Is making money from religious criticism parasitic ?

1. 77

   Oztinatoposted 7 years ago

   Is making money from religious criticism parasitic ?
   
   Many online atheists try to make money from degrading religions. Is this parasitic?
   Likewise is it parasitic for religious leaders to profit from criticising other religions?
   Dictionary definition
   plural noun: parasites
   1.
   an organism which lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
   "the parasite attaches itself to the mouths of fishes"
   2.
   derogatory
   a person who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return.
   "the capitalist is really a parasite on the workers
   
   

   replyreport
2. 0

   jonnycomelatelyposted 7 years ago

   For entertainment value, it certainly affords a few laughs.   Is that parasitic?  Or paralytic in the cause of truthfulness?

   replyreport
   1. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Can you elaborate on that?

      replyreport
   2. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Not really, I was just being humerous.  Can you show examples where you feel people are making money via criticism?

      replyreport
   3. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      There are examples everywhere. There are writing sites where certain unmentionable persons spend all their time disparaging religion to try to earn money from the frequency of logs.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Well, if religionists continue to feed those parasites, you might consider the relationship symbiotic.  The life and argument of religion is thereby maintained, fully paid, never to be laid to rest.  Good call!

      replyreport
   5. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Mutually beneficial creatures in nature are symbiotic but parasites are not beneficial to the host. Hence they aren't symbiotic but deleterious. Humans who do this have the same yuk factor as say a tick or tapeworm.

      replyreport
   6. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      That's very insulting to the Tick you have pictured.  I mean, ask another Tick, perhaps a female suitor (presuming that pictured is male, it's ugly, let's face it, wink wink) and she would probably swoon!

      replyreport
   7. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Morally ugly. Trying to make money out of regular religious intolerance is morally repugnant because it is parasitic.

      replyreport
3. 52

   Setank Setunkposted 7 years ago

   There is not a direct correlation in this instance. The writers in question are making money through their writing/publishing. The subject matter is incidental. The Capitalist/Worker example is simply not correct. This relationship is symbiotic or mutually beneficial. I would say that Labor Unions are parasites on Workers, Capitalists and the economy as a whole. Or that Liberalism is a parasite on Liberty.
   I would not argue the point. Parasite is already used outside of the original definition, so who can say how far we should stray.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The question relates specifically to the subject matter. A parasite feeds off a host but doesn't contribute to the host's well being. Feeding off religion when you don't like it could be parasitic by definition.

      replyreport
   2. 52

      Setank Setunkposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I do get your point OZ, I certainly would not argue it's use in this application. I  was putting in my fifty cents.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The successful parasite does not usually kill its host.  The successful host learns to tollerate the parasite; builds strategies that support survival; knows it has to co-exist.  Symbiosis eventuates.  Fighting to the death is pointless for both.

      replyreport
   4. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Unfortunately a parasite doesn't do that. A tick for example makes a host ill. Many ticks can kill a host etc. People living with tapeworms are not well individuals. It's not symbiotic.

      replyreport
   5. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Not entirely true.
      Some ticks can kill some animals, even humans.  But most ticks simply drop off, digest, then wait for another feed.  Read on: http://www.scienceinschool.org/2011/issue20/horrors   It pays to keep our minds open to other answers.

      replyreport
   6. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Such insects are classed as parasites. I understand why you might resist that idea.
      In other words you agree it is parasitic behaviour even if it doesn't sicken or kill.

      replyreport
   7. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Yes. 
      Don't assume that just any parasitic behavior is necessarily bad.  It might jog a believer into thinking twice about belief in God.

      replyreport
   8. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Parasites in nature are not held in high esteem. It's negative and disease carrying. For a human to practice the same thing emotionally is plain disgusting. A tick has one excuse: it's brain is extremely tiny.

      replyreport
   9. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      In human terms maybe.  Yet parasites have always been part of nature, just one piece of the jigsaw puzzle, the tapestry.  Would you banish them?  If your God made this world complete with parasites, who are you to complain?

      replyreport
   10. 77

       Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       We are agreeing that certain behaviours are parasitic. Specifically people who try to make bucks leeching off religion. That's what this is about. Insect parasites is an analogy for human parasites. Are you defending such human parasites too?

       replyreport
   11. 0

       jonnycomelatelyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       No, I'm only questioning your need to be so concerned.  Is it  really necessary?

       replyreport
   12. 77

       Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       The entire basis of certain persons hp efforts revolve around a broken down parasiticial premise that totally undermines their weak arguments. It definitely needs to be pointed out to all.

       replyreport
4. 86

   tamarawilhiteposted 7 years ago

   If you are a member of a religious faith or political ideology, you are likely to buy books, pay to listen to speakers and watch TV shows starring people who reinforce your views or discuss it in interesting ways.
   The best way for these people to get noticed is to attack other groups, validating your views and tearing down others.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I take that as a "yes". This is how parasites feed. Hence an external parasite would be an atheist feeding externally but a fundamentalist  religious bigot feeds internally.

      replyreport
   2. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I'm talking about religious bigots and atheists who spend time online criticizing other religions while trying to make money out of it.
      Understand?

      replyreport
5. 37

   Success Awakeningposted 7 years ago

   religious leaders to profit from criticising other religions are not the leaders
   path may be different but destination is the same as far religion concern
   making money its there choice and understanding

   replyreport
   1. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I agree that all paths lead to the same destination.
      Making money from denigrating other religions therefore must be highly unethical.

      replyreport
   2. 37

      Success Awakeningposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      There is Huge Traffic JAM in the Gods way it can only clear by Pure wisdom its only you can decide where to go ...
      where the money goes business started its all up to intention.
      money is the tool and you can use it either way Good or Evil

      replyreport
6. 79

   dashingscorpioposted 7 years ago

   
   
   Giving people what they want is usually profitable.
   That's just old fashioned capitalism!
   It's true not everyone is going to be in the market or desire what's being offered. However to be successful you just need a small percentage of the population to buy anything you're selling.
   A  parasite hitches a ride while an entrepreneur generates business.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      A parasite is entrepreneurial in a gross  unethical way. A real entrepreneur is not unethical. Derogatorially  feeding off others is abhorrent and has a nauseating  yuk factor.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Giving people what they want in argument, obviously profitable in HP.  Very entrepreneurial!

      replyreport
   3. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      It's the destructive unethical aspect that we are focusing on here and if it's parasitic. Entrepeneur has a totally different dictionary meaning which is more symbiotic. Parasites aren't symbiotic.

      replyreport
   4. 79

      dashingscorpioposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      "Is making money from religious criticism parasitic ?" No!
      Granted some people may hate it but anyone launching a (legal enterprise) that sells people what they want is an entrepreneur!
      It's not as if they're just holding up signs asking for $

      replyreport
   5. 77

      Oztinatoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      In fact they are holding up digital signs. Externally or internally feeding off a host qualifies them for the title of parasitic as the goal is to damage the host for their own benefit. They're not giving back anything.

      replyreport