And one does not need to debate with disregard for the other's position. Makes one seem argumentative and weakens their position.
I don't understand, don't you mean no regard for their feelings?
But you see, I don't. Evolution should be taught in classes. That's it. I am probably one of the biggest proponents of comprehensive sex education, and anti-abstinence only education on this forum. When you attack and insult these religious extremists, who, I have little use for either, you alienate an ally: ME.
I don't understand that. If I attack the 6000 year old earth theory, and you don't hold it, how am I alienating you? In fact you should be in the middle of it, explaining how one can be a Christian (or whatever you are) without being a biblical literalist.
I have always said that it is far more powerful from extremists to be confronted by the moderates of their own political persuasion than anyone from the opposite side.
Full agreement.
By alienating me, and others like me, you fall into the trap of the hypothesis that you agreed with me on.
Again I don't understand why you would be alienated by the debunking of someone else's mystical claim.
See. Here is where you did it. Delusions. Unnecessary. Insulting. My belief system is my own. What I do with it has no effect on you; I won't allow it to. Here, it is you who drops the constructivity of debate and become degrading.
Actually I think this is a case where you've taken something I said personally when that was not the purpose of the use.
I was not talking about your beliefs when I said "delusions," because I don't know what they are. You said you believe in a god, I don't know what you mean by that. You could be using the word the way Hawking or Einstein do, referring to the Universe. And that isn't a delusion!
When I was talking about the rare instance that people are "generally concerned about the actions one's delusions could lead them to" I literally meant that. In any instance where you fear that something someone believes, that you know is not true, will cause them to behave in a dangerous manner, to criticize that delusion is what it means to respect them.
When dealing with a stranger, such as you, who does not make truth claims about his faith for all to attempt to debate, but keeps his faith to himself and you have no reason to believe it will effect them or yourself, there is no reason to debate or even criticize that belief.
Someone has to put themselves out there to get my attention, making assertions about things they couldn't possibly know, I don't bait people who keep it private.
Now if you want to be offended because I refer to demonstrably false supernatural claims as delusions, simply because you hold supernatural beliefs of your own... I again don't understand.
It would be like if said that astrology were B/S, and a homeopathist took offense. I never said anything about your beliefs, unless I identified a fallacy that is the rationale for your belief.
Why is delusion offensive if it is an accurate identification? You don't regard the word "false" or "wrong" or "illogical" as offensive as well do you?
I tend to stay out of religious debates other than to do what I am doing here. Pointing out the attacking nature of the extremists of both sides and hoping for some reasonable discussion. One's beliefs are their own and without proselytizing, IMO, harm no one.
Don't think I haven't noticed, this is the first time you've spoken to me on religion I think.