Many with religious beliefs find it difficult to understand why anyone who professes no such belief would pay any interest to religion. Why not just leave each to their own? But surely it shouldn't be so hard to understand.
For someone who holds the athiest viewpoint, the notion of any part of society gaining special treatment as a result of supernatural beliefs is irritating. The idea that a witness in court would be asked to swear to tell the truth "before God" is comical. The idea that a school assembly should include the "Lords Prayer" is horrifying. But these reactions must seem bizarre to anyone who has grown up to accept such behaviours as "normal".
Now consider how something like this looks...
A teacher is locked up for 15 days because children in her class named a teddy bear Mohammed.
It sounds a bit daft to most.
How about this then...?
There are protests in the street with people calling for the sentence to be increased, including the chant that she be put to death by the sword.
Just to remind you.... this is because children named a teddy bear Mohammed.
I've seen people being interviewed on TV weighing this one up. Is it wrong, is it right... etc THEY HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THIS!
Who in their right mind can EVER under any circumstances think it is ok to lock someone up for NAMING a TEDDY BEAR anything? It's just a name - it's just a word - it's just a TEDDY BEAR. If you have to even for a moment consider whether the naming of a TEDDY BEAR should be something that can lead to a custodial sentence PLEASE GET YOURSELF SOME HELP!
Perhaps you're one of the fence sitters who'd say something like "the teacher should have been more sensitive to the religious views in the region"... thinking that you were being right and proper, sensitive and PC. BUT what does "sensitive to the religious views" mean in this instance? It means "the teacher should have had the good sense to avoid the insane actions of the irrational nutjobs in the area in the same way she'd avoid a dark alley for fear of rapists" In an ideal world you wouldn't have to, but it makes sense not to put yourself at risk. So say it how it is... this isn't about being respectful to someones beliefs, this is about being scared of institutionalised insanity.
Is there any point at which being "sensitive to the religious views of others" doesn't mean "avoiding irrational responses for an easy life". I wonder.
Last week I was summoned to the front door to find two suited men offering me The Watchtower. I explained that I was more than aware of who they were. These were perfectly nice, everyday people. I asked them if they had children. One of them said yes. I asked him whether, if his child was in an accident and losing blood to the extent that it was a transfusion or death, he would let the doctors save his child. His response, "it's something I've spent many hours thinking long and hard about." My response - "and that's why I am not wasting any further time talking to you - you're dangerous to others."
For someone who holds the athiest viewpoint, the notion of any part of society gaining special treatment as a result of supernatural beliefs is irritating. The idea that a witness in court would be asked to swear to tell the truth "before God" is comical. The idea that a school assembly should include the "Lords Prayer" is horrifying. But these reactions must seem bizarre to anyone who has grown up to accept such behaviours as "normal".
Now consider how something like this looks...
A teacher is locked up for 15 days because children in her class named a teddy bear Mohammed.It sounds a bit daft to most.
How about this then...?
There are protests in the street with people calling for the sentence to be increased, including the chant that she be put to death by the sword.
Just to remind you.... this is because children named a teddy bear Mohammed.
I've seen people being interviewed on TV weighing this one up. Is it wrong, is it right... etc THEY HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THIS!
Who in their right mind can EVER under any circumstances think it is ok to lock someone up for NAMING a TEDDY BEAR anything? It's just a name - it's just a word - it's just a TEDDY BEAR. If you have to even for a moment consider whether the naming of a TEDDY BEAR should be something that can lead to a custodial sentence PLEASE GET YOURSELF SOME HELP!
Perhaps you're one of the fence sitters who'd say something like "the teacher should have been more sensitive to the religious views in the region"... thinking that you were being right and proper, sensitive and PC. BUT what does "sensitive to the religious views" mean in this instance? It means "the teacher should have had the good sense to avoid the insane actions of the irrational nutjobs in the area in the same way she'd avoid a dark alley for fear of rapists" In an ideal world you wouldn't have to, but it makes sense not to put yourself at risk. So say it how it is... this isn't about being respectful to someones beliefs, this is about being scared of institutionalised insanity.
Is there any point at which being "sensitive to the religious views of others" doesn't mean "avoiding irrational responses for an easy life". I wonder.
Last week I was summoned to the front door to find two suited men offering me The Watchtower. I explained that I was more than aware of who they were. These were perfectly nice, everyday people. I asked them if they had children. One of them said yes. I asked him whether, if his child was in an accident and losing blood to the extent that it was a transfusion or death, he would let the doctors save his child. His response, "it's something I've spent many hours thinking long and hard about." My response - "and that's why I am not wasting any further time talking to you - you're dangerous to others."
IF you think that there's something in your belief system that means it's ok to let a child (who hasn't chosen that belief system) die rather than let them be saved GET YOURSELF SOME HELP!
