religion, advice, atheist-outreachWhat factors influence what accommodations you’d make towards the religious?
For example, what factors would you take into account when deciding whether or not to to change the ham and eggs metaphor of Scrum into some other foods?
I’m not asking what you’d do for that particular scenario, instead I’m asking for general principles and examples, such as:
Listing factors that you wouldn’t take into account is also fine. For example:
For me, it’s really very simple. I make accommodations assuming the request doesn’t inconvenience or injure me or others, however there is one point upon which I will not compromise: if given the choice between freedom of speech and blasphemy, I will side with free speech. Blasphemy is a victimless crime, or, more to the point, if I say something that offends someone else’s god, then let that god deal with me. The person whose god is offended need not take matters into his own hands.
Let’s face it: sometimes we make accommodations without even knowing we’re doing it. Take Exodus 34:26, which is one of the ten commandments from the replacement tablets after Moses destroyed the originals.
“Bring the best of the firstfruits of your soil to the house of the LORD your God. “Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk.”
(NIV translation). I concede that I have never even thought of doing this.
The question of "accommodation" might be better understood as "What claims placed upon a society (or its individual members) by members of a religious sect am I willing to allow to be placed?" Very contentious ground, but surely not so contentious that we, as thinking, collaborative human beings cannot negotiate an equally neutral and fair rule?
So there's point 1. Any societal accommodation we allow for one sect must be reasonably generalizable to ALL sects, or failing that, it should be equally, fairly and neutrally denied to all sects. Can we allow any/every sect to demand the right to erect worship structures throughout "public" space, and then demand that the public HAS to fund them for ALL religions that wish to do so? Like this one, or this one, or this one, Accommodating ALL faith requests is impractical, so tending toward a neutral, non-accommodation of all public (i.e. civil/governmental) religious accommodations seems better and more universally fair.
Point 2, embedded is, these things must be negotiated within society. Any sect making unilateral claims to ultimate authority, superceding societal arbitration and law, cannot be accommodated. Generally, assertions of "faith before law" cannot be accommodated in a society that purports to be secular, tolerant, diverse. Austin Dacey's excellent book "The Secular Conscience" covers this concept in detail. Belief, faith, morality DO belong in the negotiations, but if you play the religion trump card to try to excuse yourself from participating in societal rule making, you can't be accommodated.
Point 3. Claims upon my right to free speech are off the table. Allowing ideas to enter and mingle at the table of society's negotiations, is how we can sift and winnow the crap ideas from the brilliant. When a sect demands the right to unilaterally define what is or is not offensive to it, and then backs it up through extra-legal enforcement measures, I cannot accommodate. This does not mean I advocate incivility, but that no person engaged in conversation may play the "offense" or "blasphemy" trump card... it is too large a claim placed upon the individual AND upon the society.
Point 4: Finally, on the front addressed so thoroughly by Gerry Coyne, I cannot accommodate... when the claim is inserted into the public sphere, not just some random wingnut's anecdotal claims... I cannot accommodate the concept that there are "different ways of knowing." Again, this does NOT infringe on the reality that some people just "get" things, or appreciate things differently than I. It just means that when we talk about these things publicly, the "common" understanding has to be scientific, replicable and accessible to the individual through effort (if he/she so desires) rather than accessible through "faith" and or obeisance to the authorities of a given sect.
Some of my factors might be:
I might do something ridiculous for a family member or close friend, but not for a stranger. I will not tolerate anti-gay slurs from anyone.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.