Atheists - In today's overly PC world, do you grudingly respect Fundamentalists' absolute standpoint?

Question

This says nothing of agreeing with what they say.

However, don't you (at least a little) admire the stance that "You're going to hell. That's what the Bible says, so it's what I believe. I know it's not pretty, but I have to accept that."

Let's be frank, it's pretty ballsy in this overly happy-go-lucky, lets-all-get-along-and-ignore-our-differences world.

I certainly don't agree with it, but at least they're being honest with themselves and others about what the Bible really says.

Before you disagree, think of Primoa (an R&S Regular). He firmly believes what he believes, and is honest about who and what he is. No matter how much we disagree, I respect the hell out of him, and like him as a person for his honesty and forthrightness.

So, deep down, do you at least respect the honesty of those who DO have the courage of their convictions, who say "This is what the bible says, and whether I like it or not, this is what I believe."?

Conversely, do you respect the pragmatic Christians who admit that given the varied traditions and translations, that they have no CLUE as to what the Bible actually says? The honesty to admit that they're as blind in this world as the rest of us, and may even be wrong? (I know they are polar opposites, I'm speaking of intellectual honesty here though.)

Answer 1

I see your point. I do see bible-literalist fundamentalists as personal mortal enemies as well as enemies of civilized society in general. But I have to reluctantly admit that I do respect the steadfastness of their adherence over the hypocrisy of those who cherry pick what they like from the Bible and ignore or re-interpret what they don't.

Answer 2

It doesn't happen too often, but every once in a while someone responds to atheist critiques of religion or theism by labeling the person as a "fundamentalist" atheist. The label is, however, problematic because there are no essential or "fundamental" beliefs for an atheist to be "fundamentalist" about.The idea of “fundamentalist” atheism doesn’t make a lot of sense if you seriously consider what the concept of “fundamentalism” is supposed to mean. Even taken loosely, fundamentalism has to be about relying on basic, fundamental beliefs. So in short it doesn't really make any sense at all.

Answer 3

I'm not in the least impressed by people who are so absolutely convinced about something they have no reason whatsoever to feel convinced about.

What I do respect is someone with the courage of their convictions, who sincerely tries to walk the walk of their religion, rather than just cherry-picking the most self-serving and self -aggrandizing parts.

I used to have a very good friend who was a Seventh Day Adventist. She'd get seriously concerned if she was asked to work late on Friday and risk not getting home before sundown for the Sabbath. She'd fret over whether it was a violation of the rules if she allowed her boyfriend to spend money on her during the Sabbath, and things like that. I admired her, the sacrifices she was willing to make in the name of her religion and the way she tried to make it a part of her life every moment of the day.

Answer 4

Respect is a very strong word to throw around so freely.

I respect people whose behavior, words, logic, and evidence all line up. (Granting that nobody has a straight line; we are all human and given to mistakes as well as goals and values to which we aspire but have not yet come to fulfill)

I also respect folks who are using their given gene pool to the best of their ability, regardless of what absolute level may be their limit.

I respect those who follow the golden rule in fact rather than theory and regardless of their particular background or belief system.

Absolutism, particularly when coupled with blind faith, is a very dangerous thing. It tends to lead people down paths that routinely violate the golden rule -- a path the bible suggests Jesus even rejects.

Finally, I would point out that that someone who is absolutely, steadfastly, consistently, lovingly stupid, is still stupid. So is the one who is absolutely convinced of something that happens to be wrong.

"Respect" is the wrong word. Perhaps I admire their steadfastness and the consistency of their beliefs, but I will only respect then if the fruit coming from their tree measures up to the standards set forth by good people using the best the modern world has to offer us.

Answer 5

I've never seen a reason why absolutism, towards any ideology, should command respect. An inability to reflect on one's position is always, always a weakness, never a strength.

It is perfectly possible to be honest to one's beliefs without digging one's heels in against the glaringly obvious. In fact if anything, it is the more DIShonest position to take - faith simply doesn't cut it.

Primoa is a nice guy because he's respectful and polite, not because he firmly, firmly believes. Don't confuse the two.

Answer 6

I don't think "respect" is the right word. Other people's views should be, and mostly are, irrelevant to me. They can disagree with my views on religion, and that is fine, but if their views impact me or my family when those views are instilled in our government or our schools, then THAT is a problem.

On a personal level, I simply don't care what others believe, no matter how crazy it is. Just don't push those views on me in any way, shape, or form. I certainly don't push anything on others, and I expect the same...but the fundamentalist think they have marching orders from god to spread the "good news", and that is where the conflict begins.

Answer 7

Well, i guess I don't really respect it. It belittles the spiritual experience of all humanity that doesn't happen to agree with them on an unknowable subject.

Now someone like Primoa gets my respect as a person - he's generally a nice guy and and he *is* honest and forthright about his beliefs - but that has nothing to do with being a Fundamentalist. It has more to do with being Primoa. There is another R&S regular who shall remain nameless but who has similar beliefs to Primoa's. She is very honest and forthright about them, but she isn't as personable, so I suspect fewer people will come out and sing her praises.

Answer 8

I respect the stance of most fundies, but I don't admire it. I respect anybody who is at least honest about what they believe and unafraid to share.

What I respect most is the ingenuity required for apologetics. There are some pretty remarkable arguments that purport to resolve certain Bible contradictions/inaccuracies that I never could have come up with.

Answer 9

My problem with them is that the majority of them that post here have no real idea as to what is actually in the bible they hit you with. Ask them a question and you get dozens of quotes that refer not to what you asked, but what they learned at church that week, or what they found on their favourite fundie website. I can respect someone who has read not just their holy book, but other literature as well. I respect people that come to faith through knowledge, not ignorance.

Answer 10

No, I don't.

I agree with you about that inane PC-ness and the "everybody's the same, no-one's better" nonsense, but that doesn't mean that I should respect people who are consistently wrong instead (the fundies).

It seems to me that the choices are

- The wishy-washy inane "there is no absolute truth" nonsense.

- "There is an absolute truth - and it's that fairy tale we were told as children (and I'll defend that stance by lying like mad)".

- "There is an absolute truth. We don't know all of the details yet, but we are slowly learning more and more about it through the judicious use of scientific methods".

I'm going with #3.