NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm confused by the amount of anti-Christian sentiment in the US and Western Europe these days. From my personal experiences, Christians are some of the kindest and most tolerant people around, other than atheists. Of course there are some nutjobs who are unable to listen to reason, but overall, Christians tend to be relatively tolerant of humanist principles and willing to question their beliefs. Christianity hardly has a stranglehold over politics or the media in any country, including. It seems like it's far more popular to ridicule Christianity than support it, from what I've seen. George W Bush, who I dislike immensely, may seem to be the epitome of fundamental Christianity, since many of his strongest supporters were Evangelicals. But in truth the Republican party is controlled by neo-conservative ideology, which was never a Christian movement.

Now, let's look at some other religions:

Judaism. I've had good and bad experiences with Jewish people. But overall, there is an underlying arrogance and ethnocentrism that I've noticed among Jews that I've met in Los Angeles. I came here with a completely neutral opinion, but having delivered pizza for a year in a heavily Jewish neighborhood while going to school, I have been annoyed by the contemptuous attitude. The state of Israel is also an abomination. It was stolen, its original inhabitants made second class citizens or moved to ghettos, and a state religion established. I can think of no modern Christian equivalent to Israel.

Islam. Soon the world's largest religion. There has been little or no progress made in establishing human rights in many Muslim states. Not only is there a state religion, but ethnic minorities such as Christian and Jews are persecuted. Women are treated as second class citizens. Now if Christians or Jews followed the Bible carefully, particularly some of the verses in the Old Testament, they would commit gross violations of human rights. However, due to countless years of progress (that was resisted by the Church), even today's most fundamentalist Christians are not making animal sacrifices or waging crusades.

Not so in Islam. While many Muslims throughout the world simply want to live their life without conflict, Islam has fostered a culture of violence and repression that hurts Muslims the worst. The website www.thereligionofpeace.com shows deaths caused by Muslims caught up in fanatacism. A few bombings of abortion clinics by Christian whackos does not compare. I can think of no Christian equivalent to Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, or Iran.

Hinduism. Probably the most racist religion of all. Divides its people up into castes, and strips the lowest castes of human rights. I can think of no Christian equivalent to India.

Shintoism. Although waning, still tied to Japanese ultranationalism and a refusal to apologize to China for past atrocities.

I am not a Christian, nor do I agree with Christianity. But this liberal focus on toppling a religion that is already on its knees is stupid. Why not focus on global humanism for a change, rather than bashing an already overly self-effacing West? Which brings me to the last religion, "progressivism". Progress towards what? A caste which places plants and animals on the top and straight white people of European descent on the bottom, due to their history as imperialists and oppressors. Where all values and cultures are equal, even if those values are contrary to natural law, and where any dissenters are labelled "racists" or "intolerant" to shut them up. Where "free speech" is limited to what the owners of a few media outlets decide you should hear. I can think of no Christian equivalent to that.

'mindless christian' bashing, or 'mindless' christian bashing?

:confused:

OccidentiaPrima']I am not a Christian, nor do I agree with Christianity. But this liberal focus on toppling a religion that is already on its knees is stupid. Why not focus on global humanism for a change, rather than bashing an already overly self-effacing West? Which brings me to the last religion, "progressivism". Progress towards what? A caste which places plants and animals on the top and straight white people of European descent on the bottom, due to their history as imperialists and oppressors. Where all values and cultures are equal, even if those values are contrary to natural law, and where any dissenters are labelled "racists" or "intolerant" to shut them up. Where "free speech" is limited to what the owners of a few media outlets decide you should hear. I can think of no Christian equivalent to that.
I agree that much unfair Christian bashing happens, but explain this last paragraph, especially the part about "natural law". All the values of human civilisation are contrary to natural law.

Let's just say that most Christians I've known in my life are ignorant, intolerant, self-absorbed, bigoted, and overall assholes who contradict their own beliefs and feel the need to flaunt their self appointed "superiority" at any given moment. Notice I said MOST. I have met some nice and intelligent Christians, however being homeschooled and having met a lot of other homeschooled children, most of them along with their parents are complete lunatics.

'mindless christian' bashing, or 'mindless' christian bashing?

:confused:
Comma's make all the difference do they not :p


Anyways we have an issue with Christianity (and I hardly call our contention mindless) because they try to control us … we have to deal with them on a daily basis and trying to control what we do … who we do it with … and when we do it
All the while telling us (out of love of course) that we are wrong and sinners and going to hell

Speaking of mindless .... :headbang:

OccidentiaPrima']I'm confused by the amount of anti-Christian sentiment in the US and Western Europe these days. From my personal experiences, Christians are some of the kindest and most tolerant people around, other than atheists. Of course there are some nutjobs who are unable to listen to reason, but overall, Christians tend to be relatively tolerant of humanist principles and willing to question their beliefs. Christianity hardly has a stranglehold over politics or the media in any country, including. It seems like it's far more popular to ridicule Christianity than support it, from what I've seen. George W Bush, who I dislike immensely, may seem to be the epitome of fundamental Christianity, since many of his strongest supporters were Evangelicals. But in truth the Republican party is controlled by neo-conservative ideology, which was never a Christian movement.

Odd that you find the US so intolerant of Christianity despite overwhelming support for Christianity here.

Many in the Bush administration are neo-conservatives. Some neo-conservatives are fundamentalists.

Fundamentalists are a major force in the US Republican Party.

You seem to have little understanding of US politics.

But you are right that most Christians are good people with mostly tolerant beliefs. Unfortunately, many beliefs of many Christians are wrong - which would be fine if they didn't also feel the need to try to make them public policy. See abortion, Terri Schiavo, gay marriage, etc.

OccidentiaPrima']Now, let's look at some other religions:

Judaism. I've had good and bad experiences with Jewish people. But overall, there is an underlying arrogance and ethnocentrism that I've noticed among Jews that I've met in Los Angeles. I came here with a completely neutral opinion, but having delivered pizza for a year in a heavily Jewish neighborhood while going to school, I have been annoyed by the contemptuous attitude. The state of Israel is also an abomination. It was stolen, its original inhabitants made second class citizens or moved to ghettos, and a state religion established. I can think of no modern Christian equivalent to Israel.

Wow. In your experience of 1 year, Jews in LA failed to show enough respect to the pizza delivery person. That is definitely a rational basis to condemn a religion. :rolleyes:

As to stealing a country from its inhabitants and moving them or making them second class citizens, are you familiar with the "New World" at all? How about "Manifest Destiny"?


OccidentiaPrima']*snip*

Which brings me to the last religion, "progressivism". Progress towards what? A caste which places plants and animals on the top and straight white people of European descent on the bottom, due to their history as imperialists and oppressors. Where all values and cultures are equal, even if those values are contrary to natural law, and where any dissenters are labelled "racists" or "intolerant" to shut them up. Where "free speech" is limited to what the owners of a few media outlets decide you should hear. I can think of no Christian equivalent to that.

This is pure nonsense and most requires no response.

For someone who claims to hate labels, you sure are pretty free with them?

Consolidated corporate ownership of media outlets is something progressives are very concerned about and trying to fight. You have things backword.

Pray tell, what natural law?

Is it wrong to point out racism and intolerance? Why?

Odd that you find the US so intolerant of Christianity despite overwhelming support for Christianity here.

Many in the Bush administration are neo-conservatives. Some neo-conservatives are fundamentalists.

Fundamentalists are a major force in the US Republican Party.

You seem to have little understanding of US politics.

But you are right that most Christians are good people with mostly tolerant beliefs. Unfortunately, many beliefs of many Christians are wrong - which would be fine if they didn't also feel the need to try to make them public policy. See abortion, Terri Schiavo, gay marriage, etc.



Gay marriage is not a Christian issue, because it is largely opposed by most secularists as well. There may be some crossover between fundamentalists and neocons, but they are two different camps. Other than that, I don't see Roe v Wade being overturned, or sodomy laws being reinstated. Terri Schiavo is dead. The ACLU isn't losing too many battles. Yes, violence and sex are censored on basic cable, but still easily accessible. What social freedoms are you missing out on? And in pop culture, from what I can see, deriding Christianity seems to be en vogue.

If people were really interested in humanism, they would attack the institutions that are preventing it from becoming global. But instead,
many people zoom in on every minor transgression committed by Western institutions, wasting their time.


Wow. In your experience of 1 year, Jews in LA failed to show enough respect to the pizza delivery person. That is definitely a rational basis to condemn a religion. :rolleyes:

I'm not condemning an entire religion, unlike many posters on here who condemn Christianity because of a few bad experiences with Christians. I'm merely stating that Judaism is not innocuous, and should be open to criticism and examination as well. And yes I do tend to judge people on how much courtesy they show me. I am not sterotyping all Jews, nor am I advocating any action against them, but I am saying that overall, I have not had good experiences with them.


As to stealing a country from its inhabitants and moving them or making them second class citizens, are you familiar with the "New World" at all? How about "Manifest Destiny"?

You must have missed the word modern.



This is pure nonsense and most requires no response.


Well, several prominent feminists, eco-feminists, and socialists would disagree with you. Andrea Dworkin, Judith Butler, Noel Ignatiev, Ward Churchill to name a few. Unfortunately, rather than reject these radical elements, there is a trend among more moderate leftists to idolize them.


Pray tell, what natural law?

What I meant was, the universal traits of humankind that we base our ideas of human rights on. Such as the Laws of Nature mentioned in our Declaration of Independence. Not everyone agrees that such a thing exists


Is it wrong to point out racism and intolerance? Why?

No, but it is wrong to use ad hominem attacks as a form of argument.

OccidentiaPrima']
The state of Israel is also an abomination.


No sh1t, but you cannot say that the Jews are bad people because their country is in crisis. It's not their fault in any way

OccidentiaPrima']
There has been little or no progress made in establishing human rights in many Muslim states .... not making animal sacrifices or waging crusades.

While many Muslims throughout the world simply want to live their life without conflict, Islam has fostered a culture of violence and repression that hurts Muslims the worst.


Human rights are low, and the other things you mentioned exist, because it is and acceptable and normal part of their religion. It seems barbaric and strange to us, but so do we seem strange to them, with our exposure of women and political freedoms.

OccidentiaPrima']
Hinduism. Probably the most racist religion of all. Divides its people up into castes, and strips the lowest castes of human rights. I can think of no Christian equivalent to India.


As i said before, it is in their religion. And btw, correct me if im wrong, but isnt the caste system political and not religious?

OccidentiaPrima']
where any dissenters are labelled "racists" or "intolerant" to shut them up.

That is politics, my friend.

I also find amazing that you mentioned shintoism, but skipped over the tens of other religions. What about Buddhism? That is among the most peaceful and serene of the religions.

And for all of those times you could think of no Christion equivalent, that is because different religions have different beliefs and social standards, what is common in one religion is abominable in another. It is obvious there is no equivalent.

Your comments are simply intolerance put in a kind and polite way.

I know quite a few christians. Most I know are pretty cool people. The minority of them can be down right assholes. The reason why I say anything negative about the christian religion is because those who are at the top of these organizations are more than willing to tell everyone how wrong they are. They are also more than willing to fight to get thier way on everything. Until this stops I will not stop riding them.

Wow...so Christians are better than people of all these other religions? Let's not bash Christians, let's just bash everyone else! Yay!

There are two very simple reasons why Christianity is singled out for attack by so many in the West.

1. Christianity is the religion that the majority of people in the West come into contact with most often, and so we know far more about its foibles and injustices than we do of religions that are primarily based elsewhere.

