DescentBB

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:13 pm**

This is from a registration required site, so I will include the article.

I don't think it is that big a deal, but then maybe that is because I have lived in the Bible belt for 14 years and have learned to live and let live.

Although I do think that this guy

"Freedom of religion means the freedom to not have to listen to others' religious messages,"

is completely incorrect.

Puzzling Over Expressions of Faith in Flight
By Keith L. Alexander
Tuesday, March 29, 2005; Page E01
When United Airlines Flight 991 landed at Los Angeles International Airport on March 14, the flight attendant welcomed the passengers to their destination and thanked them for flying the airline.

Then she said something that passenger Ken Bicknell had never heard on an aircraft's public address system. The attendant concluded her remarks with "God bless you all."

Bicknell was startled and wondered if a flight attendant should offer such a comment in what was essentially a workplace environment.

"I just wondered if it was appropriate," said Bricknell, a San Francisco-based government consultant. "You're a captive audience and you have to listen to what the flight attendant tells you."

Religion in the workplace can be a touchy subject, especially when the workplace is an aircraft 30,000 feet above the ground and hurtling through the air at 500 mph.

Airlines have different policies regarding the announcements permitted by their pilots and flight attendants aboard their flights. Some carriers allow flight attendants to deviate from the standard scripts on safety instructions and gate connections. On Southwest, for instance, flight attendants often offer ad-lib jokes.

Last year, American Airlines was embroiled in controversy after one of its pilots on a flight from Los Angeles to New York asked over the intercom for all Christians to raise their hands. Some of the passengers complained that the pilot was proselytizing. American executives apologized for the pilot's comments.

United objects to their service personnel offering to customers any statements of a religious nature. The airline plans to update its flight attendants' manual to ensure that personal beliefs do not make their way into on-board announcements, said United spokeswoman Robin Urbanski.

"All service announcements are to instill confidence and professionalism, and as we update our flight attendant manual we will ask our flight attendants to not use personal beliefs or overtones in these announcements. United certainly apologizes if anyone may have been offended," Urbanski said.

Bicknell said he wasn't offended, but was curious about United's policy regarding religious or even political comments in the workplace. "I'm not for or against [the comment]. I'm just questioning it. I can think of several professions where that would not be kosher."

For many people, "God bless you," whether after someone sneezes or following a thank you, is a simple response. But Michael P. Tomaro, a Milwaukee-based psychologist who specializes in fearful flying, said such comments could trigger latent fears in passengers who aren't terribly comfortable aboard an airliner. Tomaro said fearful fliers could misconstrue such statements and think the attendant is invoking God's help for a safe journey.

Tomaro, author of the book "Flying in the Comfort Zone," said flight attendants who make such comments "haven't been properly trained" and should restrict their statements to the flight's operations.

Some frequent fliers said the aircraft cabin is not an appropriate place for spiritual references. "Freedom of religion means the freedom to not have to listen to others' religious messages," said Redwood City, Calif., investment banker Lee Shepard. Shepard said he was concerned that airlines would encourage or allow their workers to make such statements. "The next thing you know, there will be prayers before takeoff. The best policy is to keep religion a private matter and not allow any religious messages on flights," he said.
But when a plane tosses in severe turbulence, some travelers' thoughts naturally turn to God. Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, some airline passengers have increasingly sought comfort in the air in their own spirituality.

"Considering most fliers say, 'Thank God we arrived in one piece,' I welcome the [flight attendant] acknowledging God," said Nancy Pincombe of Reston.

Elizabeth Elwell of Valley Village, Calif., said that with airline employees so overworked and stressed out, she "appreciates" hearing such comments. "I'm happy to take all the blessings I can get," she said.

Arlington-based psychologist Elliott Jaffa wondered whether the United flight attendant who blessed the passengers on arrival was simply seeking to bring good fortune to the airline. United, after all, has been operating under bankruptcy protection for more than two years.

