Susan's Place Transgender Resources

So, this movie is clearly another sad attempt at keeping science and spirituality divided and at each other's throats, not to mention the ridiculous relationship drama over someone believing in God. Whoever made this movie has no concept of reality.

What they should have done is find a way to combine faith and reason, because there's no valid purpose for trying to prove the existence of a god, whether it's the God of Abraham or Zeus or Allah. Whoever is obsessed with proving something that cannot be proven with empirical evidence is not interested in truth; they're only interested in facts.

On the other hand, Religion is the social clique full of people who have had the experience (or say they've had for the sense of community). Social cliques will almost always turn into mobs, and mobs are not tolerant of other mobs. They're also not tolerant of any idea, true or false, that conflicts with their belief about reality.

The reconciliation of spirituality and science is the forbidden fruit, the occulted wisdom. Keeping the two divided is key to keeping the world divided, and the soul divided. Both Christians and Atheists approach the issue with bias which doesn't allow for any other possible explanation of life, of space, of the mind, and so on. It's always one or the other. Black or White. Anything Gray is "speculation" or "conspiracy" or "evil".

We're getting smarter in science, discovering so much new stuff, and this is good....for us; for those of us who suspend disbelief in favor of possibility. These rigid mindsets, however, will never bother. Christians will say the Atheist fears the belief in God, but are Christians not afraid of finding out "God" isn't so personal after all, or that perhaps Jesus was just an anthropomorphic tale about the passage of the sun through the seasons?

Movies like this are good for only one thing: striking up discussion, and quite often not the kind of discussions they had in mind. We need a film that explores how scientific thought and spiritual experience are fully compatible, as well as HOW such compatibility is possible. I'll tell you step one: LET GO OF THE FEAR.

Well, I thought this part of the forum wasn't focused on trans issues. I have a forum specifically for one general topic and its subtopics, but also a section for everything else. That's basically what I got from this, so I figured I'd post something here. I have no interest in causing trouble. I mean, to equate intelligent debate with "causing trouble" is really a disappointing perspective to have. Just because this is a trans forum doesn't mean that's all everyone wants to talk about, I'm sure. I obsess a bit over my transition as much as anyone, but it would be nice to get some discussion going that isn't trans focused. But if nobody is allowed to then so be it. Delete the post.

I'm going to move it to Spirituality discussion instead.

While it is nice to get discussion going, unfortunately there are a number of topics that invariably go nuclear. Believe me, this falls in that category - but we can see how it fares out of the Christianity section.

Well, I do agree that they can definitely "go nuclear", but I like to think I have a unique perspective that doesn't take sides. I'm all about bringing them together and finding common ground which is pretty much the theme of the post. I think it's also good to encourage some healthy questioning. The moment anyone gets defensive and hostile is the moment I back away from the discussion. It's amazing how maturity can fly out the window at the drop of a hat.

Anyway, my overall point in the post is to breach the topic of "religion vs. scientism" and how two very rigid perspectives are played against each other as if they're the only two perspectives in existence. It's really a giant sham. I mean, if you want to tie it into a trans issue think of how gender is pitched against gender within the LGBT community. It's sad. Instead of coming to a common ground — HUMAN RIGHTS — we isolate ourselves into cliques and then justify a lot of highly emotional rhetoric without stopping to recognize just how we're treating each other the way "normal society" treats us.

There are great people of all walks of life, of all spiritual and non-spiritual beliefs, but you find that they are individuals, not groups. The individual will show you more honesty than a horde. But these hordes are made up of individuals! So I think we know who we need to address; we know who to think about when we're about to open our mouths; but we only see the forest instead of the trees.

This movie didn't do anything to change that. I can only assume it made it worse.

I will allow the discussion to continue in this section.

But people need to be respectful of everyone's rights and opinions.

Thank You

Quote from: Cindy on August 06, 2014, 05:16:04 AM
I will allow the discussion to continue in this section.

But people need to be respectful of everyone's rights and opinions.

Thank You

The fact that common courtesy needs to be legislated is why these things need to be discussed. I've been all over the map in my beliefs. I was raised Christian, and believed as so until I was 16. I was Wiccan, then attempted a Christian path again, then joined in on some New Age groups, and where I am now I see a commonality in all of them that is rarely seen, and it's really quite simple. Can you guess what it is? So why do we have to continue the tired old arguments?

