I only mocked literalism. Didn't mean to, but it's just so easy.

So the cutoff is billions of believers. Gotcha. So a few hundred years ago Christianity was a myth?

I didn't say that either.

Y'know I was on the fence about this whole mosque thing but since people like you oppose it then maybe the idea isn't so bad after all. I'll drop an email to my congressman telling him I don't have a problem with the idea.

See what happens when you make fun of peoples beliefs? Or is the cutoff too low for you?

I didn't say I was against it, in fact I said the opposite. I said it was unconstitutional to forbid a mosque, but not a church. That would be "establishment."

Since forbidding ALL would likely also run afoul of the 1st Amendment, it''s better to make sure there are NO zoning laws that particularly pertain to places of worship at all. Build the mosque, but I can build the "I hate stupid literalists" shop next door. Or a XXX Live Girls! place, complete with booze next door to the mosque—or any church I want.

The Islamists are counting on the support of non-coreligionist fundies to help them with establishing medieval laws in what is now the free world since they have so very much in common.

BTW, you said that a belief with a few billion worldwide deserves respect. Since the question was to make a cutoff between getting respect or not, I can only assume that any religion with fewer than a few billion gets no respect from you.

I'm always interested in what makes one religion a religon, and another a "cult" or "myth." Why, for example is Zeus any less deserving of respect than any other god? Also, what about sects? If one sect, say Catholicism, has more adherents than some particular sect of Christianity here in the US with a church in a strip mall, does that make the former more valid or deserving of respect?

Oh please. Stop trying to put words in my mouth. I said that perhaps you shouldn't mock the beliefs of those whose support you might need. Period.

I never told you not to respect any group, regardless of size. I never told you that you had to believe what they believe either. Clear?

I put no words in your mouth, I asked what makes one belief fantasy, while another deserves respect, and you immediately replied "a few billion members worldwide".

If a roll call is not the difference, what is? Do you judge yourself which story is believable, and which is silly? Mormon golden plates are "dumb, dumb, dumb," while walking on water is not? As a monotheist (you are Christian, correct?) you must think that your flavor is right, and that all other religions are wrong. That's not the same as saying they have a right to their own beliefs, you can till think that, but inside you must of course think they are not right, else you'd switch to their flavor, correct? Everyone talks of "greek mythology," but why not "greek religion?"

Me calling extant religions "fantasy" is no different than calling greek gods "myths." Though again, I was talking about fantasy in science classrooms. Extant, religious just-so stories are without question fantasy—which says nothing at all of the veracity of the religion necessarily (unless you are a literalist).

Whatever tater. Feel free to continue ignoring my point.

Is that real latin or did you make it up? :88)

Numbers aren't important when it comes to faith. Faith is a personal thing and therefore, nobody elses business. Its fine to think someone's belief is silly to you, but to mock them is wrong. You are supposed to be free to believe what ever you wish without being shamed for it. Which back to topic, I agree there should be no issues with mosques, or any other buildings (ie strip clubs) in any given zone, except for school zones. I believe religion, alchohol, and strippers should be kept well away from schools. :up:

Which point? The point that it's bad politics to insult a religion, then tell members they should listen to you?

Yeah, you're right, it is bad politics. Regardless, it is in the self-interest of those who are religious to heed my call for separation, since they have more to lose in many ways. Why? Because they are more "brittle." A biblical literalist has their entire world-view fall apart if one little literalism is put into question—if the earth is NOT 4000 years old, then the bible is 100% wrong! A non-literalist believer is not disturbed by that, they'd say, "the creation story is just a story, the universe is billions of years old, and the god of the bible is still real."

That literalism and the brittleness of belief in such a system goes a long way to explain why Islam is so regressive—because all major sects are what are called "fundamentalists" in Christian sects.

I'm still curious what the cutoff is for fantasy/cult/myth vs "real" religion is—or are all beliefs equally valid and deserving of respect?

If the all deserve respect , then you must respect, say, satanism, or some random "cult" as you do a major church. If the some are less deserving (cults, etc), then you can disrespect some religions for a particular set of reasons, in which case it is presumably OK for others to be less than respectful of yours for their own reasons (or even the same reasons).

Trouble is the church or mosque will almost always add a school, then they get their way.

Please be careful slinging the word myth when talking about Hellenism, some of us around here DO believe in the Hellenic Gods. Thank you.

On a side note we do need more Hellenic temples in this country.

Even though I think its wrong to be forced by your religion to attend any sort of organized-religious services, or change how you live your life.

:nope:

Why a believer demands respect for himself or his faith because he believes something, forever will be beyond me. He seems to assume that he has collected some merits by believing in something, as if he has accomplished something fo value for himself and for the community, deserving him the right to demand special status for himself.

Myth or not, believe what you ant, and but save others from needing to take note of it if they do not ask you. as long as you claim the right to make public your private beoief issue, peope like me will claim the right to ask critical questions about it, and call it a myth - or even a folly.

Because the fact that you believe in something - earns you no credits or special rights at all. ;) and where belief is made public, it is an object of public interest, public discourse, public disagreement, and any demand not to do so, please, is a political demand to give religion a special status that protects it from free speech, free thought, critical questioning, etc.

And that is unacceptable, always.

So you will need to live with people mentioning "myth" when pointing at your belief's objects and mechanisms. ;) Because we non-believers have no obligation at all to obey any implicit rules of behavior deriving from your belief. We are not part of your club, and don't want to be.

It's simple, Skybird. Your belief in something untestable and unprovable is a myth. My belief in something untestable and unprovable is the truth.

Get it yet?

Not really :timeout: - as long as you do not try to be ironic. :06: I admit I sometimes have difficulties to catch your humour.:)

Sorry about that. Not ironic, but sarcastic. Put more simply it's easy to fall into saying that very thing - "My faith is real, the other guy's is false".

Whatever, but is it necessary to become rude by calling people "ants"?

Or am I a bit oversensitive today? :-)

You keep casting lures at me but i'm just not going bite. You addressed my only point (finally) in the first paragraph. The rest of it is about you trying to pin me down on a subject that is irrelevant to my point.

Making fun of someones religious beliefs is rude. Do you seriously think that the size of the group you're insulting makes it any less rude?

I dont think a believer demands respect because they believe in something. They just demand the common courtesy not to be ridiculed anyone else demands. You cant mock someone for being a believer and you cant mock someone for being a nonbeliever. I agree though if you make your private faith public, or attempt to impose it on others you have opened yourself up to challenge. Though faith can be argued without resorting to ridicule, it seldom is so its best not to even bring it up to begin with. Its best to just drop it. You wont convert anyone to either side.

Now we're getting somewhere.

Let's say I agree with you, and apologize for being rude for insulting someone believing a religion. You'd not then make fun of a "cult?" What about those spaceship nuts that were here in NM for a while, then moved to CA—they had some sort of suicide pact as I recall, remember that? They deserve equal respect to, say, baptists?

As you say, the number of members doesn't matter.

If it is OK to make fun of ANY religious belief, it's OK to make fun of all of them.