Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a myth and there is no evidence any of them are true.

^^^ Typical. Instead of addressing the question of whether calling God/Gods a "myth" is insulting, here's an atheist hammering on the reductive, analysis-free, childish insults.

Maybe off topic, but it’s a concise statement that isn’t childish or insulting. Nothing wrong with it.

DP.

It's like me calling you "childish." No explanation, no rationale, just random ad hominems. Even if it's true.

You don’t need extra, flowery words when stating basic facts: “there is no evidence”.

So say "there is no evidence" and people of faith will nod and say you're right, it's about faith. Calling it a "myth" is another level of rudeness.

It's the same thing. There is no evidence = it's a myth. All myths rely on "faith".

No, "myth" is insulting. It's putting peoples' faith on par with Santa Claus, as OP's gotcha in her OP clearly tried to do.

As we've all learned in the past few years, if we didn't know it before: if somebody tells you they're insulted, then it's insulting. You don't get to decide whether somebody else should be insulted by your words or deeds.

I think it’s more on par with Zeus, Odin, etc. Gods who people worshipped.

True, the Greek pantheon of gods were very real to them, and it was a religion. As was the Roman's religion which had many if the same gods by different names. True, these religions have fallen out of favor now, but the American Indians belived in the "great spirit in the sky" and the "happy hunting grounds" (heaven). These are no less respectable beliefs than the monotheistic religions that came out of the middle east.

I was referring to the Greek, Roman, Norse myths when I said all myths rely on “faith”. No evidence = myth.

So you're doubling down on the "no evidence" = "myth" false equivalence.

Again, what matters is context. If the people you're talking to are insulted by the word "myth," or by you comparing their beliefs to the Greek pantheon, then don't do it. If you want to refer to the Greek pantheon by itself and you're confident you're not talking to people who still believe it (are there?) then go ahead and refer to the Greek pantheon as myths--without thinking you're cute by dragging things people actually do believe into it.

This is so basic it shouldn't have to keep being repeated.

There are multiple posters. The reason why we call the ancient religions "myths" is because there is no evidence those gods existed. There was no evidence when people worshipped those gods either. It was a "faith".

There is no evidence that your god exists either - which is why you have "faith".

If you can’t understand the difference between acknowledging “faith” is a thing vs. insulting someone by saying their faith is in a “myth” then there’s no hope for you.

You just want to insult people. You’re a boor.

There is no evidence that the Christian/Muslim/Jewish gods exists, right? That's why people who believe he exists have faith, right?
Similarly, there is no evidence that the Roman/Greek/Norse gods exist. People who believed they exist also had faith.

A "myth" is just a traditional story - sometimes about the god(s). You're reading too much into it.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/myth
myth noun ˈmith
1a
: a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon

No scientific evidence can prove or disprove God. Yes, religion is based on faith. Atheism is based on the faith there is no God. We all have different ways of living our lives. That should be enough to end this thread.

So many incorrect and false things in so few sentences.

Atheists don’t have “faith” there is no god. That is ludicrous. Atheists simply do not believe because there is insufficient evidence. Do you have “faith” that the things you don’t believe in don’t exist? Of course you don’t. You know those things are unfalsifiable and you just logically don’t believe in them.

When we speak of evidence, we are not speaking solely of scientific evidence. There are many kinds of evidence, and there is insufficient of any of it for us to believe.

And you don’t get to decide when the thread ends.

faith
/fāTH/
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

Atheists have faith there is no God.

2.
strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
"bereaved people who have shown supreme faith"

Christians have faith God exists.

You do have faith there is no God. Faith is not just a religious word.

No No no no no. Wrong.

Atheists simply don’t believe in the existence of a god. No “faith” involved.

Here’s proof:

Name for me a thing you don’t believe exists.

