Why do some people mock others if they are either religious or have some sort of spirituality in their life?

  • Joshthegaymer

    Posts: 83

    Aug 07, 2016 1:08 AM GMT
    Whenever I see someone attacking another person for either being religious or at least spiritual or if I personally get verbally attacked for being somewhat religious/spiritual, it makes me both sad and angry. Like if I or anyone else is religious or at least spiritual and we're not harming anyone, what's the big deal? Can someone please explain this to me?
  • Badwolfxxx

    Posts: 14

    Aug 07, 2016 2:07 AM GMT
    Gays have been attacked by the church for decades. So when they see religion it causes an immediate attack
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 07, 2016 2:49 PM GMT
    Why do some people mock others if they are either religious or have some sort of spirituality in their life?

    Why are people who are either religious or have some sort of spirituality in their life mocked?

    Valerie V. Hunt wrote a book titled Uncork Your Consciousness which explains some people are grounded and some people are not.

    If a person is too materialistic, that person is lacking; and, that person is constrained from getting to spiritual success.
    With ego, and making fun of something that does not come easily to them, they may mock.

    If a person is too spiritual, they person is lacking; and that person is constrained from getting to material success.
    With ego, and making fun of something that does not come easily to them, they may mock.

    Those who are balanced probably are not lacking and probably are not mocking others.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 07, 2016 2:52 PM GMT
    Joshthegaymer

    If I or anyone else is religious or at least spiritual and we're not harming anyone, what's the big deal?


    Stephenoabc

    The big deal is that religion and spirituality can be of poor quality and this does harm people, even the believer is harmed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 07, 2016 4:43 PM GMT
    Don’t we know who the popes were from AD66 to AD100?
    One would think the head of the Church knew who wrote the seminal works Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John which were not “unauthorized” before publishing them or before supporting their publications..


    Let the above serve as an example of the poor foundation quality of Christianity.

    Recently, I posted that Luke reported he did not see Jesus carrying the cross--Simon carried it the whole way.

    But people have religious convictions on these two important issues--convictions that make them attack people with loneliness/isolation/excommunication, abandon/reject their children, not nurture their children's love interests/potential domestic partners, burn people at the stake, throw people from walls / high places, decapitate people, burn people in cages?
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4433

    Aug 07, 2016 4:53 PM GMT
    Because the invisible man in the sky with an elaborate structure of over-rule on earth is just goofy. As bad wolf says, gays have been attacked by the church and the church and church people like to feel superior. Once the spell created by indoctrination is dispelled, the whole thing just looks stupid and harmful. And dangerous. Both to individuals caught up in its spider web and also those of us the power structure has chosen to attack.
  • FitBlackCuddl...

    Posts: 800

    Aug 07, 2016 9:43 PM GMT
    StephenOABC saidDon’t we know who the popes were from AD66 to AD100?
    One would think the head of the Church knew who wrote the seminal works Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John which were not “unauthorized” before publishing them or before supporting their publications..


    Let the above serve as an example of the poor foundation quality of Christianity.


    What is this supposed connection between Christianity and a pope?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 07, 2016 11:00 PM GMT
    Because Liberals exclude and berate those who don't support their agenda as one of their own already exposed: Kirsten Powers is an evangelical liberal and author of The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 07, 2016 11:52 PM GMT
    mx5guynj saidBecause Liberals exclude and berate those who don't support their agenda as one of their own already exposed: Kirsten Powers is an evangelical liberal and author of The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech.


    William F. Buckley was one of the first to demonize atheism in conservative thought (he hated Ayn Rand). It was not long afterward that the modern Christian fundamentalists began endorsing right-wing candidates, as though Christianity ("Blessed are the poor...") is somehow compatible with the Greed is Good crowd.

    Calling the liberal left exclusive--who are embraced by Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus AND atheists--is something you can claim without irony?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 10, 2016 2:34 AM GMT
    I think it's very taboo to believe in God publicly and vocally if you are gay and it will make people look at u funny

    like what's up with that guy

    but I don't care because Jesus has been there for me when no one else was and by the way my prayers have been heard and answered
  • GoodPup

    Posts: 752

    Aug 30, 2016 7:20 AM GMT
    A lot of religious people don't fully understand homosexuality and so they push away something that is different.

    A lot of gay people don't fully understand religion and so they push away something that is different.

    A lot of religious people are okay with homosexual people but a lot are also vocal about being against it so they all get the same reputation.

    A lot of homosexual people are okay with religious people but a lot are also vocal about being against it so they all get the same reputation.