2. Christianity is, quite simply, on top. Most Western governments have a strong Christian bias, or at the very least favour Christianity over other major religions. Therefore, even if other religions are "worse" in terms of oppressiveness, their beliefs are not relevent here - Christianity is the only religion whose beliefs have the power to effect our everyday lives, and so it is common sense that that would be the religion whose policies we choose to object to.

Doesn't that make sense?

OccidentiaPrima']Gay marriage is not a Christian issue, because it is largely opposed by most secularists as well.
Statistics please. Because this is a pretty baseless claim.

Neither the atheists nor the christians on NS can claim the tolerance torch, otherwise we wouldn't have these 30 page wars over God.

The only religious group that seems to be well represented on NS are the muslims, and there are only two that I know of.

OccidentiaPrima']
Well, several prominent feminists, eco-feminists, and socialists would disagree with you. Andrea Dworkin, Judith Butler, Noel Ignatiev, Ward Churchill to name a few. Unfortunately, rather than reject these radical elements, there is a trend among more moderate leftists to idolize them.

Moderate leftists? Hmmm. Just like 'moderate' Christians idolise Christian religious fanatics? Just like 'moderate' feminists idolise feminazis? Please. Moderates do not yearn to be like extremists...or else they wouldn't be moderate.

You seem to miss altogether that many progressives are Christian and many secularists dislike or criticize all religions -- not just Christianity.

OccidentiaPrima']Gay marriage is not a Christian issue, because it is largely opposed by most secularists as well.

Untrue.

Nice job of selective response and responding not to what I said, but what you wished to assume I said.

OccidentiaPrima']There may be some crossover between fundamentalists and neocons, but they are two different camps.

Exactly what I said. And fundamentalists are a major force in the Republican party.

OccidentiaPrima']Other than that, I don't see Roe v Wade being overturned, or sodomy laws being reinstated. Terri Schiavo is dead. The ACLU isn't losing too many battles. Yes, violence and sex are censored on basic cable, but still easily accessible. What social freedoms are you missing out on? And in pop culture, from what I can see, deriding Christianity seems to be en vogue.

Did you miss the part about most Christians being good people and their beliefs mostly tolerant.

Christianity is quite alive and well in pop culture. And in US society.

Sodomy laws only recently got overturned by the Supreme Court and are still on the books -- though now unenforceable -- in many states.

Sex education is being Christianized and sanitized.

Roe v. Wade is under attack -- or do you pay no attention at all.

The right to die is also under attack.

Again, Christianity brings many good values to public policy.

And the seperation of Church and State is not an attack on Christianity. To the contrary, it is best for both the Church and the State. Religion -- particularly Christianity -- has flourished under the wall of separation.

OccidentiaPrima']If people were really interested in humanism, they would attack the institutions that are preventing it from becoming global. But instead, many people zoom in on every minor transgression committed by Western institutions, wasting their time.

Perhaps you have little knowledge of what issues progressives are working on.

And perhaps you could identify these insitutions and start threads about them instead of complaining about how picked on Christianity is.

OccidentiaPrima']I'm not condemning an entire religion, unlike many posters on here who condemn Christianity because of a few bad experiences with Christians. I'm merely stating that Judaism is not innocuous, and should be open to criticism and examination as well. And yes I do tend to judge people on how much courtesy they show me. I am not sterotyping all Jews, nor am I advocating any action against them, but I am saying that overall, I have not had good experiences with them.

Few condemn Christianity "because of a few bad experiences with Christians." Instead, most either condemn Christianity or some parts thereof because of specific teachings, beliefs, practices, or experiences/history with large numbers of Christians.

And you did criticize an entire religion based on a handful of experiences where you didn't feel you were respected as a pizza boy.

Remove the plank from thine own eye.

OccidentiaPrima']You must have missed the word modern.

You must be unfamiliar with modern nations like the U.S., Canada, Brazil, etc.

I guarantee there are many Nez Perce, Sioux, etc., that would like their land back.

OccidentiaPrima']Well, several prominent feminists, eco-feminists, and socialists would disagree with you. Andrea Dworkin, Judith Butler, Noel Ignatiev, Ward Churchill to name a few. Unfortunately, rather than reject these radical elements, there is a trend among more moderate leftists to idolize them.

First, I can name many Christians that are extremists and that you would dismiss as unrepresentative of the faith. Despite the fact that many idolize them. Jack Chick, Jerry Falwell, Randall Terry, Matthew Hale, etc.

Second, you misrepresent the views of all of those individuals.


OccidentiaPrima']What I meant was, the universal traits of humankind that we base our ideas of human rights on. Such as the Laws of Nature mentioned in our Declaration of Independence. Not everyone agrees that such a thing exists

Agreed. Not everyone agrees that there are laws of nature. So?

Please identify the progressives that do not believe in equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all persons.

OccidentiaPrima']No, but it is wrong to use ad hominem attacks as a form of argument.

But, as you admit, identifying racism and intolerance isn't an ad hominem attack. So you are going in circles.

Free speech doesn't mean I can't say Joe Blows views are racist. It means that I can say that and Joe Blow (or anyone else) can respond with why I am wrong. The marketplace of ideas.

Neither the atheists nor the christians on NS can claim the tolerance torch,Well, I can't speak for Christians, but I have no problem with religious tolerance, it's tolerance of idiots that I have difficulty with.

Well, I can't speak for Christians, but I have no problem with religious tolerance, it's tolerance of idiots that I have difficulty with.

(I may be completely misunderstanding your post, but:)

Who are you to decide what religious views are idiotic?

I live in medium-small town with quite a few churches, and while most of the Christians I know are relatively nice about it (i.e., don't shove it in my face; don't judge me or try to convert me), a few are quite intolerant. My big problem with Christianity is when that intolerance interferes with my life - when I want the scientific institutions around me to find cures for disabilities like my own, when I want my LGBT friends to live life without being hated, when I want to spend a day without being evangelized at.

Christianity is no more tolerant than many other religions; it's just the standard here, so everyone accepts it. And from my own experience as a disabled individual, we have serious prejudice issues here. While Americans have come to grips with the idea that discriminating based on race or religion is wrong (even if the implementation is lacking at times), other minorities, including the disabled, are still "fair game". To tie this back into the thread, what this says is that when we don't see discrimination, intolerance, et cetera, that may just mean that we're not recognizing it.

(I may be completely misunderstanding your post, but:)

Who are you to decide what religious views are idiotic?
No religious view is inherently idiotic. It's when a religious view is defended using circular arguments and logical fallacies that my tolerance is tested. In my view, people can believe whatever they like, as long as they can justify it in a manner which I would consider reasonable. It doesn't matter what this justification might be - a simple admission that "I like this religion because it makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside" would be perfectly acceptable - as long as it doesn't use flawed logic. Even an admission that "I don't know why I believe this" would be fine. It's when people say things like "The Bible is true because the Bible says that it is true!" or "God exists - prove he doesn't!" that my teeth start to grind.

Statistics please. Because this is a pretty baseless claim.

Well, unless you consider California to have a majority of non-secular Christians (which I think it would be hard to argue), the people in 52 of the 58 counties voted to define marriage as between a man and a woman. Which I don't support, but it doesn't seemed to be confined to Christians wishing to impose theocratic views on everyone else.

http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/sov/2000_primary/measures.pdf

actually of all the people bashing a christian religion on NS I've only seen Atheists and people of a different christian religion.

Damnit! Stupid misleading thread titles. I was all ready for some good old fashioned mindless christian bashing!

Now I must go sate my craving elsewhere.

OccidentiaPrima']Well, unless you consider California to have a majority of non-secular Christians (which I think it would be hard to argue), the people in 52 of the 58 counties voted to define marriage as between a man and a woman. Which I don't support, but it doesn't seemed to be confined to Christians wishing to impose theocratic views on everyone else.

http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/sov/2000_primary/measures.pdf
California is not representative of the US, nor of North America, nor of the Western world, most of which has a large Christian majority. And "non-secular Christians"? What the hell does that mean?

You said, the majority of secularists oppose gay marriage. Your stats don't prove that, not even in your limited sphere of California.

You said, the majority of secularists oppose gay marriage. Your stats don't prove that, not even in your limited sphere of California.

Especially when you consider that it didn't exactly pass by an overwhelming margin.

Anyways, the moral of the story is - mindless (X) bashing, regardless of what X may be, is completely unnecessary and just reveals (possibly latent) bigotry on the part of the person doing it.

On the other hand, if "bashing" is being used to refer to disagreement - well, that's a problem, since disagreement is just fine.

In many cases, for example in Ohio (probably CA as well), the anti-gay marriage laws were so confusing, so poorly written, and surrounded by fear tactics that they would pass regardless of their merit.

On the other hand, if "bashing" is being used to refer to disagreement - well, that's a problem, since disagreement is just fine.
AHA!

That's the problem with the term bashing. So often it means, "Anyone who doesn't agree with us!"

Hence: US bashing, Christian bashing etc....

Bashing should be reserved as a term that really means ad hominem personal attacks. The instances of 'bashing' would be lower once the people who simply disagree with a viewpoint are no longer counted as 'bashers'.

And frankly, without the Christian 'argument' to back up opposing gay marriage, the secularist view is reduced to the 'ewwww' factor, and kind of fades into obscurity:).

(By the way, secularist/atheist here, and there is no 'ewwww' factor in my books when it comes to someone's sexuality)

In many cases, for example in Ohio (probably CA as well), the anti-gay marriage laws were so confusing, so poorly written, and surrounded by fear tactics that they would pass regardless of their merit.

Or, they could all be like GA, which only summarized one clause of an amendment which did at least three things on the ballot. Nothing like intentionally misleading voters, eh?

OccidentiaPrima']Well, unless you consider California to have a majority of non-secular Christians (which I think it would be hard to argue), the people in 52 of the 58 counties voted to define marriage as between a man and a woman. Which I don't support, but it doesn't seemed to be confined to Christians wishing to impose theocratic views on everyone else.

http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/sov/2000_primary/measures.pdf

77% of Californians are Christian.

http://www.adherents.com/adhloc/Wh_48.html
Scroll down a bit.

77% of Californians are Christian.

http://www.adherents.com/adhloc/Wh_48.html
Scroll down a bit.
Thanks TITG...I couldn't be bothered.

I'm sticking my tongue out at the poster who started this thread.

Ok ok ok ok ok ... fine ... I'll just answer the damn question ...

Why is there so much Christian bashing and not bashing of other religions?

First of all, people are not bashed for being Jewish ... they're *bashed* for being Jewish. As in bashed by sticks and boots and rocks. Show me where in the civilised world that happens to Christians because it happens to Jews in, let's say, the United States. Usually by "Christians".

When's the last time someone in the States walked into a Christian Day Care and started shooting the kids?

Secondly, what kind of giant rock are you living under that you can't see just how much Muslim bashing goes on constantly? You even put up a website that is designed by Christians and bashes Muslims with ignorance, half-truths, and conjecture.

Third, well, you can figure this out for yourself ... all of the following are Christian websites:

http://www.godhatesfags.com/
http://www.kingidentity.com/
http://www.jewwatch.com/
http://www.k-k-k.com/

Show me one - just one - Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, or Shinto website that expressed that much unfounded ignorance, hatred, and disgusting display of inhuman grotesquery.

People bash Christians because Christians - not all, mind you, but many - want the rest of us either converted or wiped out.

