Is there a double standard between criticizing Evangelicals and other religions? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 04:43:48 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Forum Community (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, YE, KoopaDaQuick 🇵🇸)
  Is there a double standard between criticizing Evangelicals and other religions? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Does the forum accept anti-evangelical sentiments more than the same sentiments about other religions?
#1
Yes, and this is acceptabe
 
#2
Yes, and this is unacceptable
 
#3
No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 98

Author Topic: Is there a double standard between criticizing Evangelicals and other religions?  (Read 8760 times)
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,302
United States


« on: April 03, 2018, 04:06:43 PM »

The Christians are the second most disrespected group in America today after our brave police people.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,302
United States


« Reply #1 on: January 07, 2019, 09:48:59 AM »

As a Christian, I feel those range between slightly funny and in bad taste, but not particularly offensive.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,302
United States


« Reply #2 on: January 07, 2019, 10:32:58 PM »

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.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,302
United States


« Reply #3 on: January 08, 2019, 06:49:16 AM »

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?
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,302
United States


« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2019, 04:16:20 PM »

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.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,302
United States


« Reply #5 on: January 09, 2019, 05:24:39 PM »

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.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.031 seconds with 14 queries.