Why defend fundies if we are at war with ignorance?

[yosemite]

@presidebt

Double standard my ass. When did I ever say I expected anyone to give a damn about my feelings? I don’t expect any such thing.

Fine. Now we understand where you’re coming from.

I officially don’t give a damn about your feelings, and I’m sure everyone else will be eager to not give a damn about your feelings too. Glad we’re up to speed.

I’m not demanding anyone quit thinking the way they think. The views and opinions of people, however, do inform my opinion of them, and I will chose MY level of involvement with such persons based on my perception of them.

You know what? That’s fine. If that’s all that you want to do—not to associate with people who have thoughts you don’t like, that’s fine.

But it’s absurd to deem someone else’s thoughts as “dangerous,” when they don’t DO anything with the thoughts. If our thoughts are dangerous, well then, every damn one of us is dangerous. We all have unacceptable thoughts all the damned time.

When did I say I was enlightened?

…

Quite trying to turn everything I say into a personal insult against you.

Once again, try to keep up.

It’s not all about you, my dear. It’s not. Really.

If you’d been following my posts, I’ve been ranting about those who do feel this way. There are plenty of them. You don’t think that you are a superior being? Fine. You don’t have smug, condescending thoughts towards those deluded souls who believe in a God? Fine.

@Epimetheus

Ok, but I don’t think using vegetarianism is the best analogy. There are many types of vegetarianism, many of which are designated and defined quite clearly. Many still eat meat, though fish, and some even chicken.

Actually, you’ve brilliantly reinforced my point.

No, “real” vegetarians do not eat fish or chicken. That’s what I 100% believe. That’s what a lot of people firmly believe.

But you think that they do? :shrug: Well, there are a lot of people who don’t agree with you about fundies either.

@MrVisible

I’d like to thank Yosemitebabe for her brilliant illustration of how even non-gay-hating believers are making this fight harder for gays.

If she’d spent half the effort in supporting gay rights as she has on smugly distinguishing herself from the ravening mindless hoarde of her fellow fundies, she’d have actually done the world some good.

Oh give me a break. You have no idea how much I’ve helped or what I’ve done or said.

It seems to me that I’d spend less time bitching about this double standard (and this hypocricy of “I demand that you support me, but oh by the way, I think you’re a moron”) if I didn’t have to deal with it. And yes, I’ll admit, it pisses me off.

And oh, wait! MrVisible called me a “fundie”! How can that be? I don’t fit the definition of “fundy,” now do I? Or do I? Which is it?

@presidebt

And you aren’t paying attention. Last time: I am not condescending to all Christians.

It’s. Not. All. About. You.

Plenty of people are condescending to anyone who believes in a God.

[Triskadecamus]

@Epimetheus

Some people in this thread “claim” to be fundies, yet none of them has fit the criteria in my previous link, have you even read it yourself?

From the very beginning I have tried to make this exact point. Neither you, nor Gobear nor Wikkapedia, nor the Southern Baptist Convention, nor any other soul on earth has the authority to assign someone else to be “fundamentalist Christians.”

Many biblical literalists are as frustrated as you are that I insist that I am a fundamentalist Christian. But still I am. I am a Christian, and I accept no authority on that fact except Christ, Himself. That is the fundamental basis of Christianity. Christ is the only Judge. I am not a Bibliolitrist, I am in fact not any sort of ist. I am merely a Christian. That’s as fundamental as it gets.

When you go chasing after some group name to blame for hatred, you dilute, and misdirect your very valid outrage. It is hatred that outrages you, not theology. There are plenty of homophobic Catholics, and Mormons, and Atheists, and even homophobic Buddhists. Religion is not what is wrong with them; hate is what is wrong. Hating a group, like gays, or fundies is prejudice. Hate is hate.

And when that rare bird, the uncommitted mind is encountered, the message that “Fundies are trying to ruin my life” is not going to appear any more reasonable than “Gays are trying to undermine the moral fabric of our society.” They both sound like convenient rhetorical disguises for bigotry. Don’t play the game by the rules chosen by bigots. Display the hatred as hatred, not as religion. It doesn’t deserve to be viewed as any real religious doctrine; it conforms only to the doctrine of me and mine versus all others.

