Return to CreateDebate.comjaded • Join this debate community

Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day


Debate Info

11
32
Yes, we do. That's fucking stupid.
Debate Score:43
Arguments:36
Total Votes:45
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes, we do. (11)
 
 That's fucking stupid. (21)

Debate Creator

joecavalry(40097) pic



Do we HAVE TO RESPECT EVERYONE'S BELIEFS?

Yes, we do.

Side Score: 11
VS.

That's fucking stupid.

Side Score: 32
1 point

It's best for us to respect everyone's beliefs so that we could avoid the possibility of conflict. Whatever the belief of a person, for example, we should not say anything offensive for the sake of spreading peace. I know well that 'complete' peace is difficult to attain in this chaotic world but, as much as possible, we should try to alleviate the cause of wayward conflict. If we know, for example, that a person is practicing a wrong belief, we just have to reserve our words if we know in ourselves that we can't say anything good or anything that would please that person. If a particular group of men tend to practice things that would surely make them go to Hell after their death, we should better let them do so. After all, it is not us who will suffer. And also, we should remember that 'respect' is a character that should be stipulated in every religion, culture as well as traditions. By that, I believe, we could live a peaceful life as compare to not showing respect at all.

Side: Yes, we do.

You're right. For example, terrorists do NOT like being called rag heads. They find that very offensive. Especially since, in reality, it is a folded sheet. Therefore, we should call the little Shiites, sheet heads ;)

Side: Yes, we do.
zephyr20x6(2387) Disputed
1 point

It's best for us to respect everyone's beliefs so that we could avoid the possibility of conflict.

Without conflict our beliefs never get challenged, our beliefs effect other people, if we never have our beliefs challenged we never open our minds. This is why there is conflict amongst politics because that effects people, conflict amongst philosophy (and religious belief is apart of philosophy) because the point of philosophy is to pursue the truth, we can't exactly pursue truth if we never have our beliefs questioned or be open to questioning them ourselves. Their is conflict in science because it pursues knowledge, and we can't pursue knowledge without questioning what we think we know. religion has conflict, because religious beliefs effect people, they effect people's moralities which in turn effect others, they effect people's politics which in turn effects others, they effect people's philosophies which in turn effects philosophy, it effects people's scientific stances which in turn effects science. You CAN'T ever express yourself if you are to try to not criticize someone else's beliefs. By this logic you should never express your beliefs, because they will be critical of beliefs that disagree, the only way to truly respect people's beliefs fully is take away the right to express them and all discussion. If you express democratic views you are criticizing republicans, and vice versa. If you express determinism you are criticizing those that are indeterminists, and vice versa. If you express a scientific theory, you are criticizing those that hold opposing theories, and vice versa. If you express your belief in god, you are criticizing those that don't believe and vice versa. The only way to respect everyone's to the point of avoiding conflict would be to censor EVERYODY, a world like that will never advance...

I know well that 'complete' peace is difficult to attain in this chaotic world but, as much as possible, we should try to alleviate the cause of wayward conflict.

If we all had that mentality, gay marriage wouldn't be legalized in some states, women would have never gotten the right to vote, creationism would be being taught in schools and wasting our money on something that isn't real science, we would still be living in kingdoms. As a bit of a pacafist, I dislike conflict as much as you do but if you were to take conflict completely out of the picture we wouldn't have peace, cause some ideals have to rule, we would have oppression to change, to those outside of the norm.

If we know, for example, that a person is practicing a wrong belief, we just have to reserve our words if we know in ourselves that we can't say anything good or anything that would please that person.

Well that is a strange scenario to me, because by the word practicing I am thinking you are obviously referring to religion, correct me if I am wrong. Arguing religious belief against religious belief is strange to me, because to me they are both false beliefs, I think you should be able to express (if you so chose to, not that you have to) why you don't believe what they believe, why what you believe makes more sense, you shouldn't ever insult the person though or treat them less than human or imply anything negative to the human being if possible. You should be allowed to say what you think about other beliefs, because you should be able to express your own.

If a particular group of men tend to practice things that would surely make them go to Hell after their death, we should better let them do so.

