The De-Humanizing of non-Christians?

[Pharaoh Cat]

Elitism.  Elitist.

Just sayin'.  The words hadn't yet appeared on this thread, so I thought I'd add them.

Elitist: "Heaven for me, hell for you, serves you right, you stupid atheist you.  Jesus for me, Satan for you, if I didn't have Jesus, I'd be no better than you.  Boy am I lucky, sucks to be you, God loves me like offspring, discards you like poo."

[Tristan Jay]

Thanks for the replies, everybody, it's really helped me to organize it, perspective-wise, in my mind.

Once you have de-humanised a group you can ultimately start killing people in that group secure in the knowledge that you aren't really killing people.

Further reflection on this issue reminded me of a concept that I was introduced to at university.  The ironic effect of a person or group who de-humanizes others is that they are diminishing their own humanity as well (because they've broken down a barrier that restrains one human from harming another, moral clarity/humanity has been set aside with regard to a targeted human).  I don't know if I'm articulating this effectively...

i started to think about this for a while, and came to the conclusion that there are basicly three kinds of "dehumanising"...hmmm, systems, should we say? First is National, which in my opinnion would include things like ones pride on ones home nation and "race"-thinking. The second is Idological system which would include religions and, unsuprisingly, ideologies. And lastly a combonation of the first two.

This is part of what was so helpful in sorting out my understanding of this phenomenon.  I was alluding to the Nazi genocidal final solution, I am glad you set it out for clear consideration, since that is such an extreme outcome that could be at stake if people travel far enough down that road.

As soon as I started throwing out the de-humanization term, it brought recollection of studying international justice/injustice, and how politics and ideology factors into this, rather than it being a religious thing.  I think what gets to me are the people within the religion who are not challenging themselves to think beyond a simplistic interpretation of their doctrine, and they're coming at this from the perspective that perfect morality cannot be allowed to be challenged; so they are entrapping themselves in the mindset.  It makes things worse, I think.  Objectively, a soldier can see evidence that his country is not perfect, and a "good" politician can consider the perspective of his opponents and refine their position; but with religion, Sacred Holy Perfection makes it harder to break free of a mindset (especially if you think your immortal soul is at risk if you do).  Stevil talks about the programming component as well, which just exacerbates the problem.   

Did I ever tell you guys that psychology is another dear hobby of mine?

Me too

I like psychology as well!  Fascinating stuff.   

We're all people and I've never had a taste for tearing other people apart (even just verbally) on masse.

I feel this way, too, DeterminedJuliet.  Even for people I'm wary of, I still don't like to see them diminished.  On the "Dignity" thread, I get a strong impression of the OP, Egor; yet it pains me seeing him trying to diminish other people's humanity, and in a sense, attacking his own humanity (maybe I'm wrong, and perhaps he doesn't see it that way, yet this is what my educational background leads me to conclude).

I had similar thoughts about the Dignity thread, I posted there before I saw this thread.

I noticed you bringing that up in that thread, and was glad you focused on that; I had wondered about that.  Same idea, same wavelength!   

Pharaoh Cat, that's a catchy little poem about religious darkness, did you make that up?

Thanks again for all the responses.

[Pharaoh Cat]

Pharaoh Cat, that's a catchy little poem about religious darkness, did you make that up?

Yup!  Who else would end a poem with "poo"? 

[xSilverPhinx]

Pharaoh Cat, that's a catchy little poem about religious darkness, did you make that up?

Yup!  Who else would end a poem with "poo"? 

It is...quite an image.

[Happy_Is_Good]

I feel that the arguments are stupid, and insulting; but worse than that, it feels insidious and demeaning in a very dangerous way.  It never occurred to me that my basic humanity would be questioned, within the context of not being a Christian.  Does this appear to others as a de-humanizing practice, or am I being alarmist?

No, you are not being alarmist and you pretty much nailed the situation.  

I used to give Christians the benefit of the doubt when they engaged in this sort of hateful rhetoric, but not any more - they are not as ignorant as I thought they once were.  Over the years, I've seen these self-loathing Christians again-and-again engage in this type of rhetoric as a excuse for the persecution in which they are so willing to engage, and my tolerance for it has gone to ZERO.  As a result, every time I hear a Christian engage in this type Psychological Attack, I give them 10x worse than they deliver and make them very shy about trying the same tact again on another party - it really shuts a lot of them down for good (or at least for a long time).

[Sgtmackenzie]

I wonder if Islam or Judaism goes for this kind of thing?

