# Why isn't "fundie" hate speech? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 29, 2004, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709 "2004-05-29T21:51:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2004, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/81 "2004-05-30T16:09:06Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > So you yourself are unable to provide any evidence that is is considered deeply offensive by a significant number of Fundamentalists. > > In any case, the issue is not whether it might be found offensive to some degree, but whether the term by itself constitutes “hate speech.” As many others here have said, there is a difference between terms that might be regarded as slightly pejorative, and true “hate speech.” What’s a significant number? I don’t know of any polls, but I myself am offended by the term as it is used here, just as I am offended by “faggot” and “nigger” even though I am straight and Indian. Do you think any human being would not be offended by the term as it was used in the examples I gave to Flight? Would you at least agree that when it is paired with “whacko”, “loon”, and “nutjob”, it is intended to offend and that it would be reasonable to take offense? Incidentally, I can’t find any post with the words “slightly pejorative”, much less the “many” that you claim. It seems to me that recognizing what you call “true hate speech” is as dubious as recognizing a true Scotsman. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2004, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/82 "2004-05-30T16:15:06Z")
By the way, I did provide “some evidence”. I cited the positive atheists as well as an SDMB Charter Member who is a fundamentalist and called it a “derisive taunt”. If you meant “massive evidence” or “conclusive proof”, you should have said so. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2004, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/83 "2004-05-30T16:22:04Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > By the way, I did provide “some evidence”. I cited the positive atheists as well as an SDMB Charter Member who is a fundamentalist and called it a “derisive taunt”. If you meant “massive evidence” or “conclusive proof”, you should have said so. What I originally said was: > [@Colibri](#): > > Please offer some evidence that Fundamentalists in general find the term highly offensive. This you have completely failed to do. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2004, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/84 "2004-05-30T16:32:53Z")
What I asked for originally was why fundie isn’t hate speech. And your answer appears to be “because I say so”. Now, if you wouldn’t mind answering my other questions directed to you, I’d appreciate it. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2004, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/85 "2004-05-30T17:25:48Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > What I asked for originally was why fundie isn’t hate speech. And your answer appears to be “because I say so”. Now, if you wouldn’t mind answering my other questions directed to you, I’d appreciate it. To demonstrate it is hate speech, you need to demonstrate that it is hateful, in general, to those described by it. You have not even come close to doing so. And until you do, I personally feel this whole discussion is irrelevant. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2004, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/86 "2004-05-30T17:57:13Z")
Certainly your part of it is. You refuse to answer questions. You claim to know what hate speech is but won’t define it. You make false claims about “many people” differentiating between “slightly pejorative” and true Scotsman hate speech. At least Gaudere has given examples. She said, for example, that “raghead” would be hate speech. Asking you to cite a poll or give evidence that shows Arabs generally are highly offended by the term would be obtuse, so I won’t. Almost every use of the term “fundie” here at SDMB is intended to be offensive, and I have documented many examples of it. Your pretense not to understand that it is offensive, given your position with the board, frankly is disturbing. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2004, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/87 "2004-05-30T18:30:28Z")
I see belief systems as being fair game. Religious fundamentalism is not a race or a gender or a sexual orientaion, it’s a freely chosen belief. I respect the RIGHT for people to believe whatever they want but that doesn’t mean I have to respect the belief itself. It’s not hate speech to say that certain religious beliefs are stupid any more than to say that certain political beliefs are stupid. ---
**Author:** ![vanilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f19dbf/32.png) [@vanilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vanilla)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2004, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/88 "2004-05-30T18:39:11Z")
I dunno, Diogenes. Am I a fundie? Maybe I should just call myself a YEC. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2004, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/89 "2004-05-30T18:56:02Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > I’m perfectly willing to accept the prohibition of “hand stabber” right along with “fundie”. Why should we prohibit _any_ words? Instead of fighting to include more words into the “hate speech” ban, I would have thought someone with libertarian values would rather there be no words banned. Or did you completely abandon that with the name change? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2004, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/90 "2004-05-30T18:59:38Z")
I like you , **vanilla** but you have some beliefs which would not stand up to nuch of a rigorous examination (the existence of demons, for instance). However, I don’t really think of you as a “fundie” because you lack the political stridence that I associate with the term. You aren’t trying to force everyone else to think what you think, you don’t pass moral judgement (at least not out loud), and you don’t seem to have an irrational fear of all things secular. I guess mu perception of the term “fundy” includes a certain aggressiveness towards others, not just the beliefs in themselves. ---
