Is it ever appropriate to mock or insult people because of their beliefs?

[Ladewig]

In another thread, a poster asserted that

We all have a right to an opinion and to voice that opinion. We do not have the right to insult someone just because their beliefs differ from ours - whatever we think of that belief.

After thinking about the claim, I concluded that I believe it is appropriate to make fun of people for their beliefs under certain conditions. Specifically when:

1) they have been exposed to and have an understanding of other beliefs
2) they choose a belief that is either so logically flawed as to be absurd, is in such disagreement with known facts as to be silly, or is so self-centered as to be ridiculous.
3) they are willing to share their beliefs in the marketplace of ideas

Therefore, I beleve it is not appropriate to insult or make fun of the beliefs of mentally-ill people, people raised in an environment that includes only a single point of view (e.g. rural Afghanistanis), or the religious beliefs of sects that practice their beliefs privately (i.e. no proselytizing, e.g. Amish, Orthodox Jews).

On the other hand, I do believe I have the right to mock Young Earth Creationists who place their opinions on the internet, Kirk Cameron when he propounds the idea that the characteristics of a banana are proof of God's existence, and 9/11 conspiracy theorists who willfully ignore evidence pointed out to them.


ETA: edited to correct spelling error. Which leads me to another category: it is appropriate to mock people who have grammar and spelling errors in a post critizing someone else's grammar and spelling.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

On the other hand, I do believe I have the right to mock Young Earth Creationists who place their opinions on the internet, Kirk Cameron when he propounds the idea that the characteristics of a banana are proof of God's existence, and 9/11 conspiracy theorists who willfully ignore evidence pointed out to them.

As a general comment I think it is "OK" to mock the idea or the opinion itself but not the person.

Of course using such a tactic can often prevent communication but quite often you are not attempting to persuade the person holding that idea that they are wrong but the audience and whether we like the fact or not mockery can be a very useful tool to get a message across.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

How stupid you must be to believe it's ever OK to mock people for their opinions.

 

[Darat]

Obviously the Marquis is the exception that proves the rule.

 

[Ladewig]

How stupid you must be to believe it's ever OK to mock people for their opinions.

I laughed. I guess I need to add a fourth condition: one is willing to accept mockery of one's own position.

 

[DeviousB]

ETA: edited to correct spelling error. Which leads me to another category: it is appropriate to mock people who have grammar and spelling errors in a post critizing someone else's grammar and spelling.

I nevar make mistakes, so its okay for me to!

 

[Freethinker]

ETA: edited to correct spelling error. Which leads me to another category: it is appropriate to mock people who have grammar and spelling errors in a post critizing someone else's grammar and spelling.

But what about making fun of people who make spelling errors in their "Reason for Editing" comment?

IMO, you can believe whatever you want and I don't care. If you start trying to make me believe it, or make me live in accordance with your particular theistic delusion's rules, then you are fair game for insults and mockery.

 

[Z]

I think anyone who demonstrates conscious, willful ignorance is as much as demanding insults and mockery. These people KNOW they're wrong, and choose so to be. They deserve every bit of vitriole aimed at them.

For example, my belief in dragons, faeries, and women who look past the flaws of their men. Obviously driven by a conscious desire to ignore evidence to the conrary. Please, mock away.

 

[Jerry_ex_machina]

I think it is more appropriate to mock the beliefs themselves. What has happened in the United States, especially, is this notion that because some idea has adherents it somehow has validity, and thus that idea deserves "balance" alongside other, more compelling ideas. Case in point: Kansas City and evolution.

This notion - and I'm being snarky here - that if we have a Round Earth Proponent on the Fox News Sunday shows then we must have a Flat Earth Proponent on as well to provide balance, is bollocks. One idea has the weight of fact and the other has nothing beyond the voice of adherents.

I have colleague with whom I argue this point all the time. De Tocqueville forshadowed this a bit when he made the argument that in a true state of democracy even reality would become democratic. Indeed, that is becoming the case. My colleague argues that ideas such as intelligent design deserve consideration, simply because a number of people believe in it. He fails to grasp the notion that belief, in terms of weight of argument, is not akin to fact.

 

[Lothian]

I don’t think it is necessarily fair to mock people for holding a belief, but it is fair to mock their reasons for holding it.

