This small form of protest that Kalhoun has adopted has really gotten people pissed off. I bet if she were writing a scholarly paper about JC she would properly cap his name. But to try to remove some of the power or sway or whatever you want to call it caused by invoking his name, even in a non-religious discussion about him, should be her choice. You might see it as childish, but if it really bothers you that much then maybe you should refuse to engage her. Just the fact that it bothers you should indicate that it’s at least having some of the effect that she intended; protests are used to call attention to an issue.
What if it were another man? What if my grandmother were killed at Auschwitz, and I refused to capitalize hitler? In a scholarly paper I probably would, because that’s not where I would choose to protest, but I might be using it as a way to deal with my own feelings on the issue. You might call me childish or an attention-seeker (“Look at me! My grandmother was killed by a mass-murderer!”), but it would really be not sweat off my ass.
The argument could be made that Jesus has caused more death than Hitler (which would be unfortunate, what with his whole stance of loving people. That’s really the problem I have with xtnt [does that bother you? I got used to writing Christianity that way in my notes because writing the word over and over was really annoying, so I began abbreviating it that way], at least from Jesus’ teachings, is largely about loving everyone), and even if you see the man himself as blameless, I’m not going to criticize someone for protesting the power that JC has in the world these days in some small way.
Might I direct you to something that should be cited much more often on the dope?
ETA: PS, my brother once referred to Jesus and the disciples, in a final art history class paper, as “JC and the boys.”
)