Is Fox News not mainstream? Certain pundits on that channel hurl derision at the left all the time. I used TAWP as an extreme, but amusing example.
And hey, it’s not like there aren’t plenty of douchebags on the left. But it seems most folks on the left are OK with their favorite media whores taking a few lumps now and then for it. Does the right have a sense of humor when one of their own goes in for some knocks? One would hope…
The Fox news network is viewed by its loyal watchers as being against the mainstream, but becoming part of the mainstream.
-FrL-
South Park may not be “mainstream” because it’s on an entertainment-centered cable station, but I don’t see how you could argue that Team America isn’t. It was distributed through mainstream channels to mainstream movie theaters by a mainstream entertainment company (Paramount Pictures).
So were Michael Moore’s movies, but he seems to take great pride that his efforts are outside of the mainstream media.
This thread is disheartening.
I know a lot of fundamentalist Christians. I grew up as one of them. They are (by and large) people of good will and good intentions. They are (with exceptions) misguided, not evil.
If we Democrats ever hope to win another election, we are going to have to wake up to the reality that most people in this nation are Christians. We will never win hearts and minds by shrill and vitriolic denunciations of “the Christian right” (whatever that is). This is the sort of thing that makes Democrats sound elitist and out of touch. Democrats must have Christian votes. And more to the point, Democrats must have fundamentalist Christian votes. (Or hadn’t you noticed that most black Democrats are fundamentalist Christians?)
Part of the problem, I suppose, is that a few highly visible “Christians” are presumed (wrongly) to speak for all fundamentalist Christians. The so-called “Christian right” is not the monolithic entity that some on this board seem to think. It consists of dozens of denominations, all bickering with one another over various issues of doctrine, and within each of those denominations countless individuals, each potentially open to a rational political argument.
Instead of attacking Christians, we must appeal to the better angels of their natures. (For those with some knowledge of the Bible, there are plenty of Biblical passages available to assist in this endeavor. One reason that Southern Democrats have an advantage IMHO is that many grew up in this milieu and know how to sound the proper chords to reach these voters.)
The phrase “You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar” comes to mind.
I think the stereotype of the “flaming homosexual man” in mainstream media certainly qualifies as “Liberal concerns treated mockingly in the mainstream media.”
Can’t recall when an equivalent right-wing concern was “mocked” in the same mainstream media. It’s certainly not on Sunday morning teevee, which is full of ministers and preachers yakkin’ up the fire and brimstone with nary a cynic in sight. Heck, the only time I can recall a religious figure “mocked” in the mainstream media was the antagonist from the George Burns movie Oh, God!, and even he was counterbalanced by all the other positive examples of religious leaders in the movie.
Lets say that a person’s argument is this: That the bible is against Gays. How can you educate him without denouncing the bible all together? That is what the problem with liberals was in this election, that any attempt to say anything against Christian beliefs such as gay marriage or abortion, was seen as disrespectful.
When we talk about respect here, we should not think about what we think is respectful behavior, since it does not matter if the person you are trying to respect doesn’t see it the same way. Maybe you think you are respecting the Christian-right by acknowledging their faith, but at the same time when you criticize their basic beliefs as ignorance, they see you as disrespectful.
Think about what the Christian-right believes respect is, and then think if you can be respectful.
After all, we respect people so that they can give us the same respect back, so that their will be harmony and peace and all the other good stuff. What good is your respect if no one thinks you are being respectful?
Was/is there any respect from their side? No there wan’t. There was demonizing, marginalizing, accusations, wild exaggeration, etc.
Again, see above. The other side completely lacks any respect at all for anyone who is not “of the fold”.
Turn it around. They can show “us” some respect so we will give back some respect. Like the junkyard dog, I prefer to recognize the hand that feeds me, and remove the hand that hits me.
The main lack of respect is, while some of us would be happy to live and let live (a form of respect), the Fundamentals are not satisfied with that (disrespect). They prefer to attack (disrespect), try to force their ways on everyone else (disrespect), and then cry about mean nasty people when it doesn’t go their way. Fuck them. That’s my respect.
Ah. I see. So you intend to “fight the ignorance” of all relgious Dopers? All of them? Dude, don’t you have something better to do?
Are you speaking for everyone who participates on the Straight Dope? After all, ignorance, is ignorance. So if a religious Doper (and there are plenty of them) doesn’t want to “fight” this ignorance (of religious belief), what then? So what if some atheist/agnostic Dopers have better things to do than to fight the ignorance of all religious belief (as long as the religious person isn’t imposing that belief—is minding their own business), what then? Are they working against the Straight Dope, because they are actively tolerating ignorance?
