394
Important distinction
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
394 points (73.2% liked)
Memes
45560 readers
1210 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
If extremist = trying to convince others, who are not interested, to join you relligion, then I agree
The problem is that they aren't trying to convince anyone to join their religion, they are trying to remove the choice by changing laws to reflect their religion. They could give two shits about if you believe, as long as you obey.
Then it has nothing to do with religion. Religion is just the excuse to gain power over others.
Well then you should not try to convince people to accept atheism as well🤷🏻
Edit: This is not a serious counter argument in case it isn’t clear, ofc no one is going to every individual person, events and stalls are put up for this purpose, so it is obv. that the only one who will go there are the ones who are interested, there should be no force involved
I have never had an athiest knock on my door and tell me I needed to stop believing in God or I am going to suffer for eternity.
The thing convincing people to be athiests isn't other athiests. Facts and logic are the missionaries for athieism.
Trying to save a person by pulling them out of the cave of ignorance isn't the same thing as trying to convince them that the boogyman wants them to stay in the dark. This is an enormous false equivalency.
A religious person has the exact same argument...
Yes, I'm aware. The difference is in that one of our beliefs is founded in the observable world and the other delusion. One holds up to scrutiny and the other does not.
Scientific scrutiny shows there are health benefits to belonging to a religious organization. The only thing that "holds up to scrutiny" is "I'm right and you're wrong" which, again, the religious person also believes.
So instead of having "rules for thee but not for me", maybe everyone should not be trying to force their beliefs on others.
Assuming we've read the same study, that study also showed the exact same benefits you're describing could be achieved with regular yoga or meditation; it seems to me the real benefit is getting out of your own head and devoting yourself to something other than your internal monologue for awhile.
But beyond that, any health benefits are entirely an aside to whether or not the philosophy itself holds up to scrutiny, which no religion I've encountered does.
Finally, I don't believe in rules for thee, not me. They are welcome to present their beliefs in the marketplace of ideas as well. I believe in the power of veracity; I am not challenged by false ideals. I'm not anti-proselytizing, i believe in proselytizing the proselytizers.