• Revonult@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I don’t consider myself as religious, but this is just such a bad take.

    I too dislike religion, but judging people based on their beliefs and discrediting their views because of it is exactly the problem.

    • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I disagree. For hundreds of years, illogical religious beliefs have biased science. People should have a right to know if scientists have religious beliefs so they can be weary of their agendas affecting the results. Many religious beliefs are obviously illogical and make no sense and if a scientist believes them, it does illuminate the likelihood of the accuracy of their results.

      For many years “scientists” said homosexuality was caused by “mental illness” and then suddenly they decided it’s not. There were entire scientific programs devoted to racist beliefs that were psuedoscientific and often impacted by religious views justifying racism. Of course religion biases science and is a problem in having unbiased research!

      I don’t think we should outlaw religious people from practicing science, but their views should at least be known so people can scrutinize their work more closely.

      • Revonult@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        What field would be the cut off? Is religion going to influence how a metallurgist analyzes microstructure? How about how a chemist developing new polymers? Who gets to decide? If a scientist allows their religion, or any external influence, to influence their work they are a bad scientist. Which is why we have peer review and reproducible results. There is no need to label anyone. If their work is shit there is mechanisms to correct it, which we are seeing in the article.

        People’s relationship with religion is not up to you, just how the opinions of the religious shouldn’t get to dictate the lives LGBT+. They might be in it for community and don’t belive the “fantasy”. If an individual is spouting hate that is one thing, but judging individuals by their religion is the same persecution the religious zelots dish out.

        Edit: some wording

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Question… do you realize how fascist this sounds?

        You might mean well, but all you’re doing is changing who’s being discriminated against.

        Not cool.

        • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition defines fascist as an advocate or adherent of fascism, A reactionary or dictatorial person, An adherent of fascism or similar right-wing authoritarian views.

          I’m not saying right now we need to put all religious people to death, I am just tired of their lies infecting science. The idea that the delusional morons who believe their deities float on clouds and their virgins give birth are capable of objective science is preposterous. If such “miracles” exist, then the universe doesn’t follow laws of math. Yes, if we are living in a simulated reality that can be hacked then such miracles could happen, but unless a religious scientist is practicing Kali, I don’t want their religion polluting data with bullshit.

            • Barrymore@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Not advocating for the other person, but there’s a big difference in what you’re comparing it to. People choose their religion, and they choose their profession. If those 2 things are in direct conflict, like a religious scientist, the audience of their work should be made aware of that conflict.

              • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Most people are born into their religion, as a matter of culture. Frequently, religion is integral to their culture, and even if they do choose to leave that religion, it likely will leave an indelible mark- good or bad-

                Their purpose is to other-ize religious scientists, exactly like what the yellow star was used to do to Jews by Nazis, (and at other times and places.) I think we all know what Nazis did to those they otherized.

                The rhetoric is absolutely the same kind of justification for forcing it is also the same. When non-Jewish Germans started sympathies with Jews, do you think they admitted it was to encourage discrimination and bigotry, or do you think they said things like “we know it’s difficult, but they do shoddy work and you should know that you need to keep an eye on them.”

                Couching it in the rhetoric of atheist enlightenment doesn’t make it okay. It’s still bigotry, and while the OC might not realize that, meaning to or not, it’s still advancing bigotry.

                • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  when treated with ideals of respect and tolerance, religious people still adhere to the tenants of their religions leading to bigotry and stupidity

                  being tolerant of the religious is like being tolerant of a pack of rabid hyenas. I suppose it’s the kind thing to do to the rabid hyenas, but it may not be the best option for those who are not rabid hyenas

                  the religious burned scientists at the stake. i think having skepticism towards the rational ability of religious scientists is not bigotry when religious irrationality has been shown to have broad and constant historical validity

                  • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Yeah. So. To clarify, you’re okay with discriminating against people, so long as they’re the right people?