Free Speech/Nathan

by Guest with Questions 40 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Guest with Questions

  I started this on another thread so a lot of it is in response to Nathan's.

  There is still free speech, even for Christians. A lot of people would like to take free speech away from Christians; that we keep our mouths shut. As Americans, what do you think of the Fairness Doctrine that Henry Waxman wants to revive? Do you think it will be fair towards Christians? Should we, as Christians, cower when someone is offended or irritated by our ignorance and superstitions and profusely apologize?

  The Fairness Doctrine: http://www.nysun.com/article/64242

  I realize that this past week has been an emotional time for a lot of us so I hope that I can keep civil. I perceive you in this instance as being very insensitive. I sense that you loved the idea of shaking us out of our fantasy land, much like shaking the Christian out of his fantasy land. I am not an insensitive clod that tramples on other peoples rights, I would never deliberately offend someone and I hope that this thread doesn’t come across that way but I am offended by your comments. Even now I feel I have to be selective with my wording not to offend, yet you don’t seem to have a problem offending.

  You believe that God is a myth? I say that God is real. Prove to me that He's a myth? You can't any more than I can prove His existence. Science is real. It will go on with or without humans, with or without our opinions. Evolution (in the sense that Atheists believe it) and Religion are both belief systems.

  But now I will most likely state something that may offend you. You state that you will exercise your right to offer rationality as a substitute for superstition at every opportunity. Do you think it's rational to believe that the universe was created out of nothing? Will you explain the Theory of Common Descent; that all species share common ancestors, back to a single common ancestor of all life.

  Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
• 

  IP_SEC

  Hiya,

  I dont believe anyone should be muffled. Not JWs, not Xians, not atheist.

  It will all shake out in the end. May the best 'man' win.

  Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

  Yes but absense of evidence is reason not to believe until evidence exists.

  Prove to me that He's a myth?

  Dont have to. The burden of proof is on you... or him...
• 

  nvrgnbk

  Oh, God's absent alright.

  He'd have detention and suspension by now if this were school, and his dad would be getting one hell of a fine.

  I kid God.
• 

  cognizant dissident

  I realize that this past week has been an emotional time for a lot of us so I hope that I can keep civil. I perceive you in this instance as being very insensitive. I sense that you loved the idea of shaking us out of our fantasy land, much like shaking the Christian out of his fantasy land. I am not an insensitive clod that tramples on other peoples rights, I would never deliberately offend someone and I hope that this thread doesn’t come across that way but I am offended by your comments. Even now I feel I have to be selective with my wording not to offend, yet you don’t seem to have a problem offending.

  I also hope that you can keep civil. So far, you have called Nathan names such as "insensitive clod". You have decided you can read his mind and motivations and sense "that he loves to shake us out of our fantasy land". You say you do not want to offend, but he has no problem offending. When and how did Nathan offend you? Did he call you a name? Did he impute unkind motives to you without knowing you personally at all? Did he call you offensive while trying to hold himself up as a model of civility? Did he wish that you would keep quiet about your beliefs and not use the forum for a platform?

  As far as I can see, Nathan only stated his beliefs in a general way and you, as evidenced by your own words, have taken offense to them and resorted to a personal attack, name-calling, and imputing motives to others that you have no evidence for. These are all the last refuge of someone with no evidence to back up their arguments.

  You believe that God is a myth? I say that God is real. Prove to me that He's a myth? You can't any more than I can prove His existence. Science is real. It will go on with or without humans, with or without our opinions. Evolution (in the sense that Atheists believe it) and Religion are both belief systems.

  I actually agree with this part, the only distinction being, there is some rational, scientific evidence to support the theory of evolution, while there is no scientific and rational evidence to support the existence of god. (Although you are making another assumption, which is that all atheists believe in evolution and that no religious people do) I also find it interesting that you capitalize the words evolution and religion. Are people's belief systems so prominent and important in your mind, that they deserve capitals?

  But now I will most likely state something that may offend you. You state that you will exercise your right to offer rationality as a substitute for superstition at every opportunity. Do you think it's rational to believe that the universe was created out of nothing? Will you explain the Theory of Common Descent; that all species share common ancestors, back to a single common ancestor of all life.

  Nathan never claimed to believe the universe was created out of nothing. He never claimed to believe in the theory of common descent. So, why should he explain them to you? You are making an assumption that all atheists believe such.

  Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

  Is it possible for evidence of "absence" to ever exist? Especially for a being that does not even claim to exist on the same realm of consciousness as human beings. (Our consciousness being predicated on the five senses, sight, smell, taste, touch, hearing). All that we are aware of is due to our sensing it on at least one of these levels. Yet God can not be sensed on any one of them. I might also add that absence of evidence is also not evidence for God's existence either.

