Respect

[3sigma]

What other motives do they have, when it comes to discussing the Christian faith, other than to criticize or denigrate, whether implicitly or explicitly, that faith?

You seem to think that the Christian faith should not be criticized. It’s as though you are demanding it should be respected regardless of whether it is worthy of respect or not. In that case, how about answering the questions in the OP?

Is respect gained by being demanded or by being earned? For example, if I demanded that you respect my views, would you be more inclined or less inclined to respect my views and me as a person or would it make no difference? What if I tried to force you to respect my views? What would you think of my views and me then?

 

[Zebra1552]

Will you give me respect if I don’t give you respect?

I try my best to always give respect to people no matter what. I find your question a bit off topic to what I'm talking about. I'm talking about taking the initiative and showing respect first. I've found in almost every single case, with maybe one or two exceptions, that I don't have to do anything more than give respect first. Their respect to me naturally flows from it.

 

[3sigma]

I'm talking about taking the initiative and showing respect first. I've found in almost every single case, with maybe one or two exceptions, that I don't have to do anything more than give respect first.

Thank you for clarifying that. However, that still doesn’t answer the questions in the OP.

If I demanded that you respect my views, would you be more inclined or less inclined to respect my views and me as a person or would it make no difference? What if I tried to force you to respect my views? What would you think of my views and me then?

 

[Tzaousios]

You seem to think that the Christian faith should not be criticized.

No, actually I do not think that. However, I do have problems with the ways in which "criticism" of the Christian faith is carried out. I am sure you have problems with the ways criticism of atheist is carried out as well.

It’s as though you are demanding it should be respected regardless of whether it is worthy of respect or not.

You have a point here. In fact, I think that by nature and definition, the criticisms that atheism has for the Christian faith is disrespectful as well as disingenuous in many ways.

There is no way for atheists to approach the criticism of the Christian faith respectfully because of the presuppositions and irreconcilable epistemological and methodological stances that they take at the outset. Atheists expect nothing less from Christians than an absolute recantation of their faith as a result of "discussion" and "criticism."

Is respect gained by being demanded or by being earned? For example, if I demanded that you respect my views, would you be more inclined or less inclined to respect my views and me as a person or would it make no difference? What if I tried to force you to respect my views? What would you think of my views and me then?

Well, like I said, this is often determined by the context of the discussion. It is more likely to happen in discussions between Christians. There are always exceptions, obviously. On the other hand, considering the intent and motive of most atheists in "discussions" of the Christian faith, the way in which respect is asked for and given is often one-sided.

 

[Zebra1552]

Thank you for clarifying that. However, that still doesn’t answer the questions in the OP.

If I demanded that you respect my views, would you be more inclined or less inclined to respect my views and me as a person or would it make no difference? What if I tried to force you to respect my views? What would you think of my views and me then?

Forgive me for being frank, but I did indeed answer your OP. Your OP, as my third option demonstrates, is a false dilemma.

 

[Penumbra]

"I’m using the dictionary meaning of the verb respect, which is to consider worthy of high regard and to refrain from interfering with."

If that's the definition used, then my answer is that it depends.

I think respect for someone's worth as a person and respect for basic human rights is reasonable to be demanded. On the other hand, I think that respect for a set of views is to be earned.

No one can demand me to respect their views, to consider them "worthy of high regard" if I honestly don't consider them to be of high regard. But they can demand from me, and I expect them to demand from me to respect them as a person.

-Lyn

 

[3sigma]

Forgive me for being frank, but I did indeed answer your OP. Your OP, as my third option demonstrates, is a false dilemma.

The OP gave three options. It was hardly a false dilemma. Again, if I demanded that you respect my views, would you be more inclined or less inclined to respect my views and me as a person or would it make no difference? Your response was a non sequitur as far as that question is concerned. It was an evasion of the question. I’ll give you my answer to the question and perhaps that will aid you in answering it.