You are welcome to your beliefs, I am welcome to mine. I don’t want to go down the circular rabbit hole of repeating questions that dcum atheists delight in. I am going to enjoy my second scandalous cup of coffee and enjoy my Sunday. I sincerely hope everyone reading this thread immediately logs off and has a wonderful Sunday doing anything else but chasing another anonymous poster around the religion forum rabbit hole!

This. DCUM’s atheists have a repertoire of insults and questions they think are gotchas but aren’t. And they repeat these over and over and over and over.

I think we should leave this forum to the atheists so they can talk to themselves all day instead of enjoying life. Which they definitely are doing after your post. The moderator could even rename this the atheist forum.

Have a nice day, pp. I had my morning coffee but I do tea in the afternoons. Recently I bought a book on tea and am surprised I like green tea. How about you? Also this Christian needs to catch up on an online course on Indian art. Enjoy your day, don’t be like the atheists and grouse and insult all afternoon and evening!

Funny to see you here, grousing and insulting atheists.

It's only bad when someone else does it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a myth and there is no evidence any of them are true.

^^^ Typical. Instead of addressing the question of whether calling God/Gods a "myth" is insulting, here's an atheist hammering on the reductive, analysis-free, childish insults.

Maybe off topic, but it’s a concise statement that isn’t childish or insulting. Nothing wrong with it.

DP.

It's like me calling you "childish." No explanation, no rationale, just random ad hominems. Even if it's true.

You don’t need extra, flowery words when stating basic facts: “there is no evidence”.

So say "there is no evidence" and people of faith will nod and say you're right, it's about faith. Calling it a "myth" is another level of rudeness.

It's the same thing. There is no evidence = it's a myth. All myths rely on "faith".

No, "myth" is insulting. It's putting peoples' faith on par with Santa Claus, as OP's gotcha in her OP clearly tried to do.

As we've all learned in the past few years, if we didn't know it before: if somebody tells you they're insulted, then it's insulting. You don't get to decide whether somebody else should be insulted by your words or deeds.

I think it’s more on par with Zeus, Odin, etc. Gods who people worshipped.

True, the Greek pantheon of gods were very real to them, and it was a religion. As was the Roman's religion which had many if the same gods by different names. True, these religions have fallen out of favor now, but the American Indians belived in the "great spirit in the sky" and the "happy hunting grounds" (heaven). These are no less respectable beliefs than the monotheistic religions that came out of the middle east.

I was referring to the Greek, Roman, Norse myths when I said all myths rely on “faith”. No evidence = myth.

So you're doubling down on the "no evidence" = "myth" false equivalence.

Again, what matters is context. If the people you're talking to are insulted by the word "myth," or by you comparing their beliefs to the Greek pantheon, then don't do it. If you want to refer to the Greek pantheon by itself and you're confident you're not talking to people who still believe it (are there?) then go ahead and refer to the Greek pantheon as myths--without thinking you're cute by dragging things people actually do believe into it.

This is so basic it shouldn't have to keep being repeated.

There are multiple posters. The reason why we call the ancient religions "myths" is because there is no evidence those gods existed. There was no evidence when people worshipped those gods either. It was a "faith".

There is no evidence that your god exists either - which is why you have "faith".

If you can’t understand the difference between acknowledging “faith” is a thing vs. insulting someone by saying their faith is in a “myth” then there’s no hope for you.

You just want to insult people. You’re a boor.

There is no evidence that the Christian/Muslim/Jewish gods exists, right? That's why people who believe he exists have faith, right?
Similarly, there is no evidence that the Roman/Greek/Norse gods exist. People who believed they exist also had faith.

A "myth" is just a traditional story - sometimes about the god(s). You're reading too much into it.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/myth
myth noun ˈmith
1a
: a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon

No scientific evidence can prove or disprove God. Yes, religion is based on faith. Atheism is based on the faith there is no God. We all have different ways of living our lives. That should be enough to end this thread.

So many incorrect and false things in so few sentences.