Tris

[Epimetheus]

Well quite a few catholics don’t view fish as meat either, so who is wrong, you or the vegetarians?

If you can’t understand that Fundies= people that follow the Five fundementalisms of faith, and think that “just anybody that thinks they are one is one.” I don’t know what to call you but stupid. (or too lazy to read a link or two)

BTW, there are an accepted many “types” of vegetarians, no such a thing exists for fundementalism, except perhaps other religions, but that is an entirely different issue.

I’m afraid the issue isn’t about what you think though, unless you can provide citations supporting your claims, as I did on mine. Or are you too offended to support your arguments?

[Epimetheus]

@Triskadecamus

From the very beginning I have tried to make this exact point. Neither you, nor Gobear nor Wikkapedia, nor the Southern Baptist Convention, nor any other soul on earth has the authority to assign someone else to be “fundamentalist Christians.”
Tris

If you follow the Five, then you are a fundie, if you don’t then you aren’t. Sorry, fundementalism isn’t some vague, nebulous catch all, it has a specific meaning, and if you want to believe you are, without actually following the tenats, then you are a poseur.

If you don’t follow the five, yet adamently claim you are, going as far as denying an encylopedia, history, and all definitions of a term so you can define yourself as such, then you are just plain stupid or deluded, and thus your argument or claims are unsound and invalid, and thus have no merit.

[yosemite]

@Epimetheus

Well quite a few catholics don’t view fish as meat either, so who is wrong, you or the vegetarians?

That’s not a discussion for this thread. We’ve had many knock-down, drag-out threads about it, believe me.

I’m afraid the issue isn’t about what you think though, unless you can provide citations supporting your claims, as I did on mine. Or are you too offended to support your arguments?

I think Tris has covered everything quite wonderfully. Much better than I could ever do.

I’m feeling weary of this and I also feel humbled by Tris’s graciousness. He’s far better at these discussions than I am.

Time to take a break and eat my lentil stew now.

[Epimetheus]

I see after posting that you seem to think that fundementalism should mean “good christian” that follows his faith or some other bullshit.
:rolleyes:

Oh well, it is bedtime and the loonies are coming out of the woodwork.
“I don’t care how the world defines it, I say I am what I am, even though the world says I am not, but I’m not crazy, stupid, or demented”

What a maroon.

[Zoe]

Epimetheus: Some people in this thread “claim” to be fundies, yet none of them has fit the criteria in my previous link…

Epimetheus: They all have to, by definition, follow-strictly- the five fundementals though. (many fundie sites refer to people that don’t follow all of them strictly such things as heathens, and “not really a christian”)

I’m sorry that in my response about my own upbringing in a fundamental environment that I did not make it clear that I was responding to the encyclopedia link that you provided. My parents held those beliefs and that is the way that I was brought up. But when I read more, I began to see differences. For example, my parents believed that the Bible was infallible as a rule of faith and practice. The believed that it was the divinely inspired word of God, but they were aware that there could have been mistakes made over time and that some parts seemed to contradict other parts.

So right away my folks were a variable in “fundamentalism.”

(Your more recent link gives an explanation of fundamentalism that is from an extreme element.)

In reading still further in the article, it became obvious that the encyclopedia acknowledged a lot of variables in fundamentalism. Then this comment spoke to some of the issues we’ve been talking about. For whatever it’s worth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_fundamentalists#Brief_History_of_Christian_fundamentalism

The Moral Majority became one of the leading groups, which combined efforts with a broad consortium of conservative, Protestant Christians, which includes not only Fundamentalists, but also Evangelicals, Pentecostals, and conservative (Confessing Movement) members from mainline churches, some Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Mormons, and others. Together, these very widely diverse groups constitute what has since come to be known as the religious right. **It should probably be considered an abuse of the term, to label the religious right a fundamentalist movement in any sense. ** (bold type added)

As I have said previously, I think that opposition to gay rights is coming from the religious right and not from fundamentalists as such.

I appreciate the link. Any comments?

presidebt: I dare you to find a single fundamentalist family that might encourage their children to read something that is total anathema to their beliefs.

When I was seventeen I bought a copy of The Faiths Men Live By – a book about the world’s great religions. When I had finished reading it, my father borrowed it and I forgot about it. It was after his death that the book was returned to me – well-worn with many of the pages falling out.