"With United's financial situation, it needs all the help it can get, be it from its paying passengers or from the big guy or gal upstairs in the friendly skies," Jaffa said.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:58 pm**

Thought provoking. I will have to give this some thought.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 1:12 pm**

Interesting article. I'm not sure I completely agree with the pilot talking about God to an essentially captive audience, and I realize that the majority of people are staying level-headed about this. However, there's just one thing I've got to ask: why does the mention of the word God in a spiritual sense send so many people into conniptions, while using the word God as a cuss word is considered socially acceptable?

Off topic, but it's something I've always wondered about.

More on topic, I think the guy in the cockpit had a right to say what he did, but I don't think it was necessarily in good taste.

"Freedom of religion means the freedom to not have to listen to others' religious messages,"

This guy, if going by his own rule, shouldn't have said what he just did. His religion is that you shouldn't have to listen to other people's religions, and he just told everyone reading this story about his religion.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 1:15 pm**

LOL! This woman should try an El Al flight. The plane lists mid-flight from aall thhe praying going on.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:37 pm**

Yeah, that "freedom of religion" guy is definitely one of the ones who thinks it's freedom from religion. All it means is the government isn't going to endorse a specific religion (which was to contrast the Anglican Church in England, which was Henry VIII's way of getting a divorce, because he'd run out of good ways to have his wives die

).

People are free to express their own religion, though of course they need to make sure to not be imposing their beliefs on others. But something like a simple "God bless you all" is pretty much a generic phrase. How many of these people who complain say "bless you" when someone sneezes, or something similar (such as various God/Jesus-centered swears, as mentioned, or perversions thereof)?

The pilot was definitely wrong. The attendant was within the bounds of reasonability IMO, especially given how many religious phrases people use in non-religious ways. Basically, they've lost all meaning.

I'm sure these whiners are either bitter atheists or sue-happy hypocrites. Or both. Most people in the world have a faith of some sort, whether it's in one or more gods or spirits, some central generic "power", or whatever. I think one could even go so far as to say that atheists even have their own faith of sorts -- that faith being that we're all individuals having to "make it" on our own, with no help or hindrance from any sort of higher power.

But maybe it's just me. I just think we're all pretty much the same, and any sort of general religious phrase could easily be interepreted to a corresponding saying in one's own religion. Too much animosity towards those who hold a different religious belief, even if the difference is barely there.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:35 pm**

I don't see much difference between this instance and saying "God bless you" after somebody sneezes. If she was outright proselytizing to a captive audience, I could see the problem, but a simple "God bless you" doesn't do anyone any harm, nor does it violate any First Amendment rights, contrary to the one man's opinion. My question to you is, if an atheist is offended by someone uttering such a phrase, how secure are they in their belief that there is no God?

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:54 pm**

What would bring it all together is if they crashed right after she said that.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 4:32 pm**

I'm willing to bet the same percentage of Christians would complain had the flight attendant instead said, "Allah Akbar," perhaps more.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 4:34 pm**

Does anyone else find it funny that the guy questioning the use of "God Bless you" said it might not be "kosher?"

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 5:57 pm**

Gooberman wrote:I'm willing to bet the same percentage of Christians would complain had the flight attendant instead said, "Allah Akbar," perhaps more.

I agree, and I don't think they'd be any more right. I think that (both Goob's example and the article) emphasizes the point of the amendment- it's to separate the popular religious opinion from the power of the government. These days, the popular opinion seem to consist of "I don't want to hear it." I think taking more steps to prevent religion from being expressed is actually empowering the government to enforce a certain religious stance. As far as companies are concerned, it's their perogative what they want to do in terms of religious expression. They may lose some clientelle over it, but it's their call.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 pm**

Ah, the patented Gooberman strawman.

Allahu Akbar means God Is Great, which is quite a different message (especially with it's modern connotation as a war cry) than God Bless You. The first places the emphasis on an agreement that God exists and is great, whereas the second is meant to bestow good luck, safety or a sense of appreciation toward the recipient, regardless of whether the receiver believes God is great or whether God even exists. In other words, it's the expression of wishing you well and/or thanking you that should be weighed, not the anal-retentive winding out of all it's possible ramifications and certainly not an insidious attempt to convert.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:34 pm**

At this rate we will one day not be able to hear Tiny Tim say, "God bless us, each and every one."

