This idea emerged from an advice from Pipes75:
Now, I have certain problems with this offer. I will try to formulate my borders:
First of all, when I say “belief systems”, I mean “any” belief system, especially the ones that bother more than one person; such as religions, ideologies, economic plans, anything…
Secondly, the concept of “deserving respect” is not an empty demand. Respect might be working in different levels; we can respect nature, or we can respect other people’s existence and life styles, we try not to harm them in its minimum level. However, “deserving respect”, should require more than individual empathy: It follows some expressions of mutually showing, expecting, receiving, and coding this “respect” as law, code of conduct, protocol, tradition and as a rule sometimes.
Thirdly, I must clarify that I exclude individual extremes as objects of respect: For instance, I do respect the concept of neighbourhood, my neighbours and their life-styles. If any one of my neighbour starts to terrorize the neighbourhood, this can only mean one thing: he/she doesn’t respect what I valued in the beginning, he/she lost the ground. In this case, he/she is not, and can not be subject to any respect, even though I still show respect to rest of my neighbours, as much as concept of neighbourhood.
I think the trickiest part of this issue is the separation of a formulated belief system from its followers, advocates. Because no matter what they believe, feel, or appear, they are all human beings. And certain rights of human beings are clearly of utmost importance for our civilization: right to live securely, right to exercise their basic rights such as freedom of expression.
Yet, when an idea and its applications challenge to, such as racism, or slavery, or sexism, we tend to go back to the original rights, and check out the position of problematic state according to basics: These ideas have eroding effects and they undermine the equal rights, and degrade the human dignity and existence, therefore they should not deserve any respect.
How to answer the original question? How to position individual religious belief systems (Christianity, Islam) within the politics of respect? Do they deserve-what?
P.S. This thread is specifically designed for “Ethics, morality & Justice” sub-forum, since the core question of the topic is “respect”.
Respect all of life. (This includes respecting peoples believes, even when they are different from your own).
(-extract from "The mind of a creationist" thread #152-)
Now, I have certain problems with this offer. I will try to formulate my borders:
First of all, when I say “belief systems”, I mean “any” belief system, especially the ones that bother more than one person; such as religions, ideologies, economic plans, anything…
Secondly, the concept of “deserving respect” is not an empty demand. Respect might be working in different levels; we can respect nature, or we can respect other people’s existence and life styles, we try not to harm them in its minimum level. However, “deserving respect”, should require more than individual empathy: It follows some expressions of mutually showing, expecting, receiving, and coding this “respect” as law, code of conduct, protocol, tradition and as a rule sometimes.
Thirdly, I must clarify that I exclude individual extremes as objects of respect: For instance, I do respect the concept of neighbourhood, my neighbours and their life-styles. If any one of my neighbour starts to terrorize the neighbourhood, this can only mean one thing: he/she doesn’t respect what I valued in the beginning, he/she lost the ground. In this case, he/she is not, and can not be subject to any respect, even though I still show respect to rest of my neighbours, as much as concept of neighbourhood.
I think the trickiest part of this issue is the separation of a formulated belief system from its followers, advocates. Because no matter what they believe, feel, or appear, they are all human beings. And certain rights of human beings are clearly of utmost importance for our civilization: right to live securely, right to exercise their basic rights such as freedom of expression.
Yet, when an idea and its applications challenge to, such as racism, or slavery, or sexism, we tend to go back to the original rights, and check out the position of problematic state according to basics: These ideas have eroding effects and they undermine the equal rights, and degrade the human dignity and existence, therefore they should not deserve any respect.
How to answer the original question? How to position individual religious belief systems (Christianity, Islam) within the politics of respect? Do they deserve-what?
P.S. This thread is specifically designed for “Ethics, morality & Justice” sub-forum, since the core question of the topic is “respect”.