When someone demands that I respect his or her views, it makes no difference to my evaluation of the views. The views stand or fall on their own merit. If the views are sound, reasonable and humane then they are worthy of regard. If the views are unsound, unreasonable or inhumane then they are not worthy of high regard and the mere fact that the person demands that I respect the views should not and will not prevent me from challenging them. When someone demands that I respect his or her views then I lose some respect for that person’s ability to reason or make a sound argument. When people try to force me to respect their views, particularly when those views are unsound, unreasonable or inhumane, I think it shows a serious flaw in their character.

 

[Zebra1552]

The OP gave three options. It was hardly a false dilemma. Again, if I demanded that you respect my views, would you be more inclined or less inclined to respect my views and me as a person or would it make no difference? Your response was a non sequitur as far as that question is concerned. It was an evasion of the question. I’ll give you my answer to the question and perhaps that will aid you in answering it.

First of all, I'm Godschild87, not Shinbits. Second, this is your OP:

Is respect gained by being demanded or by being earned? For example, if I demanded that you respect my views, would you be more inclined or less inclined to respect my views and me as a person or would it make no difference? What if I tried to force you to respect my views? What would you think of my views and me then?

I'm not blind and I'm not stupid. You gave two options, not 3.

 

[Tzaousios]

I'm not blind and I'm not stupid. You gave two options, not 3.

Careful, respect is and will be demanded from you.

 

[Zebra1552]

Careful, respect is and will be demanded from you.

I'm quite certain our friend is more intelligent than to stoop to that. Try not to insult that intelligence.

 

[3sigma]

First of all, I'm Godschild87, not Shinbits.

My apologies.

Second, this is your OP:

Is respect gained by being demanded or by being earned? For example, if I demanded that you respect my views, would you be more inclined or less inclined to respect my views and me as a person or would it make no difference? What if I tried to force you to respect my views? What would you think of my views and me then?

I'm not blind and I'm not stupid. You gave two options, not 3.

Oh come on. You would have to be wilfully blind not to notice that the OP contained more than one question and that the other questions were the main questions. It should have been obvious to any reasonable person that the OP was asking how you would react to someone demanding or trying to force you to respect his or her views, yet you chose to ignore those questions and concentrate on the preamble instead. Then, twice more, you ignored those questions even though I repeated them specifically in posts [post=53777037]43[/post] and [post=53779385]47[/post]. It seems quite clear that you are deliberately evading the main questions in the OP. Please answer the main questions from the OP or explain why you are so reluctant to answer those questions?

 

[3sigma]

In fact, I think that by nature and definition, the criticisms that atheism has for the Christian faith is disrespectful as well as disingenuous in many ways.

The main criticism that atheists have of the Christian faith is that it is based on unsubstantiated claims. If you think that pointing out that fact is disrespectful then I’m sorry, but that’s just reality.

Well, like I said, this is often determined by the context of the discussion. It is more likely to happen in discussions between Christians. There are always exceptions, obviously. On the other hand, considering the intent and motive of most atheists in "discussions" of the Christian faith, the way in which respect is asked for and given is often one-sided.

I’m sorry, but this rambling, hedging response didn’t answer my questions. I didn’t ask about discussions between Christians. I asked about specific examples of the way in which respect is requested. Could you answer the specific questions, please? If I demanded that you respect my views, would you be more inclined or less inclined to respect my views and me as a person or would it make no difference? What if I tried to force you to respect my views? What would you think of my views and me then?

 

[Zebra1552]

Oh come on. You would have to be wilfully blind not to notice that the OP contained more than one question and that the other questions were the main questions.

Why would I assume that your 'other questions' were the 'main questions'. You put 'for example' in front of them! If it's an example, it's not the main thing you're saying.

It should have been obvious to any reasonable person that the OP was asking how you would react to someone demanding or trying to force you to respect his or her views, yet you chose to ignore those questions and concentrate on the preamble instead.