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:41 pm**

I'm surprised A Christmas Carol isn't already on banned reading lists for schools.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:49 pm**

I thought that was cute, too, T-bone.

I'm of two minds about this sort of thing. Part of me understands that it's good and professional for a business to present a neutral front--we offer flights to get you from here to there, without religious or philosophical tags attached. Some places like to be free about religious association, and some like to just do business--and neither of those seem like a bad thing to me, just a choice on the part of the business. So when places have a policy that says, "don't talk about that stuff on the job," that seems sensible to me. You've got your new-age crystal shops and your Christian bookstores, and you've also got your plain old bookstores. I don't see anything wrong with either one.

At the same time, part of me appreciates that it's a piece of a larger cultural problem, and really wishes people would learn a little tolerence. Ideally, we should appreciate freedom of religion enough to celebrate it when others can freely express contradictory religious views--much like we appreciate freedom of speech enough to celebrate the diversity of opinion on the 'net, even though we disagree with most of what's said. A society in which people are encouraged to share and celebrate their religious beliefs is a tolerant and free one. People who can't stand to hear opposing views affirmed are behaving intolerently, and a society that seeks to remove their discomfort by asking the offending party to be quiet (like ours does too often) is endorsing that intolerence. A truly free and tolerant society is one in which people can disagree publicly and vehemently, and still live and work together peacefully. I think we're getting away from that--ironically, often in the name of tolerence. Even the vision seems lost, and that makes me a little sad. I wish it were the case that people would hear something like that and think, "I disagree, but I would defend to the death your right to say that" instead of thinking, "How dare you say that, when some here might disagree!"

So part of me understands, and part of me mourns...

... and part of me reads something like this, and thinks, "the irony in this sort of thing is too thick" and wants to throw a total hissy fit next time someone says publicly, "I think Christianity is bunk," and act outraged and offended and demand that the culture celebrate and affirm my beliefs, and tell everyone that if there is any religious freedom at all in this country, I shouldn't have to listen to someone deny what I believe! Though--sadly--I doubt that sort of thing would immediately come across as satire.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:36 pm**

Bash wrote:Allahu Akbar means God Is Great, which is quite a different message (especially with it's modern connotation as a war cry)

wow, you cannot be serious. In what circles? Who gave it this modern connotation? If a Muslim says to you "allah Akbar" and you, in anyway, take it as a war cry then you are an idiot.

Bash wrote: The first places the emphasis on an agreement that God exists and is great, whereas the second is meant to bestow good luck, safety or a sense of appreciation toward the recipient, regardless of whether the receiver believes God is great or whether God even exists.

Unbelievable, is it possible to be anymore biased? Both acknowledge the personal belief in the existence of God. If anything Allah Akbar is more passive because you arenâ??t asking that God interfere with someone elseâ??s life, who doesn't believe in him. One is saying "God do good to him," the other is saying "God is good." The latter is stating your belief and keeping it withen the scope of yourself.

Both are religiously neutral phrases, and both are commonly used as greetings and forms of goodbyes. That is all that is meant by both terms: a greating and a farewell.

People shouldn't be offended by either, but my statement above still stands. You even helped prove it.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:11 pm**

heh its not a government owned company so screw'em freedom of speach

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:12 pm**

Sorry Goob, Bash is right here. "Allahu Akbar" has been media-ized into a Jihadi battle cry. Culturally, it is more like "God bless you." Then again, schools in Islamic countries teach Chemistry by saying "when hydrogen and oxygen combine, by the will of Allah water is formed." It's a cultural thing caused by the marriage of religion and society.