Are you here to admonish anyone here who merely tolerates religion? Or even (horror of horrors) respects it?
I just want to add a quick note here, before I forget. “They” aren’t Christians. At least they don’t speak for many of us who were raised Christian and still find plenty of ways to oppose what “they” say. There are plenty of us who do not believe their peculiar brand of religion, or their half baked cherry picking of passages taken out of context, or their purely invented superstitions. To simply say “the Christian this” or “Christian that” paints a lot of us with the same brush. We don’t all deserve that. Some of us think as little of them as many of the self-avowed “liberals” do. I tink that will be self evident by they many posts I’ve already made on various subjects. Let’s just call them the Dictatorial Self Absorbed Self Righteous Hypocrites.
Me, I’d be happy with “live and let live”. As in, you go over there and do what you want, and don’t fuck with me when I want to do what I want. That, in my book, ought to be the founding principle of “respect”.
I really don’t trust the “religious right” or whatever you want to call that block of America, to abide by that founding principle. Quite the contrary, all the signs lately point to a major push to further a right-wing Christian agenda nationwide, e.g. a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, selection of pro-life justices for the Supreme Court, reenstatement of school prayer, outlawing not just Federally-funded, but all embryonic stem-cell research in the US. And that’s just for starters.
I’m sorry, I don’t see this trend as “respectful”. Rather, I see it as oppressive. Don’t like abortion? Don’t get one! Don’t like stem cell research? Eschew all treatments derived from them! Demand school prayer? Send your kid to a parochial school. Nobody is forcing a secular existence on these people. Nobody is saying they can’t worship, or tell their kids that homosexuaity is a sin, or teach that God made the world in 7 days. They’re completely welcome to any and all such beliefs and traditions if that’s what they want.
But why is it necessary to not only live by so-called Christian values, but to impose them on everyone else? I, quite frankly, don’t think it is. In fact, I think it’s entirely wrong to model a society that way. I don’t see this as a debatable point: There are plenty of folks in our country who are not Christian and do not wish be ruled over by a govt. that favors that faith, or any faith, over any other. Separation of Church and State is written in our Constitution for a damn good reason, and if that separation is eroded one iota more than it has been already, I’m going to feel very disrespected. Not only that, I’m going to make my feelings known in rather stark terms; I’m going to say I don’t much appreciate hearing about your God anymore, thank you very much, and really must insist you stop confronting me with Him in matters of policy.
Is that being disrespectful? I don’t think so. And if it’s taken that way, I don’t care. Sorry, the fundies are wrong on that one, period, and I’m not going to feel obliged to “reason” with them, or “reach out”. I shouldn’t have to, and rather resent being put in that position.
YES! I’m doing a Snoopy dance over here!
So, in answer to the OP’s question, yes, I can respect them – one at a time, starting with vanilla.
The ‘fundies’ may be ‘wrong’, but they won. In this result mercantile system we have here, that is the only thing that counts.
There is a difference between attacking religious dopers, and attacking the beliefs that fundamentalists have. There are, I believe, religious dopers that believe in evolution, and the big bang, etc. I see no reason to pick fights with them.
I, personally, don’t intend to do much fighting. I’m very lazy, you see. But if you think this board as a whole shouldn’t fight such beliefs, I strongly disagree.
Ah, but I think you’re backpedalling here. I didn’t just mention evolution/creation, I mentioned stuff like raising from the dead, virgin birth, and so forth, which many Christians—not just “fundies”—believe in. It is sort of one of the “biggies” of the Christian faith. (I won’t say that all Christians believe in these things though—a guy from my church doesn’t believe in the virgin birth.) So, do you want to dispel their “ignorance” on such details, or not?
Also, most all religious Dopers believe in a soul. Do you wish to dispel their ignorance on that as well?
But you expect everyone else to?
So what are you saying here? That the board as a whole should fight the belief in souls, or basic religious concepts, even in cases where the people who believe in these things are not intrusive and have no intention of bothering anyone else? If you’re too lazy to bother to fight their ignorance, why do you expect anyone else to?
I guess a more pointed question might be: how is the belief in a soul, for instance, so terrible that you think that the people who believe in it must be “fixed,” (i.e. have their “ignorance dispelled”)? Let’s say a super-progressive/liberal/socially open-minded person happens to believe in souls. They are not trying to force this belief on anyone else, they just believe. How is this hurting anyone and why is it anyone else’s business?