**Author:** ![vanilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f19dbf/32.png) [@vanilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vanilla)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2004, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/91 "2004-05-30T19:03:19Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > You aren’t trying to force everyone else to think what you think, . If I did, the political landscape in America would be quite differet. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2004, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/92 "2004-05-31T01:03:00Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Certainly your part of it is. You refuse to answer questions. Since you refuse to actually address my initial request for evidence, but simply dodge around it, I didn’t feel there was much need to answer your questions until you responded to mine. Which you still have failed to do. > [@](#): > > You claim to know what hate speech is but won’t define it. No, I didn’t make such a claim. All I said was that hate speech must in fact be hateful to the people involved. Seems reasonable enough to me. > [@](#): > > You make false claims about “many people” differentiating between “slightly pejorative” and true Scotsman hate speech So you insist that everyone who expresses an opinion on the subject must use exactly the same phrasing and vocabulary? By my reading of their posts, at the least **flight, wring, gobear, Polycarp, Zsofia, Binarydrone, Blaron, Gaudere,** and **TVeblen** have indicated that the context in which a word is used has a bearing on whether it constitutes “hate speech”or not. (Apologies to anyone if I have misrepresented your position.) That is, hate speech is not an absolute. > [@](#): > > At least Gaudere has given examples. She said, for example, that “raghead” would be hate speech. Asking you to cite a poll or give evidence that shows Arabs generally are highly offended by the term would be obtuse, so I won’t. Her comments on the subject seems to indicate to me that she does not regard “fundie” in and of itself to consitute “hate speech:” > [@Gaudere](#): > > The “fundies” I have seen on this board do not seem to object to the term. DuckDuckGoose calls herself a “fightin’ fundie”. Vanilla doesn’t seem to mind either. It seems to me to be a harmless abbrevation, like “pubbie” for republican or “dem” for democrat or “libs” for liberals. > [@Gaudere](#): > > What I tend to object to as “hate speech” is clear-cut pointless slurs (“niggers”, “rag-heads”) and threats of violence against groups. I have banned people for what would be considered hate speech against “fundies”; Kirkland1244, for instance, although I saw that more as a “jerk” banning than a hate speech banning. > [@Liberal](#): > > Almost every use of the term “fundie” here at SDMB is intended to be offensive, and I have documented many examples of it. I will quote the first response in the thread, which is appropriate: > [@flight](#): > > Of course a term that is not in itself insulting can be used that way. I can make just about anything an insult based on how I say it. You cannot classify a word as automatically hate speach just because some people _might_ use it in a perjorative manner. You have failed to demonstrate that the word “fundie,” in and of itself, absent context, constitutes “hate speech.” > [@Liberal](#): > > Your pretense not to understand that it is offensive, given your position with the board, frankly is disturbing. You are clearly very easily disturbed. I of course never said that it might not be offensive to some degree, I just asked you to provide evidence that it was highly offensive to the people it referred to. Evidently unable to do so, you resort to setting up straw men and attacking me. Some fundamentalists on this board do not apparently find the term offensive. To state my own opinion, I think that the word _in and of itself_ is not offensive. It can, like many other words, be used in a pejorative way, depending on context. I would say that fundamentalists can be the subject of hate speech, but that does not make the word fundie by itself hate speech. Likewise, as a white, while I might consider the use of the words “whitey” or “honky” by blacks somewhat obnoxious and offensive, I personally would not consider the words by themselves “hate speech.” They could, however, certainly be used in that way if they were part of a diatribe. And what’s this crack about “given my position with the board?” I am not a moderator, but Science Staff. And if you think Cecil himself has never said anything offensive about anyone, I don’t think you’ve been reading the columns. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2004, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/93 "2004-05-31T06:43:33Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Since you refuse to actually address my initial request for evidence, but simply dodge around it, I didn’t feel there was much need to answer your questions until you responded to mine. Which you still have failed to do. The record shows that I did in fact respond to your questions in my first post when I came back the following day. I found what you asked for — **_some_ evidence** that fundamentalists in general are offended by the term. Your not liking an answer does not constitute my not providing one. You, on the other hand have yet to answer mine. > [@](#): > > By my reading of their posts, at the least flight, wring, gobear, Polycarp, Zsofia, Binarydrone, Blaron, Gaudere, and TVeblen have indicated that the context in which a word is used has a bearing on whether it constitutes “hate speech”or not. Context? Once again, here are the examples I gave Flight, all culled from the first couple of pages searching on the term “fundie”: [idiot](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4910994&highlight=fundie#post4910994), [secessionist lunatic](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4901904&highlight=fundie#post4901904), [just plain loon](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4901129&highlight=fundie#post4901129), [thief](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4899491&highlight=fundie#post4899491), [ignorant relative](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4887835&highlight=fundie#post4887835), [right winger](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4887179&highlight=fundie#post4887179), [asshole](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4875523&highlight=fundie#post4875523), [superstitious bigot](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4875251&highlight=fundie#post4875251), [nutjob](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4847711&highlight=fundie#post4847711), [humorless crybaby](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4840660&highlight=fundie#post4840660), [incorrigible fact