Moral Bigotry Without Religion

[Purple Knight]

Question for Debate: Does moral bigotry without religion exist? If so, how does it exist?

Example #1: Moral bigotry with religion. One man eats a pig. Or he serves one for dinner. Another man says, no, whoever eats that will go to Hell. He thinks the first man is trying to send him to Hell, so he kills him. Now, if he's right, this is legitimately self-defence. If the first man will commit one atrocity, he may very well lie and try to do it again. If eating a pig is really an atrocity, then you don't even need to justify that he may send you to Hell. He's done something beyond terrible so he gets punished and most people accept that if you do something horrible enough, death might be a suitable punishment.

Example #2: Morality, without bigotry. One population thinks scams and lies are perfectly fine, but violence is never okay, while the other side thinks violence is fine if it's against dishonesty and scams which are never justified. The honest people agree not to kill the scammers, and the scammers agree to at least display in their businesses that they are lie- and scam-allowed. Now, with this compromise, both sides can live in the same society in a way that is fair to both, though each side has had to make a sacrifice: The honesty-enforced side cannot use violence against the scammer side even if they are deceived, as they would with their own, and the scammer side cannot completely pretend they are honest, as they think they have every right to do. Since each compromise requires sacrifices on both sides, theoretically, with enough compromises, everyone becomes unhappy.

I used to think there was no overlap, and a religious society must have moral bigotry, while two nonreligious people would simply have to work it out like they did in example 2, or simply not live together if they can't mutually agree on a compromise. This is because the religious person believes he (or his god) has a higher moral authority, and the nonreligious person does not believe that. I've learned there can be religious morality without bigotry, if a higher authority exists but didn't decide every nuance. Or if a higher authority exists but two people who both believe something different, can never quite be sure they're right about what it wants, so compromise has to be done in practice. But I don't see how there can be nonreligious moral bigotry.

If the nonreligious person believes he has a higher moral authority, and doesn't have to compromise because he is simply righteous and the other person isn't, how could he possibly come to this belief? I've always been very fair to the religious, assuming every rational motive I possibly can, and I ask for likewise in return: Please assume this nonreligious person is not simply insane. How can he possibly believe as he does?

[1213]

Question for Debate: Does moral bigotry without religion exist? If so, how does it exist?...

I think we had vaccine bigotry and still have climate bigotry. Climate cultists are preaching the end of times, if people don't obey and buy more electric cars, and it seems many of them are willing to cause much harm to others to get people to obey their ideology. And like in the case of covid hysteria, some of them are even thinking that it is ok, if the disbelievers die.

[JehovahsWitness]

BIGOTRY noun

obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice* against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group

.

* prejudice: preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience

I do not believe a BIGOT has any place in True religion; The God of the bible is not prejudice and neither should any of his worshippers be.



Further reading : A World Without Prejudice​—When?https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2013400

[Yozavan]

There's racial bigotry, vegan bigotry, political bigotry, sexual bigotry etc. We don't need religion for bigotry

[Purple Knight]

and it seems many of them are willing to cause much harm to others to get people to obey their ideology

I agree. How could a person come to believe this was okay? On the face of it, it seems such a thing is insane.

BIGOTRY noun

obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice* against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group

.

* prejudice: preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience

I do not believe a BIGOT has any place in True religion; The God of the bible is not prejudice and neither should any of his worshippers be.

I would advise against sticking on that particular definition because it classifies what you read in a book, very cleanly into the bigoted pile, since those are neither your experiences, nor what you have reasoned is true. You may use reason later, and be charged with supporting that it is true, and you may be able to do that, but first and foremost, it is something you are told is true, and at that point it qualifies.

For the purposes of the thread, a moral bigot is somebody who believes his way is inherently the more righteous one, and the other guy who disagrees, is simply wrong. It seems like there are these people amoung the ranks of the nonreligious. Though I don't understand how it's possible for someone to simply conjure up moral authority from nothing and vest it in themselves, it seems they do.

[JehovahsWitness]

and it seems many of them are willing to cause much harm to others to get people to obey their ideology

I agree. How could a person come to believe this was okay? On the face of it, it seems such a thing is insane.

BIGOTRY noun

obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice* against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group

.

* prejudice: preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience

I do not believe a BIGOT has any place in True religion; The God of the bible is not prejudice and neither should any of his worshippers be.

I would advise against sticking on that particular definition because it classifies what you read in a book ...

I don't believe a book or any inanimate object can be bigoted because to be a bigot is to hold an particular opinion and paper and ink cannot think or hold an opinion which requires a mind.

A writer/author can express bigotry, which is not the case in the case of the bible.

[JehovahsWitness]

For the purposes of the thread, a moral bigot is somebody who believes his way is inherently the more inherently one, and the other guy who disagrees, is simply wrong.

Are some things not "inherently wrong"? And avoiding them inherently right*?

Do you believe your raping your own baby daughter would be wrong ? If so, would that make you bigot?

[Purple Knight]

I don't believe a book or any inanimate object can be bigoted because to be a bigot is to hold an particular opinion and paper and ink cannot think or hold an opinion which requires a mind.

A writer/author can express bigotry, which is not the case in the case of the bible.

No, what I'm saying is that if you believe what's in a book on faith, it counts as bigotry per your definition, at least until you find real reasons to believe it. Assuming you have them (and you've always seemed reasoned to me) it's not bigotry anymore, but at the point you were first told it, it wasn't your own experiences and neither was it backed up by reason, so according to that definition, it'd count as bigotry. But so would it be when most people believe the world isn't flat - because they were just told so. I actually don't think that definition is very good. And as sweeping as it is, I don't even think it manages to get everything, as it's possible for people to be bigoted precisely because they're guided by their own experiences and blind to anything else. All the Black kids at my school are mean. Black people must be mean. See?

Are some things not "inherently wrong"? And avoiding them inherently right*?

Do you believe your raping your own baby daughter would be wrong ? If so, would that make you bigot?

I think it is wrong but that doesn't mean I hold my view is absolute. If there's a culture that thinks it's not wrong, since compromise is out of the question, I want to be as far away from them as possible, but unless I think I am God, I have to acknowledge that I can't tell them what to do.

[JehovahsWitness]

... what I'm saying is that if you believe what's in a book on faith, it counts as bigotry per your definition...

No it does not because it would require ALSO being ...obstinate, unreasonable and /or prejudice.

Believing what one reads is not by definition bigotry.

[Purple Knight]

... what I'm saying is that if you believe what's in a book on faith, it counts as bigotry per your definition...

No it does not because it would require ALSO being ...obstinate, unreasonable and /or prejudice.

Believing what one reads is not by definition bigotry.

Believing or trusting on faith would come in at prejudice, which you said means a preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience and I think that's a bad definition because it defines 99% of round-earthers into being prejudiced.