I feel a lot of religious people would admit openly, “Yeah, the argument for God’s existence is pretty weak and a lot of things our religion teaches are quite questionable” if it weren’t for the immense social penalty they would face for doing so.
I feel a lot of Trumpers would admit that Trump is indeed quite immature, embarrassing and childish if they would face no blow back from fellow MAGA-ers or “gotcha” from their liberal opponents.
I feel a lot of people would admit “our side has a problem” if they faced no consequences for saying it aloud. Like men admitting the violence against women issue, or certain groups admitting problems that are associated with their groups. etc.
What other political or religious things would people own up to in public that they already know in private but can’t say?
I think many more people would say “we should kill everyone who doesn’t agree with me/isn’t exactly like me”, if they didn’t realize that they are massively outnumbered by the people who don’t agree with them and aren’t like them.
I think I get what you’re trying to ask, but I have had many Christians who specifically reject this particular example. To them, faith means accepting God without proof. They would admit what you suggest, because to them belief with lack of evidence is a core concept in faith[1].
In my cynical (but well informed view), I look at the swings over the last 30 years or so in public displays of racism and acceptance of diverse sexuality. We are very clearly seeing that many people hid their racist views when there were social consequences for displaying them, and some of those people are making those views public now that we have a racist leadership in the US.
(Yes, some people always displayed their racist views, and some people still hide their racist views. I’m not talking about those people.)
This does require a nuanced discussion, because just coming at them with “there’s no proof God exists,” is taken as an attack, and is often rebutted with some version of “God does to exist.” ↩︎
Yeah, I sense this from folks too. I’ve sometimes wondered how prevalent the view is, as a morbid thought exercise, among people in the vicinity. Like, when you walk in a crowd and you think, “How many people in this crowd would favor genocide of people who disagree with them? 1%? 22%? 37%?”
Not quite at the level you mention, but in several gun ownership threads I’ve brought up my experiences.
I own firearms, and keep them secured. I and my wife, with the same training, are the only ones with access to them (no kids, or young visitors). And I also support (IE have voted for) stronger gun control measures including a state-wide tax on ammunition and firearms to improve training and deal with the consequences of unsafe use.
If I mentioned this on any firearm forums I visit, I’d be flamed out of existence by the vocal majority, but there are a number of quiet voices and fellow ghosts who would almost certainly echo my feelings on how we’d like to change things.
This boardhas, for the most part, been willing to discuss options, though there are outliers on both sides of the debate here. Thankfully, most of them keep it safely within the bounds of our rules, so it’s a tense debate, and not a war.
Outside? IRL or especially online? It’s a no-ground-given deathmatch.
One of the reasons I mention this was to add a proviso to the OP: on the internet many people, whether hiding behind a screen name or not are terrified of sharing any questions or compromise because the entire world will make it their business to tear them apart. And often from BOTH sides.
Questions that could be asked, and even discussed face to face or in small groups are hidden because having the whole world stare into your particular fishbowl is terrifying.
Well, for me. Others absolutely seem to thrive on the chaos and attention.
Possibly some, particularly among members of more liberal denominations, and/or those who aren’t particularly strong in their belief – such as those who are practicing Christians because they were raised in the faith, but for them it’s more about the social, cultural, and traditions, rather than that they have ever thought deeply about religion and faith.
That said, as @echoreply replied, many Christians feel that true faith means believing even without evidence. And, in addition, there are those who see things and occurrences in the world as “proof that God exists!,” but that’s because they have an ingoing assumption that God is very real, and they interpret things through that lens: people surviving a natural disaster, someone being cured of a terrible disease, or even just a beautiful sunset, are all interpreted by such people as being evidence of the will of a present God, and the power of prayer.
If a white person says they are a christian (in the US) I take that as an immediate red flag that they are a bad person until proven otherwise. Black, asian, latino, etc christians are fine. But a white christian is probably a proto-fascist white supremacist until proven otherwise. Prominent displays of the American flag are another red flag.
Islamic nations have worse human rights than non-muslim nation
Some people on the left, despite claiming they are morally above human flaws like racism, will repeat anti-semitic conspiracy theories about Israel/the Jews controlling the US and controlling the world that are straight out of 19th century conspiracy theories like the protocols of the elders of zion.