Atheists don’t have “faith” there is no god. That is ludicrous. Atheists simply do not believe because there is insufficient evidence. Do you have “faith” that the things you don’t believe in don’t exist? Of course you don’t. You know those things are unfalsifiable and you just logically don’t believe in them.

When we speak of evidence, we are not speaking solely of scientific evidence. There are many kinds of evidence, and there is insufficient of any of it for us to believe.

And you don’t get to decide when the thread ends.

faith
/fāTH/
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

Atheists have faith there is no God.

2.
strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
"bereaved people who have shown supreme faith"

Christians have faith God exists.

You do have faith there is no God. Faith is not just a religious word.

No No no no no. Wrong.

Atheists simply don’t believe in the existence of a god. No “faith” involved.

Here’s proof:

Name for me a thing you don’t believe exists.

You are welcome to your beliefs, I am welcome to mine. I don’t want to go down the circular rabbit hole of repeating questions that dcum atheists delight in. I am going to enjoy my second scandalous cup of coffee and enjoy my Sunday. I sincerely hope everyone reading this thread immediately logs off and has a wonderful Sunday doing anything else but chasing another anonymous poster around the religion forum rabbit hole!

This. DCUM’s atheists have a repertoire of insults and questions they think are gotchas but aren’t. And they repeat these over and over and over and over.

I think we should leave this forum to the atheists so they can talk to themselves all day instead of enjoying life. Which they definitely are doing after your post. The moderator could even rename this the atheist forum.

Have a nice day, pp. I had my morning coffee but I do tea in the afternoons. Recently I bought a book on tea and am surprised I like green tea. How about you? Also this Christian needs to catch up on an online course on Indian art. Enjoy your day, don’t be like the atheists and grouse and insult all afternoon and evening!

Funny to see you here, grousing and insulting atheists.

It's only bad when someone else does it.

You can't deny that you grouse and insult all afternoon. Some of you are actually proud of using the word "myth" because you think it accomplishes something (instead of driving people further into their corners).

How do you like your coffee?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a myth and there is no evidence any of them are true.

^^^ Typical. Instead of addressing the question of whether calling God/Gods a "myth" is insulting, here's an atheist hammering on the reductive, analysis-free, childish insults.

Maybe off topic, but it’s a concise statement that isn’t childish or insulting. Nothing wrong with it.

DP.

It's like me calling you "childish." No explanation, no rationale, just random ad hominems. Even if it's true.

You don’t need extra, flowery words when stating basic facts: “there is no evidence”.

So say "there is no evidence" and people of faith will nod and say you're right, it's about faith. Calling it a "myth" is another level of rudeness.

It's the same thing. There is no evidence = it's a myth. All myths rely on "faith".

No, "myth" is insulting. It's putting peoples' faith on par with Santa Claus, as OP's gotcha in her OP clearly tried to do.

As we've all learned in the past few years, if we didn't know it before: if somebody tells you they're insulted, then it's insulting. You don't get to decide whether somebody else should be insulted by your words or deeds.

I think it’s more on par with Zeus, Odin, etc. Gods who people worshipped.

True, the Greek pantheon of gods were very real to them, and it was a religion. As was the Roman's religion which had many if the same gods by different names. True, these religions have fallen out of favor now, but the American Indians belived in the "great spirit in the sky" and the "happy hunting grounds" (heaven). These are no less respectable beliefs than the monotheistic religions that came out of the middle east.

I was referring to the Greek, Roman, Norse myths when I said all myths rely on “faith”. No evidence = myth.

So you're doubling down on the "no evidence" = "myth" false equivalence.

Again, what matters is context. If the people you're talking to are insulted by the word "myth," or by you comparing their beliefs to the Greek pantheon, then don't do it. If you want to refer to the Greek pantheon by itself and you're confident you're not talking to people who still believe it (are there?) then go ahead and refer to the Greek pantheon as myths--without thinking you're cute by dragging things people actually do believe into it.

