"Sure, there are plenty of other topics to talk about. But I'd prefer to spend most of my time with people who I don't have to worry about "red line" topics. That's a preference of mine."

Well, enjoy yourself then, I guess...

I still don't see how you can't step outside that barrier of your own making and transgress "red line issues" without it becoming a fight or a tense moment, or why you can't exist with people who disagree and not worry about that red line...seems like a very lonely and isolated life, but whatever, I guess, if it makes you happy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists

"Likewise, if I had a friend who actually DID do the whole "saying grace" thing before a meal, and insisted I do it--sure, why not? "

So clearly we disagree as to what constitutes being phony.

For what it's worth, I'm struggling to think of any friends of mine who are religious. This is not a conscious decision on my part, but more that I tend to get on better with people who have an at least approximately similar world-view to me.

Clearly--

That friend would know I don't believe, I'd know they know I'm going through the motions, but in the same way I'd prefer someone take their shoes off when entering my home, as long as it doesn't hurt me or someone else, I'll abide by their traditions in their home.

Religious faith not being a pillar of our friendship, I affirm that I'm genuinely-willing to do something minor just to make my friend happy, and they'd do the same for me.

That's called respecting and liking someone genuine enough to go through the motions for them.

"Just because you had one Christian friend who tried to convert you 24/7 doesn't mean that that's the norm."

Didn't say it was the norm. But religious people talk about their faith, either directly or indirectly, quite a bit. It's not going to fade into the background. Either you ignore it and/or go along with it, as you advocate with your examples, fine. You still think that's authentic. I don't. Or you frequently quarrel with each other. Which I don't think makes for a very appealing friendship either.

And there are plenty of quarrels that take place even if your end goal isn't to convert the other person. Case in point, I know I'll never convince you of anything. Yet that doesn't prevent quarrels now does it?

"I still don't see how you can't step outside that barrier of your own making and transgress "red line issues" without it becoming a fight or a tense moment, or why you can't exist with people who disagree and not worry about that red line."

Because people care about their values, believe it or not.

"seems like a very lonely and isolated life, but whatever, I guess, if it makes you happy."

Not really. But then again I don't require a large circle of friends, even if secular people were hard to find, which they are not.

Everyone's free to pick their own friends...

I just think consciously saying "No friends of X category" is a little intellectually xenophobic.

If it's just you tending to go with people you like, mendax, then that's different--that is, if you can picture yourself liking someone in spite of their religion, but you happen to have mostly friends who conform to your own world view, then I get that. That's fine.

That's different from actively saying "If you believe in X, we cannot be friends."

Unless that X = "belief in something harmful to me/others" (like white power or racism) then varying beliefs should not stand in the way of friendship...indeed, I think variety of beliefs is a strength in a friendship.

"That's called respecting and liking someone genuine enough to go through the motions for them."

Right, I'd prefer not to have to engage in such charades around people I care about in order to avoid offending them. I value honesty. I don't like people having to lie around me about who they are, and I refuse to do so for others if I can help it.

I never said 'if you believe in X, we cannot be friends'. My statement was I do not see anything virtuous about opposite worldview friendships, as they tend to either be tense or phony.

For once, I wish you wouldn't butcher what it is I am saying.

+1'd like five of Putin's posts itt. This is especially good imo:

"Not virtuous in and of itself. Especially as such friendships are likely to involve a lot of phoniness and condescension, at some level. Hard to imagine a lot of earnest friendships between people of polar opposite worldviews. Sure, you can have friends who you debate heatedly with and then go out and have a beer with them, but why do you want to spend your time with people you argue with on a constant basis? And if you manage to avoid argument, why do you want to spend time with people you can't speak freely around?"

It's not like we're talking about people of different sports fan affiliations being friends; sports being what they are, you can realistically set that aside and still have a lot of common ground. To anyone who's thought their fundamental principles through to their logical conclusion, though, people who claim substantially opposed/different religious and/or political philosophies are going to have a more difficult time with building a strong friendship, because those things should manifest in a lot of normal day-to-day interactions. It's certainly not insurmountable by any means, because a lot more normal day-to-day interactions don't tie back to those beliefs per se, or don't do so in a way that requires significant disagreement. But it does make it more difficult. I'd even go so far as to suggest that most people deriding the thought process here either unconsciously selected their friends for political and/or religious philosophical closeness (and so haven't encountered these difficulties, on account of not having friends of opposite affiliations), or simply don't think especially deeply about the matter in the first place (and so haven't encountered these difficulties, on account of not answering the question).