Donald Trump is severely mentally ill and physically ill.
I’m not a black person, but I’ve heard black people lament the fact that other marginalized groups like immigrants or latinos will build each other up, while black communities do not. However those other groups haven’t faced centuries of organized and pre-meditated dehumanization like black people have that makes community building difficult.
This is the big issue for liberal and progressive Christian denominations in the U.S. these days. There are Christians, and Christian churches, which are very liberal: for example, my denomination (the United Methodist Church) is pro-LGBTQ, pro-social justice, pro-immigrant, etc.
But conservative, fundamentalist, and Christian Nationalist churches and their followers have absolutely hijacked the conversation about Christianity over the past couple of decades, and have left those who don’t know a lot about Christianity thinking that all Christians have those vile beliefs.
Among voters who identify as white protestants, about 72% voted for Trump and 26% voted for Harris. So thats a 3-1 ratio.
It would be nice if white christians with good morals would play a bigger role in society, but for the most part christianity among white people is just an umbrella to hide all their destructive and immoral urges by claiming ‘god told them to’
They do, but in ways that are probably not as overtly visible. They march in Pride parades, they operate homeless shelters and food pantries, they work with Habitat for Humanity to build affordable housing, they protest against ICE, etc. What they don’t do is bludgeon others with their beliefs, or try to tear down the separation between church and state in the name of making the U.S. a Christian nation.
@Wesley_Clark - your entire post was a rant that never once touched on the OP’s topic. And it immediately hijacked the thread. It also came right up to the edge of trashing an entire religious AND racial group with a broad brush. I’ve hidden your posts, and those responses to keep the hijack from continuing further. This was a very blatant hijack, and I am reminded I had to Warn you for hijacking a thread last year. I strongly considered giving you another, and advise you that any future off topic posts will almost certainly draw a Warning from me at a minimum after the consideration you’ve just received.
Social consequences.
I am a christian who supports lgbtq and isnt a sin, considers abortion murder but should be a legal choice.
This doesnt go well with many churches Ive been in.
It is true that as soon as any GOP Politician dares cross trump, they are primaried out, or at least an attempt is made. But I know several once die hard republicans and even 2016 trump voters that left the GOP and vote against him.
What social penalty? Churches split all the time, and many churches agree that some of (for example) Paul’s weird ideas about sex are very questionable to the extent there are gay, female pastors, etc.
Pascals Wager even admits the existence of God has little evidence. But it is hard to answer Pascals point there, isnt it?
If one lives in an area of the U.S. where conservative Christianity is strong (e.g., the Deep South), particularly if one lives in a smaller town, there can be a serious social stigma to not being a believer, not regularly attending church, and/or to publicly admitting your doubts.
Maybe, that is a limited area- Deep South and small towns. But I disagree with not regularly attending church.
Also when I was sent to Birmingham once for training, I did mention I was a “doubting Christian” and altho that did get some questions, several people saw my point- mind you, it didnt change their faith. So it may not be as bad as you think.
I will agree that publicly announcing you are a atheist would get some pushback. Or an argument about say- Abortion- but that last is true even among non believers. Even here on this board.
I’ve been to Birmingham many times; it’s where my client for ten years was located. It’s relatively liberal, as Alabama goes. Also, you were there for a short time, and were not living there nor trying to have a social life there.
As the other Doper pointed out, there can be very heavy consequences indeed. It’s not unheard-of for Christians to threaten their spouses with divorce if the spouse has started to waver and admit disbelief in Christianity, maybe halfway to being atheist, to get that “wayward” spouse to come back. And in Islam, apostasy can lead to the death penalty (although this isn’t all that often enforced.)
True. I concede those points. But have you lived in a small deep south town?
1 Corinthians 7:12-14
English Standard Version
“To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.”
also 1 Peter 3:1-2.
and this article says nope.
“Marriage is supposed to be two-as-one,” she wrote to me after leaving her unbelieving husband. “But that’s not how it was for us; We were not one.”
The woman had returned to the Lord while still married, but her husband persisted in unbelief. Her statement raises an important question: Does oneness in marriage require that you and your husband both love Jesus? Both attend church? Pray together?