Thousands of dollars were wasted on filming an unrealistic portrayal of people dealing with faith and the lack of, not coming to any intelligent conclusions, completely dismissing reason, and ending on melodramatic pretense that would make Jesus facepalm. It doesn't defend Christianity in the slightest and gives the middle finger to someone who had the nerve to think outside the box.

A Christian should be able to completely defend their faith intelligently and confidently. The movie basically just said, "We're right, and you're wrong. You'd better pray and believe, or else!" That is NOT respecting other peoples' beliefs or opinions. That's self-righteous boasting. Both Christians and Atheists should be offended by this movie. There is value in faith as well as the scientific method. They should not be at odds with each other.

But as I said, we can apply this same behavior to many other issues. If we can overcome one of them then maybe we can overcome the rest with more and more ease.

And just a quick disclaimer: Please don't misinterpret a very impassioned prose for a hostile tone. I know that gets me in trouble, but I can't help but to express my thoughts. I'm not very good at it verbally, so I've spent years and years developing my grammar and vocabulary so that I can get as much as I can into text without the aid of voice tone or body language. Plus, it makes me a darn good poet. :P

Anyone's views on the topic are completely welcome, so please don't be worried. My personal spiritual path has a saying: "we are infinitely tolerant, save of intolerance."

I understand why It's so incredibly hard to understand the events of the New Testament as being an exact observation of what happened , therefore being of scientific validity. There events seem so irrational in context of everyday experience. miracles ,healing ,god's actual son walking around or the ridiculous notion  that people are raised from the dead. The problem is your saying that the events of the New Testament are not scientific reporting of actual facts. but what if that one in a quadzillion  chance that the New Testament Is a scientific observation , but the events were so incredibly against common and everyday experience that no way other then just saying what actually occured would of been believed anyway.I admit  to being absolutely biased because I love Jesus, but I refuse to dismiss that one in a mega quadzillion chance that the seemingly impossible is possible because the son of god was the one who created the events.

Quote from: stephaniec on August 06, 2014, 06:06:41 AM
I understand why It's so incredibly hard to understand the events of the New Testament as being an exact observation of what happened , therefore being of scientific validity. There events seem so irrational in context of everyday experience. miracles ,healing ,god's actual son walking around or the ridiculous notion  that people are raised from the dead. The problem is your saying that the events of the New Testament are not scientific reporting of actual facts. but what if that one in a quadzillion  chance that the New Testament Is a scientific observation , but the events were so incredibly against common and everyday experience that no way other then just saying what actually occured would of been believed anyway.I admit  to being absolutely biased because I love Jesus, but I refuse to dismiss that one in a mega quadzillion chance that the seemingly impossible is possible because the son of god was the one who created the events.

Oh, I'm not talking about the NT at all. The specifics of Christian belief are relevant only to the Christian. I'm talking about how one side dismisses the other. Trying to prove events in the Bible is irrelevant to faith and only relevant to those who feel the need to dismantle Christianity. That's not my agenda at all. I have my views about it, but the important point here is that there is room for faith and scientific thought at the same table. We shouldn't be bickering over which one is more right, or trying to proselytize by making a movie that probably cost over two million dollars when that money could have gone to a higher moral, egalitarian cause. We've got everything so backwards.

well, not to be too argumentative, How do  you know that people who profited from the movie haven't made considerable contributions to causes to help human beings.

Quote from: stephaniec on August 06, 2014, 06:23:48 AM
well, not to be too argumentative, How do  you know that people who profited from the movie haven't made considerable contributions to causes to help human beings.

I don't know. They very well could have, but the film is still an atrocity. The Last Temptation of Christ had far more philosophical depth and made me appreciate the importance and meaning of faith while this one only made me think that some people who call themselves Christian haven't yet got the point. There are those with faith and those without. It's not up to us to convince people of anything, or to frighten them with allusions of hellfire. Live by example, give love, show patience, and keep going.

Quote from: sororcaeli on August 06, 2014, 06:34:02 AM
I don't know. They very well could have, but the film is still an atrocity. The Last Temptation of Christ had far more philosophical depth and made me appreciate the importance and meaning of faith while this one only made me think that some people who call themselves Christian haven't yet got the point. There are those with faith and those without. It's not up to us to convince people of anything, or to frighten them with allusions of hellfire. Live by example, give love, show patience, and keep going.