There's one conductor on the LI Railroad (the busiest railroad in North America) who says, "Thank you and have a blessed day" whenever pulling into New York-Penn Station. I don't think anyone's given him flak over that. I've certainly never seen or overheard anyone give a disapproving reaction. But notice the lack of mentioning any diety.

Then there's the story of the subway motorman who was forced to stop wearing his turban while on duty or else be forced into working strictly in the yard. He works for the same agency as the railroad conductor, the MTA. The MTA argued that the turban violated uniform requirements -- headgear is restricted to MTA-issued winter hats or baseball caps. He sued, claiming religious harrassment. The MTA sidestepped the issue by allowing him to wear the turban if he agreed to place an MTA logo patch on its front.

Now, if you are going to argue that "God bless" is a potentially offensive declaration of God's existence, you can't possibly argue in favor of the subway motorman's case. That turban is a declaration not only of God's existence but also the motorman's devotion to that God. It's the same God that the flight attendant wished would bless the passengers. So which is it? Is "God bless you all" acceptabl, or should the motorman be forced to not wear his turban?

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:00 pm**

Sorry Goob, Bash is right here. "Allahu Akbar" has been media-ized into a Jihadi battle cry.

Only to ignorant rednecks whose only affiliation with Muslims/Religious-Arabs is through their talking picture boxes. This is a very common Arabic expression. I am sure less then 0.00001% of the time it is uttered is in a "battle cry."

If you take this phrase as a battle cry then it is only a reflection of you and certainly not reality. Don't let the media have so much control over your reality.

ASU has a very large Indian (From india, not native american) forign exchange program. I have heard the saying a few times: Amazingly, I survived them all.

Go to a mosk, you will hear it said......please don't pull out a shotgun....you will live.

Now, if you are going to argue that "God bless" is a potentially offensive declaration of God's existence, you can't possibly argue in favor of the subway motorman's case.

I can only assume that from here on you went from talking to me to talking in general. If this is to me then you have fallen victim to a severe case of skimming.

Posted: **Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:48 pm**

Allah bless us, every one!

Since most uncultured, ignorant Americans (please, we are, aren't we; at least as a group; how many high schools kids can't even locate Washington DC on a map, let alone various other countries, etc etc) would not know what Allahu Ahkbar referred to, would the response be different if the flight attendant stuck to English and just said "Allah bless you". Hmm.

Posted: **Wed Mar 30, 2005 2:36 am**

I, for one, think that Drak hit the nail fairly squarely on the head. The issue is religious intolerance... and how businesses are having to cater to the the crys of those who are intolerant.

Posted: **Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:34 am**

Goob, muslum warriors have used "Allah Akbar" as a war cry for a thousand years:

"The Afghans lined the 'morn lit ridge
and waved their sword ta catch the light.
They spurred their horse and charged at us
with yells of Allah Akbar
to give courage for the fight."

unknown british soldier

Oh and mosque is not spelled "mosk"

Posted: **Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:02 am**

woodchip wrote:Goob, muslum warriors have used "Allah Akbar" as a war cry for a thousand years

Though it's not the only way it's used, so you can't really just make the broad statement that the words automatically translate into a warcry. It's all about context. I'm sure that during the Crusades, the Christian soldiers would have their own battle cries that invoked God, as well. It's just that since God is an integral part of Muslim society, pretty much all wars would be holy wars. So you'd be more likely to hear such phrases used in that context. Whereas we don't as a culture have the same integral ties, and you'll pretty much never hear someone running in, guns blazing, yelling, "For the glory of God!!"

DCrazy wrote:There's one conductor on the LI Railroad (the busiest railroad in North America) who says, "Thank you and have a blessed day" whenever pulling into New York-Penn Station. I don't think anyone's given him flak over that. I've certainly never seen or overheard anyone give a disapproving reaction. But notice the lack of mentioning any diety.

But he does infer a diety (otherwise one couldn't have a "blessed" day), which surely would have to be as "offensive" to "these people" as mentioning a specific deity. I doubt anyone would be offended by someone invoking the name of a Hindu god, but say something that might be construed as talking about the Judeo-Christian god, and people blow blood vessels (but only if you seem like a Christian or Muslim, if you're a Jew I'm sure no one cares, despite all three religions sharing the same deity).

