Freedomain Radio

in
Latest post Wed, May 21 2008 4:41 AM by Dtomboy. 91 replies.
Page 5 of 7 (92 items) « First ... < Previous 3 4 5 6 7 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • Mon, May 19 2008 6:46 PM In reply to

    Re: talking about the Bible

    Dtomboy:
     His parents weren't here looking for some thoughts and advice and input on developing relationships in college, he was.  And if he wants to hang out with them at this point, then why continue to push right now?  This thread could have gone in a whole other direction if people would have just started to talk to him about going off to college and what he could do to find new friends.  And if he would have stayed here and continued to learn more about developing future relationships in college, then maybe he would have found his relationship with his parents to be troublesome.  Or maybe not.  But why not trust him to learn and grow on his own, in his own time?

    This really resonated with me when I read it. I don't think I knew exactly what bothered me so much about this thread before, but I think Dtomboy nailed it. Tyler didn't even really bring up his parents' religion; Stef and a few others did. Tyler didn't complain about his parents' beliefs; again, it was Stef et al. Tyler didn't even deny that their beliefs were wrong; he only denied the implications that Stef and the others were making about how his family must advocate murder, etc.

    That kid definitely would have stuck around. The message he got, though, was, "Not going to complain about your parents? Better move along, then ..."

    Well done, guys! 

  • Mon, May 19 2008 7:17 PM In reply to

    Re: talking about the Bible

    Derrick:

    Dtomboy:
     His parents weren't here looking for some thoughts and advice and input on developing relationships in college, he was.  And if he wants to hang out with them at this point, then why continue to push right now?  This thread could have gone in a whole other direction if people would have just started to talk to him about going off to college and what he could do to find new friends.  And if he would have stayed here and continued to learn more about developing future relationships in college, then maybe he would have found his relationship with his parents to be troublesome.  Or maybe not.  But why not trust him to learn and grow on his own, in his own time?

    This really resonated with me when I read it. I don't think I knew exactly what bothered me so much about this thread before, but I think Dtomboy nailed it. Tyler didn't even really bring up his parents' religion; Stef and a few others did. Tyler didn't complain about his parents' beliefs; again, it was Stef et al. Tyler didn't even deny that their beliefs were wrong; he only denied the implications that Stef and the others were making about how his family must advocate murder, etc.

    That kid definitely would have stuck around. The message he got, though, was, "Not going to complain about your parents? Better move along, then ..."

    Well done, guys! 

    First of all, I think that sarcasm is a pretty pathetic way to motivate people to become better.

    Secondly, if anyone comes to me and tells me that his parents, who belong to a cult that demands my death, and the deaths of many other people  I treasure, are wonderful and moral people, who are capable of great love, ethics and devotion, then I will now, and in the future, point out the contradiction.

    I do not do so with hatred or hostility, since I do understand that it is a tough reality for people to accept. I of course do not - and did not - claim that this young man's parents directly wanted me dead, or any such nonsense like that.

    However, if a man claims that his parents are in the KKK, but are not at all racist, then call me crazy, but I don't think I do any service to him, or to the truth, or ethics in general or my own integrity in particular, by pretending to ignore that basic fact.

    One day, those who consider themselves just and moral will actually get upset with murderous doctrines of the Christians, rather than with me for pointing that reality out.


    All Free! - Audio, PDF. Print starting @ $9.99+
    Freedomain Radio Needs Your Support!


    My status

  • Mon, May 19 2008 8:55 PM In reply to

    Re: talking about the Bible

    Stefan Molyneux:
    if anyone comes to me and tells me that his parents, who belong to a cult that demands my death, and the deaths of many other people  I treasure, are wonderful and moral people, who are capable of great love, ethics and devotion, then I will now, and in the future, point out the contradiction.

    But let's be very clear about this, because it's pretty important: You don't actually know what his parent's do or don't believe.

    You say "All Christians advocate X." And he responded with the expected, "My parents don't advocate X". You can say "Well, they're not Christians then," and that's fine. In fact, I think Tyler even admitted as much when he said that his parents wouldn't call themselves Christians if they agreed with you. So what you have is a semantic argument about what the definition of "Christian" is, not an argument about what his parents advocate.

    Either you know what his parents do and don't believe, or you are just waving around your own definition of the word "Christian," imagining that it has some kind of authority. Do you know what they believe? I don't see how you could, unless he PMed you some information that we're all not privy to. Beyond him saying that they were religious, and that they went to church, he didn't really give any specific information. As far as I can tell, you just assumed it all.

  • Mon, May 19 2008 9:42 PM In reply to

    Re: talking about the Bible

    Well I never said that 'all christians advocate X' - my direct words were:

    I do have a few problems with Christians, since their book - OT and NT - tells them that it is moral to murder me...