    It kind of goes both ways but both sides deny it. Overall I think both groups of people are very accepting but they just do t understand each other, yet be ause some people are such strong opponents of one another the opposing group thinks it's everybody.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2016 8:44 AM GMT
    When I was a child I had a great uncle (grandmother's brother) who died of AIDS in the early 1980s. The Episcopal Church in Chicago did a lot to help take care of him and was and continued to be very supportive of the Gay community.

    I understand that some churches have had homophobic leaders from time to time. However I seem to see a lot more anti-religious bigotry than homophobia these days.

    By self identifying as a Gay Christian I have been significantly more mistreated by fellow Gays than by fellow Christians, but that may just be my personal experience.
  • AnonymKOIA

    Posts: 90

    Aug 30, 2016 4:49 PM GMT
    You only mock what you don't believe in or find it off. Like being called slut,not really,but you get idea. But it only says much about the person,CLOSE MINDED.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2016 5:45 PM GMT
    Ekho said[...]but I don't care because Jesus has been there for me when no one else was and by the way my prayers have been heard and answered


    If that's the case brohamian, please, for the sake of all humanity, start praying for some good, unselfish things, like solving world hunger, ending cancer, etcetera, since you seem to have this hotline to a magical extra-dimensional source of unlimited power and goodness...actually, wait, why was that not the first thing you did do, when you realized you had this connection?

    That's my answer, Joshthegaymer. Religious beliefs, spiritual beliefs--in all instances in which I've evaluated such claims, there's always flaws in logic, rationality, skepticism, and critical thinking, that are easy to exploit--to point out reasons why such beliefs are ridiculous and contradictory to reality as we can observe and test it. Furthermore, our beliefs inform our actions, and I really don't care what people believe as much as why they believe it--because if we believe things for bad reasons, we're likely to do things for bad reasons--and that leads to a whole hell of a lot of problems. I don't attack people for their beliefs: I attack their flawed reasoning for believing such a thing in the first place. I attack their beliefs.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2016 7:49 PM GMT
    Kodiak said...

    Religious beliefs aren't based on logic and no amount of logical rational debate will ever change their thinking. At least that's been my observation.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2016 7:54 PM GMT
    Lumpyoatmeal said
    Kodiak said...

    Religious beliefs aren't based on logic and no amount of logical rational debate will ever change their thinking. At least that's been my observation.


    +1.
  • GoodPup

    Posts: 752

    Aug 30, 2016 9:37 PM GMT
    FloridaRugbyBear saidWhen I was a child I had a great uncle (grandmother's brother) who died of AIDS in the early 1980s. The Episcopal Church in Chicago did a lot to help take care of him and was and continued to be very supportive of the Gay community.

    I understand that some churches have had homophobic leaders from time to time. However I seem to see a lot more anti-religious bigotry than homophobia these days.

    By self identifying as a Gay Christian I have been significantly more mistreated by fellow Gays than by fellow Christians, but that may just be my personal experience.


    I agree. I have found its easier to be gay among some Christian friends than it is to be Christian among any gay friends.
  • GoodPup

    Posts: 752

    Aug 30, 2016 9:43 PM GMT
    Lumpyoatmeal said
    Kodiak said...

    Religious beliefs aren't based on logic and no amount of logical rational debate will ever change their thinking. At least that's been my observation.


    It is faith based... but, religious people see some things like the Big Bang as requiring just as much belief and faith. There was no witness to it, no evidence that matter could come from no matter... to me that is a faith based belief. But because people have an end result and believe it, they have come up with a story that fits in with their belief that must be true cause they choose to believe that over religion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 14, 2016 4:07 AM GMT
    GoodPup said
    Lumpyoatmeal said
    Kodiak said...

    Religious beliefs aren't based on logic and no amount of logical rational debate will ever change their thinking. At least that's been my observation.


    It is faith based... but, religious people see some things like the Big Bang as requiring just as much belief and faith. There was no witness to it, no evidence that matter could come from no matter... to me that is a faith based belief. But because people have an end result and believe it, they have come up with a story that fits in with their belief that must be true cause they choose to believe that over religion.


    Well, the difference is religion has only stories. Science has evidence. Religion is the one that leads the evidence to fit their beliefs, and Science is the one that follows the evidence to its conclusions.

    We do have evidence of a event occurring around the time the Big Bang is supposed to have happened, and the evidence of that exists all throughout the universe today--evidence that scientists can investigate in order to piece back together the puzzle of what occurred in the past. Religion, as the art of apologetics clearly demonstrates, merely searches for claims, reasons and evidence to support their personal belief, and disregard any opposing evidence or claims. They're leading the evidence, not following it.

