It's been a long time since this has been last asked. Are you for spreading atheism by openly engaging the religionists in debates or are you for a live-and-let-live approach?
When it comes to religion, I used to think that "live and let live" is a nice approach that avoids direct confrontation with the believers but if the belief is so stupid, I am for the open engagement, or on/about areas where religionist thoughts hold sway. Philippine society is soaked in religion and superstition even now that letting the religionists and superstitionists run the show is not good for our general health as a nation. I hope slowly we can weigh in on the public debate concerning policies that have basis on theism but that affect us all nonetheless.
4 comments:
I'd say tolerance. To most of these people who engage in religious debates, no reason is good enough anyways.
Religion is a philosophy packaged in such a way that it's easy to understand without much questioning. Religion is to adults what Santa Claus is to kids. It keeps them from doing evil hoping they get rewards in the end.
If it works for them, I'm all for it.
One of my favorite atheist quote:
"One man’s ambition is not another’s ambition, nor will the same event or object satisfy both; but the humanity of one man is the humanity of every one, and the same object touches this passion in all human creatures."
- David Hume
Some things are universal in standards. You cannot state that a right is a wrong, specially if when it's harmful to humanity.
I'm tolerant of most people most of the time. But when they do start hitting me on the head trying to make me accept their beliefs, that's the time to retaliate :-) I remember what Sam Harris wrote in this book, The End of Faith, that religion of any kind is not and will not be predisposed to tolerance. I need not to look far; Religious intolerance is already here at home. I just keep my mouth shut and stop arguing with my parents regarding my beliefs, since it would be rather useless to argue with them anyway because their assumptions are irrational to begin with. How can I argue with that? So, I guess tolerance is the key, to a certain limit.
Imho, it is not necessary to make direct confrontation with their kind. Wala rin namang mangyayari, even if. They will never see your point and wont even hear your side. So to speak, it's just a waste of time.
Post a Comment