Human rights are low, and the other things you mentioned exist, because it is and acceptable and normal part of their religion. It seems barbaric and strange to us, but so do we seem strange to them, with our exposure of women and political freedoms.


Whoa whoa whoa! Hold the phone there, Ethel!

Not true at all. Human rights are low because a few greedy men in power exploit the masses, not because it's acceptable to Islam. The denegration of humans and the oppression of women is NOWHERE in Qur'an. However, Democracy as the best form of government IS in Qur'an.

judge a person by the way they treat others, not by what religion they are. Surely its not right to presume charateristics of any person just because of their religion, be they christian or hindu or whatever.

You seem to miss altogether that many progressives are Christian and many secularists dislike or criticize all religions -- not just Christianity.


If this is true, I would like to see some examples of progressives who are acting on a global scale trying to bring reform to other religions rather than simply focusing on Western imperialism. What I often encounter is a refusal to even question other religions or cultures because it would be undermining their sovereignity and "what's right for us is not right for them". So much for universal human values.


Untrue.

Nice job of selective response and responding not to what I said, but what you wished to assume I said.


I don't believe our goverment is hostile to Christianity, but I don't believe it favors it either.


Exactly what I said. And fundamentalists are a major force in the Republican party.

Did you miss the part about most Christians being good people and their beliefs mostly tolerant.

Christianity is quite alive and well in pop culture. And in US society.

Sodomy laws only recently got overturned by the Supreme Court and are still on the books -- though now unenforceable -- in many states.

Sex education is being Christianized and sanitized.

Roe v. Wade is under attack -- or do you pay no attention at all.

The right to die is also under attack.

Again, Christianity brings many good values to public policy.

And the seperation of Church and State is not an attack on Christianity. To the contrary, it is best for both the Church and the State. Religion -- particularly Christianity -- has flourished under the wall of separation



Secular values are NOT being revoked. Euthanasia was never allowed except in a few states. Partial birth abortion is under fire, yes, but Roe V Wade is not in serious danger. Sex education? That's really the responsibility of parents anyways, but I'll give you that one. I can't go naked on the beach, snort coke, or abort my child after I'm six months pregnant. That's about it. So don't tell me the fundamentalists hold sway, even if they think they do.

The neo-cons control the Republican party.

And Christianity is alive in pop culture? Give me a break. 50 cent? Reality TV? Friends? Christina Aguilera? Huh? It's usually depicted pretty negatively. OK, the Passion of the Christ was a hit, but one out of how many?



Perhaps you have little knowledge of what issues progressives are working on.

And perhaps you could identify these insitutions and start threads about them instead of complaining about how picked on Christianity is.


Give me a chance, this is only my first thread :)



Few condemn Christianity "because of a few bad experiences with Christians." Instead, most either condemn Christianity or some parts thereof because of specific teachings, beliefs, practices, or experiences/history with large numbers of Christians.

And you did criticize an entire religion based on a handful of experiences where you didn't feel you were respected as a pizza boy.

Remove the plank from thine own eye.



No, despite my generally bad experiences with Jewish people, I am not going to lump them into one group. I have had some experiences with some truly wonderful Jewish people as well. I can find almost no critiques of Judaism anywhere (except in hate sites) among the millions of critiques of Christianity. I don't believe this is because Judaism is infallible, but because it has become a Western cultural value that criticising Jews is immoral.



You must be unfamiliar with modern nations like the U.S., Canada, Brazil, etc.

I guarantee there are many Nez Perce, Sioux, etc., that would like their land back.



It would be great if we could go back 250 years and correct these wrong-doings. But the present scenario is that only a small number of natives exist, and the greater population is well-established. We have given these people (at least in North America) a level of autonomy. We do not continue to maintain a religious state that seeks to repress these people.




First, I can name many Christians that are extremists and that you would dismiss as unrepresentative of the faith. Despite the fact that many idolize them. Jack Chick, Jerry Falwell, Randall Terry, Matthew Hale, etc.

Second, you misrepresent the views of all of those individuals.



Which views are taught in our universities? Which are printed in our textbooks? That should tell you which cultural paradigm dominates.



Agreed. Not everyone agrees that there are laws of nature. So?

Please identify the progressives that do not believe in equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all persons.



Andrea Dworkin thought that all sex within marriage is a form of rape. That pretty much limits a lot of the pursuit of happiness.



But, as you admit, identifying racism and intolerance isn't an ad hominem attack. So you are going in circles.

Free speech doesn't mean I can't say Joe Blows views are racist. It means that I can say that and Joe Blow (or anyone else) can respond with why I am wrong. The marketplace of ideas.



I agree. But I have heard way too many arguments of "you're a bigot." Period. The end. People are terrified of being thought of as a bigot, whether they are or not, because it is equivalent to being a social outcast. And the marketplace of ideas is quite limited, due to media filtering, but we agree on that point.
a major force in the Republican party.

I can find almost no critiques of Judaism anywhere (except in hate sites) among the millions of critiques of Christianity.

Well, I'll give you one, then - the Jews can be as bad as the Christians in terms of general bigotry, but the Jews think that they're somehow immune from accusations of bigotry because they've been so oppressed in the past. But that doesn't alter the fact that they are currently oppressing an entire culture that has nowhere else to go (regardless of what you might think, Palestinians aren't welcome in most of the Arab world either). Just because worse things have been done to them, that doesn't excuse them for wreaking their petty vengeance against an innocent third party.

I'm not alone in holding these views, and I for one haven't been silent about them. I find it hard to believe you've never heard these arguments before. Actually, if you're in America, I find it easier to believe, since America believes that Israel can do no wrong, but over here in Britain we have no such difficulty in criticising oppressors, whatever their religion.

http://www.godhatesfags.com/
http://www.kingidentity.com/
http://www.jewwatch.com/
http://www.k-k-k.com/

Show me one - just one - Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, or Shinto website that expressed that much unfounded ignorance, hatred, and disgusting display of inhuman grotesquery.


http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/005810.php#more

This site, nicely detailing how political Islam is akin to Facsim.

OccidentiaPrima']I'm confused by the amount of anti-Christian sentiment in the US and Western Europe these days. From my personal experiences, Christians are some of the kindest and most tolerant people around, other than atheists. Of course there are some nutjobs who are unable to listen to reason, but overall, Christians tend to be relatively tolerant of humanist principles and willing to question their beliefs. Christianity hardly has a stranglehold over politics or the media in any country, including. It seems like it's far more popular to ridicule Christianity than support it, from what I've seen. George W Bush, who I dislike immensely, may seem to be the epitome of fundamental Christianity, since many of his strongest supporters were Evangelicals. But in truth the Republican party is controlled by neo-conservative ideology, which was never a Christian movement.

Now, let's look at some other religions:

Judaism. I've had good and bad experiences with Jewish people. But overall, there is an underlying arrogance and ethnocentrism that I've noticed among Jews that I've met in Los Angeles. I came here with a completely neutral opinion, but having delivered pizza for a year in a heavily Jewish neighborhood while going to school, I have been annoyed by the contemptuous attitude. The state of Israel is also an abomination. It was stolen, its original inhabitants made second class citizens or moved to ghettos, and a state religion established. I can think of no modern Christian equivalent to Israel.

Islam. Soon the world's largest religion. There has been little or no progress made in establishing human rights in many Muslim states. Not only is there a state religion, but ethnic minorities such as Christian and Jews are persecuted. Women are treated as second class citizens. Now if Christians or Jews followed the Bible carefully, particularly some of the verses in the Old Testament, they would commit gross violations of human rights. However, due to countless years of progress (that was resisted by the Church), even today's most fundamentalist Christians are not making animal sacrifices or waging crusades.

Not so in Islam. While many Muslims throughout the world simply want to live their life without conflict, Islam has fostered a culture of violence and repression that hurts Muslims the worst. The website www.thereligionofpeace.com shows deaths caused by Muslims caught up in fanatacism. A few bombings of abortion clinics by Christian whackos does not compare. I can think of no Christian equivalent to Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, or Iran.

Hinduism. Probably the most racist religion of all. Divides its people up into castes, and strips the lowest castes of human rights. I can think of no Christian equivalent to India.

Shintoism. Although waning, still tied to Japanese ultranationalism and a refusal to apologize to China for past atrocities.

I am not a Christian, nor do I agree with Christianity. But this liberal focus on toppling a religion that is already on its knees is stupid. Why not focus on global humanism for a change, rather than bashing an already overly self-effacing West? Which brings me to the last religion, "progressivism". Progress towards what? A caste which places plants and animals on the top and straight white people of European descent on the bottom, due to their history as imperialists and oppressors. Where all values and cultures are equal, even if those values are contrary to natural law, and where any dissenters are labelled "racists" or "intolerant" to shut them up. Where "free speech" is limited to what the owners of a few media outlets decide you should hear. I can think of no Christian equivalent to that.

*Applauds*

Wow, just, wow. What a great post, and no, I'm not being sarcastic. I'm tired of mindless Christian bashing, too, and I'm one of the ones that had to go through it. It seems like the ACLU supports criminals' rights rather than our Religious rights set forth by thye constitution. Atheists (not all, but a lot) seem to think that Christianity is evil because of it's oppressive past, but it's not like that today. We were founded as a Christian nation, and we still have the freedom to worship as we please. I know no Jewish or Islam nation that allows you to do so. Thank you for seeing Christians in a positive light, instead of a negative one.

OccidentiaPrima']I'm confused by the amount of anti-Christian sentiment in the US and Western Europe these days. From my personal experiences, Christians are some of the kindest and most tolerant people around, other than atheists. Of course there are some nutjobs who are unable to listen to reason, but overall, Christians tend to be relatively tolerant of humanist principles and willing to question their beliefs. Christianity hardly has a stranglehold over politics or the media in any country, including. It seems like it's far more popular to ridicule Christianity than support it, from what I've seen. George W Bush, who I dislike immensely, may seem to be the epitome of fundamental Christianity, since many of his strongest supporters were Evangelicals. But in truth the Republican party is controlled by neo-conservative ideology, which was never a Christian movement.

Now, let's look at some other religions:

< snipped for length >

While you may have some good points here -- including the fact that you are non-Christian and do not fully agree with that religion -- are you aware of the fact that, in comparing it to other faiths, you have succeeded in "bashing" them? I'd say that it would have been much better, had you wished, to write what good you saw about Christianity rather than to do so at the expense of other religions. Doubtless other people from other faiths -- Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Shintoists etc. and their relatives and friends -- have read your remarks and wondering why their faith, or that of a relative or friend, has to be so insulted simply so you can make the case for Christianity being "bashed."

Also, I have noticed that certain neocons in the United States, and especially those who are Christian fundamentalists, have decided to play victim and, as often as possible, when things don't go their way, speak of the "persecution" of Christians in the United States. Sound familiar? Persecution? Bashing? I think that what's happened is, now that we've entered the 21st Century and gone global, more people are realizing how it is essential to be attuned to the diversity which, far from dividing us, binds us all together as the human race.

Always remember, you are most definitely entitled to your opinion ... but not to your own set of facts.

OccidentiaPrima'] *snip*

This is talking to a wall and I'm bored. So I'll let others respond.

I will make a few comments on a couple of outrageous statements.


OccidentiaPrima']It would be great if we could go back 250 years and correct these wrong-doings. But the present scenario is that only a small number of natives exist, and the greater population is well-established. We have given these people (at least in North America) a level of autonomy. We do not continue to maintain a religious state that seeks to repress these people.

The American Indian Movement and other Indian groups would beg to differ.

You have a rather rosy view of our treatment of indigenous peoples.