I would have to think that it does.   Not in the sense that it is a basic tenet, but that the religion itself can lead interpretations down that path.   Take Iran's position toward Israel.   They have made no excuses for their intention of wiping Israel off of the map, right?    I don't know enough to judge this to be true, but from what I have read that is the general consensus I get.

[Sweetdeath]

I feel that the arguments are stupid, and insulting; but worse than that, it feels insidious and demeaning in a very dangerous way.  It never occurred to me that my basic humanity would be questioned, within the context of not being a Christian.  Does this appear to others as a de-humanizing practice, or am I being alarmist?

No, you are not being alarmist and you pretty much nailed the situation.  

I used to give Christians the benefit of the doubt when they engaged in this sort of hateful rhetoric, but not any more - they are not as ignorant as I thought they once were.  Over the years, I've seen these self-loathing Christians again-and-again engage in this type of rhetoric as a excuse for the persecution in which they are so willing to engage, and my tolerance for it has gone to ZERO.  As a result, every time I hear a Christian engage in this type Psychological Attack, I give them 10x worse than they deliver and make them very shy about trying the same tact again on another party - it really shuts a lot of them down for good (or at least for a long time).

That's  pretty much my feelings towards religious fanatics of any degree. Zero tolerance.

[Tristan Jay]

I've been bouncing around in different forums on the 'net for a while, though still stopping in.  I posed a question on two Christian forums regarding the capacity for non-Christians to have the same depth of emotions, empathy, compassion and so forth.  On the more mainstream Christian forum, there was some interesting back and forth; I don't think I concluded that I agreed or disagreed with anything they discussed. 

On the other Christian forum I posted a topic that was practically verbatim, it was a forum that belong to an old Christian friend of mine; though I have not discussed the particulars of my current stand point, simply let the question stand as a point of curiosity.

One thing that came up during the course of the discussion on my friend's forum was a concept called "Total Depravity" which I've never come across before.  I can't figure out if I wish that no one ever came up with this kind of stuff; the only thing that comes to mind is the quote from Frank Herbert's Dune, spoken by Paul Atreides and directed towards an enemy, "This being has Human Shape, and therefore deserves Human Doubt."  Offhand, I have an image in my mind of me grabbing God roughly and painfully by his head hair and shoving his face in the direction of these mental gymnastics and demanding clarity for all of us what's really true so there's no more justification head games.  A couple of sharp tugs, and an extra shove or two for emphasis.

Beyond that gut reaction, I don't know what to make of the Total Depravity thing, trying to digest it from the context of their discussion on my friend's forum; I looked on wikipedia to read about it a little, too.  I can't figure out if I'm overreacting, because I don't think I'm processing it at all.  I keep coming back to a basic notion that we shouldn't even be questioning or justifying or marginalizing things in this realm.

I suppose this doesn't really add anything to the discussion.  I'm maintaining genuine detachment from this toward the humans engaged in these discussions, pleasingly ironically, by some very basic Buddhist calming mentality.  On a Buddhist forum, it was suggested that I let go of the idea of God as a delusion, a useless fabrication that it would be more productive to let fade away.

Reasonable human doubt is accorded without question more readily here and on Buddhist forums, while the Christian forums are buzzing back and forth about the fine points of a non-Christian being able to maximize Human Potential.  Some of the arguments are fascinating, but they give way to the fact that there's an argument going on in the first place.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

One thing that came up during the course of the discussion on my friend's forum was a concept called "Total Depravity" which I've never come across before.  

Let me give you a little background on this subject. "Total Depravity" is the first point of Calvinism's "five points" which are generally known by the acronym "TULIP": 1) Total Depravity; 2) Unconditional Election; 3) Limited Atonement; 4) Irresistible Grace; and 5) Perseverance of the Saints.

Total Depravity does not mean that everyone is a total moral failure.  It simply means that each person's "image of God" (imago dei) is fractured in some sense, so that none of us perfectly reflect God's image. We are all flawed.  God's solution to this is the unconditional election of certain persons to be saved or redeemed.  Christ's sacrifice was a limited atonement only for the elect. These elect receive a revelation of divine presence through irresistible grace. These elect will persevere through faith unto salvation.  There are New Testament proof texts for each point.   Calvinism's "five points of grace" (named after John Calvin, a Reformation theologian responsible for all "reformed" churches, such as Presbyterians), are a standard subject of discussion among Christian theologians.  A relatively small number of Christian theologians accept all five points, but many accept total depravity.  It mainly means that none of us can come into a relationship with God on our own efforts - we need a savior.

[Sandra Craft]

It mainly means that none of us can come into a relationship with God on our own efforts - we need a savior.

It sounds like the Protestants got rid of the intervention of the pope and priests, and then found they needed to replace them.