I'm sure no one complains about him because they just don't give a damn. Not everyone's intolerant, but it's a disturbing trend, especially coupled with the people who will sue or otherwise complain just to get a power rush (whether they really care or not). All of a sudden, if you say that you can't meet someone at a specific time because you'll be at church, you're trying to force your religion on them. Just wait, you'll see it in the news one of these days.....

Posted: **Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:01 am**

Gooberman wrote:If you take this phrase as a battle cry then it is only a reflection of you and certainly not reality. Don't let the media have so much control over your reality.

I can only assume that from here you went from talking to me to talking in general. If this is to me then you fallen victim to a severe case of ad hominemitis. I think you can tell that my perspective is not controlled by my boob tube, but I wouldn't want to detract from your nonexistent point, now would I?

Gooberman wrote:
DCrazy wrote:Now, if you are going to argue that "God bless" is a potentially offensive declaration of God's existence, you can't possibly argue in favor of the subway motorman's case.
I can only assume that from here on you went from talking to me to talking in general. If this is to me then you have fallen victim to a severe case of skimming.

I love how you completely dodged my point with another personal attack. Who's in the wrong here, Goob? The Christian flight attendant, or the Middle-Eastern motorman? Both are public representatives of the company they work for.

-----

Plebe, yes, I agree that he does imply (nitpick

) a diety. But my point is that if the 500 or so people on that train can deal with "have a blessed day", then why is it such a big deal?

Posted: **Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:03 am**

Whatever happened to "Have a nice day" and shutting the ★■◆● up?

Posted: **Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:49 am**

i agree with goob.

it would be kindof funny to hear a "by the grace of allah we will land"

Posted: **Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:31 am**

I can only assume that from here you went from talking to me to talking in general.

I was talking in general, good job. Does it apply to you? If someone at the end of a flight said Allah Akbar would you take it as a warcry? If so, then sorry, you need to wake up.

quote wrote:I love how you completely dodged my point with another personal attack. Who's in the wrong here, Goob?

DCrazy, go back and reread. You will find that I have anwsered your question clear as Day. I didn't dodge, I refused to repeat. To avoid going another round:

DCrazy wrote:if you are going to argue that "God bless" is a potentially offensive declaration of God's existence....

....So which is it? Is "God bless you all" acceptabl or...?

Goob above DCrazy wrote: People shouldn't be offended by either.

I don't get how I am arguing that it is potentially offensive when I am declaring that people shouldn't be offended!

This is why I asked if you were talking in general, by your responce I can only assume you weren't, so please explain this. I can't anwser your question until I can get past your premise.

My belief is that no one should be offended by "God Bless You," a Turban, or even "Allah Akbar." My origional statement was only that you would get the same percentage of complaints for each.

Posted: **Wed Mar 30, 2005 1:24 pm**

How about when they shout out Allah Board! when a train is about to leave. I don't get offended at all by that.

Posted: **Wed Mar 30, 2005 1:35 pm**

DCrazy wrote:Plebe, yes, I agree that he does imply (nitpick ) a diety. But my point is that if the 500 or so people on that train can deal with "have a blessed day", then why is it such a big deal?

Well I wonder the same thing. I just have to pick those nits.

If those people can all stand some guy saying practically the same thing (just without the "G word"), then why is anyone complaining when someone says "God" in the context of a phrase everyone either hears or uses on pretty much a daily basis?

And honestly, how many people use those phrases with the expectation of God actually blessing the person? And as I've said before, just translate it into your own religion's similar phrasing, or just take it as what it is: someone wishing you well.

Bunch of idiots we've got in this country these days. It's a wonder anyone takes us seriously anymore. Oh wait, they don't.

And

@ bash.

Watch out for those conductors, they're all terrorists! (Why do you think trains derail? It's not just bad design or land shifts or anything, it's terrorists!!)

