever said.

should we attack beliefs?personally i don't see a reason.i don't share dans beliefs,or for that matter,very many others,but i won't say they shouldn't believe as they do.i may think their beliefs are fiction,and someone else may think i am full of whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, mark 45.  we can agree or disagree without attacking anything or anyone.  Do we have the right too?  We have the right to the terms of service. Just because these forums do not seem to be moderated these days does not mean we can't be civil and behave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't say we should attack the person, but the beliefs.  If a person has a strong belief that the truth is important, let's say, shouldn't they put the truth as they see it forward?  Especially when someone starts a topic that they disagree with?  As I said, I respect Dan but I do not respect his beliefs.  I was simply using that as an example, by the way :)  Not trying to pick on Dan at this time in particular.  Let's switch it to Brother Kaman.  I disagree that reality is subjective.  Maybe it's the term attack that is loaded.  What I mean may be something different?  I don't mean bash, disparage, etc...I mean point by point debating.  Is there something wrong with telling a person who believes magic fairies created the world with special pixie dust that they are wrong, if you believe they are wrong, and why they are wrong?

Mark45, I agree.  I have seen threads shut down for far less than Gnostic Bishop has done.  I don't agree with his personally attacking others, but I don't find fault in his attack of their beliefs.  Attacking ideas, it isn't easy in some ways, and in others it's as simple as stating what you believe and that being in opposition of someone else's beliefs.  

I think some of it might boil down to intent, as well.  If I disagree with Brother Kaman above, and I legitimately care about what I perceive to be the truth, then I might simply be holding it in my duty to reveal to him what I perceive as the truth.  Or take the example of Dan.  He tells us what he believes and why he thinks we are wrong, and I don't believe he does such out of spite but rather out of wanting us to accept the truth as he sees it, because it has real consequences in his ideology and he is trying to spare us those consequences.  

Anyway, I appreciate the comments.  Keep em coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mererdog said:

Truth is power. Power can heal or harm. Power should be used wisely. Power should not be given out indiscriminately.

Which power should not be "given out indiscriminately?" Truth?  What does that mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People have different truths, what's true to one is false to another.. Nothing wrong with pointing out to someone why their truth is wrong or unbelievable. I never have a problem with that, in fact, I can relate to it because I haven't always believed what I believe. Relating to how someone else thinks is how to maintain decorum. The difference is like telling a girl that you disagree and disapprove with her youthful indiscretions, as opposed to calling her a complete whore :). One comment is a tactful interjection, while the other is just plain rude. 

Edited by Dan56

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dan56 said:

People have different truths, what's true to one is false to another.. Nothing wrong with pointing out to someone why their truth is wrong or unbelievable. I never have a problem with that, in fact, I can relate to it because I haven't always believed what I believe. Relating to how someone else thinks is how to maintain decorum. The difference is like telling a girl that you disagree and disapprove with her youthful indiscretions, as opposed to calling her a complete whore :). One comment is a tactful interjection, while the other is just plain rude. 

No.  That is about being judgmental.  Expressing that judgment is what comes across as rude.  "Judge not lest you be judged."

We can understand truth differently.  We can understand facts or reality differently.  This does not make us liers.  Only mistaken.

Edited by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

Which power should not be "given out indiscriminately?" Truth?  What does that mean?

It means that it is not a sin to lie to the Nazis about where the Jews are hiding. It means it is a bad idea to tell a recovering anorexic that you think he looked better before he put on weight. It means that if you think the violent criminal you're talking to is ugly, maybe you should keep that to yourself. Make sense?

Edited by mererdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mererdog said:

It means that it is not a sin to lie to the Nazis about where the Jews are hiding. It means it is a bad idea to tell a recovering anorexic that you think he looked better before he put on weight. It means that if you think the violent criminal you're talking to is ugly, maybe you should keep that to yourself. Make sense?

Yes, when you put it that way.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎29‎/‎10‎/‎2016 at 2:14 PM, cuchulain said:

 

Gnostic Bishop is often seen as disrespectful.  The thing is, he usually attacks people's beliefs.  Why is that wrong?  

Thanks for the thumbs up.

I have not been around much because of temporary bans that seem to come my way often here.

I have no problem allowing people to believe whatever they like, as long as they are moral tenets, even if taken from an imaginary supernatural entity.

When it is otherwise, I go by this good advice.

Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

 

The problem I have with folks like Dan is that he sets his morality aside and promotes immoral thinking, such as with his penchant for a salvific Jesus which he can only follow by promoting the notion that having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs he has done, --- so that he might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is moral.

As Ingersoll said; 'no man would be fit for heaven who would consent that an innocent person should suffer for his sin.'

