• moistclump@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I struggled a lot when I lost my faith. I truly believe I’m better off now but I don’t take other people’s spiritual paths lightly. You go to dark places when you haven’t learned how to cope otherwise.

    • Sekrayray@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, and also I wouldn’t go out of my way to shit on someone who believes we live in a simulation. Simulation theory is sort of plausible with our current understanding of tech—but right now it has just as much evidence as most religions (which is none for both). So yeah, I don’t think it’s good practice to try and dunk on people for their beliefs.

    • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I had the opposite experience. I was convinced I was going to hell and that there was nothing I could do about it, so I thought I may as well be glutinous and selfish to enjoy my time here before getting tortured for eternity. It caused me some serious trauma, and on top of that it led to me hurting family and friends.

      I don’t think I could’ve ever left my self-loathing and selfishness behind if I didn’t let go of my religion.

  • Rediphile@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Free will also isn’t real, but I don’t go around to people I know and care about trying to collapse their entire world view around it. Sometimes it’s better if people believe in fundamentally incorrect things that don’t impact others.

    Edit: here’s a crazy idea, if you think I’m wrong…that’s ok. Just leave me be? Maybe? Isn’t that the point of my entire initial comment. Lol.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      If everything is predestined, whatever you choose is your destiny. Which means you get to choose your destiny. Even if the decision is already determined, your decision process is a part of that and whatever you decide is what becomes the future (or present). Predetermination is irrelevant unless it can be seen beforehand, but if it could, that knowledge could be acted on to change it. So either you can see the future and change it, or you can’t so there’s no functional difference between it being indeterminate.

      • Rediphile@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I agree entirely with your comment and I experience the illusion of free will. I just recognize it’s an illusion.

    • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      If you define “free will” as individual processing of input based on your genetic makeup and past experiences/memories and circumstances, with some inherent randomness. Then i guess free will is real.

  • gmtom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    The neckbeardsover at atheiedtmemes@lemmy.world would be cumming in their pants if this happened to them.

  • Leviathan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Why would I want to convince my mom good isn’t real? Are any atheists who weren’t already dickbags doing this?

  • meyotch@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    This is why I may never be able to fully repair my relationship with my religious father after my own journey out, because I love him too much to undermine the belief that sustains him as an 87 year old.

    My own journey out has been incredibly painful and challenging but that is MY life path, not his. He stuck with my mother for 25 years to the very end after her Parkinsons diagnosis and he got to watch her choke to death on some food at the end.

    I really believe my father doesn’t need the religion to be that good and faithful, because he is just basically made of good stuff. But I will never attack his faith even though in my heart of hearts I find the foundations of that faith to be risible. What would be gained? What would it say about me if I did?

    • billwashere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      My philosophy is if they are truly happy with what they believe and aren’t harming other people with vitriolic speech or dogmatic beliefs just leave them be. It’s not harming anything for them to comfortable in their little bubble.

      But when they put on their “holier than thou … I know better and I am going to push my beliefs on you” hat the gloves are off. Although it’s unlikely you’ll change their mind, you can usually score a few jabs that rock their world just a smidgeon.

    • systemglitch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, I have no desire to “change” anyone either. As long as they are decent people, that’s enough for me.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      All I want is an apology for forcing their religion onto me so aggressively as a child. I don’t think that is too much to ask, but they sure seem to think it is.

      • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        not even an apology. I don’t need anyone to be sorry. The nuns who beat me will never be sorry, they think that they’re doing it for God and nothing can be wrong when you’re doing it for God. But if one of the other adults that I trust could at least say ‘Hey, they shouldn’t have beat you with sticks. They were wrong for that.’ it would make me feel like maybe I wasn’t a fucking crazy person for not wanting to get beat with sticks. But they won’t. Everyone pretends it didn’t happen, or that it was some sort of misunderstanding, because everyone needs to maintain the delusion that everything the church does is good just because it’s the church doing it. For years I was essentially told “that didn’t happen because the church wouldn’t do that but if they did it’s because you deserved it”. What can a six year old do to deserve being beaten with a yardstick by a grown woman?

      • rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        If yo momma is crying, it’s probably because I ain’t been up for a booty call in a few days.

        • masquenox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          it’s probably because I ain’t been up for a booty call in a few days.

          Yeah… your inability to get it up is not my momma’s problem.

    • Signtist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m certainly not religious, but I understand that a lot of people use religion to supplement a lacking support network. Yes, they should find healthier ways to receive the support they need, but if you force them to abandon their religion without having another source of support to replace it, they’re going to feel very isolated and scared, possibly leading to tears. Especially if their son forced them into that situation and then immediately left, showing complete disregard for their feelings.

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      "Hey, you know that belief system that attempts to answer the great unanswerable questions and gives you some shred of comfort? Nah, you live in an unfeeling, uncaring world. There is nothing, no great answer. Just living until you die.

      Why are you crying?"

      If you call yourself an atheist vs agnostic, I immediately just see an edgy teenager who wants to be confrontational. Not someone seeking actual answers or discussion. Most of the greatest scientific thinkers acknowledge that science is the answer to “how?”, but not “why?”. We simply don’t have that answer. Anyone claiming to is arrogant at best.

      • Cyrus Draegur@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        You live in a universe whose only source of joy, hope, inspiration, and meaning is sapient minds like yours. The entire observable cosmos has so far turned out to be nothing but dead rocks, dead dust, and dead gas, except for beings like you. Your very existence is an act of defiance worthy of pride. Stand tall, sophont. Create the future you wish to see, for YOUR KIND are the only ones who you’ve met who are capable of bringing it about!

      • GlitterInfection@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        So your arguments for agnosticism over atheism is that you don’t want to make religious people feel uncomfortable and science isn’t philosophy?

          • Skates@feddit.nl
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            What are you on about? Atheism is rejecting a ridiculous belief system. There is nothing for atheists to prove, they made no claims. Religion is the one making claims, so it’s on them to prove it. Atheism simply says “no thanks, the evidence you provide is insufficient and I don’t believe you”.

            • DaGeek247@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Atheism is trying to prove a negative

              What are you on about? Atheism is rejecting a ridiculous belief system.

              Y’all are arguing the same thing with these two sentences.

              There is nothing for atheists to prove, they made no claims. Religion is the one making claims, so it’s on them to prove it. Atheism simply says “no thanks, the evidence you provide is insufficient and I don’t believe you”.

              That sounds like trying to disprove a negative to me. Just because it’s an absurd negative doesn’t mean it’s not impossible to disprove it.

              I don’t want to get into all the nitty gritty, but the weight against the big sky person is “we definitely don’t see it.” and the argument for the big sky person is “we definitely feel it.”

              Y’all are both spending a lot of time arguing about the big sky person regardless of your stance.

              *edit actually, i just saw this comment, and i’m not gonna argue with that.

        • rutellthesinful@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          how on earth was that your takeaway from that comment?

          neither science nor philosophy can provide objective truth in answer to the question “is there a god?”

          it’s edgy teen territory to act like they can

          • GlitterInfection@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Their first part is a short work of fiction about making a religious person feel bad.

            Their second is saying that science doesn’t answer the question “why.”

            Philosophy asks “why” at least it does here on Earth.

            • rutellthesinful@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              The first part is a response to “why would somebody be sad if their religion turned out to be false”, which for the record, if you need it explained to you why that might be, you’re really earning that “edgy teenager” label.

              The second is saying that there’s literally no way to be sure of answers on the scale of “is there a god?”, science included

              Philosophy asks some “why?” questions, but if you think it’s equipped to definitively answer all of them you don’t know much about philosophy.

          • Skates@feddit.nl
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            neither science nor philosophy can provide objective truth in answer to the question “is there a god?”

            That’s a loaded question. What type of god? You wanna define it before you ask if it exists.

            And after you define it, you can also gather all the proof that it exists and you can present it to science and to philosophy. And they will look at all that proof and say “X”. Because they doubt.