It would all depend on if you were criticizing the human being, or if you were criticizing their views. For example, insulting someone's sexuality (which is a part of their human being, not just an opinion they hold), should be bigotry and called out for no matter what the excuse religious or not, because it is not just a view it's who that human being is, beyond that, that and those are mere preferences that don't effect anyone else.

After all, it is not us who will suffer.

maybe, maybe not, it depends on the belief, and you still deserve to be able to express your views even if it disagrees with them.

And also, we should remember that 'respect' is a character that should be stipulated in every religion, culture as well as traditions.

See, now you have disagreed with people, now you have caused conflict, if you didn't want to cause conflict than just never speak your mind again... problem solved... the price is just having no right to your opinion... or at least have to hide it.

By that, I believe, we could live a peaceful life as compare to not showing respect at all.

We should have respect, for each other, but not that same kind of respect for our views... our views are supposed to have conflict, they naturally always will unless we choose to ban expression of them.

Side: That's fucking stupid.

I believe we have to respect everyone's beliefs. We don't have to agree with them, but simply respecting their ability to have said belief is not sufficient.

Religious individuals tend to identify themselves more as their religion than they do as their ethnicity/culture, at least where those are distinct (In Muslim countries for example they are not). It's not acceptable to be disrespectful towards individuals due to their ethnicity or their culture, so why should it be acceptable to be disrespectful towards them due to their beliefs?

As far as I'm concerned, disparaging an individuals religion is every bit as bad as disparaging an individuals race. It could be argued that an individual cannot help his or her race, but it's not the fact that it's something they cannot help that makes it wrong- it's the fact that it's directly attacking the individuals identity. Disparaging an individuals beliefs can be the same thing; even worse. And this is coming from someone who is FAR from religious!

You don't have to agree with their beliefs, but telling somebody that their beliefs are stupid and by extension they are stupid is just wrong. Criticisms and reasonable discussion are fine- attacks, verbal or otherwise, are not.

Side: Yes, we do.

Criticisms and reasonable discussion are fine- attacks, verbal or otherwise, are not.

I completely agree with what you are saying, the problem I have is, when does criticism become disrespect? That could be different for everyone, and when you criticize someone's beliefs, in any case you are always criticizing the person to some extent by telling them they are wrong, or that their thinking is flawed. I do think that we should try to get along as much as possible, the problem I have is when I hear the word respect, all to often does it really mean respect as much as it means walk eggshells around my beliefs and don't say anything bad about them. One time I saw someone say "god doesn't exist" someone responded back that, that person offended everyone who believes in god, their are probably legitimate religious out there that want actual respect rather to never have anyone question them, and those that do try to point out that bad that has been done in religion are always accused of bigotry, which I think is something that SHOULD be acknowledged. No not every Christian is bad, Christianity isn't inherently bad or anything of the sort, but it does have it's problems that should be acknowledged along with other religions. Whenever anyone tries to point this out they get treated like bigots. I have seen many atheists be total and utter dicks to theists, and I see them as garbage in my book, and I am not ok with that, at the same time I am frustrated how often the need to respect each other's beliefs principal is abused to make someone elses stance taboo in society.

Side: Yes, we do.
thousandin1(1931) Clarified
2 points

I think the wording and tone of a statement indicate whether or not it is criticism vs whether it is an attack.

"That's fucking stupid" Is an attack.

"I don't understand why you would believe that" is not an attack, though it is a criticism.

"The Torah is just a bunch of bullshit" is an attack.

"Why is this passage from Leviticus taken at face value while this other passage from Leviticus is ignored?" is not an attack, but rather a criticism.

There will always be individuals who take offense to things unreasonably. That's on them- whether a statement is mere criticism or is an attack is not really subjective, after all. Rather than offer respect or disrespect, I believe that we should simply cut off or minimize interactions with those people.

Side: Yes, we do.
0 points

Mhm. It would stop wars.

Side: Yes, we do.
zephyr20x6(2387) Disputed
2 points

Well what is your definition of respect towards belief of all kinds, political, philosophical, spiritual, etc ?

Side: That's fucking stupid.
Intangible(4933) Disputed
1 point

Respect: Showing no animosity towards another .

Side: Yes, we do.
Ramshutu(227) Disputed
2 points

Yes; such respect of other peoples beliefs would have arguably stopped World War 2 and the American Civil War.

