The latter part regarding the misogyny and anti-gay stuff is the kind of religiosity I’m referring to when I say that we shouldn’t be expected to respect religion. If you think that homosexuality is a crime against god, then I don’t respect your opinion and I don’t think that anyone should respect your opinion. If you believe women shouldn’t be allowed to drive, or should be forced to wrap themselves in burkas and other oppressive garb, then I don’t respect your opinion. The list goes on and on. It doesn’t necessarily mean that I find all of those individuals that think that way to be totally unworthy of respect, but their religious views are. I don’t think that that’s unreasonable and no one else should either.
If I’m allowed to play devil’s advocate (guess chyron needs new representation), it wasn’t long ago that the consensus thought oppositely: that accepting gender norm heresies meant one’s opinion didn’t deserve respect.
The tables have turned on religion, at least in most Western countries, but how are we to grapple with “truth” in an objective way? Is it all about consensus?
I understand the sincerity of conviction (see the preceding pages) but as we survey history and different cultures, “truth” seems to be whatever those who have power insist it to be.
I get the basic point about not respecting views one finds odious, but is there an objective standard there?