Discussion Thread from the Funny Anti-Religious Pictures thread.

[Kulindahr]

I would appreciate an explanation here please.

I have no right, according to you, to find humour in religion because, according to you, I am laughing at falsehoods which should be corrected. Yet here you state that you consider some religions, which aren't your own, false or irrational. So a funny anti-Hinduism thread would be acceptable no matter what was said because in your opinion it is false.

>sigh<

This would get a D in my remedial reading comprehension class I taught for college freshmen.

No, a funny anti-Hindu thread would be subject to the same standard I apply everywhere: is it accurate? If a cartoon was based on Hinduism's caste system, it would be accurate; if it were based on a claim that Hindu gods are believed by Hindus to be extraterrestrials, it would not -- because that is not what Hinduism says.

So you would have no right to put down Hinduism on the basis of the latter, or laugh at such unless you were laughing at the ignorance of the author, because that would be merely a slur, and taking pleasure in slurs is just bigotry.

The best humor in the FARIP thread was actually based on what a religion actually says. The problem is when a religion was ridiculed on the basis of a falsehood about what it says.

 

[Kulindahr]

Originally Posted by Kulindahr

It depends on how you define "religion". .................................
............................................except where I found a religion's claims to be irrational or plain false, e.g. Hinduism).


Hinduism has over 1.09 billion adherents worldwide (15% of world's population)

Rather insulting for all these Hindus don't you think.

Hinduism insults itself by having the caste system, which is a declaration that some humans are more valuable than others.

 

[Kulindahr]

Another example of humor that's actually laughing at the author of the image. The "point" is a precise parallel to claiming the moon has no backside because the claimant can't see it with his backyard telescope, or claiming that a piece of rock isn't radioactive based on examining it under a microscope in a middle school science lab.

 

[HoodedRat]

Hinduism divides humans into levels of value of their lives, in the caste system. That is irrational enough to disqualify it.

Meanwhile ... almost everything about Christianity is irrational enough to disqualify it.

 

[johaninsc]

Another example of humor that's actually laughing at the author of the image. The "point" is a precise parallel to claiming the moon has no backside because the claimant can't see it with his backyard telescope, or claiming that a piece of rock isn't radioactive based on examining it under a microscope in a middle school science lab.

Well, in the case of the wafer, I would assume that after it is converted into the magic Jesus cookie, a simple test could determine if it contains human DNA.

 

[Kulindahr]

Well, in the case of the wafer, I would assume that after it is converted into the magic Jesus cookie, a simple test could determine if it contains human DNA.

Which would be totally irrelevant -- it's hunting for the presence of something with a tool that can't measure it.

Thinking that a DNA test would have any relevance to the presence of Christ in the bread indicates a complete lack of comprehension of the subject matter, as much as the declaration that God doesn't exist because an astronaut in an orbiting spacecraft couldn't see Him.

 

[Kulindahr]

Meanwhile ... almost everything about Christianity is irrational enough to disqualify it.

I have yet to see any claim about irrationality in Christianity that is sustainable. The vast majority of claims are based on a priori assumptions, which disqualifies them from the start.

The Hindu caste system is observably irrational.

 

[zoltanspawn]

Hinduism divides humans into levels of value of their lives, in the caste system. That is irrational enough to disqualify it.

Actually, while there is an odious system of caste prejudice in Hindu societies, it is hardly an essential feature of Hindu belief or practice.

Many Hindus regard caste in the same way many Christians regard old testament legalisms: put to rest.

 

[zoltanspawn]

The Hindu caste system is observably irrational.

By the way, this sort of harping about the caste system is widely considered prejudicial by many Hindus. They think it's reductive and stereotypical.

 

[Kahaih]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

American bison and kangaroos had to swim across oceans to hop on a boat?

Seems not only unnecessary, but also unusually cruel. Or perhaps this was from a time and place when/where it was customary to skin goats alive.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

American bison and kangaroos had to swim across oceans to hop on a boat?