I'm sorry I really can't comment on the movie because I saw the previews and it looked like a stupid movie just from viewing the content of the previews. I remember something about the way he was treated for entering the debate which totally turned me off because I tend to get quite triggered when people talk about god, but honestly I  can't remember what triggered me to not go see it.

I have not seen the movie.

But I would like to make my comment regarding science and God.

I believe in a God who is good and orderly.  If He is so, then there must be laws to the universe that we live in.  We have science that explains some of these laws in motion.

I think along the lines that science explains the how of something happening.  God is the why.

I'm going to paraphrase an example.   A kettle might be boiling, and that is the result of heat generated in the coils being transferred to the water and increasing its temperature to boiling.

Why is it happening?  Well, I want a cup of tea.

I will say this and I am like Ms Grace and am Spiritual and not religious. I haven't seen the movie so I can't comment on that but if the world of Science and the world of Spirituality no matter the religion, would ever come together we may find some very amazingly wonderous things. I think fear is the biggest motivator for keeping science and Spirituality separated. Fear that we may just find something that we may not want to know that would blow apart our illusions of ourselves to the world to the universe in general. And then again how it is may be the way its supposed to be right now. That we have to look within ourselves to find what we seek. Or some long to belong to a Spiritual community like a church and so on. If our Souls or Spirits are all at different levels of learning then everyone needs different things for the learning process.

I believe we hold near and dear to our illusions and we base our whole life on them. Einstein theorized that time, the past, present and future were all happening simultaneously. That's a thinker and could explain hauntings and so on. It's also theorized that gravity bends space and possibly time. We know for sure gravity bends light from a while ago during an eclipse when a star that should have been behind the sun was visable thus the light was bent by the gravity of the sun. So can we really even trust what we see at night in the sky is how it really is? I will even go so far as to wonder if the illusion of time even exists outside of gravitational fields. That may solve the space and time continuum to travel to distant stars. Yes I know, what does all this have to do with Spirituality and whether or not there is a Creator? It just shows how little we understand about the nature of the universe or multiverses, time and gravity. So in order to truly understand a Creator we would have to totally understand Creation and to understand that we would have to totally understand ourselves and the world in which we live and the planet on which we exist physically. We don't right now but we are slowly getting there. It's a paradox.

In my opinion, really there really should be nothing to argue about because we all experience Spirituality from there being nothing to an all knowing God that deals in our day to day lives by our own life experiences. There are no two lives alike and no two life experiences are completely the same so it would make sense that our perceptions of a God, Gods, Godesses or just nothing will not be the same. I respect all beliefs because of that, I don't think there is one right or wrong answer or perception just what is right or wrong for the individual according to that unique Soul.

I hope all that makes sense. 

sorry , I think I misunderstood your meaning. I didn't realize you were talking about the movie. I just saw the words religion, science and" Jesus was just a anthropomorphic tale I got a little triggered sorry for the science rant about the New Testament. I had just woke up and those were the first words my brain saw.

I agree with the title of the movie: God's not dead.

To be dead, you must first be alive and there is no evidence at all that a god, especially one of the gods of the abrahamic religions, ever existed.

I would rather the Black Sabbath song, God is Dead. It makes much more sense to me.

Anna,

All right, I'm going to bite.  :)
On what basis of evidence are you so adamant about that?

I am truly curious, as I've seen several of your posts regarding spirituality and you are very absolute in your conviction.  To me, it requires faith to believe in god, and also to not believe in god.

I'm gently wading into things here as this is one of those things that can lead to heated debate...

I remember now why I didn't go see the movie. I felt quite repulsed that a teacher would decide pass or fail just on his personal belief system. I was triggered by the movie's  basic unethical presumption of right and wrong.

Quote from: luna nyan on August 06, 2014, 03:48:02 PM
Anna,

All right, I'm going to bite.  :)
On what basis of evidence are you so adamant about that?

I am truly curious, as I've seen several of your posts regarding spirituality and you are very absolute in your conviction.  To me, it requires faith to believe in god, and also to not believe in god.

I'm gently wading into things here as this is one of those things that can lead to heated debate...

This gets us away from the movie, but I may have an analogy which might shed some light on the difference   

Some people are fans of sports teams.  They generally grew up as fans of that team, they have an emotional investment in that team, they know the ins and outs of the history.  They watch "their" team play, um, religiously.  They refer to the team as "we."  They have emotional highs and lows from their sports team which are really hard to explain based on the visible impact on their lives.  They spend money on gear, they go see games, etc., and they *know* their team will win each game because they have faith that it will happen.       

