I think that we all have the right to believe in the manner than feels right in our hearts and our soul. We do not have the right, however, to insist that other people believe the way we do. It is up to each of us to find our own answer regarding faith. We should not badger others about their faith or presume that we know what is best or right for anyone but our own spirit.
Maybe if the news and press would stop helping these people create an issue out of it, we may be able to tone down the whole fight regarding this issue. It is personal, leave it that way, encourage people to find their own way and do not give the bully's air time.
Maybe if the news and press would stop helping these people create an issue out of it,
Who exactly are you referring to when you say "these people" and who are the "bullies" ?
"While I happen to agree that religion should be a private matter, there are nonetheless those whose religious beliefs include a duty to spread their beliefs as much as possible. This is the heart of evangelicalism." -Dreamer71
Though there is a lot of truth in this statement, I see some confusion on your end. Evangelizing is not contrary to private matters. If a person, in public, goes to another person, in public, engages them personally one on one...that matter is private. So what does it mean then, to not be private evangelicism? It means state-sponsored evangelicism. That certainly isn't happening right now. So for the time being, your point is moot. But do not confuse keeping religion private to mean "a person cannot come up to another person and discuss religion with them." The day you say that, believe that, or it becomes law...is the day I tell you you violate the law when you try to discuss large scale evolution or atheism to me.
"though; one's right to believe ends where the next guy's right not to be coerced begins." -Dreamer71
And probably several steps prior to that, even. Though there is a HUGE difference between coercion and evangelicism. Heck, even those annoying Jehovah's witnesses aren't even an inkling of 1% coercive. Coercion means to compel to your side (your belief, in this case) with the use of force, physical force. Don't link nasty words to very reasonable loving actions such as evangelicism. Though if someone literally throws a Bible at you...you should probably do something about it lol. Call the police or somethin.
"Q. There is nothing reasonable or loving in evangelism to someone who does not want or care for your personal beliefs. It is offensive, rude, and hateful." -Physics
Offensive, rude, and hateful? Hardly! Its about the furthest from rude and hateful, and only questionably offensive because "offensive" is a subjective word. Evangelicism is undoubtedly done in wrongful ways sometimes, but evangelicism itself is not any of those characteristics AND most evangelicists are very kind, courteous, loving, and charismatic in their approach. The only true offensiveness, rudeness, and hatefulness common in evangelicism is when the approached person responds back to the evangelist in rude, hateful, or offensive ways. If you do not want to be engaged by an evangelist you can kindly ask them to leave and close the door on them, game over, no offenses committed on either side. But thats just not the way you would like to portray it would you?
Allow me to flip the coin to the other side if you insist on your prognosis. Look at the other side of your prognosis. Evangelism is not strictly a Christian word. Evangelism means to convey a message, a personal one at that. So how does that play into atheism, for example? Every time you spout off any thoughts about atheism in this world, according to your own statement, you are being offensive, rude, and hateful towards those you preach it to. Consider that food for thought. Once again trumped by the very ammunition you use to attack others, when you find that ammunition pierces the armor of your own school of thought.
Offensive, rude, and hateful? Hardly! Its about the furthest from rude and hateful"
Wrong, it is rude. Very.
It's not like there is a human being in this country with even limited cognitive ability that hasn't already "heard the good news", ad nauseum. We have the information, and we know where to get more if we want it. It's not like there isn't a church on every other street corner. We've heard it all. And, we have made our personal decision as to what we believe! That's just not it
And so yes, it is rude when somone tries to evangelize me. They are basically telling me that the way I already believe with all my heart is somehow faulty. My beliefs are not good enough. In fact ,the message they convey is that my personal beliefs are so faulty, evil even, that I am doomed to eternal hell; but their (correct) belief can save me.!
And in the case of a stranger; even approaching me about something so personal as my own spiritual beliefs, is rude and intrusive...let alone doing it to tell me that how I believe is wrong.
It is not only rude, it is presumptive and arrogant.
Well obviously I think my beliefs are better than any other beliefs
contradictory to mine. Be modest. Who doesn't? Again, the ammunition
is sent right back at your face. When you evangelize atheism and large
scale evolution its because you think your beliefs are better than
"2) I should adopt your beliefs and discard mine" -Phy
Well, certainly if I think my beliefs are better than those that
contradict them it would only be reasonable that I think others should
adopt them. And in that same light, AGAIN, you believe the same as you
constantly banter on this forum about how you need to spread your
message of atheism and enlightening others to get them out of their
Sorry, Q. But I don't think my beliefs are superior, and I have NEVER ONCE evangelized for atheism.
You will not find one single, in context, quote from me that evangelizes for anything other than an honest practice of science.
Search. Look. I urge you to find one.
You will not.
Which takes your entire rant and off topic post full of admitted arrogance and condescension and makes it completely false.
Further, science has nothing at all to do with religious beliefs. Not one single small little piece of science has anything to do with religion.
Your ignorant merging of the two is what is objectionable.
If you wish to vainly attempt to attack science, then feel free to create a new (and another useless) thread where you are ripped apart by every other rational person who posts.
"No. Because I have never told anyone their beliefs are wrong. Never. Not once. Never happened." -Phy
You told me I was wrong about 100 times at least, me alone. How can
you make such a statement without feeling like a liar? You do it to
just about every person on this forum every day.
I have never ONCE told anyone their beliefs are wrong. You have done so several times in this last posting of yours alone.
I have told you your FACTS are wrong. I have patiently explained where you are ignorant about science. I have firmly and clearly told you where you are wrong about science.
That has nothing to do with religion or religious beliefs, and everything to do with the world.
You have never once had any evidence to support your claims of false science. No journal articles, no peer reviewed sources, just your own personal opinon.