Which brings me to obi. obi, you really come off as a pretentious fool in here. You're just waving the diversity flag like it's an "I Win" button instead of engaging what Putin's saying with any intellectual depth. You come off as someone who doesn't really think very long or hard about what you claim to believe. As concerned for your appearance as you clearly are, you might take this assessment under advisement.

Could someone point me to the amateur Muslim thread? Thx

Obi pretentious? C'est vrai, bien sur ,,,,,, I still have him muted and it is one of life's little pleasures :-)

obiwan: "I just think consciously saying "No friends of X category" is a little intellectually xenophobic."

So, given that earlier you claimed that you wouldn't want to be friends with people who sympathize with Hezbollah or Hamas, does that make you a little intellectually xenophobic? After all, you can easily talk about other stuff than the Israel-Palestinian conflict so as to not offend each other. Maybe you both like the same poetry.

Anyway, I'm with Putin on this friendship thing. I think deeply religious people are delusional. Deeply religious people think that I deserve to burn in hell for all eternity. Sure, we can evade such matters in conversation and get along, but it isn't much of a basis for true friendship, even if you do have some common interests.

There are certainly religious people that I consider friends. They are of the very moderate kind though, i.e. the kind that, despite their religion, are pro-choice and in favor of gay marriage, or at least not actively against it. My closest friends are mostly non-believers however, and that's no coincidence.

Fortunately in the Netherlands, where I live, there are far less religious nuts than in the USA and around here most people that are religious are quite moderate. So, in practice, this isn't really an issue I have to deal with that often.

"Case in point, I know I'll never convince you of anything. Yet that doesn't prevent quarrels now does it?"

It might if 1. We respected one another and 2. We were friends.

Neither are the case here, so quarrels are going to happen.

"I never said 'if you believe in X, we cannot be friends'."

You said that you don't like to have friends who disagree with your "ontology or epistemology." So, basically, if they believe something significant which is outside your own beliefs, by what you said, you would not like to be friends with them, as a general rule, because in your view, doing so leads to tension and an inevitable "red line" in conversations.

This seems to be another one of those threads that requires no 'dumbing down'.
Has anyone here actually got some close Muslim friends and if so can you not share some anecdotes about them (amusing or otherwise).
I share a couple of season tickets at Man Utd with my 'brother from another mother' Tariq.
I work with Ismail at Avon, I have known him for 17 years, he's a good lad, I've just nominated him for a 'Pride of Avon' award for his exceptional professionalism and customer service.
Mohammed has been my accountant for over 10 years now, previously I worked with him, he is a lovely family man. A true friend and trusted confidante on all life issues, not just tax returns.
I'm not pro-Muslim, more pro-lovely people.

"Which brings me to obi. obi, you really come off as a pretentious fool in here. You're just waving the diversity flag like it's an "I Win" button instead of engaging what Putin's saying with any intellectual depth. You come off as someone who doesn't really think very long or hard about what you claim to believe. As concerned for your appearance as you clearly are, you might take this assessment under advisement."

1. If I were concerned about my appearance--or sanity, for that matter--I wouldn't engage in the debates here.

2. Yeah, I'll wave the diversity flag vs. the conformist, xenophobic, "I prefer friends with a similar epistemological outlook to me" flag any day.

3. Tell me what you'd like me to engage or answer specifically with regard to Putin's postings here, and I'll do it. As evidenced by my willingness to post and post and post here, I'm not shy about answering...give me a specific as to what you want me to tackle, or what you feel I'm not tackling enough, and I'll answer you and Putin both.

@oscar:

"So, given that earlier you claimed that you wouldn't want to be friends with people who sympathize with Hezbollah or Hamas, does that make you a little intellectually xenophobic?"

See my caveat, oscar, for hate groups and groups that would cause you or others harm.