            But it’s still on you to prove your claim that there is a god, if you believe it. If you’re just on the sidelines asking because you’re not sure - there’s a simpler answer: yes, there is a god. It is me. And I need about 10% of your monthly income. Get in touch, I’ll send you some details where you can donate your share. In return, I will of course love you unconditionally until you slightly annoy me with your lifestyle (which I already know you will, I am omniscient and I literally made you this way, you have no choice in the matter), at which point you will know my vengeance, for I am the Lord. Throughout this period where I exact my retribution, the expectation is that you’ll shut up and take it, and never forget about that 10% you owe me. Otherwise I will literally put you through hell.

            If you somehow doubt ANY of these claims, for reasons like “why would God contact me on the internet, or need my money, or hate me for how he made me”, or any of these silly questions, just remember - neither science nor philosophy can provide objective truth in answer to the question “is there a god?”. Just like they can’t provide objective truth to “is god that dude on lemmy?”

            • rutellthesinful@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              That’s a loaded question. What type of god? You wanna define it before you ask if it exists.

              given that we’re very clearly talking in the context of a christian god here, I’m not sure what additional information you need

              but what if i’m god ha ha he he

              this is just that edgy teenager shit again

              • Skates@feddit.nl
                cake
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Nope. I’m God. Please remember, you have as much evidence I am not, as I have that god doesn’t exist.

                And just for that “edgy teenager” comment, I’ll put a word in to make sure you’re tortured by the devil with the most jagged penis.

                • rutellthesinful@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Please remember, you have as much evidence I am not, as I have that god doesn’t exist.

                  you’re still behaving as if i’m trying to convince you of the existence of a god, rather than you trying to convince me that one doesn’t exist

                  do you understand the difference?

      • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Agnosticism was coined because people were afraid of coming out as atheists, but it’s really the same thing.

        Atheist thinks there’s no evidence for god so it doesn’t make sense to believe in one.

        Agnostic thinks there’s no evidence for god, so it’s unlikely there’s one.

        In both cases, the person is science first and would change their opinion if proof was presented but before that they don’t believe in god.

        • Pennomi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          That’s not what agnostic means. Agnostics believe “there is no way to know”, so you can have Agnostic Theists (we can’t know for sure, but I believe God exists) as well as Agnostic Atheists (we can’t know for sure, but I don’t believe God exists).

          The opposite is gnosticism, and you can similarly have Gnostic Theists (God exists and I can prove it) and Gnostic Atheists (God doesn’t exist, and I can prove it).

          • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Looks like I made a small mistake, but it just takes agnostic closer to atheist

            The English biologist Thomas Henry Huxley coined the word agnostic in 1869, and said "It simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe

            • Pennomi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Most agnostics are atheists because the evidence always favors atheism. But there really are a handful of agnostic theists out there!

              • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                So what you’re saying is that there’s people who don’t believe that god(s) exist but they believe in it/them anyways?

                Or they believe in some trash evidence for the existence of god

                • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  Simpler: he’s saying that there are people who believe in something, but they don’t claim to know it.

                  For example. I brew some coffee at 14:00. Now it’s 18:00. I believe that my coffee is still warm, but I don’t know it - because I have no data to back up that knowledge. I can however generate said knowledge by grabbing a cup of coffee. (I just did it. It’s warm.)

                  What the agnostic theists do is like that. With a key difference: they cannot generate said knowledge, and they know it. They cannot grab that cup of coffee.

                • Pennomi@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  No, they are agnostic theists, which means that they believe there is no way to know if god exists or not, but they believe in god anyway.

                  Agnosticism is about believing whether the existence of god is testable, not about whether god actually exists or not.

                  Obviously the vast majority of agnostics are also atheists, because it’s silly to believe in something for which there is no evidence. But there are some few who feel that god is out there even if we cannot know for sure.

      • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Just like nobody knows for certain if centaurs or the Tooth Fairy actually exist or not. Right.