 

[I less than three logic]

This notion - and I'm being snarky here - that if we have a Round Earth Proponent on the Fox News Sunday shows then we must have a Flat Earth Proponent on as well to provide balance, is bollocks. One idea has the weight of fact and the other has nothing beyond the voice of adherents.

I have colleague with whom I argue this point all the time. De Tocqueville forshadowed this a bit when he made the argument that in a true state of democracy even reality would become democratic. Indeed, that is becoming the case. My colleague argues that ideas such as intelligent design deserve consideration, simply because a number of people believe in it. He fails to grasp the notion that belief, in terms of weight of argument, is not akin to fact.

"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." - Douglas Adams, from The Salmon of Doubt

Or perhaps Mr. Ben Franklin’s “Your argument is sound, nothing but sound.”

 

[Ladewig]

When someone says "The Jews are respobsible for all the wars in the world," I believe it is not inappropriate to mock both the belief and the person.

 

[Ossai]

Ladewig

Is it ever appropriate to mock or insult people because of their beliefs?

Change the scope of the question from religion to say the medical field. The answer should be an obvious ‘Yes’.

Person A has a burst appendix. They and their family believe that praying over it will cure the condition.
A doctor will operate, even though to do so insult their belief.

Was it correct for the doctor to operate and save the person’s life?

Ossai

 

[Morrigan]

It's almost always appropriate. Hell, even those who whine about "respecting other people's beliefs!!" tend to mock Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses anyway. *


* anecdotal, I know

 

[Rufo]

Generally, I'd think someone who has chosen to debate their beliefs with you can be mocked. As Darat pointed out, it's tactics. You can use it when you feel you need to. If the debate is friendly, keep the mockery friendly. If the stupidity of the person you're having the debate with is boundless, perhaps you don't need to use mockery at all. It all has to do with how hard you want to be on someone.

Change the scope of the question from religion to say the medical field. The answer should be an obvious ‘Yes’.

Person A has a burst appendix. They and their family believe that praying over it will cure the condition.
A doctor will operate, even though to do so insult their belief.

Was it correct for the doctor to operate and save the person’s life?

Ossai

That's a different matter. Acting on one's own belief, which may be contrary to someone else's belief, is not an insult. The doctor can respect their belief - yet he does not share it, so he has to operate because he does not believe the prayer will have effect.

 

[El Greco]

For me, "appropriate" is to pay as much respect to them as they do to me.

So I wouldn't mock someone who was vocal about an absurd belief of his, provided he wouldn't try to force it on me and that I wouldn't be directly or indirectly hurt by that belief. I don't care whether he's been exposed to the truth or whether he is of high intelligence; the simple fact that he honestly holds such a belief is enough for me to respect him. If however he tries to attack me or otherwise damage me, then I'll defend myself and counterattack.

So a Nigerian who thinks unmarried mothers should be stoned to death because Allah says so, has no excuse because of isolation and indoctrination. A Harvard professor who believes in the "evil eye" but respects my right to think this is a mere superstition wouldn't be mocked by me.

 

[CapelDodger]

For me, "appropriate" is to pay as much respect to them as they do to me.

That's my principle. I don't always stick to my principles, of course - I'm not a saint. My default position is politeness, but if other people aren't I'll play by their rules. Mostly. Some beliefs I won't tolerate - racism, for instance. Laughable beliefs shouldn't necessarily be laughed at, but vile beliefs should definitely be vilified.

 

[Ossai]

Rufo

That's a different matter.

How?

Acting on one's own belief, which may be contrary to someone else's belief, is not an insult.

There are literally millions of Christians and Muslims alive today that would disagree.

The doctor can respect their belief - yet he does not share it, so he has to operate because he does not believe the prayer will have effect.

Operating and removing the appendix is an insult to their beliefs. If the doctor respected their belief, the doc would do nothing but sit back and watch the person die, out of respect for their belief.

I took respect to mean ‘give some credence to’ not ‘acknowledge different belief’.

Ossai

 

[bobcarp]

Whatever you say to a believer they are going to think you are mocking them. I had a discussion with a woman on another site and she kept telling me that just because I don’t believe in god doesn’t mean he doesn’t exist. I replied with, just because you don’t believe in Astrology, or Allah, or the sun god Ra, doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Of course she was very offended and said I was mocking her.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

On the rare occasions I am not mocking someone, yet they accuse me of it, I proceed to teach them new and exciting meanings of mockery. Often, I use pie charts.