A question about opinion

[Silver Adept]

...note, hopefully, that it's not an opinionated question.

The recent closure of political and religious debate topics turned gears in my head. I'm not appealing the decision of the chair (a sensible one, considering the way things were going), but there is something that nags at me while I was watching thos topics unfold.

What is it about discussing those two topics that gets people so antagonistic? And why do people shift away from talking about those topics and start attacking people when they get heated?

I'm really at a loss for this. because I'm sure I do it, too. I just don't understand why it goes like that. Someone with greater wisdom than I, can you provide some enlightenment?

[Shino]

No offense to anyone who may read this.

Many open minded people are closed minded when it comes to things like Politics and Religion. It also has to do with becoming defensive of your beliefs I think. I, for one, am not the kind of person that will push my views on anyone. If you don't believe what I believe, fine, no skin off my back. However, what gets to me are those who BASH religions. That's when I start to get heated.

Politics I could care less about. No matter who you put in the white house, they are going to be ass holes and do something you don't like. Then again they will probably also do something you like, but you will be so blind by what you don't like to care about that.

Religion however... I don't like hearing people bash religion. Not just mine, but anyones. And its not just unreligious people bashing religious people that gets me as much as religious people bashing those of other religions. That's what kills me.

"You don't believe what I believe, you are going to hell."
... Right

[Shandriz]

Well, I'm no Psychologist, but sometimes it's fun to pretend..so I'm going to give my ideas on how this whole opinion question of yours works.

People feel an attack on their political and religious beliefs-- even if it is not directly an attack and sometimes just a disagreement, is an attack on themselves personally. We are taught from a very young age that religion and politics (for many, not all) are sort of the base formula for your self...your personality, your actions, etc...even if indirectly.

That is, our culture revolves around both of these subject, makes them important. And if they're that important, they're obviously a big part of who you are. I know for a -fact- that people respond when their self is attacked. Basic psychology-- that's how self-defense mechanisms (deluding yourself, making excuses, creating a fantasy, etc) work.

[Doot]

Religion and political affiliation is a very personal decision. Even if one person practices the same faith as you belongs to the same political party as you, you aren't going to agree 100% on everything out there.

People spend years formulating their beliefs, they spend all this time making sense of all that is out there, and for someone to come along and essentailly tell them what they believe is wrong and what another believes is completely right, infringes on their individuality and feels like a personal attack.

When you get into these discussions there are two responsibilities. One is to understand what you believe is not what everyone else should believe. Two is to understand that the other person will/might have valid points that could enlighten something for you that may have been hazy in the first place.

When people get into these discussions they usually go in holding fast to their beliefs and are already well on guard to protect those things. You are then walking into a discussion that will undoubtably go no further than reiterating the same back and forth argument as the people discussing have no intentions of absorbing, processing and entartaining what the other believes.

There is no way, in these circumstances for people to remain objective because if they are passionate about how they feel they will not just let go of them to appease the other person.

[KiSin]

Being an athiest I have people that try to get me to believe in god(since it is usually christians). I don't really mind, except for the fact they try to force it on me. That I don't like.

Now about bashing other religions, I think it is because they are ignorant of other religions and basically haven't learned any respect for them.

I don't have any political views, unless I don't realize it. I don't even pay attention to it.

-I never have much to say on these issues. I am happy just drawing-

[Shino]

[Excel Zero]

Being a Pagan I get that alot. People think I am the anti Christ!

Something I was once told was 'more wars are started over love than hate.'

Kiyomi said that to me and I've never heard truer words.

Alot of wars and even over heated verbal assaults start due to love. Loving and believing your faith like Shino does is awesome. I'm sure one day we may discuss it but the there has to be a line drawn and many people don't see that line and cross it alot. It all goes back to the saying "If it's true for you, that doesn't make it true for me"

Well anyway tha's my 1 and a half cents

Adios ya'll!

[shadokastur]

I believe we're all on the right track here!
When we identify with something we say it is 'us' or who we are. Then we focus only on it's strengths and tend to ignore it's weaknesses, or chinks in it's armor. We begin to only care for what it gives us and disavow the damage the weaknesses cause, making the whole structure incomplete. Watch how your thought works: It ALWAYS moves toward the best solution but, at best, only has a theory to work on. And as far as feelings go they are also very tricky because they base themselves on a theoretical optimal situation in your past. You know, a situation with all it's intricacies that seems to be what you want your whole life to be like and modeled after. Any pain (even boredom) registers as a movement away from pleasure (i.e. life) and toward pain (i.e. death). So when someone attacks the weaknesses of the things we consider our selves, our identity, we automatically defend our investments because to be wrong is painful and we would die in that sense and then be given to a state of uncertainty. Which is disconcerting to say the least. So when threatened we defend our points by pushing it's strengths to the forefront and standing behind them.

