I really don't know why you are bringing ethnicity into that except for a reaction and shock effect.
For shock effect? Who do you think I am a member of the Jackass team? I brought it up because I see no difference between people who are persecuted for their ethnicity and those who are persecuted for their beliefs. I'm not sure why you would think I was merely trying to be shocking...
Belief in a god is not a genetic predisposition.
I wouldn't be so fast to assume this. I have tried to articulate many times to this forum that I have searched within my mind and soul and found belief in God to be a requirement. I simply cannot NOT believe in God. Since many people report this internal phenomenon it's safe to say that there might be a set of genes that predispose one to belief in God.
Yes, we do operate on the assumption belief IS a choice. Many believers have stopped believing. And so have proven it is a choice to believe or not.
This is one of the most unscientific things I have ever read from you. First there's no proof that unbelievers have a choice not to believe. It could easily be said that their dissent was predestined by the laws of motion, time and evolution. Many rationalists, including some big minds, see free will to be a human illusion. Which would mean that both my believing and your unbelief are NOT actually choices. So, your experience proves nothing, just as my belief proves nothing, only that it exists and was caused by what was before me.
It is not a stereotype of predudice even though you appear to be trying to make it one.
Yes, it is a prejudice that's my entire point. I have seen and catalogged this over the years I have contributed to this forum. There is certainly a world epidemic of anti-religion/faith and I took part in it when I came here. Eventually, I realized that it was not right and I stopped, which I then had to take heat for, like I am right now from you. The truth always hurts, my dear.
Sometimes some of the things you say really repulse me sab. And I have to say this particular argument of yours is one of those things.
This is only because you are oversensitive. It's really your psychology showing. I am not trying to be mean to you, but you present your cases strongly and pepper them with authoritative language. I get the feeling that you may be a teacher or could be one and I have noticed that those particular types of people loathe a lot of what I have to say. They want the world to be something that it's not, they often look at the world through a lens of perfectionism which effects how they view the actions of others.
I have not said personal attacks are ok. I have said when people believe they are being personally attacked it is not always so.
Of course, but the reverse is also true. That sometimes when someone is personally attacking someone else they don't really know they are doing it. This is most often the case with very logical minds who can rationalize their bad behavior. An emotional person will eventually cool down and see that they were just being emotional. Whereas a logical person will double and triple down on past insults because they don't see them as that, they see them as perfectly logical and descriptive. You are a VERY logical woman, ST, and I have seen you fall into this trap quite a number of times. Logical people still have emotions, they just often logically understand them instead of being in touch with their own feelings. They lean on logic so heavily that they stop seeing their own emotional reactions. This creates gaps of communication and quarrelling.
Attack the belief...attack them...in their minds. Don't like their belief...don't like them...in their minds.
This shows the error in your assumption that believing is a choice. Which is why I brought up racism because it lies at the heart of the assumptions of others involving choice. It's frankly dangerous thinking to think that just because others decided not to believe that belief is a choice for everyone. It's a false conclusion that's lacking in evidence. That's why you wrongly think that believers are secretly feeling not liked. It's not that believers think they are not liked, it's that they want to be able to speak and be heard just as much as the next person. They don't want to face ridicule if they have an idea that's a little silly. Rationalists on this forum have a lot of fear that they don't admit. I have tried to bring it up a few times, but it's slammed back down which just serves as evidence of the fear rather than a lack thereof. This is an issue of freedom of speech, religion and expression. If you think otherwise then you are simply going to be off track in discussions with believers on this topic.
I'm not talking about blatant personal comments like...you're an alcoholic
If someone is showing signs of alcoholism it's not an insult to bring it up. Ever hear of an intervention?
An intervention is an orchestrated attempt by one or many people – usually family and friends – to get someone to seek professional help with an addiction or some kind of traumatic event or crisis, or other serious problem. The term intervention is most often used when the traumatic event involves addiction to drugs or other items. Intervention can also refer to the act of using a similar technique within a therapy session. Interventions have been used to address serious personal problems, including, but not limited to, alcoholism, compulsive gambling , drug abuse , compulsive eating and other eating disorders , self harm and being the victim of abuse.
You can dislike an opinion and not dislike the poster. I have never disliked you sab....but I do find some of what you write distasteful.
I have not once ever thought you didn't like me, ST, quite the opposite, actually. You have shown a lot of patience with me as I know what I have to say is not always palatable for you. I look at you as a strong leader in your community and a great person and parent. Frankly, you and I could easily hang out, but there would be some heated discussions no doubt.
-Sab