Posted: **Wed Mar 30, 2005 3:00 pm**

As long as we're picking nits:

Plebeian wrote:say something that might be construed as talking about the Judeo-Christian god, and people blow blood vessels (but only if you seem like a Christian or Muslim, if you're a Jew I'm sure no one cares, despite all three religions sharing the same deity)

More accurately, two of the religions (Judaism and Christianity) share the same deity, and Islam uses similar terminology to describe a deity that shares some superficial attributes of Yahweh but is different in some important ways.

The arguments that they're "the same" are about as accurate as the argument that, since I have a mom and you (general) have a mom, and my mom has long hair and your mom has long hair, we have the same mom.

To answer your point, though: the main reason nobody cares if a Jew says something like that is that Jews have never in their history tried to convert others (at least not on a large scale.) They allow converts, but they do not seek them. This puts the secular fundamentalists a bit more at ease.

---

As for the subject at hand: I make it my own personal policy that as long as I'm representing my employer, I don't do or say anything that won't help my employer's relationship with customers. For example, when I'm teaching, I won't wear Jesus T-shirts, or talk politics. If someone wants to talk to me outside of class about those things, I can talk up a storm -- but if I want to talk about those on the job, I need to get a job where I reasonably can do so.

But, if a fellow teacher says "God bless you" or "Allah Akhbar" or even the much more serious "I'll pray for you" or "may the peace of Christ be upon you", and somebody complains, I'll stand by the teacher's side. Ultimately, it's up to the employer to decide, but culturally, all of the fundamentalists need to learn tolerance -- from the Christian fundamentalists to the secular fundamentalists. Goob might be right that you'd get just as many complaints about Allah Akhbar as God Bless, but all that really shows is that there are fundamentalists of all stripes, and all of them need a good talking to.

If you get offended because somebody of a different religion mentions their religious beliefs, you're a fundamentalist and you have a problem.

Posted: **Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:05 pm**

"i'll pray for you" really pisses me off.

it's inherently condescending.

Posted: **Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:27 am**

roid wrote:"i'll pray for you" really pisses me off.

it's inherently condescending.

And why is that? Even if you don't believe in God, doesn't the fact that the person who says the line is implying that they will ask their own deity, a being of supreme good, to watch over you mean anything to you? If you're an atheist, it really doesn't affect you either way, but it may give the other person a sense of satisfaction, so where's the harm?

Posted: **Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:53 am**

it implys that you need their help, or the help of their deity.

"things could be better for you, so i'll do what i can to help you out"

it's condescending. it's like people giving you a handout, but you've got nothing to throw back at them as they walk off. <-- the most frustrating bit.

when someone says "i'll pray for you" what they mean is "i'll pray for you to be more like me". they don't seem to be able to understand that i don't like them and disapprove of their lifestyle (outof respect for them i havn't said as much). but they still want to tell me how they are doing everything they can to make me more like them.

i guess it's just a lack of respect for other people's beliefs.
because they are saying to my face that "my beliefs are right, and yours are wrong".
no respect.

Posted: **Thu Mar 31, 2005 3:31 am**

Uh... no. Not necessarily. It can be for numerous reasons.

Personally I wouldn't be worried if someone believed something with my life could be better. After all, if I thought it couldn't there would definitely be something wrong with me, and I also don't feel the need to put up a hopeless facade to convince everyone else that it's perfect.

If you're talking about people saying that to you after preaching at you, well, I know what you mean... but that's not always where the phrase is used.

Posted: **Thu Mar 31, 2005 3:40 am**

roid wrote:it implys that you need their help, or the help of their deity.

Doesn't everybody need some help? "How dare you offer me help! You're a jerk!"

"things could be better for you, so i'll do what i can to help you out"

You really feel insulted that somebody might imply things could be better for you? If that's the case, things *could* be better, especially with your intellect

it's condescending. it's like people giving you a handout, but you've got nothing to throw back at them as they walk off.

This doesn't make any sense.

