Saturday, March 11, 2017

Shoving your beliefs down someone's throat.

Is it wrong to force someone else to live their lives based on your own religious belief system? Many people were brought up to believe that that is what they ought to do.But maybe that's absolutely wrong.

16 comments:

John Moore said...

For most things we generally think of as religious, it's bad to force others to conform. On the other hand, religion tends to work its way into all aspects of life, so we need to set some kind of limit.

Apologists sometimes claim it's a religious matter to not commit murder. Thus, laws against murder force people to conform to the Ten Commandments. I think this is taking the case way too far.

Maybe we can draw a dividing line between religion and down-to-earth things as follows: If it's a question of the afterlife, that's religious; but if it's a question of thriving in this earthly life, that's practical and down-to-earth.

Laws shouldn't try to lead people to a good afterlife, but it's OK for laws to try to improve our material existence in the here and now.

Ilíon said...

"Is it wrong to force someone else to live their lives based on your own religious belief system?"

The answer is both "Yes" and "No" -- the question as posed is too open-ended to answer any more precisely than that.

"Many people were brought up to believe that that is what they ought to do."

You mean 'secularists' and/or 'atheists' and also leftists in general, right?

"But maybe that's absolutely wrong."

Obviously, it isn't absolutely wrong; see A#1

Lauris Olups said...

Hello Victor!

I've read your book and loved it. Is there an article on your blog that gives a short version of your argument? I want to show it to a couple of friends.

Joe Hinman said...

we have a duty to seek social justice, That;s a value and we have to display that value by living consistent with it not by mandating that people do as we say, This is the case withal of the Gospel

Atonement,m solidarity ,social justice, on Metacrock's blog

Legion of Logic said...

Joe,

I read your blog post you linked. A couple questions.

One, Paul does say we are all one in Christ and dissolved the distinctions between us in that context; two distinctions he never dispenses with: false teachers, and the roles of men and women in both a marriage and within the church. I don't believe Paul would go to the trouble of attacking false teaching if it wasn't a major issue, and I don't believe he would write about the roles of men and women if there was no difference. Your thoughts?

Two, I see a growing tide of leftists who, if not actively and physically attacking people who vote for the "wrong" party or express the "wrong" opinions, are perfectly happy labeling conservatives universally as bigots, and are quite willing to use the government as a cudgel to force people into compliance with their particular demographic beliefs.

I see accusations of racism and sexism where none exists. I see MLK's dream of character as the primary object of judgment being demolished by the left. I see equality of opportunity being thrown overboard and replaced with a demand for equality of outcome (where disparities are viewed as a sign of bigotry). And I see the rights of free speech for conservatives being curtailed every time the left is able to pull it off. And all of these things are considered social justice by these people.

So my second question to you is, what do you believe social justice is, and how does it exclude the above views and behaviors?

Ilíon said...

"... what do you believe social justice is ..."

It's a moving target ... and its *only* relationship to actual justice is the word 'justice'.

The truth is, God doesn't command us to "seek social justice"; he commands us to seek justice, justly (this is, by just means).

Joe Hinman said...

One, Paul does say we are all one in Christ and dissolved the distinctions between us in that context; two distinctions he never dispenses with: false teachers, and the roles of men and women in both a marriage and within the church. I don't believe Paul would go to the trouble of attacking false teaching if it wasn't a major issue, and I don't believe he would write about the roles of men and women if there was no difference. Your thoughts?

Most of the thing Paul is assumed to have said about women are wrong,he did not say for example that a woman should cover her head to show she's subjection, or many other things mistranslated.

Two, I see a growing tide of leftists who, if not actively and physically attacking people who vote for the "wrong" party or express the "wrong" opinions, are perfectly happy labeling conservatives universally as bigots, and are quite willing to use the government as a cudgel to force people into compliance with their particular demographic beliefs.


do you not know about the massive epidemic of anti semisweet in the country?> do you know the Trump campaign has awakened a huge increase in hate groups and neo Nazis? the protesters have a right to express protest and anger, they vigilance doesn't come close to the violence done by right wing groups,

I see accusations of racism and sexism where none exists. I see MLK's dream of character as the primary object of judgment being demolished by the left. I see equality of opportunity being thrown overboard and replaced with a demand for equality of outcome (where disparities are viewed as a sign of bigotry). And I see the rights of free speech for conservatives being curtailed every time the left is able to pull it off. And all of these things are considered social justice by these people.


you don't want to see it, you don't want to ask victims you want to assert its ok because you don't want the implications, read the reports by human rights groups it's an objective measure. those guys did not trash the Jewish cemetery as a college prank. I've gotten two death threats on face book for making intellectual arguments about economic policy. One of them insisted I'm a Jew because my name ends in man.