Your 'preamble' was followed by 'for example'. There was nothing to indicate that anything BUT the preamble was the main question.

Then, twice more, you ignored those questions even though I repeated them specifically in posts [post=53777037]43[/post] and [post=53779385]47[/post].

As I have told you many times before, I do not answer false dilemmas, or questions that limit my answer to a preset and clearly narrow way of thinking that you propose. I fail to see why I should answer with some preset idea. The topic is about respect, and you asked, "Is respect gained by being demanded or by being earned?" I don't believe it's gained by being demanded OR earned. As I've already demonstrated, I believe it is a choice. If you do not like that answer, tough. Deal with it.

It seems quite clear that you are deliberately evading the main questions in the OP. Please answer the main questions from the OP or explain why you are so reluctant to answer those questions?

I have already explained why your questions are too limiting: your questions do not include enough options to them. You want me to answer in some preset way, and I believe that there is more to life than your preset answers. Thus, a false dilemma.

Speaking of respect, if you're concerned about it, you might try showing it to those whose opinions you are seeking.

 

[Tzaousios]

The main criticism that atheists have of the Christian faith is that it is based on unsubstantiated claims. If you think that pointing out that fact is disrespectful then I’m sorry, but that’s just reality.

Yes, you are right, I should have just assumed the role of the self-depricating Christian and then proceeded to recant my faith. Sorry to displease.

I’m sorry, but this rambling, hedging response didn’t answer my questions.

Translation: "Rambling, hedging response" = not playing the denigration game or recanting the Christian faith.

Could you answer the specific questions, please? If I demanded that you respect my views, would you be more inclined or less inclined to respect my views and me as a person or would it make no difference? What if I tried to force you to respect my views? What would you think of my views and me then?

Hmm, let me guess where this is going. Does it have to do with blasphemy legislation, Christians wanting to force their views on everyone else, and Christians not owning up to the Flood, conquest of Canaan, Crusades, Inquisition, and witch hunts?

 

[pdudgeon]

by 3sigma

The main criticism that atheists have of the Christian faith is that it is based on unsubstantiated claims. If you think that pointing out that fact is disrespectful then I’m sorry, but that’s just reality.

it's not disrespectful at all. at least it gives us a starting point of conversation. in return, i think the problem most Christians have in answering those critics is in finding what it is that they will accept as proof of the claims.
everyone has their own opinions, and i find no problem with respecting a person's right to hold an opinion which differs from my own. Finding the common ground between two opinions is where we can begin to have a dialogue with each other, provided both are willing to discuss.

where the problems come is when one side insists that they are absolutely in the right, and the other side is absolutely in the wrong. there are absolutes in the world, but it's not often that long-held opinions will change abruptly just because of one well-phrased arguement. what is more often the case is that something will be said in a timely manner, and interest will be pricked to examine an idea more closely. And if the idea can stand up to the examination and be found to be true and reasonable, then by logical deduction, however improbable, it must be so.

 

[Maren]

Examine 3sigma's recent posts before this thread and I think you will get a good idea. There are many others who follow the same pattern. Somehow, though, I think you already know what I am talking about.

So basically you've condemned all athiests, are stereotyping them, even before you talk to them?

And what, may I ask, is this attitude?

Being condescending and, as I mentioned above, that you are pre-judging and condemning them prior to knowing what their motives are or if they respect you.

What other motives do they have, when it comes to discussing the Christian faith, other than to criticize or denigrate, whether implicitly or explicitly, that faith?

Maybe motive little different than that of many Christians who come to the areas that non-Christians are allowed to post on Christian forums. Perhaps they find that many Christians misunderstand them or pre-judge their motivations and they are trying to build bridges of understanding between themselves and Christians.

Or maybe they are trying to explain to Christians -- who are a powerful force in American politics and society -- their political views.

It is either this or to gather information on how Christians talk about their faith and the types of argumentation that they use so as to better criticize their faith.