    Also, Tyler said:

    my family are all LDS

    This is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints of course. This is a fairly specific Christian cult.


    All Free! - Audio, PDF. Print starting @ $9.99+
    Freedomain Radio Needs Your Support!


    My status

  • Tue, May 20 2008 12:15 AM In reply to

    • pcrs
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on Sun, Apr 1 2007
    • Houten, The Netherlands
    • Posts 2,133
    • Philosopher King

    Re: Testing Bridges, and Hello!

    Stefan Molyneux:

    As I mentioned above, I am talking about the Bible, and Christianity, Judaism and Islam as doctrines, not each individual Christian of course.

    It amazes me - I mean, it thoroughly amazes me - that Christians can worship a god that tells them to kill me, and when I point this out, the only person who is considered offensive is me.

    Seriously - wow.

    But there is something strange going on. If you tell them about the kill commandment, they show disbelief. "where is that written ? Though shall not kill, turn the other cheek", they seem to magically skip those parts and I must say that I have been read from the bible every dinner as a kid, but was not aware of the direct kill commandments, although the violence was clear (the flood, crucifiction all the wars in the OT).

    From preaxeology it also follows that following bible commands and killing you is not their highest value, since actions reveal your values and they do not kill you.

    Violence has nothing with which to cover itself except the lie, and the lie has nothing to stand on other than violence. Any man who has once acclaimed violence as his method must inexorably choose the lie as his principle. Solzhenitsyn, Alexander

  • Tue, May 20 2008 2:26 AM In reply to

    • davidngo
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on Tue, Apr 22 2008
    • Posts 9

    Re: talking about the Bible

    "if you go in and start thumping in on their reason, they will just get defensive and you won't get anywhere"  --- stef

    "the point is to get THEM to think, it's not for you to be right, and it's not for you to correct them.  the point is to get them to think, cause that's a self-sustaining thing.  don't give him answers, you teach him to think, cause then he can do it on his own, and then he can become a force for truth"  -- stef

    not exactly sure you were taking your own advice here, stef.

    i don't think anyone is arguing that what you said wasn't true.  or that speaking the truth is inherently a bad thing.  in many situations, saying the emperor has no clothes is good.  but i definitely with this kid, there was a better way to get him to take the "pill of rationality and reason".

    just something to think about. 

     
    i know i've seen you act with much more level-headedness and with more ninja-like elegance than this.  you've gotten much more aggressive and disagreeable people to see your way, with a lot more tact and curiosity.  i don't think there's any reason why this kid couldn't have been dealt with in the same manner.

    here's to better times ahead!
     

  • Tue, May 20 2008 3:24 AM In reply to

    Re: talking about the Bible

    davidngo:

    "if you go in and start thumping in on their reason, they will just get defensive and you won't get anywhere"  --- stef

    "the point is to get THEM to think, it's not for you to be right, and it's not for you to correct them.  the point is to get them to think, cause that's a self-sustaining thing.  don't give him answers, you teach him to think, cause then he can do it on his own, and then he can become a force for truth"  -- stef

    not exactly sure you were taking your own advice here, stef.

    i don't think anyone is arguing that what you said wasn't true.  or that speaking the truth is inherently a bad thing.  in many situations, saying the emperor has no clothes is good.  but i definitely with this kid, there was a better way to get him to take the "pill of rationality and reason".

    just something to think about. 

     
    i know i've seen you act with much more level-headedness and with more ninja-like elegance than this.  you've gotten much more aggressive and disagreeable people to see your way, with a lot more tact and curiosity.  i don't think there's any reason why this kid couldn't have been dealt with in the same manner.

    here's to better times ahead!
     

    I think Stefan handled it the best way possible. Isn't that interesting?

    "As a vivid, living value, the nation-state as an object of worship and a source of practical and moral solutions is as dead as King Tutankhamun."-- S. Molyneux

  • Tue, May 20 2008 4:18 AM In reply to

    Re: talking about the Bible

    Stefan Molyneux:
    Well I never said that 'all christians advocate X' ...

    Well, no, you did. You said, "If your parents do not subscribe to any of the violence and evil in the Bible, then they are not Christians of course" (emphasis mine). I think you'll agree that any point you make in that sort of way is a tautological one. Whether or not someone fits your definition of Christian is irrelevant to what they actually believe.

    Stefan Molyneux:
    This is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints of course. This is a fairly specific Christian cult.

    Even knowing this his parents are LDS, you still don't know what they believe. And definitely not with the kind of certainty that would allow you to assert that they think you should be killed. I can't say much about Mormons in Chicago; here in NY, though, there's a sizable community, and most of them are pretty normal, liberal New Yorkers. I know Mormons who are gay, mormons who don't go to church, and even mormons who are libertarians :) Just because someone wears the badge of a religion doesn't mean much.