        …I can certainly relate to the idea that we cannot fully comprehend reality. No, seriously, I do; and I’m often ranting against assumers claiming to know shit that they cannot reliably know*.

        But, at the end of the day, this shit is supposed to be practical, not some mental masturbation over the metaphysical fabric of the reality. You need to draw the line somewhere and say “nah, this is likely enough to be bullshit that we can safely say «it’s bullshit»”. Otherwise your “agnosticism” is simply a fancy name for solipsism.

        *for example, implying that they know who says it (edgy teenager) and “intention” (to be confrontational), based on the label that one might use (atheist). That stinks assumption from a distance, like it or not.

      • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        attempts to answer the great unanswerable

        I can also try to do that, where is my money?

        gives you some shred of comfort

        I mean if lying to yourself and others gives you comfort, then my point stands that you need help

        unfeeling, uncaring world

        Absolutely not, otherwise i would have written “she can go fuck herself”, but i didnt because people deserve better than being forced to believe in some century old mental mindgame of bullshit.

        Just living until you die.

        Thats correct, but life is amazing and full of cool stuff already. There is no need to limit your happiness with some archaic system of self oppression.

        • lath@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I can also try to do that, where is my money?

          You lack the charisma of a televangelist and the backing of a wealthy group to lobby against taxing your gains.

          I mean if lying to yourself and others gives you comfort, then my point stands that you need help

          Truth hurts and most people don’t like being in pain most of the time.

          Absolutely not, otherwise i would have written “she can go fuck herself”, but i didnt because people deserve better than being forced to believe in some century old mental mindgame of bullshit.

          You assume they are being forced and not do so willingly. Those looking for stability tend to cling to ideas that don’t change multiple times over the course of their life. An ancient religion is considerably more stable than the ever-changing discoveries of science.

          Thats correct, but life is amazing and full of cool stuff already. There is no need to limit your happiness with some archaic system of self oppression.

          Most people don’t get to see those. Each individual has a limited experience through life and we all tend to take for granted the idea that we all experience the same things in the same way. We don’t.

          If you can’t understand why someone would cling to religion, at least try to understand that the same can be said about them regarding you.

        • Pennomi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          People who have grown up in a culture of religion assume that there’s nothing but pain in atheism, when actually it’s quite liberating. The intellectual honesty of atheism is simple, refreshing, and empowering. I for one have never been more at peace with myself.

          It turns out that fearmongering about death (eg. most religious teachings of an afterlife) perpetuates the fear of death. Atheists must make peace with the reality of the universe and when they do the fear simply goes away.

      • GlitterInfection@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        You messaged me directly rather than responding in the thread, but messaging back is failing, so I will respond here.

        There is no theory involving deities that fits the models of the universe we have based on observable evidence, and there is no evidence in support of any theory involving deities.

        For anything else we would say that this thing doesn’t exist and leave it at that.

        Agnosticism gets lost in the fallacy that since it’s logically impossible to prove non-existence we must hold open the possibility of existence without evidence.

        So I’m an atheist because it is the default state to be, it makes no statement requiring evidence, and it doesn’t require fallacy.

      • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Nah, you live in an unfeeling, uncaring world. There is nothing, no great answer. Just living until you die.

        I don’t agree with that other guy, but now you’re just wrestling with a straw man. Nobody says these things.

        Nature and physics may not have the capacity to care about you, but you have friends, family, and pets that do whether God exists or not. And there’s plenty of questions that seem like we won’t get an answer for the foreseeable future, but that doesn’t mean you can’t find any meaning or joy in trying, or that you can’t tackle smaller questions that could build up to answering a greater one.

        Just living until you die.

        This part is particularly cartoonish. Nobody says life is just living until you die. That’s a debatably bigoted caricature that Christians invented.

        We live the same lives theists do, and we have just as many meaningful experiences and relationships. We just don’t sacrifice enormous amounts of our time worshiping or thinking about something that can’t be shown to exist unless you take someone’s word for it.