If the prayers are worthless, then they're not giving you anything but attention. So why does it matter? "How dare you insult me by thinking I might appreciate your kindness! You A$$!" Be gracious; smile and nod and accept their offer, and let them feel good about themselves.

when someone says "i'll pray for you" what they mean is "i'll pray for you to be more like me".

Not usually, no. Usually they mean "I'll pray for God to influence you in a positive way" -- which may mean an improvement in circumstances, or an improvement in attitude, or whatever. That doesn't necessarily mean they're better off than you in that way -- they may be praying for you in a way that would make you totally different from them.

I've met the occasional dork who really does think he should pray for everyone to turn into a miniature version of him, but most are not like that.

they don't seem to be able to understand that i don't like them and disapprove of their lifestyle (outof respect for them i havn't said as much). but they still want to tell me how they are doing everything they can to make me more like them.

You must have people offering very strange prayers for you, then.

i guess it's just a lack of respect for other people's beliefs.
because they are saying to my face that "my beliefs are right, and yours are wrong".
no respect.

Kind of like claiming that praying for you is insulting or condescending? Yeah, talk about a lack of respect for other people's beliefs.

Now, if you have a problem with them preaching at you, that's different... but having a problem with them praying for you? You sound like a secular fundamentalist...

"How dare you imply the existance of a deity, and how dare you try to get whatever you believe in to treat me nicely! Darn it, I want your god to be mad at me, but you're asking him to be nice! Meany!"

Posted: **Thu Mar 31, 2005 4:22 am**

Lothar wrote:
roid wrote:it implys that you need their help, or the help of their deity.
Doesn't everybody need some help? "How dare you offer me help! You're a jerk!"

"things could be better for you, so i'll do what i can to help you out"
You really feel insulted that somebody might imply things could be better for you? If that's the case, things *could* be better, especially with your intellect

aha aha aha aha *hyperactively stabs at your neck with toothpicks*

it's condescending. it's like people giving you a handout, but you've got nothing to throw back at them as they walk off.
This doesn't make any sense.

If the prayers are worthless, then they're not giving you anything but attention. So why does it matter? "How dare you insult me by thinking I might appreciate your kindness! You A$$!" Be gracious; smile and nod and accept their offer, and let them feel good about themselves.

it's like someone giving you a spirit crystal telling you it will protect you from evil spirits. i dunno, i guess some people would be ok accepting it just to be polite. but i don't feel comfy with it, i'd rather refuse, they will have no choice but to keep it to themselves. them keeping it to themselves would show me that they respected my beliefs.

i would understand a christian feeling uneasy if i chose to often tell them that "satan loves them". or if i said that i would chant their name while performing some ritual. see? it's kinda creepy being involved in someone else's religion without your consent.

telling someone you will pray for them, is a little like telling someone that you masturbate to a picture of them. i'd actually rather they didn't do that. but if they must, then i wish they didn't tell me about it.

when someone says "i'll pray for you" what they mean is "i'll pray for you to be more like me".
Not usually, no. Usually they mean "I'll pray for God to influence you in a positive way" -- which may mean an improvement in circumstances, or an improvement in attitude, or whatever. That doesn't necessarily mean they're better off than you in that way -- they may be praying for you in a way that would make you totally different from them.

I've met the occasional dork who really does think he should pray for everyone to turn into a miniature version of him, but most are not like that.

i must be missing something here. see the bit i bolded above? i don't understand how that doesn't contradict the rest of your paragraph. this may be a difference in definition, but as far as you should be concerned my attitude is directly linked with my religion. i consider your attitude to be likewise linked to yours.

they don't seem to be able to understand that i don't like them and disapprove of their lifestyle (outof respect for them i havn't said as much). but they still want to tell me how they are doing everything they can to make me more like them.
You must have people offering very strange prayers for you, then.

i guess it's just a lack of respect for other people's beliefs.
because they are saying to my face that "my beliefs are right, and yours are wrong".
no respect.
Kind of like claiming that praying for you is insulting or condescending? Yeah, talk about a lack of respect for other people's beliefs. Now, if you have a problem with them preaching at you, that's different... but having a problem with them praying for you? You sound like a secular fundamentalist...

