Is there a double standard between criticizing Evangelicals and other religions?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

[Goldwater]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

Wow, I didn't realize you were so post-modern.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

I would argue criticizing Evangelicals as a social group is acceptable, given their remarkable penchant for bigotry and hypocrisy. Discriminating against them based exclusively  upon religion, however, is neither acceptable (though criticizing many of their wacky religious views is), although very few people actually do discriminate against them.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

Wow, I didn't realize you were so post-modern.

Ugh, what a typo.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

     Religion correlates heavily with culture and heritage, and is a deeply personal aspect of one's identity that carries connections with spirituality, family, and tradition. You're going to respond by saying it doesn't have anything to do with family and tradition for you. This response is irrelevant, because your experience with and attitude towards religion isn't really typical of most believers throughout human history and cannot be proffered as a template for such.

     People throughout history have endured great suffering and even martyred themselves for faith. Just because it isn't an immutable factor, doesn't mean it's a random label that everyone simply adopts as they please.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

     Religion correlates heavily with culture and heritage, and is a deeply personal aspect of one's identity that implies a connection with spirituality, family, culture, and tradition. People throughout history have endured great suffering and even martyred themselves for faith. Just because it isn't an immutable factor, doesn't mean it's a random label that everyone simply adopts as they please. People throughout history have endured great suffering and even martyred themselves for faith. Just because it isn't an immutable factor, doesn't mean it's a random label that everyone simply adopts as they please.

I think BRTD probably doesn't support killing people because of their faith. The problem, rather, is that he probably doesn't see how the relegation of religion to a "vulnerable" trait could lead to just that. Forced conversion has, in the past, been a way of expressing superiority over conquered cultures or some other manner of enforcing conformity with the standards of new rulers. All this aside, one would surely hope that he realizes the extent to which Islamophobia is tied up with race.

That said, he in the past has implied support for state-backed conversion for non-Christian immigrants.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

     Religion correlates heavily with culture and heritage, and is a deeply personal aspect of one's identity that implies a connection with spirituality, family, culture, and tradition. People throughout history have endured great suffering and even martyred themselves for faith. Just because it isn't an immutable factor, doesn't mean it's a random label that everyone simply adopts as they please. People throughout history have endured great suffering and even martyred themselves for faith. Just because it isn't an immutable factor, doesn't mean it's a random label that everyone simply adopts as they please.

I think BRTD probably doesn't support killing people because of their faith. The problem, rather, is that he probably doesn't see how the relegation of religion to a "vulnerable" trait could lead to just that. Forced conversion has, in the past, been a way of expressing superiority over conquered cultures or some other manner of enforcing conformity with the standards of new rulers. All this aside, one would surely hope that he realizes the extent to which Islamophobia is tied up with race.

That said, he in the past has implied support for state-backed conversion for non-Christian immigrants.

State-backed? No.

And Islamophobia is not a form of racism. Muslims are a VERY diverse in terms of ethnicity religion, and many of those groups have significant non-Muslim members too.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

     Religion correlates heavily with culture and heritage, and is a deeply personal aspect of one's identity that implies a connection with spirituality, family, culture, and tradition. People throughout history have endured great suffering and even martyred themselves for faith. Just because it isn't an immutable factor, doesn't mean it's a random label that everyone simply adopts as they please. People throughout history have endured great suffering and even martyred themselves for faith. Just because it isn't an immutable factor, doesn't mean it's a random label that everyone simply adopts as they please.

I think BRTD probably doesn't support killing people because of their faith. The problem, rather, is that he probably doesn't see how the relegation of religion to a "vulnerable" trait could lead to just that. Forced conversion has, in the past, been a way of expressing superiority over conquered cultures or some other manner of enforcing conformity with the standards of new rulers. All this aside, one would surely hope that he realizes the extent to which Islamophobia is tied up with race.

That said, he in the past has implied support for state-backed conversion for non-Christian immigrants.

State-backed? No.

And Islamophobia is not a form of racism. Muslims are a VERY diverse in terms of ethnicity religion, and many of those groups have significant non-Muslim members too.

Do you think racists are particular about facts?

[DC Al Fine]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

     Religion correlates heavily with culture and heritage, and is a deeply personal aspect of one's identity that carries connections with spirituality, family, and tradition. You're going to respond by saying it doesn't have anything to do with family and tradition for you. This response is irrelevant, because your experience with and attitude towards religion isn't really typical of most believers throughout human history and cannot be proffered as a template for such.

     People throughout history have endured great suffering and even martyred themselves for faith. Just because it isn't an immutable factor, doesn't mean it's a random label that everyone simply adopts as they please. People throughout history have endured great suffering and even martyred themselves for faith. Just because it isn't an immutable factor, doesn't mean it's a random label that everyone simply adopts as they please.

As the West secularizes (or in some Christians like BRTD's case, adopts a hyper-individualistic ecclesiology) it is becoming increasingly ignorant of religion as a sociological phenomenon. To put religion in the same category of "chosen traits" like say, one's taste in music or clothing is risible.

[ON Progressive]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

     Religion correlates heavily with culture and heritage, and is a deeply personal aspect of one's identity that implies a connection with spirituality, family, culture, and tradition. People throughout history have endured great suffering and even martyred themselves for faith. Just because it isn't an immutable factor, doesn't mean it's a random label that everyone simply adopts as they please. People throughout history have endured great suffering and even martyred themselves for faith. Just because it isn't an immutable factor, doesn't mean it's a random label that everyone simply adopts as they please.