Now, some other people bet on sporting events.  They really don't care who wins or loses generally as the bet is usually against a "spread" and they worry more about the final score matching up with what they expected it to be, or with some "proposition" bets for particular events happening in a game.  There may be odds on winners of tournaments (Michael Stich bettors got paid at 200:1 for his Wimbledon win in 1990, for example) or whatever.  They get excited when they're going to make money, they get unhappy when they realize they're going to lose money, but other than how it impacts their wallet they simply don't care who wins and who loses.  They have made a rational assessment of what they expect to happen based on the facts as they understand them, and their bank accounts will reflect how good they are at this assessment, but fandom is not a part of their calculus.  They've made their call based on winning streaks, losing streaks, hot players, cold players, injury reports, weather forecasts, and yes, the odd coin flip or gut feeling, but ultimately it's not about who they have *faith* will win, it's about who they *expect* to win based on how well they understand the facts.   

There are also fans who bet, and that is hard to make money doing.

Now, is either group necessarily right?  That's another question.  The guy with his entire house decorated in team colors and the guy who can't pay his rent due to bad bets may each have problems suggesting it's possible for each group to be wrong.  And I'm not trying to compare any given religion to, say, Manchester United here, I just want to try to draw a parallel on human capacities for decision making on the same subject coming from completely different directions and having trouble understanding that the other group really doesn't share any of the same metrics for decision making.  To continue the analogy, it's worth pointing out that the bettor is not a "fan" of Las Vegas in any way the team fan understands the term, particularly as Vegas doesn't even have a team; he just likes evaluating the odds and placing bets to see if he's right.  Sometimes the bettors need to be reminded that the fans aren't in it for the money and that following a team in a rebuilding cycle with better days ahead isn't a statement on intelligence.  Again, hopefully not drawing parallels on religions, just on how humans interact with the world and each other.   

Does that make any sense without being offensive, or do I need to just accept that I'm tired and go to bed?             

Colleen,

I don't care about which sports team people root for. 
But having read some of Anna's previous posts, and her views regarding the religious, I'm genuinely curious.

I have no qualms regarding someone's position on spirituality.  But the dismissive tone I read in some posts, I do really wish to know how someone arrives to that point.  I honestly respect others point of view and merely wish to know and understand.  :)

Don't worry about the sports teams part as such, just work with me for the analogy on the bettors thinking the fans are suckers rooting for a (currently) losing team while the fans are convinced the bettors really are rooting for somebody as a small-scale analogy of how atheists and theists view the same world.  I'm trying to find a medium to make the point that atheism is by definition the absence of faith; although by custom often the rejection.  There is much truth to the observation that atheism is a faith like "bald" is a hair color. 

Frankly, there really are places to legitimately outright attack certain religious views.  OTOH. the spirituality forum on a transgender resource site IMO is the kind of place to actually show even more respect for differing opinions than we might genuinely feel.  I am saddened (and candidly I do see why) you'd feel a dismissive tone in some posts and I'm trying in my own (admittedly sleepy) way to try to offer a view of the other side of the equation as I do feel part of the problem is that both sides have situations where they look at the other's position and truthfully say, "I know those words...but that makes no sense whatsoever."  Where atheists often are utterly baffled by faith and are fundamentally unable to square the circle on the other side's leap of faith, theists frequently have a corresponding inability to really grasp that atheism genuinely is the absence of something they consider a core element of the human condition.  It's been failed often enough by people smarter than I that I figured it was worth a longshot analogy to try to bridge the gap from my side. 

And if I'm completely open, I absolutely cannot wrap my head around why people have faith, so it's not like I've got a working example of how to build that bridge from either side. ;)         

Quote from: stephaniec on August 06, 2014, 09:18:18 PM
I remember now why I didn't go see the movie. I felt quite repulsed that a teacher would decide pass or fail just on his personal belief system. I was triggered by the movie's  basic unethical presumption of right and wrong.

That's a typical view of Atheists; that they don't believe because they hate God due to some personal issue, and then behave irrationally when challenged. That's never been my experience, and that's why both Christians and Atheists should criticize the film without restraint.