      • brenticus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        There are lots of ways to approach meaning, and more broadly spirituality and community, without theism.

        This is a weird take on atheism that reads like you’ve only seen atheists online creeping out of /r/atheism or some similar place. There’s no more reason that “why” should be answered by Christianity than by any number of philosophies that don’t require a god, and pegging someone as arrogant for ascribing to those beliefs is silly.

  • GlitterInfection@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    She’s crying because she realized that she could buy a second home if she hadn’t been foolishly donating to the church all this time.

  • SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Be pragmatic in your atheism advocacy. Lay out your arguments why supernatural thinking is bad, both from an epistemological and pragmatic sense, poke at contradictions of the other person’s religion with reality, and warn about the dangers of organized religion specifically, just don’t cross the line of actually engaging in nuclear warfare.

    If they haven’t been brainwashed enough, they’ll bite, even if it takes them months. If they have been brainwashed enough but they have intellectual honesty and curiosity, they may begin a self-questioning process themselves that will eventually make them crash, and it will be painful, but once they get recovered they’ll be grateful. If they don’t have that intellectual honesty, you’ve at least planted the potential seeds for them to decide at some later point that superstition was indeed bullshit, which may or may not come into fruition in the future. If the person you’re talking with is an intellectual donkey (in terms of unwillingness to reason), you have nothing to gain from that conversation.

    When it comes to old religious people, though, I limit myself to relentlessly attacking the church. Due to their material conditions, they have the lowest chance to ever leaving their beliefs anyway, so my goal is just to make them wary of any dumbfuck hate preacher they may find.

    • spiderwort@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Meh. All reasoning is grounded in emotion. Even atheistic reasoning. That’s why argumentation does zip. It’s like trying to fix a warped floor by moving the rug around.

  • bl_r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I’m an athiest, and I generally believe that religion can be easily used to be shitty towards others and push them to being the worst type of people in life (more generally this happens with all ideologies). But for many religious people they aren’t too different compared to an athiest. They might go to church only on the holidays, or maybe they go weekly. They probably have many religious values. But at the end of the day they often make similar decisions for different reasons.

    But I genuinely believe that trying to convince people that god isn’t real is super shitty and counter-productive. Show some compassion you fucking deodorant-free 🤓-brained reddit moderator. Take a shower.

    I occasionally hear people say something like “We should be making people atheists. Religion is a scourge that uses ideology to harm others.” I can’t help to laugh when I hear this, because someone who takes this seriously (perhaps the person in the comic) is doing the literal thing they are decrying.

    So what if someone is a christian because it comforts them? I don’t care if you think it lacks logic when your alternative lacks compassion.

    Instead of opposing religion unilaterally, oppose the harmful ideas laundered by religion. Shame the politicians and the charlatans. Don’t shame mary-sue who goes to church weekly for being the a Christian, even though the shitbags at NIFB hate church are also Christians.

    It’s certainly possible for people to be good to each other due to their religious beliefs. The local pro-palestine protests near me are primarilly organized by christians, and they are often led by a local group of leftist christian pacifists. They organize anti-war protests, support palestinian freedom, and do many smaller actions to alleviate suffering such as volunteering at the local food bank or other similar orgs. Compared to other groups that organize near me, I vastly prefer them over my local PSL chapter, or almost every ML group I’ve ever come across. Unlike many atheists I’ve worked with, that christian group will happily work with a local mosque, or synagogue when it doesn’t help them materially. This is because they don’t oppose people based on simple reasons like religion, but instead have deep solidarity with everyone else suffering through life on this terrible world.

    Instead of opposing religion because you think it’s cringe how about you show solidarity and compassion for your fellow human beings.

    • Gabu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      “Hurr durr, fighting fascism is just as bad as being fascist”

      That’s you

    • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I 100% agree. I think most anti-relious atheist are still living in reaction to their religious up bringing or unable to recognize where power resides to be able to hold it to account or both.

    • BallsandBayonets@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I disagree pretty strongly on especially the “don’t shame someone for who is essentially a good person for sharing the same religion as a bad person.”

