NP, I have some rage to vent

[BitVyper]

Me: I wouldn't call it stupid, necessarily, to blame religion for some of the homophobia, specifically.
You: It's stupid to say religion causes homophobia, 'cause people will be homophobic anyway, even when religions do promote it.
Me: Religion can convince people of lots of stupid things, what's stupid about thinking it might, especially in children, convince them to hate gay people?

Massive straw man. That is a very small part of what I said, and I said it only as an example.

[Krylo]

Originally Posted by BitVyper

Massive straw man.

I don't think you understand what a straw man is. Alternatively, that avatar is affecting your mind.

If you're thinking it is what I think you're thinking it is, I straw manned myself just as hard. I didn't simplify your argument in order to attack a simplified and weakend version. I did so to simplify our discussion to this point so you could see where I was coming from.

[Marc v4.0]

Originally Posted by Krylo

Because they can convince people a magical man lives in the sky and loves them and (blah blah blah religious discussion about how religion is silly), but it's totally inconceivable that when applied to children it could teach them how to hate people, right?

The majority don't need convincing of a magical man in the sky, they believe it already and seek religion for reinforcement.

People who hate seek out reinforcement for their hate. They'll go to a hate-spewing religious establishment before they wouldgo to a tolorant religious establishment of the same demonination because of that. It matters little if the religion in question actually denounces, supports, or is indifferent to the subject.

Really. Haters gonna Hate.

[Krylo]

Originally Posted by Marc v1.0

The majority don't need convincing of a magical man in the sky, they believe it already and seek religion for reinforcement.

People who hate seek out reinforcement for their hate. They'll go to a hate-spewing religious establishment before they wouldgo to a tolorant religious establishment of the same demonination because of that. It matters little if the religion in question actually denounces, supports, or is indifferent to the subject.

Really. Haters gonna Hate.

How often do children get to choose which religion they're going to be part of?

And can you prove that children would believe in god if they weren't convinced of it as children by their parents and the priests/pastors/whatever your religion calls them their parents choose to put them in contact with? How many people, honestly, stop and deeply think about their religion and denomination later in life and change it? All of them?

If not, it's not stupid to suggest that indoctrination can exacerbate or create homophobic feelings in people who may have otherwise come to adulthood without them/with weaker versions of them.

S'all I'm saying.

[BitVyper]

Originally Posted by Krylo

I don't think you understand what a straw man is.

To be fair, in a technical sense, you're not totally fabricating an argument for me, so I guess you're kind of right there. Fine, is there a logical fallacy for when you pretend part of an argument doesn't exist?

To quote what I actually said again:

It is dumb. Religion didn't spontaneously invent fear, it's just one of many things we use to give it shape and teach it to others - often for good reason, but then not always. If you want to blame religion for all that stuff, you're going to have to stretch that out to culture in general. Or you could just, y'know, blame people for being homophobic. OR, even better, you could do something more constructive than than trying to blame something, and maybe actually help people overcome their fears.

You could go after certain religious institutions for being big proponents of homophobia, but say you abolish X religion and religious institution; do you think all of the people involved in it will just up and change their core character, or will they just find another way to express it? The institutions and religions aren't the problem. They can't do anything. They're as alive as corporations.

Edit: Okay, I guess if your point isn't that it's debatable or that it could be right, then yeah, I can see considering it more of an immature worldview. But I don't think the "all" has anything to do with it.

Now here's what you said I said:

You: It's stupid to say religion causes homophobia, 'cause people will be homophobic anyway, even when religions do promote it.

I mean, that's not even the reason I gave after calling it dumb. You're turning an example I used into my entire argument.

You come in here and call everyone immature, then pull this juvenile bullshit? Yeah, forget it.

[Marc v4.0]

Originally Posted by Krylo

How often do children get to choose which religion they're going to be part of?

And can you prove that children would believe in god if they weren't convinced of it as children by their parents and the priests/pastors/whatever your religion calls them their parents choose to put them in contact with? How many people, honestly, stop and deeply think about their religion and denomination later in life and change it? All of them?

If not, it's not stupid to suggest that indoctrination can exacerbate or create homophobic feelings in people who may have otherwise come to adulthood without them/with weaker versions of them.

S'all I'm saying.

Hmmm...

Originally Posted by Krylo

their parents choose to put them in contact with

Ya know...

Originally Posted by Krylo

their parents choose to put them in contact with

I don't think Religions are the majority blame holders...

If the religious establishment the parents took them to said "Don't hate Homosexuals" and the parents hated homosexuals, well, they're going to either take them somewhere else, or teach them to hate homosexuals -Regardless of what the Religion says-.

[Krylo]

Maybe because I don't care about arguing with you?

I'm just putting out that it's not fair to call the idea dumb.

Maybe you should read the rest of that post past the 'straw man'?

Edit:

Originally Posted by Marc v1.0

I don't think Religions are the majority blame holders...

Are they completely blameless, then?

[BitVyper]

Maybe you should read the rest of that post past the 'straw man'?

Maybe after you extend the same courtesy?

[Krylo]

I did.

But if you're going to be a dick over some perceived slight that was only there to simplify MY argument so that YOU could understand it.

Well, shit, I'm done here.

Edit: This is why religious discussion isn't allowed guys. Take notes. We aren't even discussing theology, and... yeaaaaaaah.

[Marc v4.0]

Originally Posted by Krylo

Are they completely blameless, then?

Well, if I wanted to be a bit of a dick, I'd point out that Religions aren't entities or creatures, but collections of intertwined beliefs and ideas and ultimatly the responsibility lies on the shoulders of those that take those ideas and "interpret" them.

If the Church of Bob of the Fifth Seal's holy writ said "Don't hate on the Gays, guys" and someone said "Oh, but that's not what it really means, cause you see if I just explain it this way so that it sounds like it's really saying "Stone them to death and Burn their corpses" it's not the fault of the Church of Bob of the Fifth Seal. It;s that stupid asshole there.