|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 1:34 am
One of the common complaints I hear about religion is X religion is not good because they did Y in the past. While past should not be forgotten and members of religion X do have to live with the consequences of action Y, why should the those who took up the heritage of religion X stereotyped as the same as the ancestors of religion X? It's considered wrong to believe a child is going to commit a particular crime because the parent committed a crime. Why should today's members of religion X be assumed to be just like the ancestors of religion X? While the effect religion X had on a member of a group of members in the ancestors of religion X produced one particular outcome, how do we know and what gives us the right to assume the same outcome is going to occur with the descendants in Religion X? Is one's religion such a science that we can predict what the effects are going to be on an individual? It seems to be religious stereotyping.
Debate and discuss.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 10:36 am
This pickled vegetable...Thank you, rmcdra! smile This is a point I've tried to make with several people at several times.
I'd also like to add to this discussion of religious stereotyping, the idea that because someone thinks or acts a certain way they must be a member of X religion and this is a reason not to listen to them.
Example:
Person 1: "I believe you have your facts wrong you see Xa is a closed practice, what you are describing sounds more like Ya."
Person 2: "Xa isn't a closed practice! You're so closed minded you must be a member of religion X! Everything you say is a lie!"
I do hope I've made sense. ... could kick your a** !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 10:49 am
Individually I think people should always be given a chance. I don't think it's wrong to judge people based on a (major) tenet of their religion unless they specifically say they don't follow it, but as for judging a religion based on a past generations actions...it depends on how much of an impact that action had one the current generation, how many people in the religion participated or condoned the action, and how far in the past it was. In general, it's probably a bad idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 10:55 am
This is a problem that I have frequently. I'm from a small denomination (roughly five million around the world. Not very big when you consider denominations like the Catholics, Lutherans, Baptists, etc.)
I'll be discussing / debating on one of the Christian boards around here, and people will automatically assume I'm from X group, or that I support such and such a doctrine. They're often far off on where I actually stand on theological issues. People from other religions aren't near as bad about it, to be honest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 11:17 am
I do not really do this with religion, but I sometimes do with parents and their children. I guess it is because that particular person is raising the child so why would they not "inherit" their actions. Children are easily influenced so if they see something, like an action of abuse, they may repeat it not knowing what they are doing. This happened to my cousins. The children were sexually abused so the boy was reinacting something {I have not been told the details and quite frankly do not want to know} and the parents saw. What is to say that the boy will not grow up to become an abuser? Hopefully counseling and things may help, but sometimes is does nor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 11:20 am
Renkon Root This pickled vegetable...Thank you, rmcdra! smile This is a point I've tried to make with several people at several times.
I'd also like to add to this discussion of religious stereotyping, the idea that because someone thinks or acts a certain way they must be a member of X religion and this is a reason not to listen to them.
Example:
Person 1: "I believe you have your facts wrong you see Xa is a closed practice, what you are describing sounds more like Ya."
Person 2: "Xa isn't a closed practice! You're so closed minded you must be a member of religion X! Everything you say is a lie!"
I do hope I've made sense. ... could kick your a** !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 11:26 am
Aakosir Renkon Root This pickled vegetable...Thank you, rmcdra! smile This is a point I've tried to make with several people at several times.
I'd also like to add to this discussion of religious stereotyping, the idea that because someone thinks or acts a certain way they must be a member of X religion and this is a reason not to listen to them.
Example:
Person 1: "I believe you have your facts wrong you see Xa is a closed practice, what you are describing sounds more like Ya."
Person 2: "Xa isn't a closed practice! You're so closed minded you must be a member of religion X! Everything you say is a lie!"
I do hope I've made sense. ... could kick your a** !! I didn't want to name names but yeah.
Mostly it happens when I try to correct people on the misappropriation of the title "Wicca" and explain that its a fertility witchcult and require initiation through a sexual act and all that jazz. The most common response is something along the lines of "That's a dirty Christian lie!" ... could kick your a** !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 12:57 pm
Renkon Root Aakosir Renkon Root This pickled vegetable...Thank you, rmcdra! smile This is a point I've tried to make with several people at several times.
