jtpow, That's a great example of ad hominem. One point of advice though. Don't blame someone of such a thing when you're doing it as well. We all do it. Even you. I find it very close minded to point out religios persons when there are millions of examples. How about every politician? You mommy and daddy. Your friends?
I've been in the punk scene for many years and Bad Religion is my favorite band of all time. Does being religious make me less punk? NO! While you go along spouting out what your friends and bands say, I decided to think for myself and do what's best for me. But of course everybody knows what's best for you so you might be right. But remember, no Bad Religion song can make your life complete.
Well said. In perusing the comments on just a few of their songs, I'm a bit dismayed to see how many fans of BR don't seem to really get what the band is about. It seems many feel that every song is an attack on religion just because of the name of the band; in reality, even those BR songs that actually do criticize religion aren't so much critizing religion itself, so much as it's propensity for spawning dogmatic modes of thought. All ideologies can result in dogmamatic thinking, be they religious, political or even scientific, and thus why all...
Well said. In perusing the comments on just a few of their songs, I'm a bit dismayed to see how many fans of BR don't seem to really get what the band is about. It seems many feel that every song is an attack on religion just because of the name of the band; in reality, even those BR songs that actually do criticize religion aren't so much critizing religion itself, so much as it's propensity for spawning dogmatic modes of thought. All ideologies can result in dogmamatic thinking, be they religious, political or even scientific, and thus why all are challenged in numerous BR songs.
While you have completely legitimate criticism, I think you are making a big mistake.
Bad Religion asks us to consider EVERYTHING critically, the fact that EVERYONE uses ad hominim is merely proof that no one can be trusted at face value, even yourself. Consider, reflect, and reconsider. No Bad Religion song can make your life complete, to believe that it does is to take the content of what they say without critical thinking, which is the fundamental message.
You can be religious and agree with Bad Religion's message, as long as you do so in a critical manner. So while you can...
While you have completely legitimate criticism, I think you are making a big mistake.
Bad Religion asks us to consider EVERYTHING critically, the fact that EVERYONE uses ad hominim is merely proof that no one can be trusted at face value, even yourself. Consider, reflect, and reconsider. No Bad Religion song can make your life complete, to believe that it does is to take the content of what they say without critical thinking, which is the fundamental message.
You can be religious and agree with Bad Religion's message, as long as you do so in a critical manner. So while you can believe in Jesus and believe in the fundamental message of love and peace, you need to be able to breakdown the biases that religions have pushed on the world because of their false teachings.
@manchez I'm struggling to understand that reasoning. Jtpow addressed the idea of religious people often turning to ad hominems to defend their beliefs as an example. Which is a very legitimate example.
In turn you criticised him of using an ad hominem, when he never addressed anybody personally; but instead addressed the idea (which we have already established as not being an ad hominem.)
You then said that everyone uses ad hominems including his mommy and daddy. Then you persisted to say that no bad religion song will make his life complete.
This is litterally the definition of irony. Instead of addressing the...
@manchez I'm struggling to understand that reasoning. Jtpow addressed the idea of religious people often turning to ad hominems to defend their beliefs as an example. Which is a very legitimate example.
In turn you criticised him of using an ad hominem, when he never addressed anybody personally; but instead addressed the idea (which we have already established as not being an ad hominem.)
You then said that everyone uses ad hominems including his mommy and daddy. Then you persisted to say that no bad religion song will make his life complete.
This is litterally the definition of irony. Instead of addressing the issue at hand, ---which was that you thought it was unfair that he used religion as his sole example; you attacked him by calling him close minded.
jtpow, That's a great example of ad hominem. One point of advice though. Don't blame someone of such a thing when you're doing it as well. We all do it. Even you. I find it very close minded to point out religios persons when there are millions of examples. How about every politician? You mommy and daddy. Your friends? I've been in the punk scene for many years and Bad Religion is my favorite band of all time. Does being religious make me less punk? NO! While you go along spouting out what your friends and bands say, I decided to think for myself and do what's best for me. But of course everybody knows what's best for you so you might be right. But remember, no Bad Religion song can make your life complete.
Well said. In perusing the comments on just a few of their songs, I'm a bit dismayed to see how many fans of BR don't seem to really get what the band is about. It seems many feel that every song is an attack on religion just because of the name of the band; in reality, even those BR songs that actually do criticize religion aren't so much critizing religion itself, so much as it's propensity for spawning dogmatic modes of thought. All ideologies can result in dogmamatic thinking, be they religious, political or even scientific, and thus why all...
Well said. In perusing the comments on just a few of their songs, I'm a bit dismayed to see how many fans of BR don't seem to really get what the band is about. It seems many feel that every song is an attack on religion just because of the name of the band; in reality, even those BR songs that actually do criticize religion aren't so much critizing religion itself, so much as it's propensity for spawning dogmatic modes of thought. All ideologies can result in dogmamatic thinking, be they religious, political or even scientific, and thus why all are challenged in numerous BR songs.
While you have completely legitimate criticism, I think you are making a big mistake. Bad Religion asks us to consider EVERYTHING critically, the fact that EVERYONE uses ad hominim is merely proof that no one can be trusted at face value, even yourself. Consider, reflect, and reconsider. No Bad Religion song can make your life complete, to believe that it does is to take the content of what they say without critical thinking, which is the fundamental message. You can be religious and agree with Bad Religion's message, as long as you do so in a critical manner. So while you can...
While you have completely legitimate criticism, I think you are making a big mistake. Bad Religion asks us to consider EVERYTHING critically, the fact that EVERYONE uses ad hominim is merely proof that no one can be trusted at face value, even yourself. Consider, reflect, and reconsider. No Bad Religion song can make your life complete, to believe that it does is to take the content of what they say without critical thinking, which is the fundamental message. You can be religious and agree with Bad Religion's message, as long as you do so in a critical manner. So while you can believe in Jesus and believe in the fundamental message of love and peace, you need to be able to breakdown the biases that religions have pushed on the world because of their false teachings.
@manchez I'm struggling to understand that reasoning. Jtpow addressed the idea of religious people often turning to ad hominems to defend their beliefs as an example. Which is a very legitimate example. In turn you criticised him of using an ad hominem, when he never addressed anybody personally; but instead addressed the idea (which we have already established as not being an ad hominem.) You then said that everyone uses ad hominems including his mommy and daddy. Then you persisted to say that no bad religion song will make his life complete. This is litterally the definition of irony. Instead of addressing the...
@manchez I'm struggling to understand that reasoning. Jtpow addressed the idea of religious people often turning to ad hominems to defend their beliefs as an example. Which is a very legitimate example. In turn you criticised him of using an ad hominem, when he never addressed anybody personally; but instead addressed the idea (which we have already established as not being an ad hominem.) You then said that everyone uses ad hominems including his mommy and daddy. Then you persisted to say that no bad religion song will make his life complete. This is litterally the definition of irony. Instead of addressing the issue at hand, ---which was that you thought it was unfair that he used religion as his sole example; you attacked him by calling him close minded.