Sensitive?

['andersom']

I think it sucks when people I like have decided to leave here (Loupgarou I'm thinking of you, wherever you are) because of the anti-spiritual sentiment. But now that I think about it I've never gone on a crusade against people here who have blasted spirituality, in the way that I have against people who have done other things I've found unethical.

I think it's because I'm not sure either, how sensitive it's best to be towards religion.

I do know that I don't want to be predictable, and I reserve the right to go off on anyone I choose. I like it better when it's someone who presents a challenge.

Yes, I miss her too.

I'm raised Calvinist, the European way. And I've seen what it can do for good, and for bad. It is part of me, and I will not let that go. I cherish what it gives me. A reference language to be able to express some of my spirituality.
Whether there is an afterlife or not is of no importance. The only thing I can act on and be in is here and now.
There's a fair bit of heathen in me too. (As one of my church-history teachers used to tell me specifically). Bits of ancient lore and habits are as much part of me as Calvinism is. There are some atheist Calvinists who are appealing for me.

Am I more sensitive about religion than about other things? There are some things I am not sensitive about at all, there are things I am sensitive about. Spirituality probably is part of things I am more sensitive about, because it is important to me.

But it depends on what it is.

What QV said, if someone expresses a greeting or blessing clearly coloured by their faith, it is not something to frown upon. It's part of who this person is, it's OK.

If someone tells me how he or she gets through life, because of faith, comfort or courage stemming from religion, I have no problems with it at all. Can be really interesting and beautiful.

If someone tells me what has been intended, and what is the reason why something is happening to me, or someone else, I will react. People able to identify divine punishment for other people will get my reaction.

If I find people I care about troubling themselves, and making their life harder by unhealthy religious pressure on top of their problems, I will react too. I will try to gently debunk their self-deprecating religious reason. Try to bend it, in what it should be; helpful, getting them through their life.

[odeon]

Hannah's posting pattern has gaps of weeks ever since she is back.

This is not about her, though. I like Hannah and I'm glad she has found a way to cope. One of her posts triggered mine, but this is about those triggers and what to do about them.

Py put it best:

I think it's because I'm not sure either, how sensitive it's best to be towards religion.

['andersom']

Hannah's posting pattern has gaps of weeks ever since she is back.

This is not about her, though. I like Hannah and I'm glad she has found a way to cope. One of her posts triggered mine, but this is about those triggers and what to do about them.

Py put it best:

I think it's because I'm not sure either, how sensitive it's best to be towards religion.

In that case; if it has been brought up in a post by a member on I2, it should be OK to react on it, the way you would react on it the way you would react on other things.

It is getting annoying if there comes a whole train of bashing posts (in stead of critical or questioning posts). But that is not a pretty sight as a reaction on any subject to me. I am no fan of the ad hominem in lots of bashing stuff. Think that that is what happened around Loupgarou.

But reacting with what you think, why not?

[odeon]

Maybe because what I think is not always what I actually want to say.

['andersom']

The way people can get really touched by poetry, humour, music, art and such, is similar to the way spirituality touches people. It has no "practical" function for procreation and the keeping alive of the species on this planet. But it is important.

It can touch people deeply. Doesn't mean you can't think the music someone is listening to is rubbish. Doesn't mean you can't tell someone to tone down a bit, if they push their music on you. And there are people who are not touched by music at all.


(Taking music as an example, because I have seen people fight over it, bashing fiercely, nearly getting physical, because of disapproving of taste in mutual music taste.)

['andersom']

Maybe because what I think is not always what I actually want to say.

I think that you've got a point there.

[WolFish]

Another consideration:

Would we walk on eggshells if the person spouting celebrations was a troll?
I realized somewhere along the way that I too engaged in an act of treading carefully in the presence of someone I perceived to be significantly impaired.

A client I was seeing for a crisis assessment badly wanted to be admitted to the hospital. He wasn't psychotic, just homeless and in want of a bed and breakfast. I told him that I wouldn't admit him and he punched a hole in the wall about three inches from my head. I shrugged and said, that's going to be a problem.

I pressed charges at the behest of my supervisor. The point is that even people who are mentally ill must abide by the rules of the community. So here is no different, I assume.
If someone is impaired they nonetheless have entered a place where people are allowed to react to things, to speak their mind. So do we hold back for people who have fewer cognitive resources? Only if you're me and it could come back to bite you in the butt as you're trying to convince the faculty somewhere that you've been politically correct for decades.