And just in case you are going to start in with the “What if this person gives money to such-and-such cause because they believe in souls and that cause is a bad cause” or “What if they convince someone else to believe in souls” or something like that: let’s say that there are few to none “what ifs” here. The person doesn’t generally talk about their beliefs to others, is very socially liberal, doesn’t judge others, doesn’t vote in a discriminatory manner, doesn’t try to “convert,” nothing. They just have the thought in their head, and it makes them happy. Why is that so terrible that you think they should be convinced to not have that belief anymore? How is it hurting anything or anybody? If they think they are happier with the belief, why should anyone go to the effort to talk them out of it?
What some of you are failing to consider is the fact that it wasn’t just “the fundies” that reelected GWB. Many others voted for him for a variety of reasons, primarily because they believe he would be a better terror warrior than Kerry.
But given our two-party system, is it really a surprise that fudamentalist christians are voting Republican? They have consistently been a reliable voting block for the GOP.
And regarding the Red/Blue divide that some seem to be pushing for, keep in mind that GWB won the popular vote. Millions of Blue staters voted for him, just as millions of Red staters voted for Kerry. The difference is political philosophy, not geography.
If I were in the upper strata of the Democratic party, I would watch the attitude from here on out. if the public denigration of the Red states continues, it will be a recipe for Democratic disaster.
Please note my post above.
Paul Wellstone was quite religious. It’s a safe bet that both Father Robert Drinan and Rev. Martin Luther King believed in the Christian concept of a mortal soul.
These men will seldom be criticized on these boards for their beliefs.
All of this blather about religious voters concerns only one class of religious voters - those that choose to support the Republican candidate. National Council of Churches activists won’t ever be called to account for their involvement in politics.
This is a fact, quite observable. I just wish people would be honest about it. If you want to criticize someone for voting Republican, feel free to do so. But leave religion out of it. It is hardly germane to the discussion.
No, I’m not saying you should respect your opponent, so he will respect you back, and we will all march shoulder to shoulder in peace and brotherhood to a new promised land of enlightenment.
I’m saying that respecting your opponent, even when he’s wrong, especially when he’s wrong, is not just a “nice” thing to do, it is an essential feature of defeating the crazy bastard.
Let’s face some facts. There are tens of millions of fundamentalist christians in this country. They are citizens with the right to vote, and they exercize that right. You can insult them, you can despise them, you can dehumanize them, you can fear them, you can be terrified that someone thinks differently than you do. All I ask is what good will all the pissing and moaning and demonizing and hatred do? Oh, they hated you first? They were rude first? They tried to impose their beliefs first? Tu Quoque. Doesn’t matter. Were they wrong or right to hate you? Were they wrong or right to be rude to you? Were they wrong or right to try to impose their beliefs on you?
If you are right to scream with hatred back at them, then they are just as right to scream with hatred at you. Either both are wrong, or neither is wrong. Remember the discussions we had a while back about “understanding” terrorism? Yes, we need to defeat the terrorists. If you are vastly more powerful than your opponent you can defeat them without understanding them. But the reality is that you cannot defeat the religious right’s social agenda without understanding it. You can’t defeat it with slogans, you can’t defeat it by screaming about how much you hate hate hate it.
How do you get truck drivers and waitresses and construction workers and secretaries to agree with you that (say) teaching creationism in schools is a bad idea? By telling them they are dangerous idiots who don’t deserve the right to make decisions on public policy? Yes, you are never going to convince the Fred Phelps and the Pat Buchanans. So what. You aren’t trying to convince them, you’re trying to convince the people who go to church every week but haven’t thought very hard about the issue.
If you don’t wise up and fight INTELLIGENTLY we are going to lose, lose, lose, every time. Demonizing and dehumanizing your political opponents is about the stupidest thing one can do in a democratic system of government.
Thet wn this time. There will always be a next time.
Lemur 866 is absolutely right.
And we Democrats also need to realize that we received a lot of votes from so-called “fundies” in the election just held. If we hadn’t, the margins would have been closer to 80%-20% in a lot of states. Keep demonizing Christians and the margins may soon approach that range.
And while were at it, it would help a whole bunch if Democrats would stop with the blanket condemnations of “fundies” and “the Christian right.” As I tried to point out in my earlier post, these are not monolithic groups, and it is frankly bigoted to paint them with such a broad brush.
Some Protestants may be narrow-minded. Some fundamentalists may be intent on bringing religion into politics. But I can assure you that not all of them feel this way. Keep hammering at stereotyped “fundies” though, and you’ll eventually drive all Protestants out of the tent.