|
Forum: General Stuff Topic: Ignorance started by: thibodeaux Posted by thibodeaux on Aug. 26 2011,05:51
I've noticed that a lot of times when a person holds an opinion that others don't agree with, especially if those others are Right Thinking People, the person with the offending opinion is "ignorant."
Posted by GORDON on Aug. 26 2011,06:29
Easier to just dismiss peeps with a label than to try to see their point.Most issues I have thought about have come down to very slight differences of opinion.... but most people don't care to see that. MY SIDE/YOUR SIDE. Posted by TPRJones on Aug. 26 2011,06:35
Well, since my position is always the most rational, practical, and correct then anyone that holds a different position is either willfully not thinking through the problem properly or incapable of doing so. I try to have some pity for the latter, but have nothing but scorn for the former. Either way - willfully so or not - they are of course being ignorant.Simple, no? Or, to put it in a more GORDONesque manner: MY SIDE / EVERYONE ELSE Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,08:00
Apparently the NC legislature is proposing a state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Naturally, this is because of "hate and ignorance."
Posted by TheCatt on Sep. 14 2011,08:09
(thibodeaux @ Sep. 14 2011,11:00) QUOTE Apparently the NC legislature is proposing a state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Naturally, this is because of "hate and ignorance." Well... what else would it be? Outdated religious convictions? Inability to understand the Bible? Oh wait, that's ignorance again. People who don't understand the point of a constitution/republic? Oh wait, ignorance again. Posted by GORDON on Sep. 14 2011,08:25
Time to post a poll I have been thinking about....
Posted by GORDON on Sep. 14 2011,08:35
(TheCatt @ Sep. 14 2011,11:09) QUOTE (thibodeaux @ Sep. 14 2011,11:00) QUOTE Apparently the NC legislature is proposing a state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Naturally, this is because of "hate and ignorance." Well... what else would it be? Outdated religious convictions? Inability to understand the Bible? Oh wait, that's ignorance again. People who don't understand the point of a constitution/republic? Oh wait, ignorance again. I thought the core debate was whether or not is was better for children to be raised by male/female parents, and thus should be encouraged. Posted by TheCatt on Sep. 14 2011,09:51
The core debate seems to be "We're ignorant religious fucks who don't understand things."But why does the government have to intrude into relationships, families, marriage, etc? Why would a simple majority be able to tell others who they < can and cannot marry. > The core debate should be: Does the government have the right to restrict individuals from marrying whom they choose? And the simple answer is No, Hell no. Posted by GORDON on Sep. 14 2011,09:55
Religion seems to be your beef, but my personal opinion is that no one should be recognized by government as "married" until there is a good reason for it to be so. Since the government decided to treat married people differently for tax purposes, that tells me there may have been a reason for it. What was the reason? Serious question, I don't know the answer to that. I suspect, but don't know.
Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,09:56
(TheCatt @ Sep. 14 2011,11:09) QUOTE Outdated religious convictions? Inability to understand the Bible? Oh wait, that's ignorance again. If your religious conviction is about the structure of the physical universe...like "the sun goes around the Earth," I would concede that could be outdated. But a conviction about human institutions, like "men can't marry men"....that seems pretty timeless. And not based on hate or ignorance. And what part of the Bible says it IS ok for men to marry men? Because if it does, I'll cop to ignorance on that. Posted by TheCatt on Sep. 14 2011,10:06
(thibodeaux @ Sep. 14 2011,12:56) QUOTE (TheCatt @ Sep. 14 2011,11:09) QUOTE Outdated religious convictions? Inability to understand the Bible? Oh wait, that's ignorance again. If your religious conviction is about the structure of the physical universe...like "the sun goes around the Earth," I would concede that could be outdated. But a conviction about human institutions, like "men can't marry men"....that seems pretty timeless. And not based on hate or ignorance. And what part of the Bible says it IS ok for men to marry men? Because if it does, I'll cop to ignorance on that. What part of the Bible says it's ok to wear clothes of two different materials? Or grow two different crops? Or sleep with a women who's had her period in the past two weeks? Outdated. Posted by TheCatt on Sep. 14 2011,10:09
(GORDON @ Sep. 14 2011,12:55) QUOTE Religion seems to be your beef, but my personal opinion is that no one should be recognized by government as "married" until there is a good reason for it to be so. Since the government decided to treat married people differently for tax purposes, that tells me there may have been a reason for it. What was the reason? Serious question, I don't know the answer to that. I suspect, but don't know. It's not just taxes, it's legal as well, particularly with regards to property, medical issues, etc. So fundamentally, the question is why marriage is a legal concept, since taxes just draws from that, I would assume. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,10:23
(TheCatt @ Sep. 14 2011,13:06) QUOTE What part of the Bible says it's ok to wear clothes of two different materials? Or grow two different crops? Or sleep with a women who's had her period in the past two weeks? Outdated. You didn't answer the question. Instead, you're arguing that people ignore the parts of the Bible they don't like. That's still not ignorance. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,10:29
Instead of going around and around, let me just assert this:In (almost) ANY debate of a political issue, there will be people on the other side who are smarter and more educated than you are. Therefore, it is ridiculous to assert their position is based on ignorance. Posted by TheCatt on Sep. 14 2011,10:30
No, I'm saying they are ignorant of the Bible.
Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,10:35
(TheCatt @ Sep. 14 2011,13:30) QUOTE No, I'm saying they are ignorant of the Bible. You have not shown how opposition to gay marriage = ignorant of the Bible. As far as *I* know, opposition to gay marriage doesn't contradict the Bible in any way. You have pointed out that people are quite willing to ignore Biblical prohibitions when convenient; no argument there. Perhaps you mean that people are ignorant of these prohibitions? Maybe they are, but that doesn't mean their opposition to gay marriage is due to ignorance. Posted by TheCatt on Sep. 14 2011,10:55
I'm saying that they are ignorant of other Biblical issues, not that they are ignoring them. And, given the historical context of all of the prohibitions, and the way they are treated today, they are also ignorant of what the Bible is trying to convey.
Posted by Leisher on Sep. 14 2011,11:25
(thibodeaux @ Sep. 14 2011,13:29) QUOTE In (almost) ANY debate of a political issue, there will be people on the other side who are smarter and more educated than you are. Therefore, it is ridiculous to assert their position is based on ignorance. That statement is slightly vague, but logically sound. However, would you agree that there are also people on the "other side" who are smarter and more educated than someone on this side, but does have a position based on ignorance? The problem I always have is that those people, on both sides of the argument, seem to be the ones with the loudest voices. (Or that's who the MSM wants us to see/hear.) QUOTE I'm saying that they are ignorant of other Biblical issues, not that they are ignoring them. And, given the historical context of all of the prohibitions, and the way they are treated today, they are also ignorant of what the Bible is trying to convey. I'm not putting myself into this debate, but I can say that just last night my wife listened to a priest rip his fellow Catholics. Apparently some survey was just done and Catholics scored really low in knowledge about their own religion. He stated it was a huge problem, and I've got to agree. Listen, believe in God or not, but you should kind of know and understand your own beliefs... Hell, look at Muslims. Some think their religion is based on peace and tolerance and that violence has no place in the world, while other Muslims think the killing of innocents is "Allah's will". They're not both right... Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,11:27
You keep using that word. Given the number of different religious sects based on the Bible, I don't think you can fairly say that people who believe something different from you are ignorant, just because of that difference.
Posted by TheCatt on Sep. 14 2011,11:37
(thibodeaux @ Sep. 14 2011,14:27) QUOTE You keep using that word. Given the number of different religious sects based on the Bible, I don't think you can fairly say that people who believe something different from you are ignorant, just because of that difference. And I'm not. I'm saying they are ignorant of the Bible, period. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,11:48
Listen: YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT.You are ASSUMING that people who oppose gay marriage are ignorant of the Bible because they haven't drawn the same conclusions from it that you have. That is fallacious. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,12:24
Why don't you tell < these guys > they're ignorant about the Bible.