Hamas and Hezbollah cause others harm, ergo, I wouldn't be friends with a member of that group in the same way I wouldn't be friends with someone who believed in Neo-Nazi ideology or any of that racist trash.

To take the definition of "xenophobic"--

"having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against people from other countries."

I'd be fine, therefore, having a Palestinian friend (to count them as a nation, for simplicity's sake here) but not one who aligned themselves with an Antisemitic group, for obvious reasons. That's not fearing or hating someone from another country BECAUSE they're from another country, but hating them because of their hatred towards me, friends of mine, or just innocents in general.

Putin excludes people from his circle BECAUSE they're theistic, and doesn't want to deal with that...religion is different from nationality, so in the strictest of terms, "xenophobic" doesn't fit that way (so mea culpa there) but I think it works in sentiment.

"After all, you can easily talk about other stuff than the Israel-Palestinian conflict so as to not offend each other. Maybe you both like the same poetry."

How do you talk with someone about poetry, practically, when they wish for the extermination of you and your people?

The Christians and Muslims I'm friends with don't want me dead...don't want Jews dead...don't say, as Hamas does, that Jews should be killed and that ANY Jew--even children--are legitimate targets...

I'm sorry, but as much as I love Shakespeare, I WON'T discuss him with someone who thinks an entire group of people should be wiped off the planet, and supports a group that has, as part of its active charter, a declaration to do just that.

In THAT instance, Putin WOULD be right--that'd be a red line which you couldn't cross without friction, because their ideology wants you dead, and you naturally would resist that.

Conversely, someone believing in a God doesn't cause friction, because they're free to believe that, and I'm free not to believe it--unless they forced their viewpoint on me, it wouldn't be an issue, whereas the Hamas person would literally be trying to extinguish me and my viewpoint...and that's not what friends do, right?

I don't go around excluding anybody. I just avoid spending large amounts of my free time interacting with people who are strongly religious or conservative. Friendly occasional interaction is fine.

And believe it or not, mine is not the only ideology that is secular and non-conservative (shocker), and leftists themselves like to disagree with each other just as fiercely as with anybody else. So it's not like I'm insisting on an echo chamber.

"I'd be fine, therefore, having a Palestinian friend (to count them as a nation, for simplicity's sake here) but not one who aligned themselves with an Antisemitic group, for obvious reasons."

Which you define as any Palestinian nationalist group. So basically you can be Palestinian, just have to accept your narrow definition of what is acceptable for them to believe.

"The Christians and Muslims I'm friends with don't want me dead.."

They just think your "soul" will be eternally tortured.

Nice.

"Has anyone here actually got some close Muslim friends and if so can you not share some anecdotes about them (amusing or otherwise)."

Tokens aren't friends.

"Anyway, I'm with Putin on this friendship thing. I think deeply religious people are delusional."

So do I, but it doesn't mean we still can't get along, so long as they keep their delusions to themselves, which generally they're happy enough to do since they know I won't be swayed...the most that might happen is someone being slightly passive-aggressive and telling me how "sorry" they are I think what I think because I might go to Hell. I don't believe there is one, so I don't care...and I choose to look at it as them being concerned for my well-being and overlook the condescension which is implicit in the way they frame that concern.

Even so, I can count the number of times a religious friend has been that way towards me on one hand. It's NOT a significant enough fear or issue to prevent me having religious friends...that is, it's NOT a red line the way "We want you and those like you DEAD" is (not the least because while they can't send me to Hell, they COULD always, you know, decide to kill me if things soured, or if I met friends of theirs who didn't like me and believed in killing people like that.)

"Deeply religious people think that I deserve to burn in hell for all eternity. Sure, we can evade such matters in conversation and get along, but it isn't much of a basis for true friendship, even if you do have some common interests."

I disagree. You're NOT going to burn in Hell for all eternity, all the evidence says we're not, so...why does it matter if they think that in the back of their head, or even if they voice that concern to you? I really don't see what the problem is...

Either they just agree to disagree and leave the matter alone, or else they proselytize and continuously violate your personal space and dignity, at which point (to use the technical term) you can tell them to knock it off or fuck right off and stop being friends with them.