Regards

DL

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎30‎/‎10‎/‎2016 at 2:56 PM, mark 45 said:

part of the terms of service we all agreed to to be part of this forum state that we do not attack persons because of their beliefs,or lack there of.i have seen threads shut down for less than what gb ever said.

should we attack beliefs?personally i don't see a reason.i don't share dans beliefs,or for that matter,very many others,but i won't say they shouldn't believe as they do.i may think their beliefs are fiction,and someone else may think i am full of whatever.

I sure do. :huh::lol:

No personal offence meant but your view sure as hell ignores the Golden Rule. Your thinking might apply to benign beliefs but not to anything of moral importance.

I E. Muslims believe creates actions and justification to think that it is quite alright to marry off 9 year old girls to old men after they have FGM done to them.

To not attack such immoral beliefs and practices, to my way of thinking, is to condone it. 

 

On the Christian side, do you see anything in these three links that might make you rethink the notion that you should let people believe whatever they like?

 African witches and Jesus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pr6gvtYrga8

 

 Jesus Camp 1of 3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LACyLTsH4ac

 

Death to Gays.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyuKLyGUHNE

 

Regards

DL

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎30‎/‎10‎/‎2016 at 3:47 PM, cuchulain said:

I don't say we should attack the person, but the beliefs.

I am the sum total of my beliefs.

To attack my belief is to attack me.

Beliefs cannot retaliate but I can. To try to separate a person from his belief is basically political correctness.

To call a belief of mine immoral is to say that I am immoral.

Regards

DL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎31‎/‎10‎/‎2016 at 4:39 PM, mererdog said:

Truth is power. Power can heal or harm. Power should be used wisely. Power should not be given out indiscriminately.

This is also true of lies.

Just look at all the harm that Christianity and Islam have propagated with all their lies about God.

Regards

DL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gnostic Bishop said:

I am the sum total of my beliefs.

To attack my belief is to attack me.

Beliefs cannot retaliate but I can. To try to separate a person from his belief is basically political correctness.

To call a belief of mine immoral is to say that I am immoral.

Regards

DL

sometimes I think this is the truth.  Then other times I think some people are victims of brainwashing.  When a person grows up in a culture so inundated with such beliefs that are immoral, they do not realize they are immoral.  A lot of people are sheep, and are unwilling to examine their beliefs, at least in any sort of meaningful manner.  Such is my personal opinion, of course.  I tend to view such victims with sympathy when I encounter them.  They are so full of hate towards something that they cannot stop to see their beliefs are encouraging hate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gnostic Bishop said:

I sure do. :huh::lol:

No personal offence meant but your view sure as hell ignores the Golden Rule. Your thinking might apply to benign beliefs but not to anything of moral importance.

I E. Muslims believe creates actions and justification to think that it is quite alright to marry off 9 year old girls to old men after they have FGM done to them.

To not attack such immoral beliefs and practices, to my way of thinking, is to condone it. 

 

On the Christian side, do you see anything in these three links that might make you rethink the notion that you should let people believe whatever they like?

 African witches and Jesus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pr6gvtYrga8

 

 Jesus Camp 1of 3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LACyLTsH4ac

 

Death to Gays.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyuKLyGUHNE

 

Regards

DL

 

 

 

i never said anything about them acting on said beliefs,and doing nothing.if i am or were in a position to stop it,i would do what i could.but i still feel no need to persecute them for their beliefs.

and by the way,clitoris removal is done usually by the girls mother and any help she can get(and most of the women who do it have had it done to them,and think they are doing right).i don't think they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2016 at 6:43 PM, mark 45 said:

i never said anything about them acting on said beliefs,and doing nothing.if i am or were in a position to stop it,i would do what i could.but i still feel no need to persecute them for their beliefs.

and by the way,clitoris removal is done usually by the girls mother and any help she can get(and most of the women who do it have had it done to them,and think they are doing right).i don't think they are.

It is a matter of history, both ancient and modern.  Nothing helps religion prosper and spread quite like persecution.  Aside from the immorality of persecution, it is actually counter productive to persecute the followers of a religion.

For an example of this, we need look no further than modern China.  The Falun Dafa people -- the practitioners of Falun Gong -- are being imprisoned, tortured and killed.  Consequently, they are spreading all over the world.  If this keeps up, Falun Dafa will be a dominant religion.

So long as anybody is being persecuted for their beliefs -- or lack of beliefs -- we are all in danger.  None of this has anything to do with accepting, approving or condoning a religion or religious beliefs.  Simply stated,  that persecution is counter productive, to the stated goal of removing a religion from existence.  It doesn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Saturday, October 29, 2016 at 11:14 AM, cuchulain said:

Why is the truth often perceived as politically incorrect? 

Because it is a threat to those who dismiss it as such. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this