DiamondJersey: The Bible condemns it; condoning it is basically slapping God in the face.

Maybe God turns the other cheeck.

[Triskadecamus]

@yosemitebabe

Time to take a break and eat my lentil stew now.

Or, as some might say, time to go out and murder some innocent legumes!

Tris

[Ryle_Dup]

Christ what the fuck has this thread devolved into?
I wasn’t going to post but hell, why not?

1. I do not believe the majority of people in this thread who advocate gay rights have any problems with Christians or other faith-based believers that do not cause harm to fellow humans by creating inequalities or by other means.

2. I think that what many of the people here are referring to when they refer to fundamentalists are people who are what you typically think of a fundamentalist, and against gay marriage as well. A lot of fundamentalist christians are against gay marriage, there are exceptions, but for fucks sake, and for the sake of discussion, can we please just let “fundie” or a variant in this thread refer to fundamentalist christians who believe the literal bible translation and who are against gay marriage?

3. Yosemitebabe, while you have a point about non-believers sometimes acting smug towards people who do believe, it really has very little to do with this thread, seeing as most of the gay rights advocates so far have said many, many times, that they respect the beliefs of mainstream pro-gay Christians. I believe your discussion merits a thread, and I think it would be a better idea to continue that within a seperate thread, since this thread is about fundamentalist Christians in peticular.

4. Well, forgot what else I was going to say…

Anyways, fundies (who are against gay marriage and believe gay people are sinful evil etc. etc.) suck.

[Ryle_Dup]

@Zoe

As I have said previously, I think that opposition to gay rights is coming from the religious right and not from fundamentalists as such.

I appreciate the link. Any comments?

I just finished my post and noticed this, and you may be right, ‘the religious right’ might be a better term than ‘fundamentalist christians’.

[yosemite]

@Ryle Dup

1. I do not believe the majority of people in this thread who advocate gay rights have any problems with Christians or other faith-based believers that do not cause harm to fellow humans by creating inequalities or by other means.

I agree up to a point. I don’t think that all of them give a damn what others believe, as long as they don’t do any harm. (I know gobear doesn’t, and I definitely respect him for that.) But, alas, some do have a decided contemptuous attitude that goes beyond what believers do that is harmful, it’s condescending towards anyone with a faith. I saw some of it here and I’ve seen it in previous threads. Not everyone is like gobear.

3. Yosemitebabe, while you have a point about non-believers sometimes acting smug towards people who do believe, it really has very little to do with this thread, seeing as most of the gay rights advocates so far have said many, many times, that they respect the beliefs of mainstream pro-gay Christians.

You do bring up a good point and I do think that you are partially right. Except that I don’t think that as many people respect pro-gay Christians’ beliefs as you think. They might tolerate them, they might not give a damn, they might not want to rain on their parade, or they might respect the person enough to not be rude to them. But “respect” the belief? I’m not so sure—but I’m eager to be corrected if I am wrong. (And just so it’s clear, I don’t expect anyone to respect the belief. Just be polite and not condescending, that’s all I ask.)

I believe your discussion merits a thread, and I think it would be a better idea to continue that within a seperate thread, since this thread is about fundamentalist Christians in peticular.

Yeah, you’re probably right.

Except that I don’t think too many people give a damn about the subject. They want us to “know how it feels,” after all. (I admit, I could just be cynical and cranky, but I’ve run across this attitude before so, you know—whatever.)

Another thing I wanted to add before I go back to slaughtering legumes (;)) : MrVisible, I am so sorry that I don’t spend my time as wisely as you might prefer. I am so mortified that I spent so much energy arguing about an issue that I feel is important and that gripes me. I will try to do an inventory of my time and hey—here’s an idea—why don’t I pass it by you, to see if it meets with your approval?

I have spent too much time recently in Cafe Society talking about Firefly and Star Trek Enterprise. That time and energy could have been spent discussing and defending issues that you feel are important. And I goofed around on the computer today, browsing other websites and posting in other message boards—that time, too, could have been spent debating issues and furthering causes that you feel are important.

How terribly, terribly, thoughtless of me. :rolleyes:

[yosemite]

Ugh. I confuse myself. I think it should read: “I don’t think that all of them don’t give a damn what others believe, as long as they don’t do any harm.” Well, anyway, I hope you get the meaning.