I'd also like to add to this discussion of religious stereotyping, the idea that because someone thinks or acts a certain way they must be a member of X religion and this is a reason not to listen to them.
Example:
Person 1: "I believe you have your facts wrong you see Xa is a closed practice, what you are describing sounds more like Ya."
Person 2: "Xa isn't a closed practice! You're so closed minded you must be a member of religion X! Everything you say is a lie!"
I do hope I've made sense. ... could kick your a** !! I didn't want to name names but yeah.
Mostly it happens when I try to correct people on the misappropriation of the title "Wicca" and explain that its a fertility witchcult and require initiation through a sexual act and all that jazz. The most common response is something along the lines of "That's a dirty Christian lie!" ... could kick your a** !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 2:03 am
xxEverBluexx Individually I think people should always be given a chance. I don't think it's wrong to judge people based on a (major) tenet of their religion unless they specifically say they don't follow it, but as for judging a religion based on a past generations actions...it depends on how much of an impact that action had one the current generation, how many people in the religion participated or condoned the action, and how far in the past it was. In general, it's probably a bad idea. It's late so I may be misunderstanding what you are saying. You may disregard this if what I'm saying isn't in conflict. While the major tenet part does seem like a good basis, it assumes that the person of X religion is a good follower of X religion. For all we know person of X religion could be a member of X religion for a number of reason that are unrelated to wanting to be a good follower of religion X. While it may give some idea, it should not be a determining factor. So then Christians must be evil because they started the crusades would be true right? Christians must be against science because they were against heliocentricism in the past right? Atheists must be evil because Stalin was an Atheist? Pagans must be insane because Nero was a Pagan and look at what he did? Are you starting to see the problem with this line of thinking?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 9:36 pm
Or....
"I hate everyone that thinks in X way because they are close minded idiots. Y is the only truth, the only acceptable way of thinking."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 9:39 pm
Lateralus es Helica Or.... "I hate everyone that thinks in X way because they are close minded idiots. Y is the only truth, the only acceptable way of thinking." Yes, this too. ... could kick your a** !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 10:46 pm
Lateralus es Helica Or.... "I hate everyone that thinks in X way because they are close minded idiots. Y is the only truth, the only acceptable way of thinking." LMAO biggrin Would this be considered an oxymoron?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 6:26 am
If we must discard everything bad that a religion did in the past when we judge it, we must also discard everything good that that religion did in the past.
And just a side note: Christianity had a lot more to do with the crusades than Stalin's USSR had to do with atheism or Nero's paganism had to do with his actions. The Church bashed science, because it clashed with their Biblical teachings. Nero didn't burn Rome because he believed in Jupiter. Stalin didn't say "I'll kill all these people, because I don't believe in god."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:05 pm
i do not like stereotypes
and try to avoid them
whilst hoping that people will do the same for me.
but i still would not take a glass of kool ade from a cult member.
without buying into the whole stereotype, we can still be prudent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 4:33 pm
Artto If we must discard everything bad that a religion did in the past when we judge it, we must also discard everything good that that religion did in the past. Not saying to discard history. We have to account for the history. I even state that. I'm saying why should individuals today be blamed or credited for mistakes/successes of the individuals in the pasts? Positive stereotypes are far more damaging because they are less likely to be blown off as ridiculous. Quote: And just a side note: Christianity Christians on a land grab using their religion as a reason to unite had a lot more to do with the crusades than Stalin's USSR had to do with atheism or Nero's paganism had to do with his actions. The Church bashed science, because it clashed with their Biblical teachings and Ptolemy's writings and others Greek and Roman writings that were considered scientific at the time. Nero didn't burn Rome because he believed in Jupiter. Stalin didn't say "I'll kill all these people, because I don't believe in god." Fix'd But thank you for pointing out my flawed examples though. Germans started WWII so that means Germans today are going to start another WW. I've never heard of Buddhists ever starting any wars so they must be peaceful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
