When was the last time you had a civilized political/religious discussion?
- Thread starter Mysterious Stranger
- Start date
Recommended Videos
This morning over breakfast...before you accuse me of lying I should say I'm an English middle class student
Not always. That tends to happen only when:-RelexCryo said:
1. The "atheist" decides to invoke science as if that is somehow relevant (such as trying to use evolution to explain away concepts of spirituality - a somewhat bizarre proposition).
2. The "theist" decides to use science to prove god or some other religious concept (such as creationism).
In both cases this is due to the particular groups not understanding both science and their own belief system.
Ithaca, NY is too overly liberal for that. Not that I'm a conservative, but a debate is not screaming at the top of one's lungs about your views while eveyone agrees. Thank god my girlfriend's dad is a republican (it's a 7 hour trip to their CT house but goddamnit the sex is worth it), and he's actually fun to spar with, because he's that recessive-gened republican who watches O'Rielly but at least backs his arguments with real, rational facts.
Politics, over things affecting my Job Career's/ 18+ Games etc
Religious, Never. It always turns into a flame war.
Religious, Never. It always turns into a flame war.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say you are either Atheist or not very religious. If so, then you and I have common ground, I too have a friend (Anglican though) who I would describe exactly as yours, the only hing is, he has the incredibly irritating ability to 'accept' your view and yet keep his own despite a resoundingly large conflict between the two. It makes for a funny (for him) and frustrating (for me) discussion whenever we re not too busy.Godavari said:
OT: About two weeks ago ... my Atheist beliefs vs my friend's anglican beliefs.
Absolutely. Is there a scientific way to prove whether or not stealing is morally reprehensible? Is there a formula for calculating the morality of premarital sex? How about what to do when you made a big mistake, but aren't sure how to go about correcting it? What do you say to somebody you love who has a terminal illness? Do you take your spouse back if they've cheated on you?cuddly_tomato said:
Religion can give you the tools to deal with situations that science can't. If religion is an umbrella, science would be sunglasses. They're both useful, but the odds are pretty good they aren't going to both be necessary at the same time. Unless I'm taking a math test.
I mean, I don't need to ponder the spiritual meaning of d=rt, I just need to make it work for me. I see science as less of a philosophical approach to life and more of a tool to figure out how things work, not why they work.
Earlier this week I ran into a nice fellow on this forum. We talked, in passing, about the generalities of politics(differing views of which government "should" be). No one insulted anyone and both of us seemed entirely civil in the discussion.
Often, I find that my conversations on the nature of religion or politics(in my opinion, the same subject) end "prematurely." That is to say, we get to the end of the conversation very quickly as there's not much to talk about when you're talking to a totalitarian from a libertarian stand point. There's only so many times you can say "we're going to have to agree to disagree" before you eventually have to agree to disagree. As long as you know how to get to the direct heart of the matter you can end conversations before people get angry.
Often, I find that my conversations on the nature of religion or politics(in my opinion, the same subject) end "prematurely." That is to say, we get to the end of the conversation very quickly as there's not much to talk about when you're talking to a totalitarian from a libertarian stand point. There's only so many times you can say "we're going to have to agree to disagree" before you eventually have to agree to disagree. As long as you know how to get to the direct heart of the matter you can end conversations before people get angry.
I hardly ever talk about politics, but I've never had a religious discussion that [b/]stayed[/b] civil.
Usually, I say something, or they say something that pisses off the other and it becomes a heated discussion.
Usually, I say something, or they say something that pisses off the other and it becomes a heated discussion.
Few days ago. I like to debate, and indeed part of science is debate, and having a heated debate doesn't necessarily mean you are being unpolite. In fact rudeness harms the debate. I can tell a person I think he is wrong and he me he thinks I'm wrong, and it can all stay civilized.
Of course since I talk a lot about dead religions it doesn't get into personal issues because of that either, but I like to know about different kinds of life-styles, and for example what say, the Christianity is like around the world.
Of course since I talk a lot about dead religions it doesn't get into personal issues because of that either, but I like to know about different kinds of life-styles, and for example what say, the Christianity is like around the world.
Religions never make claims, people do. Where those claims are scientific claims they are subject to scientific study. Where they are belief systems they are not. Nobody believes in evolution. There may be considerably disagreement and doubt of the mechanism and methods of evolution but the basic premise (that life changes over time to adapt to changes in the environment) is not a matter of belief but of fact.Lieju said:
God, deities, the nature of the soul, the nature of natures soul, the words of Gautama Buddha, the Wiccan Rede, concepts of morality, ethics, right and wrong, justice, these things are not scientific in nature. They are based on belief. There is absolutely no basis for scientific study there because these are issues outside of the physical universe, thus the scientific method does not apply.
(American) Political debates are fun to have on the internet, because a few people don't really know that much about American politics or history. (Yes, history does have a lot to do with how things are run today folks.) It's fun because a few people who side with their political party think that their party can do no wrong, which by all means, is wrong. 
And I can prove it, but I won't actually say "You're wrong, go die". I would actually let the person state their facts (or opinions) and then offer my counter argument.
I don't like religious debates. I find them much more close minded in general than political debates. Most people I've seen thus far will just say, "You're wrong" or something else close minded like that. Saying that "you're wrong" is never a way to fuel a debate. Unless you can DISPROVE that there is or is not a God or gods, then don't tell a religious person, or lack there of, that they are wrong.
And I can prove it, but I won't actually say "You're wrong, go die". I would actually let the person state their facts (or opinions) and then offer my counter argument.I don't like religious debates. I find them much more close minded in general than political debates. Most people I've seen thus far will just say, "You're wrong" or something else close minded like that. Saying that "you're wrong" is never a way to fuel a debate. Unless you can DISPROVE that there is or is not a God or gods, then don't tell a religious person, or lack there of, that they are wrong.
A few days ago.
And that's with me being an agnostic socialist. Its always possible to be civil to people of other opinions
And that's with me being an agnostic socialist. Its always possible to be civil to people of other opinions