[Kalhoun]

@yosemitebabe

I agree up to a point. I don’t think that all of them give a damn what others believe, as long as they don’t do any harm. (I know gobear doesn’t, and I definitely respect him for that.) But, alas, some do have a decided contemptuous attitude that goes beyond what believers do that is harmful, it’s condescending towards anyone with a faith. I saw some of it here and I’ve seen it in previous threads. Not everyone is like gobear.

I agree with what Gobear said earlier in this thread; there is a huge difference between what goes on in polite, face-to-face society and what goes on in a message board thread. This space is used to express ideas in a way that is socially unacceptable in real life. I believe directness and honesty should be acceptable here. I wouldn’t dream of calling most christians “deluded” to their face (although I will make an exception for some);).

I am particularly bugged by people who speak of their “faith” as if it were “fact.” Those are the people who I have some contempt for. I truly don’t care what you believe, as long as you don’t pass it off as “fact.” Until you come up with something concrete (and none of you have, in 2000+ years) please don’t pretend you “know” your god exists. This is the kind of christian that tries to push their faith into our government, demanding that we all live by the rules of their faith.

(And just so it’s clear, I don’t expect anyone to respect the belief. Just be polite and not condescending, that’s all I ask.)

I’ll try to do better.

Except that I don’t think too many people give a damn about the subject. They want us to “know how it feels,” after all. (I admit, I could just be cynical and cranky, but I’ve run across this attitude before so, you know—whatever.)

I don’t know anyone who deliberately does this because they want you to “know how it feels”. At least, not on a conscious level. I think most people who do this in face-to-face situations are defining a line that you’d better not cross. A protective wall, if you will, just in case you’re inclined to start with the witnessing. I’m sure most people don’t mean to insult you.

[MrVisible]

@yosemitebabe

Another thing I wanted to add before I go back to slaughtering legumes (;)) : MrVisible, I am so sorry that I don’t spend my time as wisely as you might prefer. I am so mortified that I spent so much energy arguing about an issue that I feel is important and that gripes me. I will try to do an inventory of my time and hey—here’s an idea—why don’t I pass it by you, to see if it meets with your approval?

Can you please piss the fuck off, you whiny self-centered little twit?

We’re in the middle of something important here, something that could have serious effects on our futures, something that could finally grant a shunned minority a slice of equality for the first time in history.

And you’re busy whining about how hurt your feelings are. Want people to respect your beliefs? Go out and do the world some good, and earn peoples’ respect.

Meanwhile, can you shut the fuck up for a while? This thread has been about you for pages now. Can we take it for granted that you’ve martyred yourself sufficiently now, and move the fuck on?

[yosemite]

@Kalhoun

I agree with what Gobear said earlier in this thread; there is a huge difference between what goes on in polite, face-to-face society and what goes on in a message board thread.

Yes, true most of the time. But it doesn’t make direct rudeness or condescension any more palatable. And I probably wouldn’t have such a gripe about this if it only happened online. It doesn’t. I’m not saying that it happens a lot IRL, but some people really want to go over the top. (Like those fellows at the party I attended.)

I truly don’t care what you believe, as long as you don’t pass it off as “fact.” Until you come up with something concrete (and none of you have, in 2000+ years) please don’t pretend you “know” your god exists.

Oh, I agree with this. Christians who try to pass off their beliefs as fact (even though they may have strong reasons for believing it is fact) are doing no one any favors. It’s simply not sensible to present a matter of faith as fact.

I don’t know anyone who deliberately does this because they want you to “know how it feels”.

I’ve been told that after I complained about such treatment. (Once by someone who knew full well that I didn’t need to know how it feels.) That was the reasoning. Do a lot of people do this consciously? Probably not. But do they give a damn if someone who doesn’t deserve to “know how it feels” gets to know it anyway? Many probably don’t. I could be wrong, though.

I think most people who do this in face-to-face situations are defining a line that you’d better not cross. A protective wall, if you will, just in case you’re inclined to start with the witnessing.

I don’t witness, not even close. I don’t think saying, “I don’t want to judge and I don’t get all worked up about different beliefs” is exactly prime opening material for witnessing. I think that some of them see a “live one,” and they start in without thinking about what I actually said and without knowing what my actual position is.

