Don't Shove Your Religion Down My Throat

[ChoppinBroccoli]

One of my friends just posted this on her Facebook page: "'If God wanted us to live in a permissive society, He would have given us the Ten Suggestions and not the Ten Commandments." ~Zig Ziglar

So I responded with this: "If God wanted us to think for ourselves, He wouldn't have invented religion." ~Me

I'd like to take credit for making that one up, but there's a distinct possibility I stole it from someone (although I can't recall ever seeing it anywhere before--but it's just too perfect to not have been said by someone else already).

[msongs]

1. sorry but my 2000 year old superstitions and fairy tales trump your rights lol nt

[ixion]

17. rofl... indeed

They don't like it framed like that (i.e. realistically).

[mnhtnbb]

2. Those who think for themselves are using the gift God gave them.

I will take credit for that statement.

God did not invent religion. Man invented religion.

[patrice]

7. Agreed . . . . I also am a little confused by OP.

[notadmblnd]

9. I'm pretty sure Man invented God too.

Just like the Greek, Roman, Norse and many other gods of times past were created.

[mzteris]

22. You can safely assume

that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do. Anne Lamott

I LOVE this quote!!

[notadmblnd]

25. Nice quote.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

27. SIgmund Freud wrote a lot about that need for a god.

The psychological need for religion. The need for a protective sky-daddy that we feel is on our side and understands us. The need to belong to a group of like minded people.

He also wrote something called "Religious faith as an expression of psychological neurosis".


Some of what he said is still true.

[RedCloud]

3. Thank God for evolution. Those bananas are still tasty!

[Warpy]

4. Religious nanny staters just never get it, do they?

They all seem to think they can banish sin from the earth and turn it back into Eden if they pass enough laws against sin and punish sinners severely enough.

That's a prescription for hell on earth, not heaven.

[JackRiddler]

5. Clever but much too polite for my mood reading such crap.

I'm likelier to tell her to stuff her non-existent God (and her commandments made up a million years ago by demented patriarchs in some desert, at least according to legend) in the orifice where she already has the all-too-real poker.

[JitterbugPerfume]

6. crap like this from friends and family

is why I deleted my FB account. Just to let you know how BAD it was, my maiden name is Ziglar.

An athiest Ziglar is unfuckingbelievable--thats ME :rofl:

[conscious evolution]

8. My stock answer to ten commandment bullshit

As a person who is niether christian,jewish,nor muslim the ten commandments do not apply to me nor am I required to follow them.

[NoNothing]

12. Actually some of them you probably are

E.g., you are required not to steal or murder people by criminal statutes.

[conscious evolution]

13. Civil law is another law entirely

Those,for the most part,I follow.

[NoNothing]

16. Well you didn't specify

*who* required you to follow them. My point is just that some of the 10 commandments are codified into our legal systems, and thus everyone is obliged to obey them regardless of beliefs.

It is an interesting contrast to look at the ones that have and have not been turned into law.

[Winterblues]

24. I am fairly certain they were against the Law before Moses was ever born.

Those Laws didn't originate from Moses and God as they were in effect long before either came into being.

[Warpy]

14. They also forget those first 3 commandments

People who think they're universal don't know what they are. Telling people outside the desert religions that their gods are inferior in a pluralistic country like ours is a really rotten thing to do.

It's why those commandments belong in the churches, not in any public arena.

[MikeH]

28. I consider one of the Ten Commandments attributed to God to be wrong

I think the commandment to "honor your father and mother" is wrong. The commandment in the biblical text is unconditional, and makes no exceptions if one's parents are abusive or are otherwise not deserving of honor.

I think it is very unfortunate that this particular commandment is one which is attributed to God, and is one of the "Ten Commandments" which have come to lie in the center of Judeo-Christian and Western traditional morality.

It is very wrong to say to a person who has or has had an abusive parent or parents that that person has any kind of duty to honor such parents.

If anything there should be a commandment directed to parents that they treat their children with dignity and respect, that the children might come to treat others with dignity and respect.

I would think that it is a much greater crime or sin to abuse or mistreat a child than it is to talk back to or otherwise disrespect one's parents. And I don't think that any good or competent parent, or any parent with any self-respect, needs the backing of a commandment from God.

I went on a http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=248152&mesg_id=248851">rather long rant about the commandment here, and made a http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=233616&mesg_id=233703">shorter post about it here.

[gratuitous]

10. Yeah, "serve one another in love" is just so . . . played

Yanno?

[KansasVoter]

11. How can you be logical and religious?

[leftofcool]

19. You probably can't but you can be logical and spiritual.

[walldude]

15. Zig Ziglar? The corporate motivational speaker?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

If he really knew what god wanted he'd have a better gig.

[spoony]

18. Someone you chose to be friends with

posts something on *their* Facebook, which you also have the option of participating in AND the option of hiding people's status updates, and that's...shoving religion down your throat. How do you deal with actual instances of fundies trying to impose their religion on people?

[pipi_k]

20. Got to agree with you

I have FaceBook friends (and relatives) who post the same type of thing.

I hardly feel like they're "shoving religion down my throat" (as the OP stated). I figure they have just as much right to express their own religious opinions as I do (which I don't, except in my profile, under "religious views" I have put "rude" - ha ha!).

Their opinions don't affect me one bit, except for the occasional eye-roll or two.

I read them, then go on to other things.


No skin off my nose.

[Silent3]

29. +1

The worse thing about fundamentalism is NOT that fundamentalists voice their opinions, or even that they try to persuade others to their point of view. It's the nature of those opinions and the drive many have to coerce and impose their point of view, the desire to use the power of the state to enforce adherence to their version of religion law.

[Solly Mack]

21. OK..but the Church of Solly offers you Solvation.

Mint Julep


I slay me.

