Should faith be respected?

Again, that is your interpretation and opinion. Remember, I am the one who rejects logic, therefore you are mistaken in saying "by your logic".

"wrong" is an ambiguous term.

Again, you are merely expressing your opinion and basing that opinion on an ambiguous term.. "wrong".

 

Well as somebody who - on the face of it - does not have it, you can of course not know that faith and trust are very close together. As for trust: well, I too tend to be more of a northern-German type: one is lucky if it only takes 20 years for a northern-German to regard you as a friend. Some people think they are a bit stiff because of that.
As for my trust in God: He has not let me down for far longer than just 20 years now. And even though there were certainly moments in my life in which just like Job I wished I’d never been born, in my mind my every living moment and every breath I take is ‘evidence’ for this.

Seeing that you too seem to like Nick Cave:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL7q79kFWQQ

 

You have to be trying pretty hard not to get this.

If the pledge said "under Satan", that would clearly be exclusive (and disrespectful) of Christians. Saying "well, just skip that part when you recite the Pledge" doesn't really address the problem of the Pledge being divisive to begin with.

There is no good reason to have a Pledge that excludes nonbelievers, or polytheists. The phrase should be dropped, and the Pledge restored to its pre-1954 form.

 

From my (theist turned atheist) perspective, faith should be respected only to the extent that people have a right to believe whatever they like personally. No one can force anyone else's belief one way or another, unless maybe they're Big Brother....

I personally have no respect personally for factually unfounded beliefs, however, at least as something that might have merit. I'm not overly fond of children being indoctrinated into such beliefs or ways of thinking, either, and I like the idea of keeping religious indoctrination away from the young and impressionable among us. Those just aren't good lessons to be instilling in kids, in particular because it discourages critical thinking and objectivity.

 

Thanks to thousands of years of religious rule it has become taboo to criticize. In fact doing so automatically lands one any number of negative labels, like militant. In no other discourse is this kind of hands off respect given.

Sam Harris talked about if someone say at a job interview or perhaps in everyday conversation stated that they believe Elvis is still alive that person automatically pays a price, usually in unconcealed laughter. They wouldn't even make to the point where they say how this isn't a truth claim, that it's more of a metaphysical claim, that indeed looking at you they could see that you might be Elvis....

What happened to respect being something that is earned?

If everything is true than nothing is, if we care about the claims people make about the world we live in (which we must) then I will treat religion and faith in religion like anything else and respect it when it proves it deserves it.

 

No, actually it is quite easy.

Well, it doesn't and therefore I don't have to. All of the man-made laws are devisive in one way or another... so,, let's do away with all of the man-made laws.

There you go using those ambiguous terms. This time it is "good' as in 'good reason'. More opinion on your part.

 

My mistake; I thought you were interested in an intellectually honest discussion.

 

Well, I am... when is one going to show up on this forum?

 

No the pledge should be abolished altogether in schools. It is nothing but a form of indoctrination. A child should be free to choose their loyalties when they choose them unimpeded by some silly ritual. They should be made to sing the song about the spider and the water spout instead.

 

Silly. That would simply amount to substituting one form of indoctrination with another.

 

Well, yes. I usually preface posts on this by saying I think civilian loyalty oaths are something you see in totalitarian societies, not free democracies. Have a private group that wants to recite the Pledge? Knock yourself out. Have government employees lead children in reciting it every morning? No.

 

Are there any "free democracies"?

 

Why? Is it druidism to acknowledge that the rain will knock the spider out of the water spout but he will climb right back up it again, or is it because spider is code for black people?

 

Have you even considered the various definitions of the word "indoctrinate". Among those definitions is the word "teach".

 

Kids are usually taught that song before they ever get to school, which is why I chose it as the politically acceptable group song that required no additional learning, effort, or message. Otherwise, I would have selected something more normative like:

[video=youtube;MF5pbroiSoA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MF5pbroiSoA[/video]

 

There you go, admitting what I was just talking about. Indoctrination can begin even before school... they are being taught (indoctrinated)... allowing kids to watch TV cartoons is even a form of indoctrination, as they learn various behavior patterns from watching such things as portrayed on TV... I have seen this happening with my own grandchildren. regrettable but true.... then I am faced with the problem of eradicating that indoctrination and substituting it with another form which I believe to be more appropriate in this society. Point being this: Indoctrination happens.

 

Since you have yet to address what the spider song is teaching that is wrong and failed to address why Fred Should Wear His Trousers on His Head, I can only assume that you are anti-knowledge.

 

I have addressed the song.. I said it was another form of indoctrination. what type of indoctrination??? Believing in fairy tales and nursery rhymes. I have seen many spiders weave a web that resists the pressure of water flowing through a pipe.. and have seen the spider still within that web after the water quit flowing. So your analogy is a fail. The "anti-knowledge" thing is also false. I have a degree in computer technology. Try again.

 

I have many degrees but that does not mean that the spider in the song is a form of indoctrination. There is no mention of a web--just it crawling, so no you have not addressed it.

 

Seemingly then you have never seen a spider tread water. Learn a little about this natural world while you are attempting to dissuade others of their beleif.

 

The rhyme makes no reference to him treading water and I at least am unfamiliar with any spiders that can go up a waterfall so it is still a non-answer.

 

I would say, yes, as long as the person's 'faith' does not infringe upon other's rights.

Disrespect for another person's faith or philosophy of life is just immature & petty. People have a right to believe as they wish, & others have a right to disparage them.. i would not support a 'faith bashing' law that outlaws criticism or ridicule of any beliefs. Free speech is not always pretty, & seldom is politically correct, but it beats the tyranny of conformity from the left.. so i would NOT support any ploy to 'help the poor, abused christians' by stifling free speech. They would use that against everyone, & you can kiss free speech goodbye..

 

Much in the same manner is you still not admitting that indoctrination happens... in every home and every institution and organization across the globe.

 

home does not matter. We just need to stop these schools from teaching our kids anything.

 

Then get rid of the school system and save billions of tax dollars.