Quote from: luna nyan on August 06, 2014, 11:29:42 PM
Colleen,

I don't care about which sports team people root for. 
But having read some of Anna's previous posts, and her views regarding the religious, I'm genuinely curious.

I have no qualms regarding someone's position on spirituality.  But the dismissive tone I read in some posts, I do really wish to know how someone arrives to that point.  I honestly respect others point of view and merely wish to know and understand.  :)

I think it all comes down to personal experience and possibly even upbringing. I like to think my spirituality has evolved beyond religious dogma. My idea of God has expanded past mythos and into the mystic. I think that's why modern day religion often falls short; they've completely removed the mystic element in favor of patriarchal doctrine. Once upon a time, the goddess was just as important as the god, but now she's just been reduced to a submissive avatar or completely removed. So it's no wonder a lot of people have lost interest.

Quote from: Colleen M on August 07, 2014, 12:36:14 AM
There is much truth to the observation that atheism is a faith like "bald" is a hair color. 

Frankly, there really are places to legitimately outright attack certain religious views.  OTOH. the spirituality forum on a transgender resource site IMO is the kind of place to actually show even more respect for differing opinions than we might genuinely feel.  I am saddened (and candidly I do see why) you'd feel a dismissive tone in some posts...

And if I'm completely open, I absolutely cannot wrap my head around why people have faith, so it's not like I've got a working example of how to build that bridge from either side. ;)       

Quoting a few of your points here.

Faith by definition is complete trust or confidence in someone or something (check the dictionary,!).  By definition, an atheist has unwavering faith there is no god.  If you did not have this faith, then you would have to concede there is the possibility of a god.  Can we agree on that?  :)

Personally, I am in a good place mentally and spiritually.  But there are many here who are not, and it truly upsets me when some trample on all that is left for some, and call them stupid, or ignorant. When you are clinging to your life by a thread and someone is trying their best to shred that thread as you reach out...

Heaven forbid that one of our posts leads someone to end it all.

We need to better than that on a support site, and implore people to think twice and be gracious before posting.

Back on your post.  Personally, I could not eliminate the possibility of the existence of god, and that was from rational argument.  I would suspect that you have your rational basis for the opposite.  This ultimately then delves into the realms of philosophy, and would be outside of the constraints set by this thread.  :)

As a background, yes, I am scientifically trained, and no, I do not find that science clashes with my faith, in fact, it does the opposite, it enhances it.

Quote from: sororcaeli on August 07, 2014, 03:15:06 AM
That's a typical view of Atheists; that they don't believe because they hate God due to some personal issue, and then behave irrationally when challenged.

:police:
Tread softly or this will be locked. It has been allowed to continue even though there is no trans component. No more leeway will be given so let's not generalize statements.

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on August 07, 2014, 06:39:50 AM
:police:
Tread softly or this will be locked. It has been allowed to continue even though there is no trans component. No more leeway will be given so let's not generalize statements.

:)

Media like this sort of movie is for stirring up trouble.  Either for or against, it'll bring out the torches and pitchforks.  >:-)

Quote from: luna nyan on August 07, 2014, 06:46:32 AM
:)

Media like this sort of movie is for stirring up trouble.  Either for or against, it'll bring out the torches and pitchforks.  >:-)

Very true, but our members are our primary concern and topics like this just divide us instead of bringing us together. There is already enough pain here.  :)

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on August 07, 2014, 06:49:02 AM
Very true, but our members are our primary concern and topics like this just divide us instead of bringing us together. There is already enough pain here.  :)

Agreed.

Hence my plea for respect.

It really stings when someone assumes I'm trying to cause trouble, because that's not what I'm about. I'm pretty opinionated, but I'm not about making personal attacks. I only criticise what I observe to be intolerant or insane behaviour no matter who is behind it. If it's not typical to assume atheists are emotionally damaged, then why is it a recurring issue? I'm not about to defend oppressive behaviour just because someone decides to take offense to something. We're adults and we should be capable of dealing with everything maturely and without extreme bias.

Anyway, I think this post stimulated some great responses. I'd like to see more, but I will gladly back out of this if my character continues to be seen as suspect.

I said earlier that I didn't realize this part of the forum was still trans focused. I thought it was a place for off-topic discussion. I wasn't trying to defy the rules. If you want to lock it that's fine. It was an issue I wanted to get some thoughts on, and I did.

Quote from: sororcaeli on August 07, 2014, 06:57:14 AM
If it's not typical to assume atheists are emotionally damaged, then why is it a recurring issue?

