this one came up at dinner...

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
is hating someone solely due to their religion "just as bad as" being racist?

[/ QUOTE ]
It's fair to infer character from beliefs. To believe its fair to infer character from race is to be racist.

So only a racist thinks the two are equivalent.

chez

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

It's fair to infer character from beliefs. To believe its fair to infer character from race is to be racist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pithy, but pretty incomplete. While I agree with your earlier statement, do you think that you can really infer beliefs entirely from religion (or, more accurately, beliefs that are outside the spiritual context of the religion itself)? Within any given religion I think there is an incredibly wide range of behaviors and character. So to infer beliefs from religion seems quite narrow minded.

Furthermore, do you think there is zero correlation between race and beliefs? I think this is pretty obviously untrue. For example, there's a high correlation between being ethnically Jewish (we can debate whether or not this is a race, but for the purposes of this argument I think it's close enough) and being a practicing Jew. This kind of leaves you in the position of having to either accept that there can be racial correlations, or that the religious correlations need not be that significant.

There is clearly more basis for the religious intolerance than the racial one, but I think people are being a little smug about how high-minded they are here.

[chezlaw]

Hopefully my answer to RJT meakes what I said clearer.

I don't disagree with what you say but I didn't say anything different.
I wasn't suggesting the inference from belief to character is reliable or strong but it does exist and refers directly to the person who has the beliefs.

and I'm not suggesting there is no correlation between race an beliefs, but what do you mean by racist if you don't mean judging an individual by a supposed correlation between their race and some belief.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... but I think people are being a little smug about how high-minded they are here.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
I was being judgemental at all, so I'm not sure where any mindedness comes in, let alone highness of it.

chez

[gumpzilla]

The point is that either both are acceptable or both aren't. I think the natural course of action is to make generalizations (which is pretty difficult to avoid) but be flexible in reassessing them based on your interactions with particular people.

Your style and phrasing were awfully provocative for somebody who is non-judgmental in this matter. I also think you're trying to weasel out a bit here; it's pretty clear that the point of this thread was snap judgments based on religious identification, rather than an assessment of people's character based on knowledge of their specific beliefs, which are quite different things.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
The point is that either both are acceptable or both aren't. I think the natural course of action is to make generalizations (which is pretty difficult to avoid) but be flexible in reassessing them based on your interactions with particular people.

Your style and phrasing were awfully provocative for somebody who is non-judgmental in this matter. I also think you're trying to weasel out a bit here; it's pretty clear that the point of this thread was snap judgments based on religious identification, rather than an assessment of people's character based on knowledge of their specific beliefs, which are quite different things.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not weasling out of anything, I'm quite capable of being provocative without being judgemental.

All I've done it explain what was meant by my original pithy response and whilst its true that snap judgements are weak in both cases, you can see the difference as the information gets better. The more I know about a particular persons religous beliefs the more I can infer about their character. The more I know about their mix of blood and racial ancestry ...???

chez

[daryn]

[ QUOTE ]
it's pretty clear that the point of this thread was snap judgments based on religious identification, rather than an assessment of people's character based on knowledge of their specific beliefs, which are quite different things.

[/ QUOTE ]

100% correct, that was the intent of the post

[RJT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
is hating someone solely due to their religion "just as bad as" being racist?

[/ QUOTE ]
It's fair to infer character from beliefs. To believe its fair to infer character from race is to be racist.

So only a racist thinks the two are equivalent.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

chez,

You surprised me with this one, chez.

RJT

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
is hating someone solely due to their religion "just as bad as" being racist?

[/ QUOTE ]
It's fair to infer character from beliefs. To believe its fair to infer character from race is to be racist.

So only a racist thinks the two are equivalent.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

chez,

You surprised me with this one, chez.

RJT

[/ QUOTE ]
Why? I though you agreed that people bring their morality to their beliefs. Someone who believes I will go to hell because I don't share their belief is telling me a lot about them.

Noticing someones race is telling me very little about them. Infering they are likely to have some belief or behave in a certain way because there is a correlation between people of that race and that belief/behavior is racist.

Maye some confusion because by their religon, I mean what they believe not being nominally a member of some religon.

chez

[RJT]

chez,

Next time someone says to you he is a Christian (and that only, which is the question), you tell me what you (can) infer.

RJT

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
chez,

Next time someone says to you he is a Christian (and that only, which is the question), you tell me what you (can) infer.

RJT

[/ QUOTE ]
very little, but if he tells me what his relious beliefs are I would infer quite a lot.

chez