How Christians Are Using “Respect” To Win The Argument Against Atheism (In 6 Steps)

Imagine, for a moment, that someone believes something very ridiculous and very harmful – say, that green-eyed boys deserve to be tortured for the first two years of their lives because they are a demon-possessed danger to society. Or something else incredibly weird and harmful, if you prefer. Doesn’t matter what it is, really; part of the point is that this would work with anything.

Here’s one way to keep that belief intact – find a group of people who are predisposed to believing that, and say you’ll defend them. Then go into public squares arguing your belief, using a couple strategies to do so — alternating them as needed, depending on what position of power you are in.

One strategy is treating other views as if they are ridiculous and yours as if it is obviously true. You might do this through killing, imprisoning, humiliating, or torturing those who disagree with you, and credentialing and honoring those who agree with you and join you in defending your belief. This would probably work if many people believe what you’re saying to start with – it will pump up your base and intimidate those outside your base.

But what if you’re less able to intimidate because your credibility is waning? And what if all those you treated badly before begin to see that they can fight back? Well, then you switch tactics. Whereas before you worked by attacking the other side verbally and physically for not believing that young green-eyed boys deserve torture for the first two years of their lives because they are demon-possessed now you notice that the other side is an angry mob who is ready to attack YOU back, as you have attacked them for so long. How do you stop the attack while at the same time gaining credibility for your now-waning view? You can use the second strategy — utilizing the notion of “respect” to insulate you from criticism.

This can be done in six steps.

You apologize for all the rudeness that went on before in an attempt to redefine yourself in contrast to them. With a good enough marketing plan, you can turn from being seen as the abusive beast you once were that people are angry at, into the more persecuted party. It’s like – if you slapped someone else, so that they got angry and wanted to slap you back, you might apologize profusely for slapping them by saying slapping is wrong so loudly and insistently and eloquently that they would feel guilty about wanting to slap you back in the first place.

In addition to speaking out against rudeness, you should start speaking up for the principle of respect. You can do this by apologizing so profusely for not showing respect to those who opposed your view that you make those around you guilty for any lack of respect they show your own view. As you uplift this notion of respect, you can, of course, say that any view that says green-eyed boys should not be tortured for the first two years of your life can be tolerated. In fact, you should, because those who are following you will encounter people who oppose this view in their everyday lives. What you can’t afford is for any of the people who believe your ludicrous view to think that their view is ludicrous and not deserving of respect. You have to keep them thinking that their view is respectable. You can ensure this appearance of respect, even in a critical world, by seeking out arenas of disagreement that give your view the respect you want, and by rejecting arenas that won’t give your view a respectable air in order to show that those who do not respect your position should not be taken seriously. By doing this, you’ll make it less likely that those under your charge will see your ludicrous view as ludicrous and leave – regardless of how good the arguments are on the other side, most of those you represent will be satisfied in thinking that, because their position is given respect, it’s still viable. Also, you’ll make progress in insulating them from thinking they should listen to any view that denies the supposed respectability of their position.

Then, you’ll need tighten the noose. Keep apologizing repeatedly for past instances of disrespect and rudeness in your history, while highlighting more and more how the nonbelievers are being rude in the present, thus reinforcing a bubble of respect for your belief. You’ll also need to increasingly use the notion of “respect” to give your belief more and more credibility, a credibility that will increasingly insulate those behind your defensive ranks from criticism.

Notice – it is not necessary, or even advisable, for you to win all arguments, or even really be right. You can do this with the most ridiculous and harmful of stances, and it will probably even help you to concede a more minor point now and then (always make clear, though, that you’re being gracious about it, as if you are doing your opposition a favor, to keep your authority and your armor of respect intact). For example, you might graciously concede that people who don’t think green-eyed boys should be tortured for the first two years of their lives are often fairly pleasant people who seem to have a good everyday knowledge of right and wrong, as if you’re giving them permission to have this pleasantness and could take it away at any moment. And while the opposition pats themselves on the back for being pleasant chaps (because you don’t enter the arena of anyone “disrespectful” enough to vocally reject your patronizing tone), you can go right on torturing the green-eyed toddlers and have people see your reasoning behind it as respectful, which was the main thing all along — and you can also, at will, remove the compliment. Furthermore, you will have also reinforced your role as the arbiter of arenas of respect, arenas you constructed and control that you can point to as models for conversation, and your control of this arena can allow you to infuse credibility into your position almost at will, in the eyes of your constituents.

Be sure to exalt people from the other side who enter these arenas of respect in the manner you prescribe. Such compliments can strengthen your position as the arbiter of respect, especially if these compliments are gratefully accepted, as they can be taken back by you at any time you see your opposition stepping out of bounds. Thus, by defining this arena as an arena of respect, you’ll prevent the views you express from being seen as anything less than respectable — in fact, you can make them appear more respectable than your opponents. As people come to these debates and see that they are not judged as much by their words as they are by how respectful they are (using a definition of “respectful” that you, increasingly, control), they may be more focused on being “respectful,” further defining this arena with the rules you want the arena to follow and, by extension, inadvertently presenting your belief as one worthy of the respect you want it to be given. And as you’re, increasingly, the arbiter of this respect by encouraging discourse you deem as respectful through strategic praise, you can make the actual arguments made in the arena less and less relevant and your rules for respect more and more relevant.

Those who do not enter the arena “respectfully,” according to the way you strategically choose to define “respect,” reject as strongly as possible for their rudeness. Repeat this method enough, and you’ll be enough of an arbiter of the notion of respect that you can be rude about your rejection of their rudeness without anyone seeing the hypocrisy – including those on their side. Anyone who disagrees with you who you deem respectful enough to enter your arena of discourse will, like you, reject the “disrespectful” individuals, as you’ve shown them that the proper arena of disagreement is one in which respect, as you define it, is granted and, thus, the respectability of your viewpoint is assumed

I think that the strong emphasis in much of apologetics towards intricate expectations of decorum and politeness (which exhibits, often, a lack of decorum and politeness towards those who reject these expectations) is already constructed or is being carefully constructed to insulate believers. Because, in Christianity at least, most adherents do not study the religion all that much — they depend, largely, on the perceived reputations of those who defend their beliefs. So what’s being fought is more of a war over reputations than one that focuses on who is actually right and who is actually wrong.

Thus, if the rank and file can easily be persuaded think that if their religion can be respected by those who disagree with it, its position is respectable, and if it’s respectable, it will make sense to them that it’s credible enough for them to stand behind it and follow it without being too concerned.

Indeed, it took a Christopher Hitchens, who woke me up to the fact that my religion may not, in any way, be respectable to dissuade me from Fundamentalist Christianity in the last months of it. This is part of why I disregard many instructions to be polite to Christian beliefs (although I think it is VERY important to be respectful to people – the line gets blurred by churches all too often).

A powerful counter to the method I’ve outlined here would be for the nonbelievers to begin defining respect as respecting people over and above their beliefs. A good rule of thumb may be to think about the kind of relationship you would want with the person if they came over to your position, and try not to mess that up. Therefore, it may be within your bounds to call a position stupid or ridiculous if that is the truth, because the person could come over to your side of thinking and you could be friends – the problem was the belief, not the person. But if you call the PERSON stupid or ridiculous as if it is an unimpeachable quality, then, even if you convince the person, the relationship is going to be strained because the person will still think you think they are stupid and ridiculous as a basic feature of their personality.

Once you disrespect the belief, then believers will begin to see that their beliefs CAN be effectively disrespected and perhaps gain courage to begin disrespecting the beliefs themselves.

Or at least, that’s been my experience, and I’m grateful to those who gave it to me, and more than happy to pass on the favor.