    One of the big problems we might have for religious people seeing theories and hypotheses as being 'based on faith' is that they don't understand the science that such theories and hypotheses are based on. There's a level of comprehension here that some people either don't have the aptitude for, or don't have the patience or desire to learn--and a desire to learn is critical, since, after all, science isn't the one going around saying, "believe this or else you'll be tortured for all eternity," as is often said by certain religions...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 14, 2016 7:50 PM GMT
    Kodiak saidOne of the big problems we might have for religious people seeing theories and hypotheses as being 'based on faith' is that they don't understand the science that such theories and hypotheses are based on.

    Which is why for them science is just another faith or set of beliefs. When you believe that "anything is possible" whether it's the big bang or God created the universe, each is just a belief. Each side believes that they're arguing from a foundation of facts. So in the end it's a pointless debate.
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4433

    Sep 14, 2016 9:14 PM GMT
    Lumpyoatmeal said
    Kodiak saidOne of the big problems we might have for religious people seeing theories and hypotheses as being 'based on faith' is that they don't understand the science that such theories and hypotheses are based on.

    Which is why for them science is just another faith or set of beliefs. When you believe that "anything is possible" whether it's the big bang or God created the universe, each is just a belief. Each side believes that they're arguing from a foundation of facts. So in the end it's a pointless debate.

    See, here's the problem. If a religious person calls science just another set of beliefs, he has no idea what science is or doesn't believe in empirical knowledge, the gathering of facts to make predictions which are then tested and if true, become facts. Religion is nothing but fantasy explanations for the unknown but because the litmus test of a true believer requires a statement of belief, faith, anyone challenging the fantasy story is opposition, thus no variance from the story is possible, no progress. Stuck brain.
  • eM_Jay

    Posts: 90

    Sep 15, 2016 11:21 AM GMT
    Mocking usually has more to do with the person's own ego and immaturity than with the 'inherent truth' of their claim in the first place. Whether religious/spiritual or not, is not really as important a factor in inciting mocking/verbal attack than the perp.'s own desires for being recognized and pat-on-the-back by others. To me it doesn't seem to matter whether the mocked are religious or not (nor the 'truth' of their claims), rather what causes mocking from the get-go is the mocker's own ego-trip that uses the 'mock-ees' belief as a vehicle for the exchange. But it doesn't just go one way and is more complex than simply the religious being completely victim to aggressive non-believers. Since most religion makes it's fundamental claims on an idea of being better/enlightened than others, religionists themselves can (and mostly do) fall into the trap of mocking others viciously or violating non-believers in some form or another. So both sides are equally capable of getting or giving the mocking (and other more extreme results of it).

    But back to the question, like i mentioned, mocking is usually more about the people involved and their feelings rather than the feasibility of their claims. Gays have been hurt by religion for ages and continue to be, so 'mocking' has elements of self-defense as well as 'fact' mixed in. Likewise, religion (or it's adherents) has been received contemptuously (more than deservedly in some cases) and so becomes more fundamentalist or prone to feeding the 'martyr/victim' position when met with some differing position. Either way, both sling mud whenever the chance comes up and those liable for this blame are people who do so to prove their own points rather than get to a point of actual dialogue that will get us somewhere. Which is a shame really because both religious and non-religious claims have given immense contributions to the world in differing ways.

    Ofcourse this is not a gospel truth for each situation and every case has many other factors interwoven in so.... Anyway, this is just a thought on the matter...

    For Joshthegaymer, it naturally should be uncomfortable, that you feel personally attacked when another religious person is mocked. Since that mocking is less about the individual victim and more about believers (or religious belief) in general ofcourse it would strike a cord with other believers. But it's also not just believer vs non-believer, it's people who have much more going on under the surface (just like everyone else). So the act/feelings that accompany the mocking shouldn't be so much a problem. Rather, lets focus on how you respond and move on from the situations...
  • tantra2men

    Posts: 9

    Sep 15, 2016 6:26 PM GMT
    What's the #Kabbalah has to tell you about your interactions with men?
    Men have difficulties getting connected to each other, and they even have more difficulty than women.

    It is not very difficult for women to establish a connection.

    First of all, women communicate more easily. Women really like to communicate, and they can talk about everything. They always have the subject or something to start a conversation with. They can always talk about various things.

    Men usually ask themselves:
    * What I would receive from communicating with a certain person.
    * What would I receive out of opening to this person?

    Read more...
    https://tantra2men.com/kabbalah-sexuality/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2016 7:50 PM GMT
    tantra2men saidWhat's the #Kabbalah has to tell you about your interactions with men? Men have difficulties getting connected to each other, and they even have more difficulty than women.
    It is not very difficult for women to establish a connection.
    First of all, women communicate more easily. Women really like to communicate, and they can talk about everything. They always have the subject or something to start a conversation with. They can always talk about various things.
    Men usually ask themselves:
    * What I would receive from communicating with a certain person.
    * What would I receive out of opening to this person?

    That's totally sexist.