[LanternWaste]

23. Religion, philosophy, economics, politics...

Religion, philosophy, economics, politics-- I look at each of these man made constructs and see only two which are forced down our throats on a daily basis.

With regards to the other two, well... I don't really perceive reading facebook post as shoving something down one's throat.

[Zorra]

26. For some folks, thinking is terrifying, so they keep their mind in a box,

and are afraid to let it out. If they let it out, it quickly expands, and becomes too big to be comfortable for them.

Hobbits stuck in the Shire.

[Critters2]

30. Your friend posted this on HER Facebook page,

and you're offended? What part of "her Facebook page" do you not understand. On a related note, you're free to post anything you want on YOUR Facebook page.

[darkstar3]

31. It's Facebook, so it's the internet equivalent of putting a sign in your front yard.

That means that whether they like it or not, your neighbors have to read that shit.

Do you have the right to put tacky, annoying signs and other shit in your yard? Probably, depending on where you live...

Is it in any way tactful? Absolutely not.

[Nihil]

33. Hardly ...

> It's Facebook, so it's the internet equivalent of putting a sign in
> your front yard.

More like the internet equivalent of putting up a small sign in your
back garden, hidden by a six foot fence and half a dozen fruit bushes.

You have to *want* to go there to read it.

It's a bit like the people who are "offended" when they deliberately
disable the default setting of "Moderately safe search" in Google images
and then complain about being shocked by explicit images in return to a
search for "Enormous Erection" or suchlike ...

If you have to make an effort to look, you have surrendered your right
to feel offended when you succeed in your search.

:shrug:

[darkstar3]

34. Bullshit

Clearly you've never experienced the "news feed." I find your "make an effort to look" defense laughably lacking.

[Nihil]

35. Bullshit yourself.

You are correct that I've never experienced any of the crap that
is Facebook's "news feed" but, again, I've never made any effort
to look into someone else's life using such "entertainment".
Hence my comment.

If you choose to do so, you are - by definition - making the effort
to look and so you can hardly claim to be "offended" as a result.

:shrug:

I don't give a fuck about anyone's "posting status", "updates", "news"
or other self-important puff-pieces on Facebook or any of the similar
crap so I am not "defending" the behaviour of the OP's oppo any more
than I am somehow "encouraging" the trumpeting of religion (or lack
thereof) on it. I simply commented that it is a different scale of
behaviour from the "posting a sign in your front yard" claim.

Your personal belief might be that it is equally important (and somehow
as unavoidable) to receive pointless updates from mediocre gossip sites
as look at your neighbour's front yard but it doesn't make it true.

HTH.

[darkstar3]

36. Oh, I see, so once people choose to be on Facebook

they've hopped the fence? Joining a social networking site in order to share information with your friends forces you to wave all rights to be offended by inane shit that shows up in your news feed?

Following that logic, strippers have no right to be offended when their employers expect private lapdances and other sexual favors.

[Nihil]

37. Maybe you need to choose your "friends" more carefully rather than just whinging about them?

> Joining a social networking site in order to
> share information with your friends forces you
> to wave all rights to be offended by inane shit
> that shows up in your news feed?

If your "friends" are spamming you with inane shit then maybe you
need to either stop subscribing to those "friends" or put up with
their inanity?

If they are not real friends then don't bother with them.
If they are, choose to accept them as they are or filter out their
crap instead of willingly receiving it then complaining.

You are the one who has requested to be kept "up to date" with their
pointless drivel yet you are the one who is complaining that it *is*
pointless drivel ... umm ... why?

:crazy:


> Following that logic, strippers have no right to be offended when
> their employers expect private lapdances and other sexual favors.

A closer analogy would be that punters in a strip club have no right
to be offended when someone takes off their clothes on the stage ...

[darkstar3]

38. Spend six months on Facebook and then read this again.

And BTW, I'm not the one whinging, I'm just trying to get you to understand why the OP is upset.

[Nihil]

39. Certainly not.

I have a life thank you ... :P

To remind you, you were the one who claimed that Facebook is "the internet
equivalent of putting a sign in your front yard" and that "whether they like
it or not, your neighbors have to read that shit".
>> It's Facebook, so it's the internet equivalent of putting a sign in your
>> front yard.
>> That means that whether they like it or not, your neighbors have to read
>> that shit.

I'm simply trying to point out that, unlike walking past your neighbour's
front yard, you (or the OP) have to make the effort, to deliberately choose
to express an interest in a person's outpourings (be they nonsensical dribbles
or deep philosophical insights).

To continue to make that effort, that choice, even when the results of that
effort & choice is unpalatable to your sensibilities ... that is every bit
as irrational as the particular viewpoints that you are claiming to dislike.

:shrug:

Just goes to show that nobody's perfect after all :hi:

[darkstar3]

40. What you are deliberately refusing to understand is the nature of the site itself.

I cannot explain it to you here, as you will not listen. Go and join the site and see for yourself. You will realize that my front yard analogy is quite apt.

[Nihil]

41. What you are deliberately refusing to see is your own part in this.

> Go and join the site and see for yourself. You will realize that my
> front yard analogy is quite apt.

Think about what you have just said.

You don't have the opportunity to avoid your neighbour's front yard
(short of shutting your eyes every time you walk past).

I would first have to "go and join the site".

I would then have to add a born-again Christian friend (or someone capable
of producing equivalent unsolicited offences to my intellect as those that
you claim you are suffering).

I would then have to wait for such an utterance before being able to climb
on my high horse and complain that my rights are being infringed.

Your "front yard" analogy is as weak as ever.

[darkstar3]

42. Joining the site is analagous to moving into the neighborhood.

Try it, you'll see.

[raccoon]

32. "If God had wanted us to go naked, we'd have been born that way."

I don't know who said that, but you could respond to her with that.