s/o Harold Camping: persecution

[MelanieM]

I feel like im stating the obvious here. We all have "opinions". My point is whats the motive behind sharing such an opinion? Not to say there may not be a time and place, but i think we all know the dominoe effect of deciding to state that opinion. Its not the view that offends, its the venue. It just begs a response and before you know it we all start defending our views which, to me, is not fruitful. We all think our own view is right.

 

But it's a discussion board. What are people here for, if not to offer up their opinions on the things they read?

 

I'm sure sometimes people have many motives for stating an opinion. Sometimes they want to feel heard. Maybe they want to flesh out their viewpoint so that others understand where they're coming from. Sometimes they're hoping to pull out others that agree with them. Or maybe it's about stirring stuff up. Then there's the soap box posts... All sorts of reasons for all sorts of posts. But I certainly wouldn't jump to the conclusion that people are out to offend and insult me. In most cases, I'm betting they don't give a thought to me and my viewpoint at all. People talk and share because they like to talk and share... on a discussion board... where we discuss things, and sometimes disagree on them.

[WishboneDawn]

We all think our own view is right.

 

Why bother discussing anything then, eh?:confused:

[mommaduck]

Good rule I've found to live by in everyday life:

 

I do not speak about Christ, unless others want to, unless they ask. I pray for those people, I will even work miracles for them, but I do not speak to them. I want their soul to open up and to ask me. By asking to hear something, a person willingly listens. ~ Elder Porphyrios

 

 

Basically, I don't have to go shoving my faith down everyone else's throat or try to "convince" them. I leave much of the direction of faith and judging of souls in God's hands, where they belong and are anyhow. Just respect me and allow me to live out my faith as well, aka don't take offense if I do something or believe something different than you.

Edited May 24, 2011 by mommaduck

[MelanieM]

I guess we all need to decide for ourselves what purpose sharing our views serves. Religion is just one of those issues i always tread lightly on, especially on an open forum with diverse views. Of course as a Christian i believe in salvation through Christ alone, and as an atheist one would consider that bunk. So my point is, why go there at all?

 

Well, I hope people don't stop going there! I *love* religious conversations on here! I've learned so much about various religious beliefs on this forum. Some of them make me scratch my head in wonder, some of them surprise me and I find truly fascinating, and some of them have helped me to heal my view of certain faiths by showing me that not everyone is painted with the same brush, even if they identify with the same terms. So I guess I'll go with my favourite phrase from a dear friend... "if you don't like it, you can't have any!" Mabye it would be best for people who are annoyed by conversations that involve religion (or politics, or math, or...) to simply stay away from those threads. (Unless they're feeling an urge to be annoyed, which can happen too! ;))

 

I am enjoying this discussion with you Lisa, so this isn't meant as a way to tell you to push off or anything! Just expressing my desire that people get to have the experience they want to have, whatever that may be. :)

Edited May 24, 2011 by MelanieM

[OnTheBrink]

Well, I can only speak for myself here. Regardless of how I feel about someone else's beliefs, I'd not use derogatory terms such as "fairy tales", "opiate of the masses", "Jesus killer" or anything else. If I was having a respectful conversation with someone of a different belief system about our respective faiths, I'd realize that the use of potentially offensive terms or references would squelch the conversation.

 

I think one could say that they don't believe in Christianity and they don't believe what the Bible says without actually referring to it as fairy tales. "I don't believe those stories are true" gets the point across without offense. So, yeah, I do think a point can be made without insults. That doesn't mean someone's polite disagreement can't be taken offensively, because some people can't handle it when people don't agree with or think like them 100% of the time, but I think most of us here are relatively intelligent and can use words that express their views without using offensive and insulting terms.

 

I'm not sure there's a way to say that you think organized religion is a crock without offending someone. :)

 

There. I repeated it for you. :001_smile:

 

And, just for clarity's sake, I'm not one who is offended by the fact someone doesn't believe in what I believe. Honestly, I don't really care, in the sense that I don't feel it's my job to make people believe anything.

 

So, it doesn't bother me at all that there are people here who are against Christianity, just as I doubt they much care about my thoughts on their beliefs. But, the difference is, how is that opinion expressed? A dialog can ensue with "My experience has been hurtful/negative/ridiculous/whatever" but "I think your religion is a crock" pretty much slams the door on anything other than an attempt to insult.

[WishboneDawn]

Mabye it would be best for people who are annoyed by conversations that involve religion (or politics, or math, or...) to simply stay away from those threads. (Unless they're feeling an urge to be annoyed, which can happen too! ;))

 

Yes. :001_smile:

[Joy at Home]

Why bother discussing anything then, eh?:confused:

 

You dont consider religion a bit more controversial than other topics (maybe not shopping carts, of course)? If i stated my opinion, unsolicitedly, that i think atheism is a crock and theyre all going to hell (which inever would, for the record), dont you think id get some pretty snippy responses? Sure, we could "discuss" it, but it wouldget shut down fast.

 

**** ipod, i cant keep up.

 

Lisa

[Joy at Home]

There. I repeated it for you. :001_smile:

 

And, just for clarity's sake, I'm not one who is offended by the fact someone doesn't believe in what I believe. Honestly, I don't really care, in the sense that I don't feel it's my job to make people believe anything.

 

So, it doesn't bother me at all that there are people here who are against Christianity, just as I doubt they much care about my thoughts on their beliefs. But, the difference is, how is that opinion expressed? A dialog can ensue with "My experience has been hurtful/negative/ridiculous/whatever" but "I think your religion is a crock" pretty much slams the door on anything other than an attempt to insult.

 

Yes. If real dialog is desired.