OccidentiaPrima']Andrea Dworkin thought that all sex within marriage is a form of rape. That pretty much limits a lot of the pursuit of happiness.

That is a rather vicious lie. She thought no such thing.


OccidentiaPrima']I agree. But I have heard way too many arguments of "you're a bigot." Period. The end. People are terrified of being thought of as a bigot, whether they are or not, because it is equivalent to being a social outcast.

Tough. Suck it up. If you are "terrified" of being criticized for your views, it is not up to the rest of us to coddle you. What you are asking for isn't free speech, but special protections for some speech.

And you might consider that your views might very well be influenced by racism or intolerance.

Tough. Suck it up. If you are "terrified" of being criticized for your views, it is not up to the rest of us to coddle you. What you are asking for isn't free speech, but special protections for some speech.

And you might consider that your views might very well be influenced by racism or intolerance.

He's saying that people who hold a certian type of views are immidately insulted by others as being biggoted. Where as thats not the case, they just hold views which differ to the other view. Its just that often many liberal minded people will call anyone who doesnt support their ideas a conservative biggot or a neo-con.

. Show me where in the civilised world that happens to Christians because it happens to Jews in, let's say, the United States. Usually by "Christians".

When's the last time someone in the States walked into a Christian Day Care and started shooting the kids?

What do you call civilised? Because I can name you a list of countries where Christians are persecuted, often horribly. And actually I know an orphanage that was very close to the situation you are describing.

OccidentiaPrima']If this is true, I would like to see some examples of progressives who are acting on a global scale trying to bring reform to other religions rather than simply focusing on Western imperialism. What I often encounter is a refusal to even question other religions or cultures because it would be undermining their sovereignity and "what's right for us is not right for them". So much for universal human values.


Oh Christ. Stop acting like your limited exposure gives you the right to speak for a huge group of diverse people. Seriously. How's this...you go do some research on your own to broaden your narrow horizons instead of saying, "This is how I see my little world around me, thus the world is so". Don't ask everyone else to educate you.

Here is a topic that shoulda died in subcomittee. :)

I say to hell with all free opinion and a boot-to-the-head for all! Vote me in the next election! I promise to squander your money, lie, cheat, steal, and generally bring shame upon the nation. I will fight for what I believe is right(money), sleep with as many women as I can, and strive for equality(for the rich). No child shall be left behind, they make good, free labor. Racisim shall be a thing of the past because all people shall serve me equally till they die of exhaustion.

There, an honest,unrelated political speech(although brief) in the middle of a very, very over used topic. :) And don't forget to vote!

Vote me in the next election! I promise to squander your money, lie, cheat, steal, and generally bring shame upon the nation. I will fight for what I believe is right(money), sleep with as many women as I can, and strive for equality(for the rich). No child shall be left behind, they make good, free labor. Racisim shall be a thing of the past because all people shall serve me equally till they die of exhaustion.

There, an honest,unrelated political speech(although brief) in the middle of a very, very over used topic. :) And don't forget to vote!

You have my vote.

actually if you want to go with who were the "original" inhabitants of Israel....guess what, it was the Jews.

basically what i got from your post is that we should stereotype every religion and since christianity is the best we should all stop mindlessly bashing it. instead we should mindlessly bash the other major religions.....

< snipped for length >

While you may have some good points here -- including the fact that you are non-Christian and do not fully agree with that religion -- are you aware of the fact that, in comparing it to other faiths, you have succeeded in "bashing" them? I'd say that it would have been much better, had you wished, to write what good you saw about Christianity rather than to do so at the expense of other religions. Doubtless other people from other faiths -- Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Shintoists etc. and their relatives and friends -- have read your remarks and wondering why their faith, or that of a relative or friend, has to be so insulted simply so you can make the case for Christianity being "bashed."

Also, I have noticed that certain neocons in the United States, and especially those who are Christian fundamentalists, have decided to play victim and, as often as possible, when things don't go their way, speak of the "persecution" of Christians in the United States. Sound familiar? Persecution? Bashing? I think that what's happened is, now that we've entered the 21st Century and gone global, more people are realizing how it is essential to be attuned to the diversity which, far from dividing us, binds us all together as the human race.

Always remember, you are most definitely entitled to your opinion ... but not to your own set of facts.

The thing is, I dislike most organized religions. They keep people from thinking clearly and create barriers. The people they hurt most are the people who believe in them. I believe Islam is a major factor that is keeping Muslims in relative poverty. I love Muslims, and that's WHY I don't like Islam in it's current state.

I find that many Christians are pretty moderate as to how much they practice their beliefs. We have done a good job "civilizing" Christianity from its days of torture and warfare. I certainly don't think that Christians are better people. Yet it has gotten to the point where people are attacking the people and not the religion.

All I'm saying is try to judge things objectively. If you really want to help people, you won't be afraid to denounce any system that is oppressing people. From what I can see, look elsewhere.

You can't really talk about what a religion is as a whole because everybody has different beliefs and morals. Also, whoever started this post really should have though about how offensive this may be to other people reading it. Besides, bashing just any religion you don't like is really childish.

Whoa whoa whoa! Hold the phone there, Ethel!

Not true at all. Human rights are low because a few greedy men in power exploit the masses, not because it's acceptable to Islam. The denegration of humans and the oppression of women is NOWHERE in Qur'an. However, Democracy as the best form of government IS in Qur'an.
actually it depends what sect... Sunnis and Shiites are fundamentally different based almost solely on this. one beleives in a semi-democratic system and the other beleives in a monarchy like Caliph of the descendants of Mohammed. (thats where the split first occured anyway)

OccidentiaPrima']
All I'm saying is try to judge things objectively. If you really want to help people, you won't be afraid to denounce any system that is oppressing people. From what I can see, look elsewhere.
Looking elsewhere doesn't mean ignoring what is going on in your backyard. If what affects you most intimately is fundamentalist Christians, then by all means, deal with that issue FIRST.

Atheists (not all, but a lot) seem to think that Christianity is evil because of it's oppressive past, but it's not like that today.Umm, not meaning to sound patronising, but have you taken a look at America recently? The uproar over Gay Marriage, the "War on Terror", the return to a more religious style of government?

I said it before (under my previous account "Smug Wankers"), but the simple reason why Christianity is so criticised by Liberals in the West is that it is the most powerful religion around here. Doubtless in Iran, the Liberals would rather criticise Islam, but right here and right now, Christianity is the nation that we can see the most flaws and bigotry in from where we're sat.

OccidentiaPrima']The thing is, I dislike most organized religions. They keep people from thinking clearly and create barriers. The people they hurt most are the people who believe in them. I believe Islam is a major factor that is keeping Muslims in relative poverty. I love Muslims, and that's WHY I don't like Islam in it's current state.

I find that many Christians are pretty moderate as to how much they practice their beliefs. We have done a good job "civilizing" Christianity from its days of torture and warfare. I certainly don't think that Christians are better people. Yet it has gotten to the point where people are attacking the people and not the religion.

All I'm saying is try to judge things objectively. If you really want to help people, you won't be afraid to denounce any system that is oppressing people. From what I can see, look elsewhere.

once again, "organized religion" does not include the whole religion. There are still people that are against it that practice the same religion. You can't judge a religion by the actions, but by the people themselves.

Well, I'll give you one, then - the Jews can be as bad as the Christians in terms of general bigotry, but the Jews think that they're somehow immune from accusations of bigotry because they've been so oppressed in the past. But that doesn't alter the fact that they are currently oppressing an entire culture that has nowhere else to go (regardless of what you might think, Palestinians aren't welcome in most of the Arab world either). Just because worse things have been done to them, that doesn't excuse them for wreaking their petty vengeance against an innocent third party.
Well obviously. Why on earth would the rest of the Arab world let the Palestinians emmigrate to any place but Israel? The rest of the Arab world wants to make Israel look bad, and the Palestinians do that just fine exactly where they are...

People bash Christians because Christians - not all, mind you, but many - want the rest of us either converted or wiped out.
Christians who want a new crusade and genocide of non-Christians are probably the tiniest minority in Christianity.

http://www.godhatesfags.com/
http://www.kingidentity.com/
http://www.jewwatch.com/
http://www.k-k-k.com/

Show me one - just one - Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, or Shinto website that expressed that much unfounded ignorance, hatred, and disgusting display of inhuman grotesquery.

I really wasn't gonna reply to anything other than that lil political speech I made, but I gotta hit this one.

First, none of these are Christian web sites. A name, is a name, is a name. A Christian is identified by deed, not by name. I could run around saying that I'm Emmit Smith or Jamie Lee Curtis and would you believe me? No, clearly not. You show some semblance of intelligence.

Second, sure, lets pick a few religions out of the hat and say, "They don't do anything wrong." There are no extreamists in THSES religions because I havn't seen any of them. Oh woe is them. PLEASE! Take five seconds to do a Google search and you'll find that there are plenty of idots out there that claim to be of X religion that does the same thing. Good grief. You destroy your own credibility here.

Third, don't ask me to show you proof. I'm not gonna be checking this thread again for a day or two if ever. School calls and programming in JAVA is a pain. Have a nice day!

I say to hell with all free opinion and a boot-to-the-head for all! Vote me in the next election! I promise to squander your money, lie, cheat, steal, and generally bring shame upon the nation. I will fight for what I believe is right(money), sleep with as many women as I can, and strive for equality(for the rich). No child shall be left behind, they make good, free labor. Racisim shall be a thing of the past because all people shall serve me equally till they die of exhaustion.
All hail President Clintobush!

Vote Republocrat '04!

this is rather off-topic, but I'm surprised the mega-anti-Christian dude Cabinia isn't in this forum. but i will sereve no one willingly except our Lord, the Messiah, and Savior, Jesus Christ

77% of Californians are Christian.





No wonder California is falling into the sea. Christianity is a lie like all religions are lies. They are used by the leaderships of the world to keep all the peasents in line. You can easily abuse them if the have their "religion" to fall back on.

the Grokdoc

Well obviously. Why on earth would the rest of the Arab world let the Palestinians emmigrate to any place but Israel? The rest of the Arab world wants to make Israel look bad, and the Palestinians do that just fine exactly where they are...Israel's doing quite well in making itself look bad, thank you. And it's immaterial - the Palestinians don't WANT to move anywhere else. Palestine is their homeland, and they have as much right to it as the Israelites do.

First, none of these are Christian web sites.Now hang on a minute, what gives you the right to say who's Christian and who's not? These people aren't lying when they say they're Christian, they do actually consider themselves Christian, they follow the teachings of the Bible, and what other definition of a Christian is there? You can't just say that anybody you don't like isn't a Christian, that's not how it works. They may not be very Christian (adjective), but they are definitely Christian (noun).

Palestine is their homeland, and they have as much right to it as the Israelites do.
How can you say that? It's like saying that we natives have a right to live in Canada and the US, even though Europeans came, stole our land, and now call it their own! How ridiculous!

How can you say that? It's like saying that we natives have a right to live in Canada and the US, even though Europeans came, stole our land, and now call it their own! How ridiculous!
Well, when you put it like that, I guess I was being kind of silly...

First, none of these are Christian web sites. A name, is a name, is a name. A Christian is identified by deed, not by name. I could run around saying that I'm Emmit Smith or Jamie Lee Curtis and would you believe me? No, clearly not. You show some semblance of intelligence.