See, you provide two options, both negative and rather cynical, about the motivations of all atheists. And then you wonder why these same atheists are cynical and condescending to all Christians -- it is because they happen to meet Christians daily in the world who a rude, cynical, and condescending to them for being atheists.

You know, like the Christians in North Carolina who are trying to remove a city councilman for being an atheist. Or how last election, Elizabeth Dole accused her competitor of taking "godless money" and even insinuated in the ad that her competitor was "godless". Basically, atheists are being made out to be some type of "boogeymen" who don't believe the way 'we' do.

What's even more ironic is that there are Christians that actually do this type of thing to non-Christians. Christians often study the thoughts and arguments of non-Christians and atheists in order, not just to counter the arguments, but to convert the non-Christians. In fact, there are entire Christian websites on the 'net devoted to how to witness to atheists and other groups, such as HowToWitness.com.

Apparently Christians are various kinds of animals in cages to be studied and dissected.

Persecution complex much? This comment is just way over the top, especially with how atheists aren't trying to remove people from office for the sole offense of being Christian (or trying to keep them from donating money by demonizing the candidate who took that money). Not to mention the fact that I've seen comments on this site saying they would prevent atheists from holding public office, if they could.

Then again, I've already mentioned how many Christians do this type of thing to non-Christians in order to learn to witness to them -- so maybe you're just projecting your own purposes onto atheists?

Well, there are always exceptions. I am quite willing to be surprised by an atheist who is willing to show respect to Christians and to want to discuss their beliefs for other reasons than those that I listed above.

I wouldn't. I've seen atheists here who are willing to show respect. I personally find that it is a few who don't try to be respectful. At the same time, I've found some Christians can't be respectful either, and things get worse because sometimes a few will make the entire debate seem like neither side is wanting to listen or debate but merely demonize the other side.

As for unorthodox or liberal Christians, I can tell you personally that I have tried to maintain a level of respect when discussing things with them.

And that is good of you. Unfortunately there are far too many that don't. To give an example of it, there was this thread about a Mormon missionary being murdered a couple of years back. From what I recall, there were about 20 messages on that thread all bashing the missionary/the Mormons -- again, all of the posts were that way. Which is why the second post on the thread is the moderator saying the thread was cleaned and to refrain from bashing but to be respectful of the person that lost their life.

If these Christians can't even be respectful of a person who, though of a different belief, gave his life in the service of what he believed, how do you think they treat others here who don't have a belief?

 

[RocketRed]

I feel that it's rather unfair to judge anyone by anything but their own actions. To say, for example, that all atheists will do x, y and z is a rash generalization. No one is their social group. Are they're disrespectful atheists? Sure, but there are respectful ones too. Same goes for Christians. Same goes for any social group.

It is best to take it on a case-by-case basis. To me the golden rule is always to never assume anything like that of a person. Otherwise, it creates this defensiveness, this preemptive rancor that is rather unnecessary.

Everyone's going to have different motives and reasons for the things they do. In this case, yes, some atheists are trying to launch an attack. But are all of them? Or even most? Unlikely. I don't believe in judging an entire group of people by the words and actions of their loudest. I believe that it's much easier to give each person a chance to present themselves on their own merits instead of those of their social group.

 

[3sigma]

As I have told you many times before, I do not answer false dilemmas, or questions that limit my answer to a preset and clearly narrow way of thinking that you propose.

I think you are clutching at straws to find an excuse not to answer the questions. The question “If I demanded that you respect my views…” gave you three options: would you be more inclined to respect them; less inclined; or would it make no difference. What other answer options to that question are possible? Or is it that you think the whole premise is preposterous; that no one would ever demand or try to force people to respect their views?