Posted by TheCatt on Sep. 14 2011,12:53
OK.
Posted by TPRJones on Sep. 14 2011,13:45
It's not about the Bible. It has never been about the Bible. If it were really about the Bible then the Defense of Marriage Act would have stated that "Marriage is between one man and one or more women, which will serve him without question." I have looked and looked and looked, and I have been unable to find anything in the Bible about marriage being between one man and one woman, or about the women having any sort of say in anything important.No, it's about what people think God wants, regardless of what is in the Bible. Does that make them ignorant? Many of them, yes; lots of them really have no understanding of what the Bible actually says. The rest that really do understand are hypocrites who choose to play willfully ignorant either because they think they know better than God, or because they are using the situation to gain political power. My take on it: Fuck the Bible. It's completely irrelevant to this question due to the First Amendment. There is no right in this country for one religion to force their views on everyone. Legislating based solely on your religious beliefs is the worst sort of anti-American treason there is as it strikes at the very core of what America is all about. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,14:15
(TPRJones @ Sep. 14 2011,16:45) QUOTE No, it's about what people think God wants, regardless of what is in the Bible. Does that make them ignorant? Many of them, yes; lots of them really have no understanding of what the Bible actually says. The rest that really do understand are hypocrites who choose to play willfully ignorant either because they think they know better than God, or because they are using the situation to gain political power. It sounds like you're contradicting yourself. First you say it's about "what people think God wants." Then you that the only choices are: * Ignorant * Hypocrites who think they know better than God * Hypocrites who are trying to gain political power What about the people who sincerely believe that God is against gay marriage? Are those the ignorant ones? Are you seriously saying that people whose beliefs about what God wants is different from yours are ignorant? Or, again, are you saying that since their beliefs contradict what YOU say the Bible says, they're ignorant? Posted by TPRJones on Sep. 14 2011,14:31
QUOTE What about the people who sincerely believe that God is against gay marriage? Are those the ignorant ones? Are you seriously saying that people whose beliefs about what God wants is different from yours are ignorant? Or, again, are you saying that since their beliefs contradict what YOU say the Bible says, they're ignorant? Ignorant or willfully playing ignorant, yes. Or more accurately, picking and choosing the parts they like and ignoring others. Please tell me where in the Bible that God wants marriage to be only one man and one woman and no other options. You can find places where it says homosexuality is bad. But I have been unable to find anything specifically about one man and one woman, which is the oft-repeated mantra. If they really based their argument on the Bible, they'd be pushing of legalizing polygamy, because that's very biblical. Or if you think Matthew 19:4-6 implies one man and one woman, then the question becomes how can they not be pushing just as hard to make marriage permanent and divorce illegal? However, I'd also like to reiterate that it's really irrelevant when you get down to it. It is fully within the rights of any Christian to practice their version of their religion and not get gay-married. It is not within their rights to force others to practice their version of their religion. EDIT: I will make one exception to the "ignorant" label for Catholics. Under Catholicism the Pope makes proclamations that God promised to uphold. So then if the Pope says it it's so. So for Catholics it's not about ignorance, although I would argue against the legitimacy of the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility. But that's a different conversation. Posted by TheCatt on Sep. 14 2011,14:46
Ignorant.
Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,15:03
(TPRJones @ Sep. 14 2011,17:31) QUOTE However, I'd also like to reiterate that it's really irrelevant when you get down to it. It is fully within the rights of any Christian to practice their version of their religion and not get gay-married. It is not within their rights to force others to practice their version of their religion. I agree, but what part of that is "ignorant?" There's a lot of people trying to get the government to overstep its bounds---hell, SUCEEDING---and I think it's dangerous to attribute that to ignorance. You can't tell me that the hundreds of LAWYERS who have passed those laws as legislators, and upheld them as judges are ALL IGNORANT. Ok, fine, you can TELL me that, but I don't believe. Some of them, sure, and some of them were evil, but some were just misguided well-meaning people. Posted by TPRJones on Sep. 14 2011,15:26
Ignorant of what they can get away with with the law? No. Ignorant of what the Bible says about it, or willfully playing ignorant by using the Bible to achieve their ends while ignoring the parts that don't help them? Yes.I don't consider the word ignorant to be an insult. It's a correctable situation. They can study the Bible themselves to learn what it says instead of listening to the evil ones twisting it to their own ends. And I think it's fair to apply the word ignorant to "misguided well-meaning people" up until they do that. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,17:46
I swear to God: stop it, both of you. You are wrong if you assume that everybody who objects to gay marriage on religious grounds is ignorant of what the Bible says. End of discussion. You may think they are WRONG, but you cannot assume they are ignorant because they disagree with you.
Posted by TheCatt on Sep. 14 2011,17:49
(thibodeaux @ Sep. 14 2011,20:46) QUOTE I swear to God: stop it, both of you. You are wrong if you assume that everybody who objects to gay marriage on religious grounds is ignorant of what the Bible says. End of discussion. You may think they are WRONG, but you cannot assume they are ignorant because they disagree with you. They're both ignorant and wrong, but it has nothing to do with disagreeing with me. You'll never listen to what I'm saying, so I know it doesn't matter, but they are ignorant. I've never said "everybody" but I'm definitely going 80/90% rule here. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,17:51
(TheCatt @ Sep. 14 2011,20:49) QUOTE You'll never listen to what I'm saying, so I know it doesn't matter, but they are ignorant. What exactly is your evidence for this? What information given to an anti-gay-marriage person would correct this ignorance? Lay it on me. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,17:52
(TPRJones @ Sep. 14 2011,18:26) QUOTE I don't consider the word ignorant to be an insult. It's a correctable situation. It most definitely is an insult, and you know it. You're basically saying that all RIGHT-THINKING PEOPLE believe a certain thing. It's conceited, condescending, and insufferable. I expect it from self-righteous asshole liberals; I don't expect it from you people. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 14 2011,18:08
I shouldn't really complain so much, because in the case of anti-gay-marriage, it's not like < the opponents are all Redneck Crackers >. Nope; it's those ignorant blacks and Hispanics, too.No enemies to the left, right? Posted by TPRJones on Sep. 14 2011,21:03
(thibodeaux @ Sep. 14 2011,19:52) QUOTE You're basically saying that all RIGHT-THINKING PEOPLE believe a certain thing. Not so. I'm saying the source material from which they claim to get their reasoning does not support them in their stance. At least not in the way they claim it does. Therefor they either are not familiar with the source material (ignorant of what it says) or know better but choose to ignore that fact (willfully feigning ignorance). They're welcome to say gay marriage is bad, but if they're going to give a religious basis for it it should be one that shows some understanding of their own religious text. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 15 2011,05:23
(TPRJones @ Sep. 15 2011,00:03) QUOTE Not so. I'm saying the source material from which they claim to get their reasoning does not support them in their stance. At least not in the way they claim it does. Therefor they either are not familiar with the source material (ignorant of what it says) or know better but choose to ignore that fact (willfully feigning ignorance). Or not; just because you say it's so doesn't prove it. There's also the choices of: 1. their interpretation is in good faith (no pun intended) but incorrect, or 2. YOUR interpretation is incorrect. But of course, YOU'RE not ignorant, so you couldn't be wrong, could you? Posted by TheCatt on Sep. 15 2011,07:05
< Clint Eastwood is Libertarian. >
Posted by TPRJones on Sep. 15 2011,10:36