Second, sure, lets pick a few religions out of the hat and say, "They don't do anything wrong." There are no extreamists in THSES religions because I havn't seen any of them. Oh woe is them. PLEASE! Take five seconds to do a Google search and you'll find that there are plenty of idots out there that claim to be of X religion that does the same thing. Good grief. You destroy your own credibility here.
I find it funny that you say people can't deny that any specific religion has extremists directly after you do exactly that.

How can you say that? It's like saying that we natives have a right to live in Canada and the US, even though Europeans came, stole our land, and now call it their own! How ridiculous!

I've never thought of it like that. You're right. it's utterly ridiculous.
Ridiculous like PINK WRITING!

I apologise for being hyper now.

How can you say that? It's like saying that we natives have a right to live in Canada and the US, even though Europeans came, stole our land, and now call it their own! How ridiculous!

Will you marry me?

Now hang on a minute, what gives you the right to say who's Christian and who's not? These people aren't lying when they say they're Christian, they do actually consider themselves Christian, they follow the teachings of the Bible, and what other definition of a Christian is there? You can't just say that anybody you don't like isn't a Christian, that's not how it works. They may not be very Christian (adjective), but they are definitely Christian (noun).

Well, actually you can say who's christian and not. Christians tend not to act on it these days, but there is established precedent.

I saw her (him?) first!

Orgainized religion is a way to control people's thoughts and actions. This is true in ALL religions. However, not all religions try to force theirs upon others. Christianity is a huge converter. Christian missionaries exploit the people they "help" by giving them food and helping their community in return for a conversion to Christianity. While I commend missionaries on the kindness they have shown needy people, I strongly object to converting people.

Maybe this is why Christians are "bashed" so much. They force their religion on others and condemn those who refuse to give up their traditions and religion.

Well, actually you can say who's christian and not. Christians tend not to act on it these days, but there is established precedent.
Well, don't keep us in suspense! *bites nails*

Maybe this is why Christians are "bashed" so much. They force their religion on others and condemn those who refuse to give up their tradions and religion.
Agreed. Compare this with Buddhists, whose religion expressly forbids them from trying to convert anybody. They're not even allowed to tell anyone about their religion unless they're asked.

Orgainized religion is a way to control people's thoughts and actions. This is true in ALL religions. However, not all religions try to force theirs upon others. Christianity is a huge converter. Christian missionaries exploit the people they "help" by giving them food and helping their community in return for a conversion to Christianity. While I commend missionaries on the kindness they have shown needy people, I strongly object to converting people.

Maybe this is why Christians are "bashed" so much. They force their religion on others and condemn those who refuse to give up their tradions and religion.

Firstly, the idea of "Conversion for food" is a very old Urban myth which is very much untrue. Christian aid and other Christian charities do not give out aid based on how much the recipients will convert.

Secondly, Christians know not to "force" religion on people. All we can do is explain to people what Christianity is and what it means. It is up to other people to accept it or not. The problem being is that this explination is often mistaken for "forcing" because in the belief of truth. We believe its true, and here is why... is basicly what missionaryism is.

Never knew that Israel and Palestine was important to Christian bashing. :p


On-topic:
I don't like it when people bash Christians and ignore all other religions, but, in the VAST majority of people I have met, these people just hate the policies of the Religious Right. It is spilled over to moderate Christians, of course, but, hey, it is the fault of the extremists.
Another point, already made, is that Christianity is the established power in the West. Example: Do you think people in Iran are REALLY worried about the policies of religious leaders in, say, Malaysia? I'd think they'd be more concerned about the Mullahs.
Most people don't run into Buddhists. So, there is no need to attack Buddhists.

Whoa whoa whoa! Hold the phone there, Ethel!

Not true at all. Human rights are low because a few greedy men in power exploit the masses, not because it's acceptable to Islam. The denegration of humans and the oppression of women is NOWHERE in Qur'an. However, Democracy as the best form of government IS in Qur'an.

While I'm thinking about it Keru, you once gave me the name of a translator that you said had translated one of the best English language versions of the Qur'an, and I lost it. Could you post/TG it to me?

Thanks!

While I'm thinking about it Keru, you once gave me the name of a translator that you said had translated one of the best English language versions of the Qur'an, and I lost it. Could you post/TG it to me?

Thanks!

I think her name was Ethel. ;)

Well, don't keep us in suspense! *bites nails*

Why are you asking me, I am an atheist? I just know they spent most of their history persecuting each other for not being "christian."

There must have been some reason for the the thirty years war after all. So like I said, you can denounce someone who claims to be christian as not a christian. (Heretic..blasphemer etc. I suppose).

And as an atheist, I would like to say the Hindus are the most screwy of the major religions.

[QUOTE=Neo Cannen]Firstly, the idea of "Conversion for food" is a very old Urban myth which is very much untrue. Christian aid and other Christian charities do not give out aid based on how much the recipients will convert.

Ok. That isn't exactly what I meant. I know a missionary couple on a Navajo Reservation and they are very nice people. They do not give out food based on who attends church more often, but they do discourage any activities that reflect Navajo traditions (Pow wows (sorry if I spelled that wrong)). They think that helping these people is showing them "the way to God".

Missionaries exploit the people they are "helping," no matter how you look at it.

Another point, already made, is that Christianity is the established power in the West. Example: Do you think people in Iran are REALLY worried about the policies of religious leaders in, say, Malaysia? I'd think they'd be more concerned about the Mullahs.
*grumbles* I bet people'll listen when you say it...

Why are you asking me, I am an atheist?
You just sounded like you knew what you were talking about.

I just know they spent most of their history persecuting each other for not being "christian."

There must have been some reason for the the thirty years war after all. So like I said, you can denounce someone who claims to be christian as not a christian. (Heretic..blasphemer etc. I suppose).
I think that's more of an inter-denominational thing, rather than just rejecting the extremists. And of course every denomination thought that it was "True" Christianity, so there would be no objective way of deciding who was right.

Ok. That isn't exactly what I meant. I know a missionary couple on a Navajo Reservation and they are very nice people. They do not give out food based on who attends church more often, but they do discourage any activities that reflect Navajo traditions (Pow wows (sorry if I spelled that wrong)). They think that helping these people is showing them "the way to God".

Missionaries exploit the people they are "helping," no matter how you look at it.

They try to show people Christianity but they cannot force people to become Chrisitians. That is a decision that only those people can make. All they can do is explain Christainity to the people of those places.

OccidentiaPrima']Which views are taught in our universities? Which are printed in our textbooks? That should tell you which cultural paradigm dominates.

That all depends on where you are - since many people are trying to force fundamentalist Christianity into science textbooks these days.

OccidentiaPrima']I agree. But I have heard way too many arguments of "you're a bigot." Period. The end. People are terrified of being thought of as a bigot, whether they are or not, because it is equivalent to being a social outcast. And the marketplace of ideas is quite limited, due to media filtering, but we agree on that point.

Why are people terrified of being thought of as a bigot? If they truly hold these views dear, then the descriptor for them wouldn't bother them at all. In general, people don't want to be called bigots because they wish to believe that their views hold some merit beyond "this is just what I think and that is that, no matter what."

Calling a bigot a bigot is no more of an insult than pointing out that an overweight person is overweight. It is simply a descriptor.

Lay off Christian, he's a great bloke!

It seems like the ACLU supports criminals' rights rather than our Religious rights set forth by thye constitution.

Yes, because suing a school to have a young girl's Biblical senior quote reinserted into the school yearbook has nothing to do with religious freedom.

We were founded as a Christian nation, and we still have the freedom to worship as we please.

I call bullshit. The US was founded as no such thing.

Lay off Christian, he's a great bloke!

He drinks his tea without milk!!! The blasphemer!!!

He's saying that people who hold a certian type of views are immidately insulted by others as being biggoted. Where as thats not the case, they just hold views which differ to the other view. Its just that often many liberal minded people will call anyone who doesnt support their ideas a conservative biggot or a neo-con.

Look up the word bigot.

Meanwhile, if you are a bigot, then why is the word insulting?

He drinks his tea without milk!!! The blasphemer!!!

Liar!!! Christian never drank a cup of tea without milk in his life!

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/005810.php#more

This site, nicely detailing how political Islam is akin to Facsim.

Oh yeah ... forgot to put jihadwatch on my list. Another Christian site that uses conjecture, half-truths, and outright lies to bash Islam.

actually if you want to go with who were the "original" inhabitants of Israel....guess what, it was the ...

Canaanites. ;)

Who were wiped out.

I really wasn't gonna reply to anything other than that lil political speech I made, but I gotta hit this one.

First, none of these are Christian web sites. A name, is a name, is a name. A Christian is identified by deed, not by name. I could run around saying that I'm Emmit Smith or Jamie Lee Curtis and would you believe me? No, clearly not. You show some semblance of intelligence.

Second, sure, lets pick a few religions out of the hat and say, "They don't do anything wrong." There are no extreamists in THSES religions because I havn't seen any of them. Oh woe is them. PLEASE! Take five seconds to do a Google search and you'll find that there are plenty of idots out there that claim to be of X religion that does the same thing. Good grief. You destroy your own credibility here.

Third, don't ask me to show you proof. I'm not gonna be checking this thread again for a day or two if ever. School calls and programming in JAVA is a pain. Have a nice day!

Note that Keru was replying to someone who stated that there were no such sites.

Liar!!! Christian never drank a cup of tea without milk in his life!

I lived with the man for 2 years and never once saw him add sweet cow juice to his tea.

*grumbles* I bet people'll listen when you say it...

Nah. Most points that are reasonable or logical get ignored for the inflamatory.

Orgainized religion is a way to control people's thoughts and actions. This is true in ALL religions. However, not all religions try to force theirs upon others. Christianity is a huge converter. Christian missionaries exploit the people they "help" by giving them food and helping their community in return for a conversion to Christianity. While I commend missionaries on the kindness they have shown needy people, I strongly object to converting people.

Maybe this is why Christians are "bashed" so much. They force their religion on others and condemn those who refuse to give up their traditions and religion.

Not all missionaries (of any religion) actually attempt to convert people so much as present options. I know of a program in many traditionally Muslim countries where religion is very rarely discussed, and only if those who are being helped ask about it. It's really more of a "breaking-stereotypes" mission, as, in many of these countries, the term "Christian" is synonomous with all sorts of horrible things.

Firstly, the idea of "Conversion for food" is a very old Urban myth which is very much untrue. Christian aid and other Christian charities do not give out aid based on how much the recipients will convert.

It is a very old story because it happened in earlier times. It was not uncommon in many "less civilized" countries for missionaries to convert people at the end of a sword or gun. Surprisingly, many of these countries are now the ones with the lowest view of Christians.

Not all missionaries (of any religion) actually attempt to convert people so much as present options.

You're right.

Choice 1: Become a Christian

Choice 2: Be condemned to Hell

I lived with the man for 2 years and never once saw him add sweet cow juice to his tea.

The ways of Christian are strange...He always put the milk in *before* the tea.

Firstly, the idea of "Conversion for food" is a very old Urban myth which is very much untrue. Christian aid and other Christian charities do not give out aid based on how much the recipients will convert.

Secondly, Christians know not to "force" religion on people. All we can do is explain to people what Christianity is and what it means. It is up to other people to accept it or not. The problem being is that this explination is often mistaken for "forcing" because in the belief of truth. We believe its true, and here is why... is basicly what missionaryism is.

Yeah ... tell them about it ... sort of like this:

Jew: Hey, whassup?
Person: Yo.
Jew: Hey, there's a dinner thing at the synagogue tomorrow, wanna come?
Person: No.
Jew: Okie dokie! Let's go get a beer.
Person: Cool.