 

[3sigma]

Hmm, let me guess where this is going. Does it have to do with blasphemy legislation, Christians wanting to force their views on everyone else…

Is that why you are reluctant to answer the questions? Do you recognize these traits in Christians, but you want to avoid acknowledging them? Do you think that Christians would say that we are required to respect their beliefs, even if we do not share them? Do you think that Christians would try to force people to respect their beliefs by threatening them with imprisonment or death if they disrespect their God? Would Christians actually do such things?

 

[Tzaousios]

So basically you've condemned all athiests, are stereotyping them, even before you talk to them?

Being condescending and, as I mentioned above, that you are pre-judging and condemning them prior to knowing what their motives are or if they respect you.

How was I condescending? It seems you are basing your perception of my attitude upon a preconceived notion of how some Christians act.

Also, it does not seem that you bothered investigating how I have formed my ideas of the motives of atheists based on the ones I have encountered here at CF. Or, perhaps you might think that atheists such as 3sigma have pure and good intentions and motives and represent the right way in which atheists should conduct themselves.

Maybe motive little different than that of many Christians who come to the areas that non-Christians are allowed to post on Christian forums. Perhaps they find that many Christians misunderstand them or pre-judge their motivations and they are trying to build bridges of understanding between themselves and Christians.

Oh? What kind of "little different" motives are these? I would especially like to know if they are more positive and respectful than to criticize the Christian faith as being a fairytale, the God that Christians serve as being a murderous, genocidal, evil being, and to convince Christians to recant their faith as the expected result of any discussion.

Or maybe they are trying to explain to Christians -- who are a powerful force in American politics and society -- their political views.

Sure, Christianity is merely an element of the superstructure and all of its practioners suffer from false consciousness and cognitive dissonance, right?

See, you provide two options, both negative and rather cynical, about the motivations of all atheists. And then you wonder why these same atheists are cynical and condescending to all Christians -- it is because they happen to meet Christians daily in the world who a rude, cynical, and condescending to them for being atheists.

Like I said earlier, there are probably exceptions to the norm and I am always willing to be pleasantly surprised.

You know, like the Christians in North Carolina who are trying to remove a city councilman for being an atheist. Or how last election, Elizabeth Dole accused her competitor of taking "godless money" and even insinuated in the ad that her competitor was "godless". Basically, atheists are being made out to be some type of "boogeymen" who don't believe the way 'we' do.

What's even more ironic is that there are Christians that actually do this type of thing to non-Christians. Christians often study the thoughts and arguments of non-Christians and atheists in order, not just to counter the arguments, but to convert the non-Christians. In fact, there are entire Christian websites on the 'net devoted to how to witness to atheists and other groups, such as HowToWitness.com.

Wow, it seems you had been wanting to get this out there. Do you feel better now?

What are some of the positive and respectful motives that atheists have towards discussing faith with Christians that you have come across?

Persecution complex much? This comment is just way over the top, especially with how atheists aren't trying to remove people from office for the sole offense of being Christian (or trying to keep them from donating money by demonizing the candidate who took that money). Not to mention the fact that I've seen comments on this site saying they would prevent atheists from holding public office, if they could.

No, the comment is not "way over the top." That is a description that you are using to label my comment in order to make it appear as such. In the end, it only shows to whom you are partial. Although there are sites which discuss witnessing, there are also many atheist forums whose main purpose, or at least in which there is a specific venue, to do exactly the things I mentioned.

Then again, I've already mentioned how many Christians do this type of thing to non-Christians in order to learn to witness to them -- so maybe you're just projecting your own purposes onto atheists?

No, I am not projecting my purpose onto atheists. In fact, I have my own ideas about presenting the Gospel which does not include infiltrating atheist forums, legislating morality, and standing on university quads with signs and screaming.

If these Christians can't even be respectful of a person who, though of a different belief, gave his life in the service of what he believed, how do you think they treat others here who don't have a belief?

I agree on this point. It is a wilfull sin that they are accountable for, in my opinion. However, I do not think that an orthodox Christian has to agree with an unorthodox Christian's theology in order to be respectful.