The Atheism Thread - Part 6

[redhawk23]

The persecution complex exhibited by many Christians is as ridiculous, and has similar motivations to whites screaming about "reverse racism" or Men's Rights Activists in general who see challenges to their wide hegemonic power as being the same as being powerless and discriminated against.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

^ Add RadFems.

You want to talk about a persecution complex.

 

[redhawk23]

You miss my point entirely.
The difference being that women actually have a centuries long history of marginalization and disenfranchisement having been shut out the public sphere, largely barred from many industries, their labor devalued and denied the right to vote until the 20th century. Christians decrying persecution due to challenges to their influence over school curricula and displays on public property is exactly the same as men complaining because they can no longer act like sexist a*****les in the workplace without consequence.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

OK. And while you're making that point, I'll point out the likes of Rachel Watson and Anita Sarkeesian, because I can.

Feminism is grand. Especially in the Middle East.

But yeah. People once in power losing power and then complaining, I get it.

 

[Schlosser85]

"Persecuted" looks ridiculously overdramatic and paranoid, and I get tired of the Christian Right claiming persecution just because their beliefs aren't the law.

 

[KevanG]

But they used to be and that's the problem.

 

[regwec]

As a mod for the section in which the gay rights thread is located, I can tell you in advance I will not look kindly on anyone who comes there to compare gays to pedophilia and bestiality.

I don't have a problem with people disagreeing respectfully....but the kind of offensive and illogical comparisons, slander, and frankly, lies perpetuated by The Harvest are not welcome here.

Can you help to clear up exactly the degree to which it is permissible to "hide behind religion" here? I understand the over-arching policy of this board is that discriminatory or prejudicial language isn't allowed, but the sentiment amongst out Christian friends is that homophobia shouldn't be challenged so long as it can be backed up with a few words of scripture.

But they used to be and that's the problem.

Exactly what is the status of gay marriage in the US? It has just been legalised here in the UK, and the sun still appears to be in the sky.

 

[KevanG]

Gay marriage in the US is changing status from "Never ever" to "if we have to" for many states. Never mind all the bans, then repealing bans, then making laws for it then them getting repealed. It's kind of a cluster****.

In Canada it's been approved since 2003-2006 or so depending on where you are.

As for how the Hype handles religion vs everyone else is that as long as no one goes overboard like The Harvest did then it's mostly permissible to have your own opinions as long as you aren't actively going on about how gays are looking to murder everyone and eat your children or whatever they're supposed to be doing.

 

[The End]

More Christian movies on the way.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Persecuted-movie-Christian-Fred-Thompson/2014/03/10/id/557015/

The paranoia is high with this one.

It would be fine if it were a political thriller and that was it but the implication seems to be that the government chasing the guy down is somehow representative of what's happening to christians in reality

It's absurd.

 

[KevanG]

The film is about a televangelist named John Luther, played by James Remar, who is being pressured into supporting legislation that would give "equal time" to all religions

Because making sure all religions get an equal voice is crazy nonsense!

Also, Dammit Senator Kelly! Stop messing around with everything and get out of politics! I'm also assuming the main character is a mutant as well and that this ties into the story of God loves, Man kills from X-Men.

 

[regwec]

An interesting thing about the UK (stop yawning) is that it is in many respects a much more secular country than the US, but at the same time we have the Church of England as the state religion. I think that remains because the whole tapestry of our (uncodified) constitution is woven into it. If there was no Archbishop, who would put the crown on the new king/queen's head?

The result, I think, is that people just see the established church as a bit of antique decoration, rather than a proper religion as such. Something similar could be said of the monarchy.

 

[Feenix]

An interesting thing about the UK (stop yawning) is that it is in many respects a much more secular country than the US, but at the same time we have the Church of England as the state religion. I think that remains because the whole tapestry of our (uncodified) constitution is woven into it. If there was no Archbishop, who would put the crown on the new king/queen's head?

The result, I think, is that people just see the established church as a bit of antique decoration, rather than a proper religion as such. Something similar could be said of the monarchy.

It's the same sort of deal in Germany. I think it has more to do with tradition than actually following the "rules" of the religion. They're more secular than North America, and yet many stores are still closed on Sundays and most kids still go through communion. When I asked my relatives about it, they say that it's about the community and family and not about paying homage to a specific god.

 

[regwec]

I suppose Germany exhibits a particular relationship between local identity and the local church, going back to the the period before the Thirty Years War where the local nobleman decided whether the region was to be Lutheran or Catholic. It is encouraging that the "sting" has gone out of that kind of sectarianism. Let's hope that oneday happens in Northern Ireland, too.

 

[Shikamaru]

It's incredibly ironic the US is the only first world nation in the West whose constitution states religion must stay out of politics, yet it intervenes in politics more than any other European developed nation.

 

[regwec]

I think France's constitution has said the same, since 1789 and all that.

 

[C. Lee]

You miss my point entirely.

And you and others still miss the point I made yesterday....why is everyone spending so much of their time insulting or making fun of someone else because they have a different opinion?

 

[Human Torch]

The other thread is closed for the moment. If people on both sides can show that they can act like a reasonable adult...it will be reopened. So far people are not impressing me.

Just an honest question....If both sides are not acting like a reasonable adult,why is only one side's thread being punished?

 

[The End]

Only one thread degenerated into comparing homosexuality to beastiality. It was getting out of hand.

 

[MrsKent26]

You miss my point entirely.
The difference being that women actually have a centuries long history of marginalization and disenfranchisement having been shut out the public sphere, largely barred from many industries, their labor devalued and denied the right to vote until the 20th century. Christians decrying persecution due to challenges to their influence over school curricula and displays on public property is exactly the same as men complaining because they can no longer act like sexist a*****les in the workplace without consequence.

Bingo. I endorse this post.

 

[Human Torch]

Only one thread degenerated into comparing homosexuality to beastiality. It was getting out of hand.

Supposedly one member (and I say supposedly since I myself didn't bother to read Havest's walls of text) compared homosexuality to beastiality and was banned for it.It's the hight of hypocrisy to close a whole thread when the "offending member" had already been punished,while leaving the antagonists alone.

 

[The End]

1) I'm not a mod, wasn't my decision.
2) It's silly to label the people trying to reason with the bigot 'antagonists'. C'mon.

Now, can we have an interesting discussion about the thread topic?

 

[Schlosser85]

Can you help to clear up exactly the degree to which it is permissible to "hide behind religion" here? I understand the over-arching policy of this board is that discriminatory or prejudicial language isn't allowed, but the sentiment amongst out Christian friends is that homophobia shouldn't be challenged so long as it can be backed up with a few words of scripture.

Let's not paint with a broad brush here. There are openly Christian members here who disagree with homosexuality, and there are also openly Christian members here who support gay rights. All Christians don't agree with each other about everything.

As for clarification about what's acceptable to mods....I'm only going to speak for myself. And I'm not going to pretend I'm not human or incapable of seeming inconsistent, or of sometimes missing an offensive post, but I'm gonna try to be clear and candid.

I don't have a problem with someone believing marriage should be between a man and a woman, or that homosexuality is a sin, as long as they express their views in a civil and respectful manner. When someone compares homosexuality to pedophilia and beastiality, that is crossing a line and being offensive to many members here.

Basically, you can have any opinion you want here as long as you express it respectfully and keep a civil tone. That door swings both ways. I will and have deleted and/or infracted posts that are insulting to Christians as well as those insulting to gays or atheists.

 

[C. Lee]

Supposedly one member (and I say supposedly since I myself didn't bother to read Havest's walls of text) compared homosexuality to beastiality and was banned for it.It's the hight of hypocrisy to close a whole thread when the "offending member" had already been punished,while leaving the antagonists alone.

(1) Because of what was going on in there (people being extremely offensive in their postings)....I banned the main offensive poster and temporarily closed the thread to give people time to calm down and to put across the point that I am not putting up with offensive behavior from anyone.

(2) I have a couple of times said why it was closed and that guy banned. Other mods have said why the thread was closed and that guy banned. Multiple posters have said they saw the posts that got the thread closed and that guy banned. Your "supposedly" in bold above is basically calling me a liar. I don't appreciate being called a liar.

(3) The closed thread was reopened by me hours ago. Hows the height of that hypocrisy?

 

[Human Torch]

(2) I have a couple of times said why it was closed and that guy banned. Other mods have said why the thread was closed and that guy banned. Multiple posters have said they saw the posts that got the thread closed and that guy banned. Your "supposedly" in bold above is basically calling me a liar. I don't appreciate being called a liar.

I wasn't calling you a liar.Any lawyer would use that language when dealing with information that I knew only from hearsay.

(3) The closed thread was reopened by me hours ago. Hows the height of that hypocrisy?

I apologize,as I was unaware.

 

[regwec]

We still seem to be left in this uneasy aftermath where is seems some people tacitly agreed with what The Banned One said.

That makes me feel deeply uncomfortable, I must say.