Posted by llrrrpp on June 1, 2006, at 14:20:14
In reply to Offensive statements, posted by curtm on June 1, 2006, at 12:20:24
The thing is, that the Christian notion of God as some universal thing that affects ME, whether I believe in him or not-- THIS is so intrusive on my own personal beliefs. By simply saying that I have no God, no God watches over me etc etc I will offend any true believer in the Judeo-Christian concept of God. We simultaneously offend one another, simply by saying something about our own personal beliefs. Whether or not we phrase it in "I" language or not. It's a lose-lose situation.
Bob, I'm concerned that certain religions may be given preference in terms of what is deemed "civil" on the faith board. To call someone who questions the universality of god uncivil is to offend his or her faith, which is also uncivil.
Not that estella questioned the universality of God. I'm not sure exactly what's going on. I can't wrap my mind around it. too many parameters to consider simultaneously.
I just wonder whether it's possible to concede a truce, when two people's beliefs are equally believed, and equally civil, and equally uncivil. Why does there have to be a loser?
poster:llrrrpp
thread:646675
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060525/msgs/651522.html