Seems not only unnecessary, but also unusually cruel. Or perhaps this was from a time and place when/where it was customary to skin goats alive.

I can't find a cartoon for it, but there is a strong of Creationism who believe the world was all one continent until the Flood -- then they went scooting apart at high speed!

 

[Kulindahr]

Actually, while there is an odious system of caste prejudice in Hindu societies, it is hardly an essential feature of Hindu belief or practice.

Many Hindus regard caste in the same way many Christians regard old testament legalisms: put to rest.

As far as I can find, the caste system is integral to Hindu belief. So while Christians reject Old Testament legalism because the Bible tells them to and are thus following their religion, Hindus who abandon the caste system are rejecting part of their religion.

 

[Kulindahr]

By the way, this sort of harping about the caste system is widely considered prejudicial by many Hindus. They think it's reductive and stereotypical.

"Harping"? Pointing out an aspect integral to a religion that shows it to be irrational is hardly harping; it's merely pointing out a feature that disqualifies the religion from having any legitimate claim to being actual revelation.

I've seen arguments that it isn't integral, but they seem to depend on the idea that a religion can be changed by those who follow it -- which would also disqualify it as a claimant. If you choose a religion to make you feel good rather than on the basis of truth, that's fine -- but if I were choosing a religion on the basis of what made me feel good, I would not be a Christian.

 

[HoodedRat]

I have yet to see any claim about irrationality in Christianity that is sustainable.

You obviously haven't looked very far then.

 

[Kulindahr]

You obviously haven't looked very far then.

Only if you think learning three languages and taking a good fifty hours of college courses to investigate it qualifies as not "very far".

 

[zoltanspawn]

As far as I can find, the caste system is integral to Hindu belief. So while Christians reject Old Testament legalism because the Bible tells them to and are thus following their religion, Hindus who abandon the caste system are rejecting part of their religion.

No, not at all. Your conception of "Hinduism" is wildly at odds with people who study its variety, and people who practice it.

Yes, some Hindus believe in some conception of a caste system.

But there is no corpus of beliefs to which all Hindus adhere.

That you don't understand that very elementary fact indicates you are trying to talk about something you don't know about.

 

[Kulindahr]

No, not at all. Your conception of "Hinduism" is wildly at odds with people who study its variety, and people who practice it.

Yes, some Hindus believe in some conception of a caste system.

But there is no corpus of beliefs to which all Hindus adhere.

That you don't understand that very elementary fact indicates you are trying to talk about something you don't know about.

I've read several thousand pages and everything indicates that the caste system is integral. But if there's no actual corpus of beliefs, that becomes irrelevant, because it becomes a smorgasbord, while also rules out any claim to being actual revelation -- pick and choose makes it all from man, because there's no way to sort out what would be from a Creator from the rest. At that point I have no need to understand anything else, it's disqualified itself.

 

[star-warrior]

I have yet to see any claim about irrationality in Christianity that is sustainable. The vast majority of claims are based on a priori assumptions, which disqualifies them from the start.

Which ones don't disqualify themselves and prove the irrationality of Christianity then?

You state, "majority", therefore a minority would, by extention prove the irrationality of Christianity...

 

[zoltanspawn]

I've read several thousand pages and everything indicates that the caste system is integral. But if there's no actual corpus of beliefs, that becomes irrelevant, because it becomes a smorgasbord, while also rules out any claim to being actual revelation -- pick and choose makes it all from man, because there's no way to sort out what would be from a Creator from the rest. At that point I have no need to understand anything else, it's disqualified itself.

If you've read several thousand pages about Hinduism and they don't begin with simple statements explaining that there's no single corpus of beliefs, you should find better sources. I can only assume you are reading "Christian portraits of false religions" or some such, because there's no respectable literature on Hinduism that would state otherwise.

 

[zoltanspawn]

^I should probably add the thought that talking about "Hinduism" is rather like talking about "Abrahamism" only more imprecise.

Following Kulindahr's logic, because "Abrahamism" lacks a single corpus of beliefs, it's a smorgasbord and definitely something he doesn't need to understand.