Muslim: Hey, whassup?
Person: Yo.
Muslim: I just got a new copy of Qur'an, want my old one?
Person: Nah, thanks, not interested.
Muslim: Cool. Wanna get some dinner?
Person: Alrighty then!

Christian: I'd like to tell you about Jesus.
Person: No.
Christian: Oh but you must know about the Lord for your very soul.
Person: I'm ok, thanks.
Christian: Perhaps I can leave you this pamphlet.
Person: No, really, I'm fine.
Christian: Christ has a plan for this world you know.
Person: I'm really not interested.
Christian: Jesus said, "I am the way and the light and none come to the Father but through me"
Person: Really, dude, I don't care.
Christian: But you need to care! Jesus died for you!
Person: Well, thank him for me, but I don't need it.
Christian: But you could end up in eternal Hell.
Person: I'll worry about that when I get there.
Christian: But I ...
Person: FUCK OFF, SPOTTY!
Christian: *builds website discussing the greivous oppression of Christian thought and wins Awful Link of the Day*

Person: *sips beer with Jew while at dinner with Muslim* Man ... what was his problem?
Jew: Meh. Mishugoyim.
Muslim: Yep ... insane ... pass the potatos, please.

While I'm thinking about it Keru, you once gave me the name of a translator that you said had translated one of the best English language versions of the Qur'an, and I lost it. Could you post/TG it to me?

Thanks!


Abdullah Yusuf Ali

The work is titled "The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an"

Abdullah Yusuf Ali

The work is titled "The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an"

Ok, so is it more of an interpretation than a translation, then?

Ok, so is it more of an interpretation than a translation, then?

It's a translation, with English and Arabic (for comparison) and a whole lot of footnotes ... I mean ... a *lot* of footnotes.

OccidentiaPrima']I'm confused by the amount of anti-Christian sentiment in the US and Western Europe these days.
what, you mean like how all three branches of the US government are controlled by Christians? or how Christians are in power over most of Western Europe? or how Christian holidays are nationally recognized and observed as official days off, while holidays for other religions are merely noted and excused for those individuals who happen to practice some non-Christ-centered faith? or how references to the Christian faith are found on currency, on political buildings, on state seals, and even (now) in the US Pledge?

yeah, i can see how you would feel very put upon, what with Christians being so persecuted. my heart is bleeding for you.

Person: *sips beer with Jew while at dinner with Muslim* Man ... what was his problem?
Jew: Meh. Mishugoyim.
Muslim: Yep ... insane ... pass the potatos, please.

hehe.

Inter-religious groups are fun. I regularly eat out in a group that tends to include an atheist, a Jew (although he's more ethnic than religious), a Muslim, several agnostics, and a few of us Christians. We have great fun (generally poking fun at anyone and everyone).

I did get quite a kick out of it though when a Muslim friend of mine came home with my boyfriend and I for the holidays. He obviously wasn't celebrating Christmas per se, but his family and most of his friends were heading out of town so we invivted him along. Two days before Christmas, my mother was shocked to find that he didn't eat pork.

Mom: "But I'm making ham for Christmas dinner! Don't you have any normal friends?" -- I'm not kidding, she really said this.

Me: "No problem, Mom. I'll make him some chicken. He isn't going to be offended that we're eating ham."

You're right.

Choice 1: Become a Christian

Choice 2: Be condemned to Hell

He's a good fellow, but I'm not "becoming" him...No way.

He's a good fellow, but I'm not "becoming" him...No way.

Ha Ha.

You are hilarious!

:headbang:

Wow, this is a topic that enlivens debate.
India encourages the caste system, I know this because I've worked with many an Indian in Kuwait. Most of them could not even look you in the eye because they are scarred by years of oppression and indifference. They are willing to put their lives on the line for a few dollars, because they couldn't tolerate their own country anymore. I've been in different lands and have spoken to people who were treated worse than vermin in their own towns and cities.

People, if you think Christianity pushs people around, you are bonkers. Or merely self-absorbed, and self-righteous. This kind of self-righteous thinking lead to environmentalists (the self-righteous) petitioning genetically enhanced crops in starving Zambia (the duped), Africa. Now millions will die. One small problem, people have been genetically 'enhancing' crops for 20,000 years. It's called cultivation. Of course you probably think CNN, Fox News, and BBCW tells you everything you need to know about the world, I mean, they cater to you, right?

Christianity is probably the only religion that ever displays total altruism on a frequent basis. Giving without asking for anything in reture. It's also the backbone of the United States, and the only reason the US is so tolerate. This is where the self-righteous jump in, saying (most of whom will be americans), America isn't tolerant, blah, blah, blah. Bull. Live somewhere else, challenge your preconceptions a little tiny teeny bit. You might find the truth. Or you might drink bottled water because someone told you it was cost-effective or even more misleading: healthy!

I think it's funny we get enough time to argue this on the internet. An impossibility for three to four billion people, whom are too busy trying to find food tonight. Christian missions deliver needed food and security to masses of people without ever pushing any bibles in people's faces. I have not seen any sizable amounts of Muslim missions around the world, nor have I seen any Hindu ones. Knock it if you'd like.

Wow, this is a topic that enlivens debate.
India encourages the caste system, I know this because I've worked with many an Indian in Kuwait. Most of them could not even look you in the eye because they are scarred by years of oppression and indifference. They are willing to put their lives on the line for a few dollars, because they couldn't tolerate their own country anymore. I've been in different lands and have spoken to people who were treated worse than vermin in their own towns and cities.

People, if you think Christianity pushs people around, you are bonkers. Or merely self-absorbed, and self-righteous. This kind of self-righteous thinking lead to environmentalists (the self-righteous) petitioning genetically enhanced crops in starving Zambia (the duped), Africa. Now millions will die. One small problem, people have been genetically 'enhancing' crops for 20,000 years. It's called cultivation. Of course you probably think CNN, Fox News, and BBCW tells you everything you need to know about the world, I mean, they cater to you, right?

Christianity is probably the only religion that ever displays total altruism on a frequent basis. Giving without asking for anything in reture. It's also the backbone of the United States, and the only reason the US is so tolerate. This is where the self-righteous jump in, saying (most of whom will be americans), America isn't tolerant, blah, blah, blah. Bull. Live somewhere else, challenge your preconceptions a little tiny teeny bit. You might find the truth. Or you might drink bottled water because someone told you it was cost-effective or even more misleading: healthy!

I think it's funny we get enough time to argue this on the internet. An impossibility for three to four billion people, whom are too busy trying to find food tonight. Christian missions deliver needed food and security to masses of people without ever pushing any bibles in people's faces. I have not seen any sizable amounts of Muslim missions around the world, nor have I seen any Hindu ones. Knock it if you'd like.


In other words: If we didn't have time to think, we'd all be christians.

Originally posted by Dempublicents1
Originally Posted by Haloman
We were founded as a Christian nation, and we still have the freedom to worship as we please.



I call bullshit. The US was founded as no such thing.
Good call, Dem. It was founded by a bunch of Deists, which share beliefs with Christianity in that they believed in a created universe. That is where the similarity stops.



Oh, can't we all just get along!

Originally posted by Keruvalia
Yeah ... tell them about it ... sort of like this:

Jew: Hey, whassup?
Person: Yo.
Jew: Hey, there's a dinner thing at the synagogue tomorrow, wanna come?
Person: No.
Jew: Okie dokie! Let's go get a beer.
Person: Cool.

Muslim: Hey, whassup?
Person: Yo.
Muslim: I just got a new copy of Qur'an, want my old one?
Person: Nah, thanks, not interested.
Muslim: Cool. Wanna get some dinner?
Person: Alrighty then!

Christian: I'd like to tell you about Jesus.
Person: No.
Christian: Oh but you must know about the Lord for your very soul.
Person: I'm ok, thanks.
Christian: Perhaps I can leave you this pamphlet.
Person: No, really, I'm fine.
Christian: Christ has a plan for this world you know.
Person: I'm really not interested.
Christian: Jesus said, "I am the way and the light and none come to the Father but through me"
Person: Really, dude, I don't care.
Christian: But you need to care! Jesus died for you!
Person: Well, thank him for me, but I don't need it.
Christian: But you could end up in eternal Hell.
Person: I'll worry about that when I get there.
Christian: But I ...
Person: FUCK OFF, SPOTTY!
Christian: *builds website discussing the greivous oppression of Christian thought and wins Awful Link of the Day*

Person: *sips beer with Jew while at dinner with Muslim* Man ... what was his problem?
Jew: Meh. Mishugoyim.
Muslim: Yep ... insane ... pass the potatos, please.

Hilarious. I assure you, as a pastor, that not even I am like that.

Ha Ha.

You are hilarious!

:headbang:

http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~raza/banfish.jpg

Hilarious. I assure you, as a pastor, that not even I am like that.

=) In my experience, very few pastors are. I think Keru was referring more to the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons that show up at the door on Saturday mornings at 7-8 in the morning sometimes. I'm all for spreading the Gospel, but I think they go about it an often less-than-productive way.

Oh, can't we all just get along!
Agreed.

http://www.schools.pinellas.k12.fl.us/gallery/variety/Heart.gif
LOVE, NOT WAR!

This may repeat sections of earlier posts, if so, sorry.
Several reasons for people hating Christians

America
Not to say I agree but Americans have no idea the level of hatred felt towards them by people outside of the US. As a Australian I don't hate americans, but most Westerners are sceptically or suspicous of the US government. Both parties are equally hated because they hated Clinton too.
The Middle East hates the US.
China, Japan, Australia and a lot Pacifics Nations and most of Asia and Europe don't like the way the US operates.
Because American foreign policy is so antagonisitc to other nations, especially non-western nations, and so self absorbed, people that don't have a problem with other western nations often hate America
This affect the portrayal of christians as such a huge amount of visible americans are christians. Name a current, american politican that is not christian and that is internationally visible.

Priests, Missionaries and TV Evangelists
Who has had of a Rabbi, Islamic cleric or other leader of a religion molest children. Furthermore when the muslims catch them, they are truly punished.
In Iran or another nation with muslimic law they caught a man who kill 20+ children after abusing them. He was flogged 100 times, stabbed and hung. they even hung him by putting a rope around the neck and lifting him with a crane so his neck would not break. THAT is serious determent.
Preists however are protected by the church bodies. what they should be doing is excommunicating them. The Vatican would gain a lot more respect if they started putting preists on trial instead of protecting them
Missonaries while 'spreading the word of Jesus', are often acting completely out of the spirit of the Bible, not feeding those who do not convert, etc. Please note the word often.
TV evangelism irritate almost everybody, and often are only watchable by drunks or hardliners.
Mormons and Jehoviah's Witnesses are almost as bad. I have never opened my door to see two imams standing there and saying
'Good day to you friend. I am Imam Abboud and this is Imam Mohammed and we like like to talk to you about the holy Quran and how Allah fits in with your life. Mecca is that way, Will you pray with us?'

Visible christians
Let's face it, if you know someone 20 metres ahead is Christian, it usually because they are an extremist. Unfortunately, when nonchristians think of Christian, they usually think of the nutjobs. Why? Because moderate Christians are usually not identifable. It's not like Jews with yarmulkas or Muslims with the jihab and veil. The only common Christian item of faith is a cross, usually small and concealed. There are rosary beads but they are not too common
Also, because there is so much variation of christanity exteremists are to easy to find. Lutherians, Calvinists, Anglicans, Fundamentalists, Coptics, Jesuits, Mennonites, Reformists Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Catholics, Russian Orthadox, Greek Orthadox, Roman Catholics and a whole lot more I can't think of. Also is is a lot of confusion about Christians and Catholics. Catholics are different to christians. Catholics are usually the guys getting carried away, or at least more strict.