So my second question to you is, what do you believe social justice is, and how does it exclude the above views and behaviors?

justice is treating like cases in like manner; extending rights and priveliages without regard to social differences.

Joe Hinman said...

Social justice is relevant in a discussion about imposing your views, because to advocate for SJ we have to impose some things.

Joe Hinman said...

The truth is, God doesn't command us to "seek social justice"; he commands us to seek justice, justly (this is, by just means).

that is the kind of semantic bull shit I expect from right wingers. you just don;'t like it because it's a left wing term.

Legion of Logic said...

Most of the thing Paul is assumed to have said about women are wrong,he did not say for example that a woman should cover her head to show she's subjection, or many other things mistranslated.

Sources? I'm not denying it's true, I'm just wanting to read up on why you say this.


you know the Trump campaign has awakened a huge increase in hate groups and neo Nazis?

I know it's also awakened violence on the left. I don't differentiate or excuse either, but within the context of what is claimed (by leftists) to be actions for social justice, this violence is real. People getting beaten for being at a Trump rally or a conservative presentation at a university are not the ones instigating the violence.

you don't want to see it, you don't want to ask victims you want to assert its ok because you don't want the implications

I didn't deny there are racists, I said that accusations are thrown at people who are not racists. I see no evidence - and I'm not exaggerating, no evidence whatsoever - that the average vocal activist for social justice is able to see the difference between racism and things they simply don't agree with. I've been called a racist lots of times, despite my not even mentioning race. It's just an assumption thrown at me because I'm largely conservative.

I also see TONS of racism from the left - generally leveled at conservative members of so-called minority groups. Same with the hatred thrown at conservative women and homosexuals, the types of remarks that would never be tolerated in any other context.

My point is, social justice as a method of ensuring equal rights is fine and good, but leftists have a ton of baggage that they don't seem willing to condemn and discard. So long as hatred and bigotry are allowed under the social justice umbrella, the entire term is a non-starter for dialogue with those on the right.

Joe Hinman said...

Legion


I don't want to get us off on the women issue but here are my egal pages om Doxa

Joe Hinman said...

here is my specific page on gender equality.
The others are answering questions on passages such as 1 cor 11 but this is just a summary of the major passages that spell out gender equality,


"My point is, social justice as a method of ensuring equal rights is fine and good, but leftists have a ton of baggage that they don't seem willing to condemn and discard. So long as hatred and bigotry are allowed under the social justice umbrella, the entire term is a non-starter for dialogue with those on the right."

sure. leftists have a lot of BS. Let me tell you a little story. I once went down to a conference in San Antonio Texas of all the central America groups in the state, the major one's anywise. Before we could get any work done planning and discussing this one women came in and began talking about how evil men are and how we should scrap the whole central america thing and do feminism all the time.

We spent hours listening, com doling, arguing trying to understand what she had been though,
the meeting was breaking up. People were leaving. Finally this old socialist from Catholic labor group who had worked in central America for years and had seen it all, came up and offered to chair the meeting, He took it and went through the agenda with no discussion,He item after item "there being no discussion so ordered," we got through in five miniutes.

morak you wallow in the BS or you can cut through the bs

Joe Hinman said...

I did not say be a leftist I said work for social Justice

Nick said...

"we have a duty to seek social justice"... Social "justice" isn't justice.

Joe Hinman said...

why do you say that? social justice is justice that's why it;'s called "justice."

btw Metacrock's blog is about IQ testing. I dom't believe IQ tests ,measure intelligence.

Joe Hinman said...

but hey I dom't mean to cram my ideas down your throat