Anyway, I think this post stimulated some great responses. I'd like to see more, but I will gladly back out of this if my character continues to be seen as suspect.

You are alluding to stereotype here in one brushstroke.  Causality of a few losing their faith (which is what I think you are alluding to here) to turn atheist, does not mean that all atheists are people traumatised or disillusioned with their previous faith.

Most atheists I know are intelligent, well balanced individuals, and some of the, are amongst my best friends.  I would feel offended for them it someone called them emotionally damaged!  There are many reasons why one would be atheist, and equally as many to be a theist.

Quote from: sororcaeli on August 07, 2014, 07:05:24 AM
I said earlier that I didn't realize this part of the forum was still trans focused. I thought it was a place for off-topic discussion. I wasn't trying to defy the rules. If you want to lock it that's fine. It was an issue I wanted to get some thoughts on, and I did.

If you read through topics, you'll find most posts are in regard to reconciling ones belief system and being transgender.  Or alternatively, what position some subsections of ones belief system has on LGBT matters.

Hence the subsections.

I'm happy to take this to PM and philosophise with you.  Anyone is actually, as I do enjoy a good civilised chat.  :)

I can see both sides. I could very well be an atheist. I think it all boils down to our perceptions and life experiences. I choose to believe in something greater than ourselves. Being trans got me delving deeper into philosophical questions but it just as easily could have let me not think there is more. I have delved into the mystic side of Christianity and the Gnostic texts which go into much greater detail than the normal accepted books of the New Testament. And possibly why they were left out of the new Testament.

sororcaeli, I definately agree with you on the mysticism aspects.

Quote from: luna nyan on August 07, 2014, 07:09:34 AM
You are alluding to stereotype here in one brushstroke.  Causality of a few losing their faith (which is what I think you are alluding to here) to turn atheist, does not mean that all atheists are people traumatised or disillusioned with their previous faith.

Most atheists I know are intelligent, well balanced individuals, and some of the, are amongst my best friends.  I would feel offended for them it someone called them emotionally damaged!  There are many reasons why one would be atheist, and equally as many to be a theist.

See, you've misinterpreted me. Let me try to break it down:

The portrayal of the atheist professor in the movie was as someone who was broken by a past experience that led him to atheism. In the movie they make atheism out to be an excuse based on emotional trauma that is being masked with intellect, and in my experience this tends to be the way a lot (not all) of Christians see atheists. They create this false access route for themselves by assuming the person really isn't atheist and just hates God so that they can reason away trying to save them. And since not all Christians are like this it not only paints atheism in a shoddy light, but also Christians.

So, I was never generalizing on anyone, or trying to pigeonhole one belief or the other. I'm saying that the whole message of the movie was preposterous and unfair as if they were trying to speak for every Christian.

I think the discussion of "is there or isn't there a god" is valid, to an extent, but things like that movie try far too hard to make arguments that aren't based in reality. Maybe there are some cases where trauma leads someone to atheism, but I'm sure you know that's far from the case overall. Plus, I don't think a lot of people even know what atheism really means. It's not the disbelief in the God of Abraham; it's the disbelief in any deity of any mythos. One can be atheist and yet still find spirituality, or even consider a more pantheistic view.

I know that this post has nothing to do with trans issues directly, but the theme of misrepresentation and assumption can certainly apply. Just look at Rad-Fem blogs and articles and how they just assume all trans women are men with a fetish and an agenda. Whatever the social matter is we never seem to snap out of the mentality of Us vs. Them. My whole motive is to bring together apparently opposing sides so that maybe together we all can come to some common ground instead of going at each other's throats.

There's not enough mediation in the world. We just turn our eyes, put our fingers in our ears, and hope for the best. I can't do that. I have to be active. Our skulls aren't there just to form our pretty faces. It holds a brain, and the brain is where we find the ability to reason and the ability to love. It's the host to our consciousness, and consciousness has no gender, no religion, no desire to outwit others. It's the commonality that links us all, but we're all too busy being defensive.

Quote from: sororcaeli on August 07, 2014, 08:13:08 AM
It's the commonality that links us all, but we're all too busy being defensive.