I am a Deist so I am not impartial. I don't like a lot of Christians because I'm am tolerant of faith and they are not. Many christians try to exorcise or convert me and that's really irrating after a while. The coolest guys i have met are the Buddhists, who I personally believe are what people should be.
Tolerant, peaceful and in the case of the Shaolin, able to beat seven hells out of people who screw with them

=) In my experience, very few pastors are. I think Keru was referring more to the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons that show up at the door on Saturday mornings at 7-8 in the morning sometimes. I'm all for spreading the Gospel, but I think they go about it an often less-than-productive way.

Yes.

I just had some Mormon missionaries at the door this afternoon.

They refused to take no for an answer. Even when I explained I was an athiest who had read the Book of Mormon and grew up in LDS country and probably knew more about it than they did.

I ended up inviting them, opening a cerveza, and sitting down to convert them. They left almost immediately.

Yes.

I just had some Mormon missionaries at the door this afternoon.

They refused to take no for an answer. Even when I explained I was an athiest who had read the Book of Mormon and grew up in LDS country and probably knew more about it than they did.

I ended up inviting them, opening a cerveza, and sitting down to convert them. They left almost immediately.

My boyfriend is an atheist. He has no problem talking about religion with anyone, but eventually simply states that he is an atheist. The usual response? "But aren't you afraid of going to hell?" So many people have no understanding of others' beliefs. If you don't believe in hell, would you really be afraid of it?

Meanwhile, a trick he learned when he was younger - he opened the door wrapped in a towel. When asked if they could talk to him about God, he said "Sure, I was just about to take a shower, come on in." They left pretty quick after that.

Personally, I try not to be rude when people come to the door, but I don't generally talk to them much either. My mode of religious discussion involves an open mind on both sides - and I usually don't see that from those who go door-to-door. While I can respect and leave them to their beliefs, I don't really want to talk to someone whose only statements will be that they know my religion better than I do and that I should see things their way.

Meanwhile, a trick he learned when he was younger - he opened the door wrapped in a towel. When asked if they could talk to him about God, he said "Sure, I was just about to take a shower, come on in." They left pretty quick after that.

It works much faster without the towel.

Odd that you find the US so intolerant of Christianity despite overwhelming support for Christianity here.

But you are right that most Christians are good people with mostly tolerant beliefs. Unfortunately, many beliefs of many Christians are wrong - which would be fine if they didn't also feel the need to try to make them public policy. See abortion, Terri Schiavo, gay marriage, etc.

Wow. In your experience of 1 year, Jews in LA failed to show enough respect to the pizza delivery person. That is definitely a rational basis to condemn a religion. :rolleyes:

Is it wrong to point out racism and intolerance? Why?

Just as a note before I continue: the LA Jews who didnt show respect - it probably had nothing to do with their religion, just that you are a pizza delivery guy.

I feel it is quite interesting that you should say, quite blatantly, that the beliefs of many Christians are wrong. The only possible justification for saying something so blatantly abrasive as that is that you believe you are right, and you are criticizing based upon your personal sense of morality. Sounds like a pretty obvious case of intolerance to me, especially with your choice of issues. Come on, they are intolerant because they believe that 1 million children are being killed every year and they want to change that. They are wrong because a Catholic woman was starved to death (which I realize is not quite the same as starving a conscious person; still an unnatural death to die because you are deprived of nutrition), based upon the testimony of a man who would have motive in wanting her death. Maybe, you might want to consider other people's beliefs as legitimate even though they are not exactly the same as yours. As for gay marriage, they believe it to be changing a sacred institution given by God 6000 years ago to the Jews, and it is just now decided it can be changed by a guy in a suit who feels that another group deserves the nomenclature. It may not make any sense to you that they should not have it, but to them it is sacred and has been under attack for years. The large majority are not opposed to unions to which all state support is equivalent to that of a married couple, they are just opposed to the word.
I am not, in any way, supporting either side, but I feel that it is simply stupid to have decided that people are wrong and their claims are illegitimate simply because you do not agree with them.

Just as a note before I continue: the LA Jews who didnt show respect - it probably had nothing to do with their religion, just that you are a pizza delivery guy.

That wasn't me. It was the person I was responding to -- thank you very much. I don't have a problem with Jews.

I feel it is quite interesting that you should say, quite blatantly, that the beliefs of many Christians are wrong. The only possible justification for saying something so blatantly abrasive as that is that you believe you are right, and you are criticizing based upon your personal sense of morality. Sounds like a pretty obvious case of intolerance to me, especially with your choice of issues.

I do believe I am right. Don't you?

Tolerance is not agreement. I can tolerate a wide range of views. I do not have to agree with them.

Interesting that I am supposed to not disagree with any Christian beliefs, but you and they are free to disagree with my beliefs.

Come on, they are intolerant because they believe that 1 million children are being killed every year and they want to change that.

Did I say that was intolerant? I said it was wrong.

They can believe flying monkeys are kidnapping children. Doesn't make it so.

They are wrong because a Catholic woman was starved to death (which I realize is not quite the same as starving a conscious person; still an unnatural death to die because you are deprived of nutrition), based upon the testimony of a man who would have motive in wanting her death.

You have not the slightest clue what you are talking about.

She was starved to death primarily because Christians -- particularly Catholics -- make a moral distinction between witholding nutrition (okay) and assisting someone in dying (sin!).

She did not want to be kept alive in persistent vegetative state. Several separate witnesses testified that she had told them that -- including an uncle and her best friend. Several courts found by clear and convincing evidence that she did not want to be forcibly kept alive.

And he had no motive in wanting her to die other than fidelity to her wishes. That is a lie.

You are wrong and poorly informed -- as were most Christians that were hysterical about something that happens routinely everday.

Maybe, you might want to consider other people's beliefs as legitimate even though they are not exactly the same as yours.

I am more than willing to agree to disagree.

That does not mean I agree. It does not mean I can never say someone is wrong.

Maybe you might want to consider other people's beliefs -- like mine -- as legitimate even though they are not exactly the same as yours.

As for gay marriage, they believe it to be changing a sacred institution given by God 6000 years ago to the Jews, and it is just now decided it can be changed by a guy in a suit who feels that another group deserves the nomenclature. It may not make any sense to you that they should not have it, but to them it is sacred and has been under attack for years. The large majority are not opposed to unions to which all state support is equivalent to that of a married couple, they are just opposed to the word.

Again, they can believe whatever they want. When they wish to use those beliefs as a basis for discrimination, then they are wrong.

Maybe homosexuals believe they are people too. And they are entitled to the same rights as other people.

Maybe being "just opposed to the word" because is "sacred" and "given by God 6000 years ago to the Jews" isn't a very good reason for public policy.

Just as similar beliefs about the sacred institution of marriage being violated by interracial marriage were wrong.

I am not, in any way, supporting either side, but I feel that it is simply stupid to have decided that people are wrong and their claims are illegitimate simply because you do not agree with them.

I said they were wrong. I did not say "illegitimate." I do think they are wrong.

You have said my views are "stupid."

Remove the plank from thine own eye.

I did not say your views were stupid. I respect your views. I said that it is stupid to say that because you do not agree with something makes it wrong. It is perfectly okay to disagree, but it is merely bigotry to say that people with perfectly legitimate views are definitely and absolutely wrong and cannot be right. It is condescending to say that you respect their opinion but to say that many Christians beliefs are wrong, and it is therefore wrong to try and have those views reflected by their society. You said specifically that many Christians were okay, but that their beliefs were wrong as if there is no room for debate. If you believed that there was mass infanticide, it makes sense for them to try and fight it, just as you would not stand by and say "it is the parent's choice to kill their children." Once again, I am not saying they are right or that you are right, merely that you cannot use, as a reason why Christians are "bashed", the idea that their beliefs are definitively wrong.

As for Terri Shiavo, why was her husband trying to save her at first if she had said that to him? He only asked to have it removed about 5 years into her condition. Also, though it is unlikely he wanted to kill her, there is at least sufficient doubt that he might have a reason to.

And, once again, gay marriage is a touchy topic, so I will be brief. Most Christians do not believe that homosexuals are less human or evil, but they believe that there are basically two reasons for sex which both must be present: unity and procreation. They also believe these two factors to be important in marriage. If there were actual separation of church and state, the state probably wouldn't use the word 'marriage' at all, but since they do, the Christians believe it to be wrong to allow a marriage without that element of procreation in the sex act. It is the same reason that they oppose contraception, and the same reason for which they feel that 'marriage' is under attack, with high divorce rate and etc...

Also, I realize that it was not you with the pizza delivery comment, but it seemed easier than dragging the quote out of another person.

As for Terri Shiavo, why was her husband trying to save her at first if she had said that to him? He only asked to have it removed about 5 years into her condition. Also, though it is unlikely he wanted to kill her, there is at least sufficient doubt that he might have a reason to.


He loved her. Thats the reason he kept her on for 5 years. People will clinge to any hope, no matter how small it may be, and keep holding. Eventually it likely dawned on him that she would never recover and that the humane thing would be to follow her wishes.

Or at least, that's my theory at first glance.

I did not say your views were stupid. I respect your views. I said that it is stupid to say that because you do not agree with something makes it wrong. It is perfectly okay to disagree, but it is merely bigotry to say that people with perfectly legitimate views are definitely and absolutely wrong and cannot be right. It is condescending to say that you respect their opinion but to say that many Christians beliefs are wrong, and it is therefore wrong to try and have those views reflected by their society. You said specifically that many Christians were okay, but that their beliefs were wrong as if there is no room for debate.

Meh.

Mind if I interrupt your debate with a strawman?

I said: "[M]ost Christians are good people with mostly tolerant beliefs. Unfortunately, many beliefs of many Christians are wrong - which would be fine if they didn't also feel the need to try to make them public policy."

That was in response to someone asking why do people criticize Christian beliefs.

If someone has certain beliefs that they wish to impose on others, those beliefs are then open to be criticized and disagreed with. They can be called wrong.

And what, pray tell, are "perfectly legitimate views"? And why can't anyone disagree with them or say they are wrong?

I never said they could not have their views or debate them. IMAO they are wrong. I am routinely informed that others think I am wrong. That is debate.
As we were talking in a broad brush, we didn't get into specifics.

Your idea of tolerance appears to be that everyone keep silent.

If you believed that there was mass infanticide, it makes sense for them to try and fight it, just as you would not stand by and say "it is the parent's choice to kill their children." Once again, I am not saying they are right or that you are right, merely that you cannot use, as a reason why Christians are "bashed", the idea that their beliefs are definitively wrong.

What is the difference between "wrong" and "definitively wrong"? You throw out these qualifiers as if they have some meaning.

I can, did, and will say the anti-choice movement -- which is largely Christian -- is wrong and I can, did, and will criticize them for seeking to deprive women of basic human rights.

Again, you can say I am wrong. Christians can say more than half of women in America are wrong. But I can't disagree?

As for Terri Shiavo, why was her husband trying to save her at first if she had said that to him? He only asked to have it removed about 5 years into her condition. Also, though it is unlikely he wanted to kill her, there is at least sufficient doubt that he might have a reason to.

Glad you abandoned all the falsehoods you put forth before.