Why are we walking on eggshells?
We're being manipulated by someone who wants to use us to get what they didn't get as a child.
What will happen if we hurt the feelings of such a person?
In my profession they say a third get better, a third get worse and a third experience no effect at all.
On the other hand, such people, with assistance can become litigious, which, likely no coincidence, rhymes with religious.

OK, good night. When I start rhyming it's time to go to bed.

[Lord of the Ales]

I think part of the issue around public outpourings of faith is that you lay yourself open to mockery or robust disagreement from those who do not share your convictions, compounded by the fact that some atheists (well, anti-theists) seem to feel obliged to harangue those who have spiritual beliefs as delusional cretins. Here in the UK most folk don't witter on and on about God, or Allah, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, other than shiny eyed JWs and Mormons trying to spread the 'good news' - the national religion is agnosticism. It's much easier to be sensitive to each others deeply held beliefs if they aren't shoved in other people's faces. That's the risk you take, that others will find your views offensive.

I identify as a pagan. Generally I consider that to be my own concern, and don't really see why other people's faith is any of my business, unless they're making fucked up choices which affect other people, like campaigning against gay rights or mutilating their daughters' vaginas.

[Jack]

Would we walk on eggshells if the person spouting celebrations was a troll?

Who's to say it's not? Was very tempted to troll Hanna's 'god loves' thread with: god loves rape, war, dead babies, self-mutilation, murder, slavery, and so on, all with verses from the new testament for that extra flavor of dickery. Though what would be the point of such a response other than trollish dickery? Which brings the question of, what's the point of the thread other than trollish dickery? Maybe the point to bring about a good laugh to the author, which it did.

['andersom']

I keep forgetting that "heathen" and "pagan" have different connotations in English. In Dutch there is only one word for the two of them.
 

[Parts]

I tend to hold back if I feel the people are true believers and make no attempts to push their faith on me or condemn me for my beliefs or actions, I feel if it works for them great.  A lot of people seem to find comfort in religion that I personally just don't understand.    If  they are preachy, condescending, or disrespectful to my beliefs that is another story. 

[odeon]

I find it difficult to accept a faith that defines me as a sinner because I don't believe.

[Jack]

I find it difficult to accept a faith that defines me as a sinner because I don't believe.

Have defended believers here before, when they were attacked as not being intellectuals. Personally have no problem accepting other people's faith, or lack of, though find it difficult to accept viewpoints which come across as knowing either way. Strong atheist can really annoy me, equally as much as a believer who attempts to tell me what god wants. It's emotion presented as fact.

[Hannah]

I don't know the answer.

The answer for me is, yes, to the question of the thread title. Her response to a simple challenge was, I've just got to be me, but she refrained from calling anyone dear for an entire three months, absolutely not being her because of sensitivity toward some stupid troll tactic to see how she would respond. Actually am glad she's returned to addressing people as dear, because was beginning to feel a bit bad about that. The point was brought up at that time, of it being very curious, as to why other people here don't care to respond to some of the things said.

Though don't personally care for the third person approach. Hannah, sometimes I ignore you, due to thinking you're simply trolling the forum gushing so much about god, knowing those who share your views have no need to contribute, so it makes you appear to simply be trying to elicit negative responses from those who don't. Certainly those expressions would receive more positive response on a religious forum, or more trollish fun on an atheism forum; either way it's hard to conclude what might be the motive for expressing it here at all. Also sometimes ignore you, due to viewing you as somewhat mentally and emotionally weaker than myself, and am more likely to challenge people who I don't view as inferior. Otherwise, it makes me feel like a bully. If it's not trolling, then will be very bothered by my saying anything about it, if you stop gushing about god now that the topic's been brought up.

Is that it, Odeon. Don't want to feel like you're picking on poor sweet Hannah? Personally wanted to question an ex-cutter's motives in telling mdagli1 to cut off his fingers. Already know why I didn't do that.

that was my assumption of the thread being a 'joke' I'll take that post down, in hindsight it was eh me not thinking about what I was saying before I hit the post button. more in a min.

[Jack]

that was my assumption of the thread being a 'joke' I'll take that post down, in hindsight it was eh me not thinking about what I was saying before I hit the post button. more in a min.

Your candor is appreciated. Wasn't certain if correct in calling you a god troll in that thread; just a hunch. See no need to take it down, though. The bible quote game is one of my favorites, when it's clear it's a game, and am willing to play whenever you are.