      Community is everything, and there’s strength in names. If you say you are of the same religion as a bigot, you’re telling the bigots that you agree with them, even if you don’t. If you want to follow the teachings of the character known as Christ, you ironically have to call yourself something other than Christian, because that label is synonymous with all kinds of bigotry to a dangerous number of people. The bigotry isn’t going to die out as long as they can claim to be a majority.

      We’re not talking about sports teams here. These labels matter, and have dangerous effects. I’d rather everyone drop religions labels entirely and just say how they claim to be a good person, because as it stands there are good people and bad people who share the same label, which makes the bad people stronger.

      • KombatWombat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        If you say you are of the same religion as a bigot, you’re telling the bigots that you agree with them, even if you don’t.

        Hitler and I may have agreed that the sky is blue, but if someone uses this to say we agree in general, they are simply being unreasonable. There are countless denominations of Christianity as a result of people disagreeing with each other about history and values. The Christian label is not synonymous with bigotry, and we could use more counterexamples if people seem to think otherwise.

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        But whenever we do say that those evil people aren’t Christians and push them away, we get accused of “no true Scotsman fallacy” or some BS and “you are part of the problem not taking responsibility”.

        As for coming up with a new label, the thing with the label “Christian” is that it’s prescribed in the Bible. Even other religions far removed from Nicene Christianity that respect the Bible or some form of it use the label, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons. So the productive thing to do is calling them out on not being one for not following the teachings of the Bible

      • bl_r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Christianity is a big tent term that encompasses a lot of differing groups of thought. You’ve got Catholics and Protestants, being the largest groups that come to mind. Below that you have everything from Lutherans to Presbyterians to Christian Scientists to Westboro Baptists. Admittedly, I don’t think I made it clear enough in my comment I was speaking more big-tent Christianity when referring to mary-sue rather than a specific denomination (or a specific church), as I was speaking about religion as a whole, using Christianity as an example, hence why I was saying “Oppose harmful ideas laundered by religion” rather than opposing religion unilaterally. For example, we should oppose the colonialist ideology smuggled through religion, such as forced religious conversions (in order to save their soul!) or the necessity to colonize to do said conversions. We should oppose genocidal rhetoric smuggled through religion. Heck, we should even oppose the shitty bits of text in a religious text like when or when not to stone someone or the punishment for whatever crime.

        However, you are implying that you should simply give up your label when bad actors take up your label. While I don’t dispute that labels matter, because they do, I think it’s silly to just give it up once another person/group tries to coopt your label. If you don’t want bigots using your label, you’ve gotta kick them out. If you change your label to something else, and the bigots come to hide in the crowd, what are you supposed to do, change it for the 5th time?

        As far as dropping labels goes, while I like the idea (I hate labels though I find them useful), I think it’s impractical. As you said, “there’s strength in names,” and I think it would be crazy to ask someone to entirely drop a label that they hold dearly, such as their religious affiliation. It would also be crazy to ask them to just say “I believe in Jesus Christ…” and then list out 95 theses to indicate that they oppose aspects of the catholic church, then a good 95 more when they need to indicate their church had a schism in 1893, and another in 1913.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Agreed, except for proselytizers. If they came to my door, bus stop, or campus to try to “convert” me, I’m gonna use their own “holy book” against them.

      Numbers 5: 11-21 is one of the more effective passages, since it’s the only time The Bible mentions abortion, and it tells you how to perform a questionable method.

      • bl_r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I mean, I haven’t dealt with proselytizers in so long I kinda forgot about them. I used to get the odd mormon or Jehovah’s witness but they stopped coming a long while ago, and I don’t miss em.

        Numbers 5: 11-21 is pretty good imho. But I rarely debate religious people since I’ve gotten in a position where I really don’t see people like that anymore between the online algorithms which don’t show that shit and the fact that there aren’t too many religious people near me who are fascistic.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’ve decided that I can’t change my mother’s beliefs nor should I. I told her that we have a no-politics rule as of summer 2020. It saved our relationship.

    • UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Instead of having faith in God, I have faith in the next generation to do slightly better each time. I can’t really bring it to myself to tell my grandma there’s no heaven or hell and her entire life has been a lie. Ignorance is truly bliss sometimes.

      • nonfuinoncuro@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Slightly being the key word. I used to think we’d be fine after boomers die and millenials take over (sorry Gen X yes we always forget you) but then realized there are plenty of terrible Gen Y and then for a moment Gen Z was going to change labor politics gun control environment gender/sexuality and be super accepting but there’s still a huge proportion who still want to MAGA… we’ll see how bad alpha is

        like my nephews say the same racist shit on their discord and valorant as I saw on 4chan 20 years ago and it’s just sad

    • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Part of this was what finally got me off Facebook. People I liked, family members, posting dumb shit, and me letting it trigger me. It was literally only on Facebook, family gatherings were fun times. And honestly, since Trump, and despite the dichotomy that exists in my family and probably every other family, we seem to speak less about politics.

      • cheesymoonshadow@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’ve been off Facebook for somewhere between 10 and 15 years. I quit it because I didn’t care about what friends and family posted because they were all very religious, and I couldn’t post what I really wanted without offending said friends and family.

    • Wes_Dev@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I wish mine did that. I said one thing about Trump not having as much money as he claims, and my mom got all insulted. She said that maybe we shouldn’t talk about politics, etc, and I agreed to be nice. I don’t like to talk politics at all, even with like-minded people. But she’ll blame a company getting hacked and losing my personal info on democrats, and tell me that she can’t wait until all democrats die off.

      But now she just spouts of any shit that comes to her mind without a care, while I’m keeping to our dealt and shutting up. I doubt she even remembers our promise, because the moment it wasn’t convenient for her, she dropped it.

      • samus12345@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        the moment it wasn’t convenient for her, she dropped it.

        Sticking to the (lack of) principles of the Republican Party, I see!

  • HowManyNimons@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    The woman on the floor is thinking about all the gay people she screamed at about God’s wrath, and all the beatings she took from her husband because he was the Head of her, and all of the time and money she wasted on the church, and all of the beatings she let her husband give to her kids lest she “spoil the child,” and all of the bs she swallowed from Republicans, and all of the shame she carried for masturbating, and all of the abuse she hurled at women outside abortion clinics, and all.of the children she’d terrified at Sunday School, and all of the things she never tried because someone had told her not to.

    • SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I kid you not, all that kind of personal history creates a massive sunk cost fallacy that will make it impossible for them to admit that they may possibly be wrong.

  • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Belief only becomes a problem when someone weaponizes it. If you want to become a better person to appease the space rock, go for it, but if you tell me the space rock says no abortions for anyone, no it doesn’t.

    • Soggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Belief is a problem because it normalizes magical thinking and pushes blame away from the self. Belief paves the way for snake oil, anti-intellectualism, and learned helplessness. Belief is comforting shackle but there are other ways to be comforted that do not leave one vulnerable to predation.

      • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Nah, it really isn’t a problem. At all actually. It doesn’t matter if every single person believes in a different gemstone and that the gemstone will bestow upon them magical blessings for being a good person. If that is what they need to be good people, to motivate them, to inspire them to be better - who gives a fuck if it ‘normalizes magic’?

        I’m not so concerned with being right that I’d let us live in misery to be closer to ‘intellectualism’. Not everyone will find other methods to cope and their belief doesn’t harm anyone. I think you have to be a genuinely dank and dreary person to want to rob people of something like Santa Claus because it ‘normalizes magic’ while I’m sitting here hoping people just try to be better with the vague promise of presents.

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Their preachers tell them how to vote, and their preachers tell them to take rights away from women and minorities. To not worry about climate change because the Rapture is coming. To give all their money to Trump. They hurt our society.

              • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Everything has grifters. Elon Musk hasn’t whispered a word of religion yet people will vote the way he tells them to. Magic has nothing to do with stupidity.