This is so basic it shouldn't have to keep being repeated.

There are multiple posters. The reason why we call the ancient religions "myths" is because there is no evidence those gods existed. There was no evidence when people worshipped those gods either. It was a "faith".

There is no evidence that your god exists either - which is why you have "faith".

If you can’t understand the difference between acknowledging “faith” is a thing vs. insulting someone by saying their faith is in a “myth” then there’s no hope for you.

You just want to insult people. You’re a boor.

There is no evidence that the Christian/Muslim/Jewish gods exists, right? That's why people who believe he exists have faith, right?
Similarly, there is no evidence that the Roman/Greek/Norse gods exist. People who believed they exist also had faith.

A "myth" is just a traditional story - sometimes about the god(s). You're reading too much into it.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/myth
myth noun ˈmith
1a
: a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon

No scientific evidence can prove or disprove God. Yes, religion is based on faith. Atheism is based on the faith there is no God. We all have different ways of living our lives. That should be enough to end this thread.

So many incorrect and false things in so few sentences.

Atheists don’t have “faith” there is no god. That is ludicrous. Atheists simply do not believe because there is insufficient evidence. Do you have “faith” that the things you don’t believe in don’t exist? Of course you don’t. You know those things are unfalsifiable and you just logically don’t believe in them.

When we speak of evidence, we are not speaking solely of scientific evidence. There are many kinds of evidence, and there is insufficient of any of it for us to believe.

And you don’t get to decide when the thread ends.

faith
/fāTH/
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

Atheists have faith there is no God.

2.
strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
"bereaved people who have shown supreme faith"

Christians have faith God exists.

You do have faith there is no God. Faith is not just a religious word.

No No no no no. Wrong.

Atheists simply don’t believe in the existence of a god. No “faith” involved.

Here’s proof:

Name for me a thing you don’t believe exists.

You are welcome to your beliefs, I am welcome to mine. I don’t want to go down the circular rabbit hole of repeating questions that dcum atheists delight in. I am going to enjoy my second scandalous cup of coffee and enjoy my Sunday. I sincerely hope everyone reading this thread immediately logs off and has a wonderful Sunday doing anything else but chasing another anonymous poster around the religion forum rabbit hole!

This. DCUM’s atheists have a repertoire of insults and questions they think are gotchas but aren’t. And they repeat these over and over and over and over.

I think we should leave this forum to the atheists so they can talk to themselves all day instead of enjoying life. Which they definitely are doing after your post. The moderator could even rename this the atheist forum.

Have a nice day, pp. I had my morning coffee but I do tea in the afternoons. Recently I bought a book on tea and am surprised I like green tea. How about you? Also this Christian needs to catch up on an online course on Indian art. Enjoy your day, don’t be like the atheists and grouse and insult all afternoon and evening!

Funny to see you here, grousing and insulting atheists.

It's only bad when someone else does it.

You can't deny that you grouse and insult all afternoon. Some of you are actually proud of using the word "myth" because you think it accomplishes something (instead of driving people further into their corners).

How do you like your coffee?

The only thing that defining "myth" accomplishes is defining myth. I honestly DGAF what you believe. I just detest falsehoods and failures of logic.

I'm just about to start another movie with my sick kid in a hotel room on a rainy day so I'll probably be here until dinner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

I agree. I think there have been a lot of thoughtful replies to this thread that all boil down to the fact that context makes all the difference to whether or not something is offensive.

Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want and even more so to believe whatever you want. But people are not necessarily trying to silence you when they point out that your words might be hurtful or harmful. And on the flipside, taking offense to something because you don't like some of the people on the other side is not helpful; not everyone is a troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

I agree. I think there have been a lot of thoughtful replies to this thread that all boil down to the fact that context makes all the difference to whether or not something is offensive.

Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want and even more so to believe whatever you want. But people are not necessarily trying to silence you when they point out that your words might be hurtful or harmful. And on the flipside, taking offense to something because you don't like some of the people on the other side is not helpful; not everyone is a troll.

So can I say any of these here:

- your religion is a myth
- your religion is like Santa Claus or fairies
- atheists are immoral
- atheists will rot in he!!

I like my coffee with cream. Currently at work but texting with DD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

I agree. I think there have been a lot of thoughtful replies to this thread that all boil down to the fact that context makes all the difference to whether or not something is offensive.

Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want and even more so to believe whatever you want. But people are not necessarily trying to silence you when they point out that your words might be hurtful or harmful. And on the flipside, taking offense to something because you don't like some of the people on the other side is not helpful; not everyone is a troll.

So can I say any of these here:

- your religion is a myth
- your religion is like Santa Claus or fairies
- atheists are immoral
- atheists will rot in he!!

I like my coffee with cream. Currently at work but texting with DD

Well, see, your context and tone imply that you are not engaging in thoughtful discussion of religion and/or atheism, but just looking to stir the pot. Thank you for providing such a clear example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

I agree. I think there have been a lot of thoughtful replies to this thread that all boil down to the fact that context makes all the difference to whether or not something is offensive.

Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want and even more so to believe whatever you want. But people are not necessarily trying to silence you when they point out that your words might be hurtful or harmful. And on the flipside, taking offense to something because you don't like some of the people on the other side is not helpful; not everyone is a troll.

So can I say any of these here:

- your religion is a myth
- your religion is like Santa Claus or fairies
- atheists are immoral
- atheists will rot in he!!

I like my coffee with cream. Currently at work but texting with DD

Well, see, your context and tone imply that you are not engaging in thoughtful discussion of religion and/or atheism, but just looking to stir the pot. Thank you for providing such a clear example.

DP. PP was clearly hyper-provocative, but as an atheist I don't get offended if any believer types that "atheists are immoral" or "atheists will rot in he!!" because I know that they sincerely believe that.

But I don't believe that. So why would I get offended?

I would prefer, as you state, "engaging in thoughtful discussion of religion and/or atheism". I am willing to change my position if shown sufficient evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

I agree. I think there have been a lot of thoughtful replies to this thread that all boil down to the fact that context makes all the difference to whether or not something is offensive.

Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want and even more so to believe whatever you want. But people are not necessarily trying to silence you when they point out that your words might be hurtful or harmful. And on the flipside, taking offense to something because you don't like some of the people on the other side is not helpful; not everyone is a troll.

So can I say any of these here:

- your religion is a myth
- your religion is like Santa Claus or fairies
- atheists are immoral
- atheists will rot in he!!

I like my coffee with cream. Currently at work but texting with DD

Well, see, your context and tone imply that you are not engaging in thoughtful discussion of religion and/or atheism, but just looking to stir the pot. Thank you for providing such a clear example.

No, I provided two examples on each side (atheist and believing) to try to get at what you think should be tolerated here. Still waiting for an answer.

Meanwhile you miss the irony that you’re only offended by the insults against atheists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

I agree. I think there have been a lot of thoughtful replies to this thread that all boil down to the fact that context makes all the difference to whether or not something is offensive.

Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want and even more so to believe whatever you want. But people are not necessarily trying to silence you when they point out that your words might be hurtful or harmful. And on the flipside, taking offense to something because you don't like some of the people on the other side is not helpful; not everyone is a troll.

So can I say any of these here:

- your religion is a myth
- your religion is like Santa Claus or fairies
- atheists are immoral
- atheists will rot in he!!

I like my coffee with cream. Currently at work but texting with DD

Well, see, your context and tone imply that you are not engaging in thoughtful discussion of religion and/or atheism, but just looking to stir the pot. Thank you for providing such a clear example.

No, I provided two examples on each side (atheist and believing) to try to get at what you think should be tolerated here. Still waiting for an answer.

Meanwhile you miss the irony that you’re only offended by the insults against atheists.