"My closest friends are mostly non-believers however, and that's no coincidence."

I have a lot of atheists/agnostics as close friends, some Christians, and Jews, a Muslim, and then a whole range of different "I believe in something" kind of people as friends.

I really, *REALLY* fear those who shut themselves off and desire ONLY those who think and act like themselves as friends. That's a dangerous thing. It's informal conformism, it's cutting you off from being able to see different points of view (even if you totally disagree with them) and as a result, it can distance you and dehumanize those other points of view--and, thus, the people who hold them.

It's what FOX and MSNBC do in US cable news, trap viewers in an echo chamber of like-minded people who never question one another, never question party dogma, never disagree with one another, view anyone who doesn't agree with them as idiotic, amoral, or worse, and just trap everyone in an unproductive feedback loop...

And see where that's gotten us?

It's my firm belief that you should WANT friends who'll disagree with you, challenge you, and be different from you in a variety of ways, adding to you, and maybe you add to them in return. Doesn't mean you have to agree with them, but at least you're getting other perspectives, and valuing people because of or in spite of those perspectives, learn *why* they think that way, and maybe find common ground.

Diversity is productive, conformity less so.

"I don't go around excluding anybody. I just avoid spending large amounts of my free time interacting with people who are strongly religious or conservative."

Avoidance would be a more passive form of active exclusion?

I have never been to Toke but are you insinuating that they are a bit unfriendly?

"And believe it or not, mine is not the only ideology that is secular and non-conservative (shocker), and leftists themselves like to disagree with each other just as fiercely as with anybody else. So it's not like I'm insisting on an echo chamber."

You are to a certain extent, you're just choosing what is and is not permissible within it...what you're OK with having challenged (by otherwise like-minded people) and what you wish to exclude or avoid entirely if possible.

"Which you define as any Palestinian nationalist group."

No, I REPEATEDLY advocated for Abbas' sect over Hamas' this summer? O.o

To the point you even questioned me as to why I would do so?

I'm not in love with Abbas' sect at all, there's a LOT I disagree with him on, but at least--as far as I know--he doesn't have a "Kill all Jews" clause in his ideology, as does Hamas, so at the very least I'd be willing to hear someone out.

Someone disagreeing with me 100% is fine.
Someone disagreeing with me 100% AND saying "Oh, and I think Jews should be exterminated" is not fine--in a person, or a group.

"So basically you can be Palestinian, just have to accept your narrow definition of what is acceptable for them to believe."

Believe:

1. Jews shouldn't be exterminated and
2. Both an Israel and a Palestine should exist

And we're good.

ANYTHING within those pretty broad terms is fine with me. That's pretty fair.

"why does it matter if they think that in the back of their head, or even if they voice that concern to you? I really don't see what the problem is..."

Once again the issue of authenticity reveals itself. You don't care if your close friends think your beliefs are so abhorrent that you're to be tortured eternally for them. A bizarre basis on which to base a friendship.

"Avoidance would be a more passive form of active exclusion?"

It's entirely in line with what Mendax and Oscar have said, that they gravitate towards people who aren't theistic, which implies that they don't go out of their way to interact with those who are should they come across them.

"They just think your "soul" will be eternally tortured."

So? O.o Why does that matter? Unless we're all staggeringly wrong and it WILL be eternally tortured, why should I care if they think that, and why should they care if I think they've said the equivalent of "And I can fly on the back of a rainbow-farting unicorn, too!"

Who cares? That's not the bedrock of the friendship, so it doesn't matter.

"Once again the issue of authenticity reveals itself. You don't care if your close friends think your beliefs are so abhorrent that you're to be tortured eternally for them. A bizarre basis on which to base a friendship."

Yeah, I don't care about that.

As long as they're honest and genuine enough to tell me that's what they think, and I'm honest enough to say I don't believe that for a second, we both say why, and respectfully disagree, there are more and, frankly, better things to build a friendship on than agreeing to the same religious dogma, or even the same world view.

I'd rather a friend I could trust over a friend that agrees with me any day...THAT is what I'd call real genuineness and honesty, being able to open up to someone and likewise having them trust me enough to open up to me.

Trust, not ideological agreement, is the bedrock of a good friendship.