I think BRTD probably doesn't support killing people because of their faith. The problem, rather, is that he probably doesn't see how the relegation of religion to a "vulnerable" trait could lead to just that. Forced conversion has, in the past, been a way of expressing superiority over conquered cultures or some other manner of enforcing conformity with the standards of new rulers. All this aside, one would surely hope that he realizes the extent to which Islamophobia is tied up with race.

That said, he in the past has implied support for state-backed conversion for non-Christian immigrants.

State-backed? No.

And Islamophobia is not a form of racism. Muslims are a VERY diverse in terms of ethnicity religion, and many of those groups have significant non-Muslim members too.

The problem with saying "Islamophobia is not a form of racism" is that the people who are the most likely to be victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes (in North America, at least) are specifically Middle Eastern and South Asian people.

Even people who aren't Muslims (like Sikhs) are often victims of Islamophobic crimes because Islamophobia also involves a lot of racism. This is a tragic example of this.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'm sure this woman would be interested to hear all the Islamophobic hate mail she's received is based on race:

[DC Al Fine]

Whoosh

[Badger]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

So unless someone makes that conscious effort to change their religion to one you don't disapprove of, it's okay to disparage their faith. Got it.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

So unless someone makes that conscious effort to change their religion to one you don't disapprove of, it's okay to disparage their faith. Got it.

Um, yeah?

I would NEVER belong to a religious group that marginalizes women and gays and lesbians. Absolute litmus test. It doesn't matter about whatever my heritage and background is, I value my politics FAR more. All liberal all the time after all.

There's no way I could POSSIBLY ever imagine myself being like this:

"Hey I see you're drinking a Coke."
"Yeah, that's what this is."
"I'm not really a fan of Coke. You should try this Pepsi."
"I have actually. I much prefer Pepsi."
"Oh, then why aren't you drinking it instead?"
"Well I grew up drinking Coke and most of my family drinks Coke. And most people with a similar ethnic background makeup as me drink Coke. So even though I despise the aftertaste of it, it wouldn't be right for me to drink anything but Coke."

[Santander]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

So unless someone makes that conscious effort to change their religion to one you don't disapprove of, it's okay to disparage their faith. Got it.

By that standard, since some peoples' sexual orientation change, just like some peoples' religious convictions change, gay bashing is completely okay, too.

[RINO Tom]

I mean, I can't make rules about what is or isn't okay to "criticize."  However, attacking someone's religion is pretty unquestionably low-brow.

[Xing]

On Atlas, sure, but that's because Atlas is left-leaning, and Evangelicals are (as a whole) strongly Republican-leaning. Surprisingly, there's also a decent amount of malice towards atheists here, not sure why.

In America as a whole, definitely not. While you could certainly find people who attack Christians in America, there's much more anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, and anti-secular sentiment here.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

So unless someone makes that conscious effort to change their religion to one you don't disapprove of, it's okay to disparage their faith. Got it.

By that standard, since some peoples' sexual orientation change, just like some peoples' religious convictions change, gay bashing is completely okay, too.

I'm not on the religion-bashing train here, but sexual orientation is a lot more complicated than religious convictions.  They're not comparable.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Also I will note that there is a difference, I think, between bashing religions and bashing religious beliefs.  I don't mock Evangelicals because they are a large and diverse group of people, but I do mock people who believe that the world is 6000 years old.

[RINO Tom]

On Atlas, sure, but that's because Atlas is left-leaning, and Evangelicals are (as a whole) strongly Republican-leaning. Surprisingly, there's also a decent amount of malice towards atheists here, not sure why.

In America as a whole, definitely not. While you could certainly find people who attack Christians in America, there's much more anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, and anti-secular sentiment here.

Hate to generalize, but there really are two kinds of atheists.  Only one type gets ridiculed here, and for good reason.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Indeed. This type of atheist gets mocked all the time, including by people who aren't religious:

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

So unless someone makes that conscious effort to change their religion to one you don't disapprove of, it's okay to disparage their faith. Got it.

By that standard, since some peoples' sexual orientation change, just like some peoples' religious convictions change, gay bashing is completely okay, too.

I'm not on the religion-bashing train here, but sexual orientation is a lot more complicated than religious convictions.  They're not comparable.

Both involve performative roles based on the cultures we're brought up in.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

So unless someone makes that conscious effort to change their religion to one you don't disapprove of, it's okay to disparage their faith. Got it.

By that standard, since some peoples' sexual orientation change, just like some peoples' religious convictions change, gay bashing is completely okay, too.

I'm not on the religion-bashing train here, but sexual orientation is a lot more complicated than religious convictions.  They're not comparable.

Both involve performative roles based on the cultures we're brought up in.

Yes, but only one has biological factors involved (though it is still not well understood).

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Attacking religious groups is perfectly fine, not bigoted and not comparable to bashing based on race, gender or sexual orientation. That's because religion is a chosen trait that one decides for themselves, unlike the other traits. Its more comparable to bashing and attacking members of a political party.

Um, no?

Um, yes? One can not change their race or sexual orientation. One can change their religion and political party.

So unless someone makes that conscious effort to change their religion to one you don't disapprove of, it's okay to disparage their faith. Got it.

By that standard, since some peoples' sexual orientation change, just like some peoples' religious convictions change, gay bashing is completely okay, too.

I'm not on the religion-bashing train here, but sexual orientation is a lot more complicated than religious convictions.  They're not comparable.

Both involve performative roles based on the cultures we're brought up in.

Yes, but only one has biological factors involved (though it is still not well understood).

There are also biological determinants involved in political and aesthetic persuasions.

I kid. Idiotic postmodern social science is a hilarious and sort of screwed up my early twenties.

[Santander]

I bash whoever I want for whatever reason.