wenglund wrote:Moniker wrote:It's a belief system. Why is it taken so personally? When Wade was equating discussing religion to a personal smear against a person it really surprised me and at the same time was rather illuminating. It's not just something that some subscribe to -- it is them.
I don't know that it always is taken personally--I know I don't. It depends much on how and why the belief system is being discussed.
But, to understand why certain discussion may be taken personally, it to may help to recognize that our faith is more than just a belief system. To many of us, it is a way of life and, in part, a way of defining who and what we are (individually and collectively).
Right, I'm understanding that a bit better now. Although I always understood that various sacred beliefs need to be dealt with gently -- I just don't know that I quite understood that self was intertwined completely with the belief system. Of course I don't have religious beliefs -- and I've considered why this is difficult for me to comprehend why those that do feel the way they do. Yet, I do have other beliefs and don't take it as if it is
me. I was quite active in the Libertarian party and was an Ayn Rand libertarian (philosophical) when I was a young lady. This philosophy was something that greatly was part of who I was -- I thought of actions and behaviors I could take that would allow me to live up to the philosophy I ascribed to -- and it was personal... yet, it wasn't me. I could discuss my beliefs with others (even those that didn't understand it or attacked it) and not feel as though they were attacking
me. That's the closest I can come to thinking of something that I've completely wrapped myself in and tried to essentially live.
I'm trying to understand!
I don't know if that's a healthy mentality. I can see that discussing various religions as a positive step to understanding differences and similarities and to better understand human nature to subscribe to some faith system. When all discussions are taken as a personal affront I think it's time to step back and perhaps evaluate why you feel that way?
Perhaps it may be best to first understand that it is inaccurate to assume that "all discussions are taken as a personal affront". They aren't.
My entire post wasn't about you. I should have been clearer about that. I invoked your name because when you equated your faith with a person it was really an "aha" moment for me. The rest of my comments carried from there -- yet, they were not specific to you. I think there are some that absolutely take everything as a personal affront against LDS. I was dismayed when I was on MAD that I would have to repeatedly state my purpose for being there and assure people that I cared not what beliefs they subscribed to and I was there to learn more. Yet, some still insisted on treating all questions (of a sincere, non-judgmental nature) as if I was somehow attacking them. It was frustrating and more than slightly disappointing.
Second, it may help to discipher why some discussions are taken personally, and why some aren't.
I was pretty certain I did understand that! Yet, I think there is suspicion. For instance the first thread I participated on MAD was discussing bigots in the South that are Baptists. I was surprised at the sentiments and popped in to explain that I know some wonderful neighbors that did not fit that stereotype -- there were people in that thread that disagreed with me. I assured them that not everyone in the "outside" hated them and that what I'd heard often was PRAISE for LDS (in the South) for their charitable works and ESPECIALLY their political stances. The call to label Huckabee voters as bigots was likewise seen just recently by LDS -- there are legitimate reasons why people vote for candidates and it does not necessarily deal with religion -- it's an ingrained suspicion I see (us. vs. them) that is evidenced at times.
Speaking of personal affronts in which you participated -- I was surprised that you saw me stating that LDS have an emphasis on appearance and I prefer other Churches that do not have this emphasis, as somehow me being negative in nature. There are Catholic Churches where I live that are the same way, there are some Churches in the more affluent areas where I live that are very appearance oriented. Yet, as this was about LDS I spoke to what I saw and how I preferred other places. I'm dismayed that all my statements seem to require some sort of disclaimer. It wasn't to degrade, ridicule, or mock those that hold this view and yet it was seen by you as a negative thing. I think that (with just using a few examples) sort of illustrates what I mean when I say "all discussions are taken as a personal affront". It's frustrating when I don't mean them to be that way and others take them as such. And when I say "all discussions are taken as a personal affront" I mean only certain posters -- those would be the zealots I speak of.
I understand the threads where there is CLEAR mocking and smears that this is offensive. Truth be told it is offensive to me! I think that perhaps these posters and the rabid nature really gets those on the other side (whichever side that may be) into a defensive stance and perhaps start to get jumpy.
Once that is done, then perhaps one may be in a better position to determine whether it is healthy or not, and whether there is a need to step back or not.
Agreed! I took a few things personally over the last few weeks and did have to step back and consider why I was reacting in the manner I was. There were no beliefs challenged though -- more personal issues. Yet, I think anytime you react in an emotional manner it's best to evaluate why that is so.
I think zealots, no matter which stripe, are usually rabid and difficult to discuss anything with in a sensible manner. Yet, I do see some sensible posters on MAD -- just the overly fanatic ones seem to stand out more. Of course the same is seen here.
Since you envoked my name earlier, I am wondering if you incude me among the "zealots" who are "usually rabid and difficult to discuss anything with in a sensible manner."
Certainly not. I separated by a paragraph and I do not see you as a zealot. I've been called of Satan by some and had my family insulted by others -- those would fall into the "rabid" category for me.