For many years, Mr. Schiavo and the Schindler's sought every hope for Mrs. Schiavo. They tried every treatment. It was only after it was extremely clear there was no hope of recovery he sought to fulfill her wishes. Should he have tried to have her allowed to die immediately? Would that be better? :rolleyes:

No. There is no evidence whatsoever that Mr. Schiavo will benefit from Mrs. Schiavo's death. There is not sufficient doubt. There is rumor, innuendo, character assassination and false witness.

You do not want to go down this road further. You do not know the facts. This has been debated several times in these Forums.

Remind me again, why you can say Mr. Schiavo was wrong, the courts were wrong, and I am wrong -- but I can't say some Christians were wrong -- on this issue?

And, once again, gay marriage is a touchy topic, so I will be brief. Most Christians do not believe that homosexuals are less human or evil, but they believe that there are basically two reasons for sex which both must be present: unity and procreation. They also believe these two factors to be important in marriage. If there were actual separation of church and state, the state probably wouldn't use the word 'marriage' at all, but since they do, the Christians believe it to be wrong to allow a marriage without that element of procreation in the sex act. It is the same reason that they oppose contraception, and the same reason for which they feel that 'marriage' is under attack, with high divorce rate and etc...

Again, they may believe whatever they like. That doesn't make them right. That doesn't make them immune from criticism or disagreement.

They can believe that if too men kiss a giant platypus will rise from the sea and destroy North America. Once they try to impose that belief and policies based on that belief on others they are open to critique. Once they wish to share that idea in the marketplace of ideas, then others can say it is wrong.

Marriage is a longstanding legal institution. It may also have religious meaning to some. Tough. If they wanted it to remain purely religious, then they should not have involved the state.

Many of these same arguments were raised in defense of laws forbidding inter-racial marriage. It was said that marriage -- as defined by God -- meant white people marrying white people, blacks marrying blacks, etc. It was said that allowing a white person to marry a black person would destroy the institution of marriage. It was also said that bans on interracial marriage were "to preserve the racial integrity of its citizens," and to prevent "the corruption of blood," "a mongrel breed of citizens," and "the obliteration of racial pride." (This was by states arguing before the Supreme Court, no less.)

Would you say that it was "stupid" to say those beliefs against interracial marriage were wrong? Many good Christians believed them firmly. Going to defend them too?

Go read some Locke and some Mill. Study the First Amendment.

When you understand freedom of conscience, tolerance, and freedom of speech, try again.

Meh.

Mind if I interrupt your debate with a strawman?

I said: "[M]ost Christians are good people with mostly tolerant beliefs. Unfortunately, many beliefs of many Christians are wrong - which would be fine if they didn't also feel the need to try to make them public policy."

That was in response to someone asking why do people criticize Christian beliefs.

If someone has certain beliefs that they wish to impose on others, those beliefs are then open to be criticized and disagreed with. They can be called wrong.

And what, pray tell, are "perfectly legitimate views"? And why can't anyone disagree with them or say they are wrong?

I never said they could not have their views or debate them. IMAO they are wrong. I am routinely informed that others think I am wrong. That is debate.
As we were talking in a broad brush, we didn't get into specifics.

Your idea of tolerance appears to be that everyone keep silent.



What is the difference between "wrong" and "definitively wrong"? You throw out these qualifiers as if they have some meaning.

I can, did, and will say the anti-choice movement -- which is largely Christian -- is wrong and I can, did, and will criticize them for seeking to deprive women of basic human rights.

Again, you can say I am wrong. Christians can say more than half of women in America are wrong. But I can't disagree?



Glad you abandoned all the falsehoods you put forth before.

For many years, Mr. Schiavo and the Schindler's sought every hope for Mrs. Schiavo. They tried every treatment. It was only after it was extremely clear there was no hope of recovery he sought to fulfill her wishes. Should he have tried to have her allowed to die immediately? Would that be better? :rolleyes:

No. There is no evidence whatsoever that Mr. Schiavo will benefit from Mrs. Schiavo's death. There is not sufficient doubt. There is rumor, innuendo, character assassination and false witness.

You do not want to go down this road further. You do not know the facts. This has been debated several times in these Forums.

Remind me again, why you can say Mr. Schiavo was wrong, the courts were wrong, and I am wrong -- but I can't say some Christians were wrong -- on this issue?



Again, they may believe whatever they like. That doesn't make them right. That doesn't make them immune from criticism or disagreement.

They can believe that if too men kiss a giant platypus will rise from the sea and destroy North America. Once they try to impose that belief and policies based on that belief on others they are open to critique. Once they wish to share that idea in the marketplace of ideas, then others can say it is wrong.

Marriage is a longstanding legal institution. It may also have religious meaning to some. Tough. If they wanted it to remain purely religious, then they should not have involved the state.

Many of these same arguments were raised in defense of laws forbidding inter-racial marriage. It was said that marriage -- as defined by God -- meant white people marrying white people, blacks marrying blacks, etc. It was said that allowing a white person to marry a black person would destroy the institution of marriage. It was also said that bans on interracial marriage were "to preserve the racial integrity of its citizens," and to prevent "the corruption of blood," "a mongrel breed of citizens," and "the obliteration of racial pride." (This was by states arguing before the Supreme Court, no less.)

Would you say that it was "stupid" to say those beliefs against interracial marriage were wrong? Many good Christians believed them firmly. Going to defend them too?

Go read some Locke and some Mill. Study the First Amendment.

When you understand freedom of conscience, tolerance, and freedom of speech, try again.



*applaudes*

Hmm, my getting along idea didn't work.

It took me three years to permanently get rid of the Mormons, but through planning (and being a mischevious youth), I succeeded.

They had been coming to our house every year for as long as I can remember in the summers. My parents were usually at work, but since I was under sixteen, I had no job. This gave me plenty of time to think.

The first year, I allowed my dog to greet them at the door. He's just a little 45 pound Brittany Spaniel, but when they asked his name, I told them it was Satan.

They returned the second year, and I threatened them with a shotgun out the window, doing my best impression of a redneck.

Since the fear of life and limb didn't seem to be bad enough, they came back yet again the following year. This time, they had caught me off-guard, and I only had a few minutes, as I saw them down the road. Think quick!

Well, I think it was my best trick yet, and it was off the top of my head. I just stripped down and, being an adolescent (and a blessed one at that), I got myself an erection . That is how I answered the door, and they promptly handed me a tract, and left without hardly a word. I promptly threw the tract away, and they haven't returned since.

Moral of the story: To get rid of Mormons, get rid of clothing.

*Needless to say, I wouldn't do that now, but it sure seemed fun at the time.

The absurd beliefs of christians do not deserve any more respect or consideration than the absurd beliefs of new agers or the customers of psychics or UFO nuts.

People are welcome to believe in an afterlife and believe that doing this or that or believing such-and-such will get them to paradise.

However,
if a person believes that the earth is six thousand years old, they cannot be trusted because their mind does not respect the boundries of truth.

The absurd beliefs of christians do not deserve any more respect or consideration than the absurd beliefs of new agers or the customers of psychics or UFO nuts.

People are welcome to believe in an afterlife and believe that doing this or that or believing such-and-such will get them to paradise.

However,
if a person believes that the earth is six thousand years old, they cannot be trusted because their mind does not respect the boundries of truth.

What is a new-ager?

The UFO thing can still go either way really.

OccidentiaPrima']I'm confused by the amount of anti-Christian sentiment in the US and Western Europe these days. From my personal experiences, Christians are some of the kindest and most tolerant people around, other than atheists. Of course there are some nutjobs who are unable to listen to reason, but overall, Christians tend to be relatively tolerant of humanist principles and willing to question their beliefs. Christianity hardly has a stranglehold over politics or the media in any country, including. It seems like it's far more popular to ridicule Christianity than support it, from what I've seen. George W Bush, who I dislike immensely, may seem to be the epitome of fundamental Christianity, since many of his strongest supporters were Evangelicals. But in truth the Republican party is controlled by neo-conservative ideology, which was never a Christian movement.

Now, let's look at some other religions:

Judaism. I've had good and bad experiences with Jewish people. But overall, there is an underlying arrogance and ethnocentrism that I've noticed among Jews that I've met in Los Angeles. I came here with a completely neutral opinion, but having delivered pizza for a year in a heavily Jewish neighborhood while going to school, I have been annoyed by the contemptuous attitude. The state of Israel is also an abomination. It was stolen, its original inhabitants made second class citizens or moved to ghettos, and a state religion established. I can think of no modern Christian equivalent to Israel.

Islam. Soon the world's largest religion. There has been little or no progress made in establishing human rights in many Muslim states. Not only is there a state religion, but ethnic minorities such as Christian and Jews are persecuted. Women are treated as second class citizens. Now if Christians or Jews followed the Bible carefully, particularly some of the verses in the Old Testament, they would commit gross violations of human rights. However, due to countless years of progress (that was resisted by the Church), even today's most fundamentalist Christians are not making animal sacrifices or waging crusades.

Not so in Islam. While many Muslims throughout the world simply want to live their life without conflict, Islam has fostered a culture of violence and repression that hurts Muslims the worst. The website www.thereligionofpeace.com shows deaths caused by Muslims caught up in fanatacism. A few bombings of abortion clinics by Christian whackos does not compare. I can think of no Christian equivalent to Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, or Iran.

Hinduism. Probably the most racist religion of all. Divides its people up into castes, and strips the lowest castes of human rights. I can think of no Christian equivalent to India.

Shintoism. Although waning, still tied to Japanese ultranationalism and a refusal to apologize to China for past atrocities.

I am not a Christian, nor do I agree with Christianity. But this liberal focus on toppling a religion that is already on its knees is stupid. Why not focus on global humanism for a change, rather than bashing an already overly self-effacing West? Which brings me to the last religion, "progressivism". Progress towards what? A caste which places plants and animals on the top and straight white people of European descent on the bottom, due to their history as imperialists and oppressors. Where all values and cultures are equal, even if those values are contrary to natural law, and where any dissenters are labelled "racists" or "intolerant" to shut them up. Where "free speech" is limited to what the owners of a few media outlets decide you should hear. I can think of no Christian equivalent to that.
It is irrelevant what others do. Others' errors do not justify your own. And the reason why christians get bashed is that they constantly try to patronize everyone else and try to spread their baseless mission. Christians have proved over history to be the unkindest and least tolerant people ever to exist and until today most christians never question their beliefs and they even do not want to know about the true roots of their worship or about who it really is they worship.

It is irrelevant what others do. Others' errors do not justify your own. And the reason why christians get bashed is that they constantly try to patronize everyone else and try to spread their baseless mission. Christians have proved over history to be the unkindest and least tolerant people ever to exist and until today most christians never question their beliefs and they even do not want to know about the true roots of their worship or about who it really is they worship.

That is possibly the stupidest thing I have ever seen posted on this forum. Would you kindly attempt to provide a single piece of basis of any of what you have just posted. Before you even attempt to drag up the crusades I will explain again what I have explained for several times over. The first crusade was a reaction to the Muslim invasion of Spain. It was not Christianity saying "Lets go kill all the Muslims we can find" but instead it was "The Muslims have taken our land, we want it back". Now I agree it can be argued forever over "Whose land" it was but the point is that in the same way that the second world war can be seen as a conflict of ideologies (Democracy and Communisim Vs Facisim) it was started by Nazi expansionism, in the same way the Crusades were Saracan expansionism.

And also "spread their baseless mission" and "patronise"? Can you actually explain either of those points or are you going to attempt to win us over with your boundless rhetoric.