I’m sure most people don’t mean to insult you.

Oh, I’m positive that many do.

Look—if someone doesn’t want to talk about religion, it is no problem for me. I feel very strongly about this. I see no percentage in forcing a sermon on someone and possibly alienating them. I see other people do this and all they do is make matters worse. Nope. Not for me. Yikes.

So when I get “the treatment” anyway, I doubt it’s warranted. I try to be very careful to not “witness” in the way that you mean.

@MrVisible

Can you please piss the fuck off, you whiny self-centered little twit?

Mwahaha! I am so not suprised that you’d say that. That’s so funny.

We’re in the middle of something important here, something that could have serious effects on our futures, something that could finally grant a shunned minority a slice of equality for the first time in history.

The OP is about not giving fundies respect, or something? Something about how to treat religous folk, right?

How is my semi-hijack not related to that?

And you’re busy whining about how hurt your feelings are.

I got it that you don’t care about my feelings. And I’m supposed to care about your feelings . . . why?

Want people to respect your beliefs?

No, you might notice, I’m not asking for that. Just politeness.

Go out and do the world some good, and earn peoples’ respect.

You have no idea what I’ve done and not done. And this “respect” thing works both ways. Usually it helps to dish it out if you want to get it back.

Look—you have no right to dictate how I spend my energy and what rants I choose to focus on at the moment. Sorry that my sarcasm about my posting habits pissed you off, but I kind of think you earned that sarcasm.

Now, back to the lentil soup . . .

[yosemite]

One more thought before I get back to the lentil stew and let more gracious people like Tris discuss the issues . . .

I’ll never not care about fairness and decent treatment towards gays or just about anyone. Because to not care would be reprehensible. I have had a small taste of the “social leper” treatment and I don’t want that for anyone else. So believe me, I’ll never stop being supportive.

But it’s tough to take when the attitude amongst some (not everyone, but some) is, “We demand your support, you deluded moron.”

I’d like to also to point out (and I think Tris has pointed this out, far more eloquently), that some people who are unfamiliar or undecided on the issues don’t need their first exposure to all of it to be bigotry, or hostility. As Tris says, this is about hate, not religion.

[vanilla]

Is it really “we demand your support?” or We ask for your non interference?

Well, now at least i know that I am not a fundie by definition.

[lissener]

@Triskadecamus

. . .When you go chasing after some group name to blame for hatred, you dilute, and misdirect your very valid outrage. It is hatred that outrages you, not theology. . .

Again I must call bullshit. I’m tired of these thinly veiled attempts to quash debate. Any attempt to describe who it is you’re talking about, just so each participant in the debate KNOWS who we’re talking about, is PCed into a forced silence.

Anyone who continues, at an advanced stage of a debate, to redirect the course of the debate from substantive discussion to meta-meta-semantics, is not interested in the actual point of the debate; only in clogging it up.

“Well, that’s not what that word means to me.”

“Fine, so for the sake of this discussion, let it be understood that when I say XXXX, I mean those people who behave in such and such a manner.”

“No, it’s more fun to stall the debate by continuing to say, ‘Well, that’s not what that word means to me.’ I don’t have to make a point; I just have to keep you from making yours.”

[Lord_Ashtar]

lissener, it’s been demonstrated time and again in this thread that fundamentalists are not the ones trying to mess with your life. Some are, but it seems to me that a more accurate descriptor would be the Religious Right. Why can’t you just direct your ire at them?

[gobear]

@Lord Ashtar

lissener, it’s been demonstrated time and again in this thread that fundamentalists are not the ones trying to mess with your life. Some are, but it seems to me that a more accurate descriptor would be the Religious Right. Why can’t you just direct your ire at them?

Ahem, your repeated assertion that because one person self-identifying as a fundie does not harbor anti-gay feelings means that no fundies hate gays is a load of horseshit.

Fundamentalists, like the Southern Baptist Convention, are the Religious Right. That you persist in denying this doesn’t speak well for your undrstanding of the politics involved.

Lissener is quite right in denouncing the fallacious notion that one exception in a group counteracts the actions of the majority. I don’t care if your second cousin is a gay-friendly fundie, that doesn’t mean that the fundie churches embrace gay people.