• Kalash@feddit.ch
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    So you want religion banned across the board?

    No, just dangerous ideologies (which include all major religions). Religions like pastafarism or the satanic temple are totally fine.

    • Lightdm@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      What means dangerous in this case? And what makes the major religions dangerous?

      • Kalash@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        What means dangerous in this case?

        Just it’s regular textbook definition.

        And what makes the major religions dangerous?

        Claiming a monopolity on truth, indoctrinating people with lies, promiting homophobia, xenophobia, rape, violence, slavery, etc.

        • Lightdm@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Most governments indoctrinate their people with lies. Christianity and islam and strongly against xenophobia (I don’t have much knowledge about judaism, so can’t speak for or against it). Same goes for rape. Slavery is legal to this day in the USA for example.
          I hope you can see my point, that standing on the moral basis of the modern western societies can make it seem like people, who live their lifes following different rules, may be “backwards” or “morally inferior” but you are lacking the logical foundation to claim something like that.

          • Kalash@feddit.ch
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Most governments indoctrinate their people with lies

            I agree, but one wrong doesn’t justify another one.

            I hope you can see my point, that standing on the moral basis of the modern western societies can make it seem like people, who live their lifes following different rules, may be “backwards” or “morally inferior” but you are lacking the logical foundation to claim something like that.

            Not sure there is much of a point. Morality in an entirly human invented concept, no one has any fundation for it other than their personal believes. If I believe people that follow religious rules are backwards that claim is just as logical founded as a religions person thinking I’m am infidel that will burn in hell. It’s all made up. Some of the made up stories are just way stupider than others.

            • Lightdm@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              If you agree that humans alone can’t claim what is universally right and wrong, then that is a first step towards religion, but I will leave that aside.
              It seems like you agree that you have no basis on which to claim, with a degree of authority, that someone has to adjust their actions in your vicinity. If you don’t contest this then I will leave this discussion, as you have confirmed, that you can’t just forbid others from dressing in a certain way.
              If you do not agree then I would like to understand how you can say that “morality is an entirely human inventes concept, no one has any foundation for it…” and then go on to say that somehow you can in fact impose your morality on others, as I understood it because their “made up stories are just way stupider than others”? According to which scale? One that does suddenly pop out of nowhere and is absolute for all humans?

            • Theobroma@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              I’ve read most of your respones in this thread and have deemed them thoroughly thought out.

    • branchial@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      So religions are not inherently dangerous ideologies but some of them are.

      By what criteria should a government decide which religions should be banned?

      • Kalash@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I’d start with looking through their club charters and apply general hate speech rules.

        • branchial@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          But we are talking about banning an entire religion and any symbol or item associated with it from the public and workplace, not some clubs and their signage. My question is how should a government decide if e.g. christianity as a religion is a dangerous ideology, and should therefore be banned, or whether it isn’t? We are not talking about banning some clubs here, but your claim that some religions are inherently so dangerous that any religious display or symbolism should be banned from the public and workplace. And presumably since they are so dangerous probably ought to be banned in entirety.

          • Kalash@feddit.ch
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Same way they decide which terrorist groups and nazi organisation are dangerous. You look at their fucking charters/book/scripture and the actions of their members.

            • branchial@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Do all of the organisations of that religion need to be dangerous to warrant a ban on the entire religion or just some clubs? The biggest clubs, the most clubs, whats the criteria here? What about people practicing that religion that do not belong to any religious organisation?

              Again you are proposing banning an entire religion, that means places of worship, religious texts and items and removal of any public display of these religions because they are deemed as dangerous as nazis. So it stands to reason that any building or statue that displays the same religious symbols ought to be demolished or vandalised to the point where it can no longer be recognized as a building of that religion.

              How should a government judge a religion as worthy of such persecution as the nazis?

              edit: maybe via an example. Tell me which religions you want the government to ban and why.