(thibodeaux @ Sep. 15 2011,07:23) QUOTE Or not; just because you say it's so doesn't prove it. There's also the choices of: 1. their interpretation is in good faith (no pun intended) but incorrect, or 2. YOUR interpretation is incorrect. But of course, YOU'RE not ignorant, so you couldn't be wrong, could you? If you are going to sling about such accusations, why don't you have the courtesy I have shown of citing specific Bible passages to back up your point? If someone "interpreted" the Bible to have been written entirely by cats and telling of the Mewsiah who will appear in a puff of fur and rid the world of all dog-kind, and they seemed serious about it, I would label them as ignorant of the actual contents of the Bible. This isn't everything goes here. There are actual words in the Bible with actual meanings, and some "interpretations" can be labeled as ignorant when they show a clear lack of understanding of what is in the book. EDIT: People are welcome to believe whatever they want. But when it comes to Bible references, there are some things that are correct and some things that are wrong. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 15 2011,12:58
(TPRJones @ Sep. 15 2011,13:36) QUOTE If you are going to sling about such accusations, why don't you have the courtesy I have shown of citing specific Bible passages to back up your point? It's not MY point. I'm just telling you, don't be an arrogant asshole like the Lefties. There are other possible states on the other side besides "evil" and "stupid." And as far as I'm concerned, you have no business telling people they don't understand their own religion, unless it's also your religion. Like I said, go tell the Pope he's ignorant (oh right, you graciously gave him an exception. Nice of you). Saying, "you're ignorant" is NOT an argument. It's a dismissal. Posted by TPRJones on Sep. 15 2011,13:41
QUOTE Like I said, go tell the Pope he's ignorant (oh right, you graciously gave him an exception. Nice of you). No, I do not except the Pope. I excepted Catholics because by the tenants of their religion if the Pope says it then it is God's law, and the Pope did say it. However, the Pope himself - along with the entire upper levels of the catholic Church hierarchy - is a whole other issue and I except him from nothing. He's a bastard, as are most of those in the Vatican, whether they mean well or not. It's just that I won't hold their sins against the rest of rank-and-file Catholicism. QUOTE Saying, "you're ignorant" is NOT an argument. It's a dismissal. I guess we'll just have to disagree here. I know there's many things in this world of which I'm ignorant and if someone were to point out that I was ignorant about the topic being discussed I wouldn't be insulted, I would either acknowledge that that is something I haven't studied properly or instead demonstrate my knowledge of the topic. I guess if you are saying that someone is ignorant about ALL topics then that could be considered a dismissive insult, but I don't recall anyone here doing that. QUOTE And as far as I'm concerned, you have no business telling people they don't understand their own religion, unless it's also your religion. For the record I've never told people they don't understand their own religion nor implied I would tell someone that. If you go back and read my posts, this is only about Biblical references. Which aren't magically changed when someone changes their religious stance. The Bible says what it says, not what people want it to say. If they don't like it they should probably go make their own Bible; you know, like the Mormon's did. Posted by thibodeaux on Sep. 15 2011,14:08
(TPRJones @ Sep. 15 2011,16:41) QUOTE For the record I've never told people they don't understand their own religion nor implied I would tell someone that. If you go back and read my posts, this is only about Biblical references. Which aren't magically changed when someone changes their religious stance. The Bible says what it says, not what people want it to say. If they don't like it they should probably go make their own Bible; you know, like the Mormon's did. So what are the anti-gay-marriage Mormons ignorant of? And the A.G.M. Jews? And the A.G.M. Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus? And the A.G.M. atheists? What are all these people ignorant of? Or are they just haters? Posted by TPRJones on Sep. 15 2011,14:28
If they are basing their arguments on the Bible, then they are ignorant of what is in that text (or willfully ignoring what it says). I could be shown to be wrong about this with proper Biblical quotes, but I've been unable to find anything to substantiate those views or find anyone that can point to such quotes. With the possible slightly vague exception of Matthew 19:4-6, but then that just raises questions of hypocrisy in most people citing it.If they are just pulling their rationalizations out of thin air, then they aren't necessarily ignorant per se, just homophobic haters. Although perhaps an argument could be made that they must be ignorant of the nature of homosexuals and homosexual culture if they hate them so much with so little basis. But I don't care to make that argument; I'll let someone else deal with that one should it be necessary. |