You have to realize that for some people all they have in this world is their faith. They may have no home, income or anything else. When people try to take that away then yes, people become defensive because it is all that is holding them up. Would you rather have a live person with faith or one who self terminates because their system of belief is removed leaving them with no hope? Expressions and views of faith are OK, but trying to disprove or belittle one is not. I am NOT saying that is what you are trying to do. Let me repeat that, I am NOT saying that is what you are trying to do. People's faith and beliefs should not be questioned or rationalized, it should be left to the individual to be comfortable with themselves and believe how they wish. Some have found great strength in the movie, some have not. An opinion on it is OK and that is what communication is about. The trouble starts when some try to disprove another's belief system or say the movie has no value when to some it does. :)

I'd like to say I have faith in humanity, but today I have more faith in garden weeds. I'm a very passionate person, and sometimes it overflows. It just makes me ill how we're still perpetuating the same old primitive attitude towards those who think or believe differently. Even when there's biological evidence for it people are still immovable. So, all that I know to do is to stimulate discussion and to break down the walls. It's uncomfortable, but what's right is never easy.

Quote from: sororcaeli on August 07, 2014, 08:34:53 AM
Even when there's biological evidence for it people are still immovable.

This is why people get offended. Faith is NOT about biological evidence, it is about belief and what gives a person peace of mind and soul. I do not agree with many religious or faith systems, but I let them be because it provides them with happiness. I do not try to disprove it or denounce it. I do not agree at all that one should question others beliefs or have uncomfortable discussions about it. Uncomfortable discussions usually means you do not agree and are trying to disprove. There is no reason to attempt to do this. Have your beliefs and let others have theirs without interference. That is called respect.  :)

kind of confused about the statement biological evidence. what, that god does or doesn't exist

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on August 07, 2014, 08:29:30 AM
You have to realize that for some people all they have in this world is their faith. They may have no home, income or anything else. When people try to take that away then yes, people become defensive because it is all that is holding them up.

I completely understand that. In fact, I would same the same about myself. Without my spirituality I'd be a mess, but I don't feel threatened. I feel centered and on track more than ever. If someone wants to try to say that what I believe is absurd then they can have a go all they want. Nobody should have to prove anything to anyone, but misrepresentation should enrage anyone. That's far more personal than just telling someone they're beliefs are rubbish.

My personal path has a saying: "every man and every woman is a star." That means we're all on our own individual orbit, and collision is impossible on its natural course. We value all belief systems and include all walks of life, because the ultimate force between us is Love. When someone tries to interfere with that orbit — or as we call True Will — it then becomes intrusive and worthy of reaction. So, to me, the film was a sneaky way of not only intruding upon the Christian faith, but also condoning the intrusion of atheism.

Sure, not everyone is going to be bothered by it if they don't see it that way, but I felt it to be unfair, and it's really hard for me to just stay quiet.

But faith can never be taken away. You can lose it, gain it, question it, or challenge it, but you never take it from someone. All you can really take is someone's freedom to express it, and when that happens someone had better not tolerate it.

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on August 07, 2014, 08:41:53 AM
This is why people get offended. Faith is NOT about biological evidence, it is about belief and what gives a person peace of mind and soul.

And I wasn't referring to faith having anything to do with biological evidence. That bit had to do with the way people judge and condemn those of us who are neurologically different whether it be transgender, autistic, or whatever.

"It just makes me ill how we're still perpetuating the same old primitive attitude towards those who think or believe differently. Even when there's biological evidence for it people are still immovable."

So, clearly I need to just stop talking, because I'm apparently not being clear enough.

Quote from: sororcaeli on August 07, 2014, 09:02:43 AM
Nobody should have to prove anything to anyone, but misrepresentation should enrage anyone.

You are deciding what is misrepresentation, aren't you? That is judgmental and causes the defensiveness from the opposition.  :)

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on August 07, 2014, 09:08:26 AM
You are deciding what is misrepresentation, aren't you? That is judgmental and causes the defensiveness from the opposition.  :)

And you are deciding that that's what I'm doing and assuming it's an act of judgment. I said that when my character is made suspect again I was done. So, lock the thread. I won't make another post like this.

TOPIC LOCKED.

Topic reopened per Administration.

Bumped to continue dialog.

Quote from: luna nyan on August 07, 2014, 06:37:27 AM
Quoting a few of your points here.