    Tyler said his parents were pedestrian, so why not believe him? They're probably no different then most of our parents. In fact, they might be a whole lot better. Are you a "single issue voter" on the issue of religion, Stef? Isn't it possible that his family, in spite of their silly mythologies, could have been decent people?

  • Tue, May 20 2008 7:55 AM In reply to

    Re: talking about the Bible

    "Subscribe to" <> "advocate"

    "Subscribe to" = "accept"

    "advocate" = "urge others to enact"

    Any person who rejects all the evil and violence in the Bible must necessarily reject most of the book - and, as a consequence, must reject God as an evil deity, since it is God who performs the majority of these evil actions.

    There is a reason I use specific words, but of course that means little to those who wish to twist them.

    I am not going to continue with this thread, since no one who is criticizing me has bothered to ask me why I did what I did, or shown any curiosity, and I believe that I have earned that consideration.

    However, for those who feel concerned about Tyler, he is very easy to contact - someone mentioned that he is posting on another forum, so you can go and talk to him there:

     

     
    If you are concerned about him, it is far better to talk to him directly of course.Smile


    All Free! - Audio, PDF. Print starting @ $9.99+
    Freedomain Radio Needs Your Support!


    My status

  • Tue, May 20 2008 10:18 AM In reply to

    Re: talking about the Bible

    Right, it's everybody else's fault for not being curious about about you. Your curiosity about Tyler? Basically non-existent. You didn't ask him reasonable questions about his parent's faith, you didn't ask him about the anxiety he was feeling about leaving him. No, none of that. You jumped right into an anti-religious tirade, and implied that his parents advocated your murder.

    And when he took offense to your characterizations--which were based on no actual facts about his family's behavior--you told him to take a hike. It couldn't possibly be that you made a mistake, that you banned Tyler from these boards for basically no good reason, could it? It has to be that other people are twisting your words, trying to make you look like a big, bad bully. 

    I'm not too concerned about Tyler. I think he handled himself just fine. What I'm concerned about is the lack of independent thought on this website, and your apparent encouragement of that phenomenon. "Oh I love familes! Familes are great," you say, and yet (1) you don't actually have any, and (2), basically everyone you allow to stay on this site is asked to indict their parents for something when the subject comes up. And you love to bring the subject up, don't you? There are all these call-in shows where someone will be feeling bad, or will be having relationship trouble, and you'll walk them through your little step-by-step -- with your characteristically manipulative "..., right?" at the end of every other sentence, as if it was really a question -- until finally they're convinced that all their woes, and all the woes of the world, are because of abusive, 'corrupt' parents.

    But then some teenager shows up and doesn't have anything terrible to say about them, you basically tell him that he's in denial, and not to come back. Again, you had zero information about his family and their behavior. Whatever you think about them, whatever horrible beliefs you attribute to them, is all coming from within yourself. As far as I can tell, Tyler had no real complaints about them. You, and a few other rabid interrogators are the only ones who even seemed to care what his parents think about God. He only mentioned it in passing in his original question.

    Why not just be honest about it? You seem to think that anyone who is religious, no matter to what extent, is beyond redemption. You apparently believe that parents who are religious are necessarily abusive. And please, please just be honest about how you really feel about families. Stop all these disclaimers about how great families are, and how wonderful families can be. I doubt you've ever given an example, certainly I've never heard it, of a family that you actually approved of. Well, apart from your own "family" of course, which is just absurd. Your little family of two, right? With all the chid-rearing experience you don't have, all the difficulties you never had to face yourself, you get to sit in your empty house and take pot-shots at all the "horrible" families out there who have the corruption and arrogance to make mistakes as they raise children, or to teach their children things that they honestly believe are truth. Shame on them, right?  

    You're like a guy who can't stomach musical performances because of all the mistakes he hears from the players. "Oh they're so terrible," he exclaims, "They shouldn't be allowed near an instrument." But when asked whether he'll ever pick up the craft himself, he says, "Nah, it's not for me." It's convenient. It's very easy to criticize others for something that you yourself are immune to. It doesn't take much courage or insight to accuse people of mistakes that you, yourself, don't ever have to worry about. 

    And, no, you do not need to whip our your banning gun on my behalf. I don't plan on coming back. Reading through this thread, and seeing your renewed inability to take responsibility for your own mistakes and biases is, I think, reason enough to abandon this environment. 

Page 5 of 7 (92 items) « First ... < Previous 3 4 5 6 7 Next >
Copyright 2005-2009 By Stefan Molyneux
Powered by Community Server (Non-Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems