Part of the problem, in addition to the fact that the US is virtually run by Christianity, is that there is quite a strong fundamentalist streak in the US.
Too true. And not just in matters of religion.
I have to agree with part this discussion. The amount of “persecution” really is reliant on where in the world the religion is being practiced. This is something that i noticed where i grew up; Christains were being actively pestered for thir beliefs. I found this to be more than other religions, really felt for them, and thus I wondered if this was a constant everywhere. As I do not live everywhere, it is impossible for me to gage this behavior in other areas of the world.
For those of you who posted in a civil manner, I thank you. I was not stating a fact when I began this post, but a question as to how people perceive religion. It was not a personal attack on anyone, nor ignorance. Isn’t that why we ask questions? To battle ignorance?
For those of you who did not post in a civil manner: Learn how to debate as would a mature adult. Don’t make it personal if the question at hand is not a personal attack.
Well, no actually.
You said:
A question, yes, but one that makes the assumption that Christianity is a) looked down upon and hated and b) more so that other groups.
I cannot discuss the issue until you support those assertions.
Thanks.
yes. I made that statement in my initial posting, where I also said that it seemed to me that Christianity received alot of persecution (or whatever you want to call it. I know not all teasing and so forth is not persecution). Since then, I have agreed that religion acceptance varries every where. Then, my opinion having changed, the statement now applies to all religions: that we need wide spread acceptance if this is what the world preaches. ok?
Still don’t see it. Religious intolerance certainly exists everywhere, even in the U.S. This intolerance is, unfortunately, pretty much innate to religion (note, I did not say faith) - Even if you do not belong to a religious that preaches prostelyzation and/or that other religions are evil, one belongs to a religion because one thinks that religion is the correct one. At the very least, that implies that adherents of other religions (or of none) are in error. Error can easily be equated with “lesser” or “evil”.
Other points:
-
Much of what is called “persecution” in America of any religious belief is actually “you can’t do everything you want to do”. We have had long debates on this board where it has been posited, for example, that barring a local town’s long-standing tradition of crosses, etc., at Christmas time is “persecution”. It is not. Persecution would be when a private citizen is not allowed to display that cross.
-
Overt displays of religion in this country have become frowned upon. To a large extent this is overreaction to the often agressive prostelyzation practiced by many religious groups. However, disagreement, even if (verbally) violent isn’t persecution. The person overtly displaying their religion is making a statement. The person may think that that statement cannot be rationally disagreed with, because it is self-evidently right. Not true. I find it self-evident that abortion rights shouldn’t be infringed, but I’m not shocked or surprised when someone violently disagrees with me.
Sua
The problem here- and I believe others were alluding to this or stating it outright- is that fundamentalist Christianity does not believe in tolerance. In the fundamentalist mindset, you’re either saved (because you’re a like-minded fundamentalist), or you’re going to Hell.
Therefore, the fundamentalists have no interest in tolerance of other religions. Quite the contrary- if they want people to go to heaven (which they do), it behooves them to ensure that other people do not follow other religions. Therefore, those other religions must be shut down, removed from society, and any who does not follow fundamentalist Christianity must be pestered and petitioned and even persecuted until they finally see the light and convert.
So the problem with “live and let live” is that while many other religions are willing to do so, fundamentalist Christianity is not. Therefore, the hostility one encounters when speaking of Christianity tends to be that of a pre-emptive strike: if you proclaim yourself a strong Christian, and I admit my atheism, you will attempt to convert me by any means necessary, based upon the fact that 4 out of every five “strong Christians” try to do such.
This is not persecution, not in any way, shape, or form. This is annoyance, and perhaps a bit of lashing out by a minority which has no recognizable power (name a single avowed athiest Congressman. Or Governor. Or Senator). Were the Muslims as intent and ever present in attempting to convert us, we’d probably lash out at them as well. However, generally the only people to take issue with people being atheist (or etc.) are fundamentalist Christians.
SPM wrote:
Would you mind telling us where you grew up, and some specific instances of persecution suffered by the Christians in that region?
Freyr wrote:
snigger
**SuaSponte wrote:
Even if you do not belong to a religious that preaches prostelyzation and/or that other religions are evil, one belongs to a religion because one thinks that religion is the correct one. At the very least, that implies that adherents of other religions (or of none) are in error.**
Not necessarily. I practice Wicca because I believe it’s right for me, not because it’s right, period. Some religions do imply that other faiths are wrong or that their’s is superior, but not all. Christianity isn’t right for me, but it’s well suited for others. Buddhism works well for another set of people. YMMV 
To betenoir & tracer… thanks! I got that off the 'Net, from one of the Pagan mailing list. Author unknown, but it is damn funny!
Hate comes as a symptom of our tempestuous desires, that sway us to and fro amidst a sea of passions. I used to walk in hate, I will admit. But one day the Path found me, and ever since I have know the Light.
We do not wish to ‘knock’ Christianity, nor any other faith. But you may find the Path has more to offer than simply a destination, you see?
Could you be more specific about which posts you felt were uncivil?
-Ben
The ones that disagreed with him?
Let me be the first to welcome you to the Straight Dope Message Boards!
I’m sorry, but I could not make heads or tails out of your post. My knowledge of non-Christian religions is pretty rudimentary, so correct me if I’m wrong, but this sounds like some kind of Bhuddism.
Cite, please, how hate is a symptom of temestuous desires, and not just human beings acting like morons. (My personal opinion. No, I don’t have a cite. It is original.)
Anyway, I’m of the school of thought that believes in living like a Christian rather than saying I am one. I try to be loving, joyful, peaceful, patient, kind, gentle, good, faithful, and disciplined (the "Fruit of the Spirit, according to the apostle Paul.) Then, if anyone is inspired to do the same, that’s one person I convert to Christianity.
And I do it all without annoying “Do you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ?” questions. It’s much more effective my way.
Imagine that.
-Soup
Soup_du_jour wrote:
But by saying so, you’ve just said, indirectly, that you are a Christian.
Does this mean you’ll have to have to disappear in a puff of logic now?
Another effect that results from Christianity being the dominiant religion is that it is most likely to be the religion that people were raised in and have rejected. HTere are people out there who seem to belong to a religion called “not christian anymore”. They are pretty easy to spot, because whatever religion they espouse will always be compared to Xtianity, not defined in it’s own terms. Because these people see Xtianity as something they have moved past, they are often condecending to anyone who is still Xtian. I have also noticed in certain (usually young) groups that an ability to bash Xianity is a sort of way to prove you have rejected your parents, that you are hip. These people come across as irritating and adolecent to anyone who is listening.
There are also people who were raised Xitian and have latched on to that as the thing that has Ruined Their Life, just as other people feel that their parents ruined their life, or their circumcisions ruined their life or their outie bellybutton that ruined their life. It is human nature to look for simplistic reasons why we are not as happy as we would llike to be, and since religion is such large institution it is a fairly easy target. These people can be pretty vocal, and will make blanket statements that would be appalling if they were made about any other group. But again, while thes people are irritating and adolecent I don’t see as how they are making the U.S. a diffucult place to live if you are a Xtian.
You asked, so you shall receive
Christians are being persecuted in the Sudan, China and other parts of the world, but there is also the problem of what is happening here at home.
We convince the School Board, principles and teachers to all participate in school prayer and along comes one Jew or one atheist and objects and we have to stop saying prayers in that school. We keep doing it where we can though.
Then we try to post the Ten Commandments in a court room and along comes one humanist and objects and we have to remove them. So we bring it up in another state.
We start teaching about creation and along comes a scientist and objects and we have to teach only about evolution. Then we educate our own “scientists”.
This is a nation that was founded on the belief in God and yet we are always losing in our attempts to do God’s Will.
Can’t they see that separation of church and state only means that we should be allowed to do what we think best?
So why can’t you people see why we feel persecuted. It only takes one person to tear down all the good we are doing. We are the majority and we should be able to do what is best for the country. Why? Oh, why…
I’m going to address this response to Kniz in response to the post’s subjective language. If the opinions you posted are not necessarily your own, please keep that in mind.
Persecution happens almost everywhere. You will find in the US the situation is slightly different from, say, Sudan. As has been pointed out, there is little religious persecution in the US as far as Christians are concerned–on the contrary, I would say Christians are the most privilged religious group in the country. What tends to happen is resistance to tedious nonsensical evangelism, such as this response to your post.
Invalid objection. How would Christians feel if the prayer in school every morning were Jewish or Moslem? Would you resist or assimilate? Widespread institutionalized prayer in a public place is an infringement of the rights of those who aren’t interested in it. Besides, students are in school to acquire knowledge and skills, not to develop religion.
Cultural sensitivity. Maybe people are not interested in seeing your Christian values and beliefs splattered over a courtroom. Maybe a courtroom is not about religion, but about the justice system. Maybe it’s not God who runs a courtroom, but … the judge!
Teaching creation is, as far as we can possibly know, teaching a blatant falsehood. Keep it in optional Sunday school if you wish to persist in ignorance, not in places of education. Talk about raising an army of fundamentalists. Faith is all that holds up the kind of “scientists” you are educating with this propaganda program.
You assume you know God’s will, a statement that I contest on all possible levels. I put it to you that you know your will, and you don’t like it when civilization rejects it as impractical and inconsiderate.
Interesting definition of SOCAS. I would like to see some support for this bold assertion.
Because you’re not. What you are talking about is not persecution, it is simply fully warranted resistance to Christianity integrating even further into American society than it already has. Everyone has the freedom to object to the kind of world you seem to want.
Because it is clear you don’t have a clue what is best for the country. If we left it up to people like you, based on your examples:
- Christian worship would be in all schools, producing a homogenous Christian population to the exclusion of other cultures and religions
- The justice system would shift towards religious rather than civil law. If you don’t see that as a problem, the situation is worse than I thought (time to hit the history books)
- Respect and tolerance for other creeds would vanish completely following the pervasiness and ubiquity of your flavour of Christianity
- Unsupported beliefs such as “creation” would be the order of the day, possessing the backing of both your “science” and religion–leaving supported, valid theories like evolution high and dry.
So when people reject developments that could lead to the situation described in points 1-4 above, you call it persecution. That is a persecution complex, and not the real thing.
I have to come back to this statement:
Why do you assume that the majority, particularly the ignorant but loud masses of fundamentalists, have any idea what is best for the country?
This is new!
I am always amused by Pat Robertson’s Founder’s Inn having a picture of Ben Franklin in its hallways. Evidently Pat never read ole Ben’s autobiography.
Even Rush Limbaugh equated the term ‘God Almighty’ by James Madison as an proclamation of Christianity instead of the deism that was the norm in Jimmy boy,s time.
But then evey dittohead thinks the Pilgrims came to the New World for religious freedom when all learned know that the Pilgrims had religious freedom in Amsterdam (but heaven forbid the youngsters had freedom of choice) so they came to the New World to establish a society where their religion was the only permissible religion.
By the way, did you research the time period when deism was changed into the present day belief of Christianity? When a belief in One God was subverted into a belief of three gods?
No, it isn’t. Every President and Vice-President in US history has claimed to be Christian. Self-report is notoriously unreliable, of course.
You realize that Franklin was never President, right?
“The norm?” Cite please?
Er . . . cite on this one too, please.