  Cog
• 

  journey-on

  I'm a believer in the Divine Creator, not necessarily the Bible God Jehovah. (I'm beginning to think that god is an alien...lol)

  However, Nathan's words did not offend me in any way. I actually enjoy the diversity of presentations regarding one's spiritual

  or non-spiritual beliefs put forth on this board. I thought he spoke his mind and heart with sincerity and conviction. What's

  wrong with that? His atheism doesn't change me into a full blown atheist. But it does make me think and go back to my

  research and analyse my personal experiences against those underpinnings. I love it! Please don't attempt to censor

  opinions and beliefs. It would make for a very dull forum, imo.

  Edited to add: I re-read his words carefully and did not find him to be disrespectful or hateful in any way....just opinionated.

  Nor do I think he was insensitive. It's just his style.
• 

  blueviceroy

  No individual should need to refrain from expressing the view they have , ever. Free speech is needed to bring us to a place where we can truly become what we are capable of , the place where our birthright can be returned, where we can be free of fear and longing,

  I would support anyones right to free speech , particularly those who don't agree with me , without dissent no new ideas are possible.
• 

  lovelylil

  I am a Christian and have believed in God all my life. For me religion and God belief is very personal. I don't really care if others believe in God or not and do not feel it is my duty in life to convert everyone to Christianity. I believe that living my life in a certain way, that is in accordance with Christian beliefs, is my witness to unbelievers and they can take it for what it is. My hope is that I will live my life in such a way as to be an example for others and that they will seek out why I am the way I am and then I can give a verbal witness for Christ at that time. However, I don't make it my aim to hit people over the head with the bible at every waking moment and recognize the bible has merit only in the eyes of believers anyway. So, I try to be sensitive to those who do not believe as I do. These are my personal feelings on this matter and I do feel I should be allowed to freely speak about my beliefs but only to a point...........

  The reason I say to a point is that most Christians feel they are under obligation to convert the whole world and sometimes we (myself included as I am a Christian) can sort of get up on a soap box and preach at others in a way that they find offensive. We may also come off at times as seeming to believe we are somehow superior to those who do not share our beliefs and this can understandable make others angry.

  Case in point, although I said earlier I live my life as a Christian to be an example to others, I am NOT saying I am more moral than non-believers or that those who are athiests are not good descent people either. I am simply saying for me, my moral compass is based upon my personal belief in God and his laws (that I believe are contained in the Bible). But of course, others who are of other religious beliefs or who have no belief in a God can be very good examples too and be descent, moral people. So we should not feel superior to anyone else. And in actuality, if we really are a Christian, i.e. follower of Christ, we should not be haughty about it at all and should treat all people in a humble and respectful way regardless of thier beliefs as this is the example Christ set. Sadly, many Christians do have a "holier than thou" attitude many times when dealing with non-believers and so I can understand the hostility we get back sometimes.

  If we are stating our personal beliefs (Christians that is) and someone is strongly against it and the conversation starts to break down into name calling or hurtful feelings, we should end the conversation there and try as hard as we can on our part to keep the peace. I am all for debating God/No God, but I draw the line when it gets heated or into name calling. I think we (believers and unbelievers) can equally make intelligent points for either case but ultimately our belief is still a personal choice we make. And no matter which one it is, should be respected by others.

  And there is merit in the point already made that we cannot 100% prove that God exists but no one can 100% prove he doesn't either. Because the "proof" is in the eye of the beholder. Lilly
• 

  Happy Harvester

  Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

  In the case of fanatics and fundamentalists, absence does make the heart grow fonder.
• 

  cognizant dissident

  Journey On's and Lovelylil's posts have just illustrated beautifully an important (to me) point. The taking of offense at other's viewpoints is largely a choice. They read the exact same posts and responded to it an totally different manner. Not taking offense, they responded thoughtfully from their own viewpoint without sacrificing the integrity of their own beliefs in any way.

  When someone disagrees with us, whether backed up by evidence or not, we can choose to react angrily or respond thoughtfully. If we choose to be hurt, offended, and react angrily, there is usually another underlying core belief underlying that reaction. That belief is usually, "I KNOW I am Right and you are Wrong. Because I am Right, I have a Right to get angry when others do not agree with me". This belief alone is not that dangerous, but it often leads directly into another belief which is very dangerous, namely, "If I am angry and I have a Right to be angry, then I have a Right to behave towards you in a certain way". One example, is to take away another's Right to free speech. After all, they are Wrong! So, they have no Rights! This is where we get onto very dangerous ground. From there, we proceed to justify taking away other Rights. We are on a slippery slope. It is the stuff wars are made of!

  Cog
• 

  sweetstuff

  yet you don’t seem to have a problem offending.

  Choosing to be offended by something written as personal opinion on a forum, is soley on the reader's shoulders.

  Note to self: Don't state your opinions, you might cyber-offend some one.