I don't think it's insulting to make those statements in a conversation like the one we're having (essentially, a "what are the boundaries?" conversation).

In many other conversations, I'd suspect you were trying to derail or blow up the conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

I agree. I think there have been a lot of thoughtful replies to this thread that all boil down to the fact that context makes all the difference to whether or not something is offensive.

Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want and even more so to believe whatever you want. But people are not necessarily trying to silence you when they point out that your words might be hurtful or harmful. And on the flipside, taking offense to something because you don't like some of the people on the other side is not helpful; not everyone is a troll.

So can I say any of these here:

- your religion is a myth
- your religion is like Santa Claus or fairies
- atheists are immoral
- atheists will rot in he!!

I like my coffee with cream. Currently at work but texting with DD

Well, see, your context and tone imply that you are not engaging in thoughtful discussion of religion and/or atheism, but just looking to stir the pot. Thank you for providing such a clear example.

No, I provided two examples on each side (atheist and believing) to try to get at what you think should be tolerated here. Still waiting for an answer.

Meanwhile you miss the irony that you’re only offended by the insults against atheists.

DP - all should be tolerated. And by "tolerated" I mean not deleted. I am free to be offended if I choose and I am free to not respond or engage as I wish. But that should not abridge another person's right to state their beliefs.

That's how I think it should be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

I agree. I think there have been a lot of thoughtful replies to this thread that all boil down to the fact that context makes all the difference to whether or not something is offensive.

Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want and even more so to believe whatever you want. But people are not necessarily trying to silence you when they point out that your words might be hurtful or harmful. And on the flipside, taking offense to something because you don't like some of the people on the other side is not helpful; not everyone is a troll.

So can I say any of these here:

- your religion is a myth
- your religion is like Santa Claus or fairies
- atheists are immoral
- atheists will rot in he!!

I like my coffee with cream. Currently at work but texting with DD

Well, see, your context and tone imply that you are not engaging in thoughtful discussion of religion and/or atheism, but just looking to stir the pot. Thank you for providing such a clear example.

No, I provided two examples on each side (atheist and believing) to try to get at what you think should be tolerated here. Still waiting for an answer.

Meanwhile you miss the irony that you’re only offended by the insults against atheists.

I don't think it's insulting to make those statements in a conversation like the one we're having (essentially, a "what are the boundaries?" conversation).

In many other conversations, I'd suspect you were trying to derail or blow up the conversation.

PP with the questions here. That’s my take too—this is a boundaries conversation, but used in another context these are trolling or flame-throwing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

I agree. I think there have been a lot of thoughtful replies to this thread that all boil down to the fact that context makes all the difference to whether or not something is offensive.

Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want and even more so to believe whatever you want. But people are not necessarily trying to silence you when they point out that your words might be hurtful or harmful. And on the flipside, taking offense to something because you don't like some of the people on the other side is not helpful; not everyone is a troll.

So can I say any of these here:

- your religion is a myth
- your religion is like Santa Claus or fairies
- atheists are immoral
- atheists will rot in he!!

I like my coffee with cream. Currently at work but texting with DD

Well, see, your context and tone imply that you are not engaging in thoughtful discussion of religion and/or atheism, but just looking to stir the pot. Thank you for providing such a clear example.

No, I provided two examples on each side (atheist and believing) to try to get at what you think should be tolerated here. Still waiting for an answer.

Meanwhile you miss the irony that you’re only offended by the insults against atheists.

I thought I was clear in my response: I don't see any of your examples from either side as thoughtful or discussion-based. Your initial comment lacks context, which I've already said is important. And your tone, what with the reference to coffee that was part of someone else's back-and-forth snippiness above, did not imply that you were asking a sincere question.

