Why is religion above criticism?

[AlvinofDiaspar]

It's not a topic that is above criticisms - however, sensitivity is called for.

AoD

 

[Hydrogen]

The ads aren't even critical of any religion in my opinion. "There probably is no God" should hardly send a beep on the controversy meter, yet because people peceive it an attack on their personal religion, they stifle the message..

I think this illustrates the over-sensitivity on the part of some religious persons. There is nothing in the ad that makes it a personal attack, yet some individuals choose to take it that way.

What is striking is the fact that a very significant portion of the opposition to this ad is founded on emotion alone, and not any fully-reasoned arguments. The essentially positive suggestion and the use of the word "probably" offers so much wiggle room, it's hard to understand some of the vitriol that has been expressed concerning this ad.

 

[Brian69]

I don't think its above criticism as much as its influence in society has made it risky to criticize. Until recently non-believers (heretics, infidels etc.) have been careful to only criticize outside of the public eye. Even today in the workplace or social situations there's little incentive to criticize religion in case one finds oneself isolated from the majority and a pariah in an environment where one needs to see people regularly. The reward is just not worth the risk. That's why, as Whoaccio mentioned, religious people tend to get together and discuss their thing while the non-religious do the same. However, the latter group usually has to make greater and more careful efforts when doing so.

There's still no way an atheist could become president and I have a feeling any future Canadian Prime Minister would also have a hard time overcoming this obstacle even though the vitriol would be less pronounced up here. Ironically, even as Christianity is taking a hit in Canada in modern times through moderating influences and diminishing numbers the increase of observant immigrants is ensuring religion retains its power though not its exclusivism. I don't think things will change too quickly as far as religion being above criticism is concerned.

I'll add a plug for Maher's film as well. Aside from a few odd ideas about health care Bill Maher is a sharp wit and quite intelligent on the big issues in general and Religulous is worth seeing.

The rise of the Internet as well as bold people such as Richard Dawkins has made a slight impact but its difficult when you're up against thousands of years of belief (even though many belief systems that were quite significant for their times have already risen and fallen, so nobody seem to respect the Sumerian gods, Egyptian gods or Roman gods simply because the followers have disappeared--so much for god being eternal). Would anyone get offended by a bus that said: "There's probably no Zeus, now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

 

[Hydrogen]

I'll be off to Queen Video this week to rent Religulous.


I wonder if we will ever see an admitted atheist take public office in Canada or the United States? Clearly, atheists and agnostics tolerate the admittedly religious pretty well; I wonder if the reverse would be the same?

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

It's not a topic that is above criticisms - however, sensitivity is called for.

AoD

i wouldn't support anyone going up to a religious person and telling them off for no reason or making fun of them (the sensitivity part) but when one wants to question theology and criticize aspects of it which our society has deemed illegal and is harmful, why do people shout bigotry?

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

nobody seem to respect the Sumerian gods, Egyptian gods or Roman gods simply because the followers have disappeared--so much for god being eternal). Would anyone get offended by a bus that said: "There's probably no Zeus, now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

wanna talk about insensitivity? in school, the greek gods were referred to as mythological and the religion of the ancient greeks, nothing more than a myth. i guess it's okay for one religion to bash another as long as there aren't any followers left from the myth. this also ties into the belief that the religion that has the most people is the correct one. how can so many people be wrong i thought?

p.s, brian, you are still banned or censored in many countries.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

I saw on the news this morning a lawsuit has been filed in Ottawa because the bus ads are not allowed. The ads aren't even critical of any religion in my opinion. "There probably is no God" should hardly send a beep on the controversy meter, yet because people peceive it an attack on their personal religion, they stifle the message.

some people believe it is an attack on christianity because it uses the word god. now if the word god references the deity of the christian religion, does that mean that the canadian government has a preference for christianty over all other religions when they mention god? i think any politician should be very careful not to make that connection. one of the reasons that were given why certain spiritual references are still permitted by our government is because they told us that they are not exclusionary and include the deities of other religions (even though realistically, the references can only apply to monotheisms).

 

[urbandreamer]

What if the ad was phrased "g-d?"

Without religion, the world would be very dull.

 

[Whoaccio]

I don't remember Religulous being particularly, umm, good. It is such a juicy topic, and Bil Maher is (imo, at least) a smart person. It was just poorly done though. The interviews were flat and most of the time utterly pointless.Making fun of Mormons, for instance, is a bit like shooting fish in a barrel. If you are going to pick such an easy target he could have at least got some deeper commentary than two people he interviewed. At the end I found it even got sort of preachy, probably the ultimate irony.

 

[gei]

It's time we have this discussion. Our society allows religions a free pass not given to other topics like politics. We see it right here on Urban Toronto.
How do we change it?

I've actually been thinking about that exact thing lately. And I've decided to take it upon myself to change that status.

The thing is, we've been taught all our lives to "tolerate" and "respect" other people's beliefs, and it's hard to get over that.

What I've recently realized, is that I DON'T respect a lot of other people's beliefs. I think religion is stupid, plain and simple. And I think anyone overly religious is just a product of brainwashing and simple-mindedness. I actually freely tell people that now... religious or not. Problem is that some people get offended.... but I really don't care anymore.

Religion is fiction, plain and simple. Anyone who is religious or spends time 'praying' etc etc is really just wasting their time. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc etc... all stupid.

See... it's not above criticism!

 

[digi]

Without religion, the world would be very dull.

Without religion, the world would be at peace....I'll take dull and peaceful over religious wars any day.

 

[urbandreamer]

^What if everyone was either Mennonite or Amish or Old German Baptist Brethern? They are all pacifists.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

we are frequently asked to tolerate views which do not tolerate us.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I think it's not very fair to use the general term "religion" in this thread when the criticisms are directed to the more virulent forms.

AoD

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

I think it's not very fair to use the general term "religion" in this thread when the criticisms are directed to the more virulent forms.

AoD

what do you mean by virulent forms?