distorter](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4826459&highlight=fundie#post4826459),[pornographer](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4803453&highlight=fundie#post4803453), [hate](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4800410&highlight=fundie#post4800410) [group](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4800009&highlight=fundie#post4800009) [member](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4799995&highlight=fundie#post4799995), and [whack job](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=4790674&highlight=fundie#post4790674), to name a few. Would you care to explain how, in those contexts, a person might not be offended or how “fundie” is not the rhetorical equivalent of “raghead”? ---
**Author:** ![Israfel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/87869e/32.png) [@Israfel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Israfel)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2004, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/94 "2004-05-31T06:46:08Z")
For what it’s worth, I’m rather sympathetic towards literalist Christianity (and incidently feel that the hate espoused by certain self-described fundamentalists is unrepresentative of the movement as a whole- but that’s neither here nor there) and I’m very _mildly_ offended by the term ‘fundie’ insofar as it’s often used with the conscious intention of being derogatory. But it’s not so much the word that bothers me, but rather the flippant attitude that tends to accompany it. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2004, 6:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/95 "2004-05-31T06:48:33Z")
> [@Dio](#): > > Religious fundamentalism is not a race or a gender or a sexual orientaion, it’s a freely chosen belief. That isn’t necessarily true. Neurological researcher, VS Ramachandran and others have determined experimentally that there seems to be a link between the brain’s limbic system and religious faith. That’s why you cannot now simply declare that you will believe in God any more than you can declare that you will be attracted to men (or women, whichever is the case). I did not “choose” to believe. It’s just simply that one moment I did not, and the next moment I did. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2004, 7:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/96 "2004-05-31T07:08:22Z")
“Fundie” is generally intended to be derogatory, correct? It refers to all believers in the Bible-as-literal-truth, correct? In other words, it’s a generalization? I don’t see a difference, other than one of degree, between “fundie” and any racist epithet. The statement “crackers/Jews/wops are (insert derogation)” is equivalent to “fundies are (insert derogation)” in that you’re projecting some characteristic to a group of people based on something other than that characteristic itself. Forget hate speech, because I don’t know what that means. “Fundies are shitheads” is equivalent to “Jews are shitheads.” Unless shitheadedness is _literally_ a doctrine of fundamentalist Christianity, that is. Is it? In my opinion, **Liberal** raises a very valid objection. As long as “fundie” is intended as a general slur (it appears it has been used so), and as long as it’s not literally true that Christian fundamentalism necessarily involves whatever negative attribute you ascribe to it, the use of “fundie” is equivalent to the use of any other slur. Less offensive I guess, but equivalent. I can’t begin to say whether that’s hate speech or not, but it ain’t love speech. It’s not even neutral. It’s hate_ful_ speech, at least. What am I missing? ---
**Author:** ![Shade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2bfe46/32.png) [@Shade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shade)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2004, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/97 "2004-05-31T08:05:53Z")
> [@Jimmy Chitwood](#): > > “Fundie” is generally intended to be derogatory, correct? > > It refers to all believers in the Bible-as-literal-truth, correct? In other words, it’s a generalization? > > I don’t see a difference, other than one of degree, between “fundie” and any racist epithet. The statement “crackers/Jews/wops are (insert derogation)” is equivalent to “fundies are (insert derogation)” in that you’re projecting some characteristic to a group of people based on something other than that characteristic itself. Forget hate speech, because I don’t know what that means. “Fundies are shitheads” is equivalent to “Jews are shitheads.” Unless shitheadedness is _literally_ a doctrine of fundamentalist Christianity, that is. Is it? > > In my opinion, **Liberal** raises a very valid objection. As long as “fundie” is intended as a general slur (it appears it has been used so), and as long as it’s not literally true that Christian fundamentalism necessarily involves whatever negative attribute you ascribe to it, the use of “fundie” is equivalent to the use of any other slur. Less offensive I guess, but equivalent. I can’t begin to say whether that’s hate speech or not, but it ain’t love speech. It’s not even neutral. It’s hate_ful_ speech, at least. > > What am I missing? But wouldn’t the same argument prove that “evangelical christian”\* or “American” is hate speach, since some people make the incorrect generalisation that “Evangelical Christians are shitheads” or “Americans are shitheads.”? There has to be something more to it than that. If “fundie” is ALWAYS used in that sense, then it becomes hate speach. But people still sometimes use it as just an abbreviation IME. \*I’m assured by a man who describes himself thus that evangelical is the term used to be mean ‘believing the bible is literally true’, so I bow to his knowledge. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2004, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/98 "2004-05-31T08:10:33Z")
Just quickly to note that the OP is asking for proof of a negative. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2004, 9:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/99 "2004-05-31T09:38:46Z")
> [@sevastopol](#): > > Just quickly to note that the OP is asking for proof of a negative. No, it isn’t. It isn’t asking for proof of anything. But besides that, what’s the problem with proof of a negative? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2004, 9:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709/100 "2004-05-31T09:41:29Z")
> [@Shade](#): > > If “fundie” is ALWAYS used in that sense, then it becomes hate speach. Click “Search” above and type in “fundie”. I leave you to make a judgment. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-fundie-hate-speech/247709.md?page=6)