[Graillik Tur]

Now I"m gonna get hated for what I'm about to say.

Man is not logical. Open mindedness leads eventually to chaos. Religion is not a secular thing. Agnostic and Athism are both 'religions' in a sense.

The American Heritage dictionary defines religion as:
3. An objective persued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

That means your belief in there not being a god, and defending it, is your religion. In fact, no where in the 3 definitions does it say anything about morals, ethics or god. Just a belief in either supernatural or superhuman beings.

So onto politics, another one of my religions. Why do we become so adamite about our politics. Because everyone wants to feel like they are in power, they are in charge of their own life and thier own future.

This isn't they way politics or religions works, because the individual has exceeded the pack.

I'll use the latest political 'screw up' by Bush. No WMD's. Everyone is pointing at Bush. The intel that lead us to beginning war was the same the UN had, the same France had, the same England had. We weren't the only ones with the wrong intel. Now, that being said, if you can let that idea go for a second and focus on, Iraq had the capabilities to create weapons of mass destruction quickly and effectively, is it more important that we made an intellectual error of him 'having' WMD's or is it more important that based off past cases and current info that he 'could have made' and 'had intentions of making' WMD's?

Now if we take the idea of the 'super-being' in politics what happens is a group of individuals form an opinion about and idea and vote to put a person of like minded ideals in control through democratic proceedings instead of war. Now in this idea the individuals lose their personal voice and join a group to get 'most' of what they want, cause no one completely agrees with their leader, unless they trust their leader as a friend.

Which brings me to these questions. What is most important? The individuals opinion or the well being of the pack? Is it more 'honorable' to die for your fellow man to ensure the future of others? Is it better to suffer yourself to lessen the burden of others? Is there a 'universal truth' in all things, or is it just a chaotic swirl of individual ideas and wants? Does natural law exsist and if it does, does it go hand in hand with universal truth?

I ask this because we as humans like to discuss ideas singularly because it makes it easier to wrap our minds around and discuss. Unfortunately this is not the way things work, that is why Einstien looked for many years for a 'Universal Theorm' to expain everything.

And I turly believe that this is why we get into such heated debates about politics and religion. Because we as humans have a hard time dividing ourselves away from our deepest beliefs and look objectively at ourselves and ask, in the ethical and moral manner, 'is this what is best?'

And in there you have to define 'best'. Best for the individual or group?

See how I keep going in circles? It's because like Einstien I believe that everything comes from a single source and all things are inter connected. Not just mathmatically or physically, but emotionally, sprititually, morally, ethically, and personally. No one things is an individual per se, but a part of a larger being.

Alright, I'm running my mental circle again and don't have any more room to discuss it here.

Salut.

[Tobias]

well, as far as why people are like that, its opinion. An opinion is what someone believes, and is not fact. Religion, from what ive learned, is just opinion. And as Grallik said it was, a belief (or opinion, in cases) of what the supernatural is.

As people, we are naturally curious things. The proof of this would be that if thee was one answer, then there wouldnt be curiosity to begin with. As people, we believe what we want to believe, much like in the matrix, and turning down Morpheus' proclamation of "Taking the blue pill."

But like ive stated before, its just opinion. This also leads to what fuels the aggression in these discussions. As many of you have stated already: if you believe something well, and someone tries to tell you differently, then your going to get on the defensive. Its almost as if you spent your whole life growing up in a peaceful community, and when someone pulls a dagger on you, you are naturally going to defend yourself. As ive stated in my essay, these ideals, which are usually expressed in words of some form, are always interpreted differently by all ears.

Personally, its a matter of interpretation...but some times, its possibly from open-mindedness. When it comes to what you believe, people tend to be close-minded about it. Yet, as my religion teacher stated in class: "Those catholics that read the bible, and understand the religion, dont truely know their religion untill they go to the standpoint of another religion and see what they see of the christian faith."

Personally, if everyone did this - take a step back from their religion, and view it as if they weren't a part of it - could possibly cause a lot of arguments to stop, due to the fact that you can now see at some level what the argument is about.

Personally, the choice of religion, for me, is Catholothism, but at the same time, i incorporate other things into my religion...something that i call "Religionism." I believe that most religions have some sort of power of truth in their writings, whether it be big or small.

Ultimately, the choice IS up to you though. As Morpheus said: "Take the blue pill, you wake up in your bed and believe, whatever you want to believe." Since we dont know the truth, there is no true Red Pill...so its bottoms up to Mr. Bluey!