"How dare you imply the existance of a deity, and how dare you try to get whatever you believe in to treat me nicely! Darn it, I want your god to be mad at me, but you're asking him to be nice! Meany!"

Posted: **Thu Mar 31, 2005 4:45 am**

roid wrote:it's like someone giving you a spirit crystal telling you it will protect you from evil spirits.

"While I don't believe this crystal has any power, I thank you for the kind gesture."

See how easy it is?

them keeping it to themselves would show me that they respected my beliefs.

While your accepting it would show them you respected their beliefs.

Are you requiring more of them than you are of yourself?

i would understand a christian feeling uneasy if i chose to often tell them that "satan loves them".

Now you're off in the realm of intentional offense. Invoking the name of an evil being from their own religion is very different from invoking the name of a deity you personally believe in. There's a HUGE difference between somebody saying "[my religion's god] bless you" and "[your religion's evil] bless you"...

... or if i said that i would chant their name while performing some ritual.

So long as you didn't make the ritual intentionally offensive, it's no big deal.

telling someone you will pray for them, is a little like telling someone that you masturbate to a picture of them.

Again, we're in the realm of "intentionally offensive". Please come back with an analogy that makes sense.

when someone says "i'll pray for you" what they mean is "i'll pray for you to be more like me".
Usually they mean "I'll pray for God to influence you in a positive way" -- which may mean an improvement in circumstances, or an improvement in attitude, or whatever...
i don't understand how that doesn't contradict the rest of your paragraph... my attitude is directly linked with my religion...

How is "improvement in attitude" the same as "be more like me" or "change to my religion"?

"Don't worry, be happy" is a request to change your attitude, but says nothing about how similar you are to me (your original point) or what religion you are (the point you've switched to). Similarly, "I pray you will be happy" says nothing about how similar you are to me (I may or may not be happy) or about what religion you are (you may be a happy agnostic...)

---

To get back to an earlier point: you're talking about people respecting your beliefs. Yet you say you'd rather not have them pray for you. Why don't you respect their beliefs about praying for you? Why do you expect them to respect you, but not give them the same respect back?

That's one of the two main points in this thread. Be respectful of others' religions, rather than taking offense and acting like an intolerant fundamentalist. (The other is that a business can choose its own policy for employees expressing religious ideals on the job, and customers can choose whether or not to stay with said business.)

Posted: **Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:37 am**

So Roidy if you are very sick and someone says, "I'll pray for you", you are going to be mad?

Posted: **Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:54 pm**

it's like someone giving you a spirit crystal telling you it will protect you from evil spirits.

Actually, I've been in this situation. When Tom and I were leaving for our long road trip last summer (Seattle -> Denver -> Chicago), as we were taking off, a pagan friend put a raven feather in the car, saying it was for a safe journey. I don't know if it was just a symbolic thing, or if he thought it had real spiritual power (though I suspect the latter--he doesn't really do symbols), but we said thanks and took it as a simple friendly good-bye.

This despite the fact that witchcraft, sorcery, and general association with any god but our own are very, very grave sins from the Christian perspective. It's not just that we think it's meaningless--it's actually explicitly forbidden. So what he did would actually be perceived by most as pretty offensive, like offering meat to an ethical vegitarian. But he doesn't think that way, because his religion isn't like that, and we didn't think there was any danger of misunderstanding: he knows we don't believe in that stuff, and can't participate. It was just a friendly gesture, and we took it as that.

Posted: **Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:58 pm**

Well you didn't crash the car did you.

Posted: **Thu Mar 31, 2005 3:22 pm**

Drakona wrote: This despite the fact that witchcraft, sorcery, and general association with any god but our own are very, very grave sins from the Christian perspective. It's not just that we think it's meaningless--it's actually explicitly forbidden.

If it is meaningless, why is it forbidden?