While most definitely not in all cases, in many situations it has only been the challenging and NOT respecting peoples beliefs that have brought about every landmark change in attitudes that has led to increased rights for all.

Slavery, Womens Suffrage, Equal Rites, The End Nazism, and many other horrors of our history have arguably only ever been brought about by a group of people standing up and pointing out how stupid the other person beliefs are.

While granted these are not religion, which is sort of implied but not stated at the top of this debate: Several religions are actively trying to bring about similar aspects of the above.

Side: That's fucking stupid.
Intangible(4933) Clarified
1 point

1. Duh.

2. I only said that it would stop wars, I didn't say all wars.

3. You agreed with me, yet you disputed.

So what was your point?

Side: Yes, we do.

Are you kidding me? ;)

Side: That's fucking stupid.
2 points

There is a major, significant and massive difference between respecting someones right to have a belief and respecting the belief itself.

If beliefs had no effect on any other person other than the believer, then it maybe fair that we should respect peoples beliefs as they by definition have no effect on anyone else.

However, in a world where different peoples beliefs or exercising of those beliefs often involve affecting other people, be it via indoctrination, violence, mistreatement, curtailing of rights or imposing of some portion of that belief on others; then that belief should not ever HAVE to be respected simply because it is their belief.

Side: That's fucking stupid.
2 points

This comes down to what a person means by 'respect' in this context.

By respect I mean ones ideas or beliefs should only be questioned to an extent they are comfortable with. That being said; someone who proselytizes another should be ready to have their own beliefs subjected to scrutiny to a further degree than they put forth in their actions. If you wish to show your stance on an issue is superior to another your stance must be examined thoroughly.

Should you watch the tone and aim of your criticisms when discussing someones beliefs? Yes. If their tone sours you could just leave them to their own thoughts if the belief is of no consequence to others (or troll them....this is the internet). Which brings me to my next point.

Beliefs should only be respected in as much as they do not interfere with another persons ability to hold their own beliefs or prevents another person from taking their own actions unless the belief or action affects as a direct result a persons well being in an irreparable way.

Some examples:

The Inquisition, this one should be an apparent assault on the beliefs of others. The faith healing or the anti vaccination crowd who, in place of tried and true scientific methods, prefer to take their dangerous alternatives with their children's lives.

Side: That's fucking stupid.

I'm glad to see someone say it. A Similar topic that seems more untouchable is culture. Just because it's someones culture doesn't mean it's good or even ok. Think about cultures built around human sacrifice. And just to stay on topic, their beliefs are stupid too.

Side: That's fucking stupid.
1 point

i dont have to respect anything

Side: That's fucking stupid.

I for one am obliged to agree, we don't have to "respect" each other's beliefs, we do, but I have a feeling my interpretation of respect is different from others. To acknowledge someone else's belief as a valid perception that many people hold, to respect the person that holds the belief. Beliefs were made to be criticized, I want my perception of things to be criticized. I want those speak their mind when we don't agree politically, philosophically, etc, I'd rather be open minded then sensitive to those that wholly disagree with me. Their is no reason to get emotional, and civility should be an objective, we should TRY to be kind to each other as possible, but allow each other to express our points without restrictions getting in the way.

Side: That's fucking stupid.

You're right. For example, terrorists do NOT like being called rag heads. They find that very offensive. Especially since, in reality, it is a folded sheet. Therefore, we should call the little Shiites, sheet heads ;)

Side: That's fucking stupid.

Should we have to respect a sexist, a racist or a homophobes beliefs? Should we respect a terrorist's or a neo-nazi's belief?

Side: That's fucking stupid.

Perhaps some will respect all beliefs, because the "equal respect", outside of evidence or integrity, is the only respect and the only justification for their own beliefs. The logic goes like this: "I may have no evidence for my claims, but if you disrespect my firm devotion to the invisible man in the clouds, the world will be torn apart by war!"

Side: That's fucking stupid.
1 point

Really no of course not , but there will he less fighting and it will also be respectful to others. also have manners for each other beliefs but you should you don't have to.

Side: That's fucking stupid.

Only prior to giving the beliefs proper consideration. Once you've had a chance to look at it and try to understand it to at least some level, feel free to lambast away if you find it lacking.

Side: That's fucking stupid.