I have found it equally inappropriate on this forum to see someone compare God to Santa and to call atheists immoral. I'll add that there were some posters in the Santa-God debate who genuinely seemed to want to know why it's a bad analogy, so it's not necessarily without merit to ask, in the same way that non-Christians have asked non-combatively for an explanation of the Trinity. I could envision a conversation (yes, even in the hellscape of the internet) in which myth and religion were discussed civilly. I could envision (admittedly with a bit more difficulty) a conversation about secular vs. religious morality that didn't have to devolve into name-calling.

As for your comment about irony and my being personally offended, I didn't indicate one way or another which of your examples I may or may not find offensive myself. I should point out, though, that I'm not atheist, nor Christian. The world is not a dichotomy between those two things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

I agree. I think there have been a lot of thoughtful replies to this thread that all boil down to the fact that context makes all the difference to whether or not something is offensive.

Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want and even more so to believe whatever you want. But people are not necessarily trying to silence you when they point out that your words might be hurtful or harmful. And on the flipside, taking offense to something because you don't like some of the people on the other side is not helpful; not everyone is a troll.

So can I say any of these here:

- your religion is a myth
- your religion is like Santa Claus or fairies
- atheists are immoral
- atheists will rot in he!!

I like my coffee with cream. Currently at work but texting with DD

Well, see, your context and tone imply that you are not engaging in thoughtful discussion of religion and/or atheism, but just looking to stir the pot. Thank you for providing such a clear example.

That’s why people hate her. Stir the pot and then try to play the victim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have asked these questions every time someone claims a non-believer is "insulting" and no one replies. Another PP suggested its own thread so here it is:

1. Is it "insulting" to refer to god as "mythical"? Why?

2. Is it insulting to compare a god to another god or mythical being knowing people who believe in one don't believe in the other? Why?

3. Those of you who believe in one god: do you think the other gods are "mythical"? Why?

Thoughtful replies only, please. If you don't like the questions you don't have to respond at all. However all views are welcome as long as they are thoughtful and not trolls or insults.

I'm not religious, but I think that in a pluralistic society, it all depends on the context.

There are plenty of contexts where it would be insulting to tell believers "the basis of everything you believe is false." Nearly all of us (even most atheists) live under a set of beliefs that is more nuanced than the law of the jungle, and if pressed the answer why is some version of "because I like it that way" ... so all of us can show some humility about the 'worldviews' of others.

But I also agree w/ the previous posters that in a debate about comparative religions (for example), believers shouldn't be able to shut down debate by claiming offense ... and should just roll with it or disengage ... especially on the internet where, as far as I can tell, no one ever changes their mind in response to any reasoned argument (in one direction or the other). In those contexts, the non-believers should be allowed some civil way to make the point that "you are the one asserting supernatural things" without the believers quibbling endlessly over language and insults etc. If it isn't a reference to "myth," perhaps there's some other turn of phrase that gives less offense?

I agree. I think there have been a lot of thoughtful replies to this thread that all boil down to the fact that context makes all the difference to whether or not something is offensive.

Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want and even more so to believe whatever you want. But people are not necessarily trying to silence you when they point out that your words might be hurtful or harmful. And on the flipside, taking offense to something because you don't like some of the people on the other side is not helpful; not everyone is a troll.

So can I say any of these here:

- your religion is a myth
- your religion is like Santa Claus or fairies
- atheists are immoral
- atheists will rot in he!!

I like my coffee with cream. Currently at work but texting with DD

Well, see, your context and tone imply that you are not engaging in thoughtful discussion of religion and/or atheism, but just looking to stir the pot. Thank you for providing such a clear example.

DP. PP was clearly hyper-provocative, but as an atheist I don't get offended if any believer types that "atheists are immoral" or "atheists will rot in he!!" because I know that they sincerely believe that.

But I don't believe that. So why would I get offended?

I would prefer, as you state, "engaging in thoughtful discussion of religion and/or atheism". I am willing to change my position if shown sufficient evidence.

It depends on the context. On DCUM? No. IRL with friends/family? Sure.