Faith by definition is complete trust or confidence in someone or something (check the dictionary,!).  By definition, an atheist has unwavering faith there is no god.  If you did not have this faith, then you would have to concede there is the possibility of a god.  Can we agree on that?  :)

OED, Definition 1, I assume?  Definition 2 (including 2.1 and 2.2) is worth a look as it's the definition which is germane to a religious discussion.  It doesn't help you.  Putting aside Definition 2 synonyms being entirely religious, none of the Definition 1 synonyms have anything in common with rational conclusions as embraced by atheism.  I'd also point out that even making any hay of the holes in the generalized Definition 1 involves identifying the complete rejection of trust or confidence in something as its opposite "complete trust or confidence in something" which would be quite an adventure as the definition is for a positive assertion and you're attempting to apply that metric to a negative assertion.  That's a heck of a set of logical obstacles to try to work against already, and I haven't even raised the humor of the real killer yet.  Unfortunately, much of the neat stuff at the OED seems to be behind a paywall and I'm too lazy to dig up my old unabridged print OED for the benefit of purely private viewing at the moment.  Shall we turn to an admittedly lesser dictionary for both convenience and transparency?   

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith

faith noun \ˈfāth\
: strong belief or trust in someone or something

: belief in the existence of God : strong religious feelings or beliefs

: a system of religious beliefs
plural faiths

Full Definition of FAITH

1
a :  allegiance to duty or a person :  loyalty
b (1) :  fidelity to one's promises (2) :  sincerity of intentions
2
a (1) :  belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) :  belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion
b (1) :  firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) :  complete trust
3
:  something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially :  a system of religious beliefs <the Protestant faith>

This rhymes with the OED well enough, but it adds something I didn't see on the OED page.     

Antonyms
atheism, godlessness

That seems pretty explicit, no?  We have checked the dictionary and can call the dictionary's view that faith and atheism are opposites well-documented?  How about a thesaurus?

  http://thesaurus.com/browse/faith

Antonyms for faith
disbelief disloyalty dishonesty distrust doubt faithlessness inconstancy lying treachery uncertainty unsteadiness agnosticism denial misgiving rejection skepticism suspicion unbelief

Putting aside the ones relating to integrity and looking at the religious context, we've got disbelief, distrust, doubt, agnosticism, denial, rejection, skepticism, suspicion, and unbelief.  No, I have no idea how agnostics got on this list but not atheists.  Still, there are a lot of antonyms for faith that have more in common with atheism than religion. 


And that brings us to the real killer of the idea that a theist can parse holes in a generalized definition to even suggest faith is in any way part of atheism.  We actually have to throw out the dictionary's definition altogether without ever giving it any thought or consideration whatsoever.  Ultimately it's nice when a dictionary reflects reality here, but that's all it could ever do because at the end of the day atheists started and ended the conversation with the only vote that ever mattered on what I point out is essentially the definition of the atheist position.  Otherwise, we'd have one of those situations where somebody else gets to tell you that your understanding of who you are and what you believe is inaccurate, that they know what you want and believe better than you do, and that their opinion somehow matters at least as much as yours on core concepts of your identity.  And that's just silly.  People are certainly entitled to an opinion on whether we're right or wrong, but obviously no foreign party gets to come along after the fact and exactly reverse our understanding of who we are with their wildly inaccurate misconceptions for the benefit of their own worldview.  Can we agree instead that each group should have the freedom to define their own position without the opposition's help?   Or would my faith be misplaced in hoping for such?  :P 

I repeat my observation that theists really do generally have trouble grasping the fact that faith truly has no role in atheism whatsoever while atheists are generally (I know I am specifically) incapable of following the thinking behind belief.  It does help to keep me from thinking I'm wise and all-knowing and it reminds me that the other person does a few things I simply can't do and sometimes has an approach to the world I'll never fully understand.  Nobody, absolutely nobody, focuses on spirituality out of a belief they have all the answers.  Usually (clergy and some others aside) most people pay it the most attention when they're hurting.  We all know the transgender depression statistics.  I do think we emphatically agree that nobody here should be so much as tapped when down, and I definitely echo your preference for no posts which can be perceived as "dismissive" regardless of how much benefit of the doubt you give somebody's intent.  This really is the more open section where various parties are supposed to try to be nice to each other and it pays to go out of your way to tread softly here.   

And it really does sound like a dreadful movie.  There are times I think the last good movie prominently featuring religion was The Name of the Rose.  I'm not sure what the last good movie really directly addressing the merits or flaws of any particular religion was.