[WishboneDawn]

There. I repeated it for you. :001_smile:

 

And, just for clarity's sake, I'm not one who is offended by the fact someone doesn't believe in what I believe. Honestly, I don't really care, in the sense that I don't feel it's my job to make people believe anything.

 

So, it doesn't bother me at all that there are people here who are against Christianity, just as I doubt they much care about my thoughts on their beliefs. But, the difference is, how is that opinion expressed? A dialog can ensue with "My experience has been hurtful/negative/ridiculous/whatever" but "I think your religion is a crock" pretty much slams the door on anything other than an attempt to insult.

 

Thank you for the play-by-play of our dialogue! :D

 

Maybe it's just me. I spent a couple of years on an atheist discussion board (I was doing my Education for Ministry course and found a lot of people there, atheists and Christians, with a very deep knowledge of Biblical scholarship and criticism) and so I had to develop a pretty think (oops - thick. Although "think" is sort of funny) skin. I think I'm actually more tolerant these days of some atheist views than some Christian ones. Completely tainted, I am. :)

 

I did find though that by being there and not getting offended and letting things slide I never would have before I also got to have some discussions that I never would have had otherwise. Maybe this isn't the message board for those kind of discussions but it would be sort of nice if there were section where you were warned that you would have to put on your flame-proof panties before you entered. :D

Edited May 24, 2011 by WishboneDawn

[LauraGB]

I guess we all need to decide for ourselves what purpose sharing our views serves. Religion is just one of those issues i always tread lightly on, especially on an open forum with diverse views. Of course as a Christian i believe in salvation through Christ alone, and as an atheist one would consider that bunk. So my point is, why go there at all?

 

Education, information, discussion, broadening one's views, understanding, all of which lead to tolerance and acceptance...hopefully.

 

I understand what you are saying, though. And I find it interesting that most of us who have participated in this thread are all agreeing with the "live and let live" thing, we are all just saying it differently. :) It's hard to let one's guard down when it comes to something that is a part of who they are, but it is important to "hear" what others are saying and ponder it for a while - it's not necessary to come out and agree with it or not, just to hear it. Diversity is alive and well every where in the world, not just here.

[Dolphin]

Yeah, I think I agree with you.

 

There is a vocal group out there who does try to make all of Christianity look a certain way and fit a certain mold. They do tend to speak for all Christians, and the rest of us get painted with their brush, like it or not.

 

Religion is hard because people are so passionate about it. And it quickly switches from I think I am right to I am right, therefore everyone else must be wrong. I am not sure how we think about these things or talk about them without either taking the hardline "right' position or moving into moral relativism, where everyone can be right and it doesn't matter. I just don't know if people can talk about religion without offending somehow.

 

:iagree:

 

There is a lot of that out there. I end up in a lot of talks IRL that don't end up this way. We tend to talk more about our own spirituality. By being respectful of each others beliefs and embracing our own ignorance. When it comes to God, I have faith that he makes available to me the information that I *need* to know. If there is something that I do not understand, I just put my trust in him that he has it handled. I *try* to not worry about who is right and wrong in the small stuff. It also helps that my parents and sister don't believe in God, I am the oddball in my family. I started walking to church when I was 8. They never banned me, but the did all think it was very odd. I don't know how it will differ for my children being raised in a Christian household, but I think my upbringing helps me in my faith based conversations with others.

[twoforjoy]

Try being the child in a classroom that gets slapped by the teacher for telling the teacher that they believe it's immoral after a class on the subject (yes, real case). Yes, slapping a student is unacceptable under all circumstances, but the point is, students get targeted in various ways if they don't embrace, not just endure, the status quo.

 

Gay students, though, are also targeted, over and over, in many school districts. I think it would be difficult to argue that Christian students face more bullying and harassment, with the complicity of teachers and administrators, than gay students.

[herbalgirl]

I find the difference in perceptions interesting. I see a greater quantity of arguments between different varieties of Christian than I see of Other v Christian.

 

I agree with this 10000%.

[kchara]

Gay students, though, are also targeted, over and over, in many school districts. I think it would be difficult to argue that Christian students face more bullying and harassment, with the complicity of teachers and administrators, than gay students.

 

I don't think that was the point. The point was that there is bullying, harassment, and discrimination against Christians, and saying there isn't or that it's not as bad as whatever-other-group doesn't make it any less wrong. Discrimination, bullying, and harassment are wrong, period, no matter what group it is aimed towards.

[mommaduck]

Gay students, though, are also targeted, over and over, in many school districts. I think it would be difficult to argue that Christian students face more bullying and harassment, with the complicity of teachers and administrators, than gay students.

 

I never stated that Christian students face it "more". I do believe that in certain areas they do. In most areas, no, they would not. My point is, that like the gay student, they should not have to face it at all. Just because a group is "less targeted" does not make targeting right.

[Mejane]

I confess that I haven't read this whole thread - just the first page - (this one, nor the other Camping one) but there is a family at my church that came here from Africa. The mother and children left first, with their father following behind. They fled Africa because he was a Christian pastor there and was truly persecuted. He has the scars on his back to prove it.

 

 

 

Yup. Just try being Christian in North Korea, the Middle East, or many African countries. Christians persecuted here? Really, it's to laugh.

[TXMomof4]

:confused: I wasn't saying religion IS a crock, I was saying that I wasn't sure there was a way to express that without offending some people. Melanie threw you a life line there...

 

I'm a Christian who happens to think organized religion is a pretty neat thing. I just understand that some people think it's a crock, am not particularly offended by that view and am at a loss as to how they'd express it without sending some people off the deep end.

 

Ah well, take offense if you wish.

 

ETA: NM. I'm just going to settle for banging my head on my desk.

 

It's one thing to say "I believe religion is a crock." and a completely different thing to take it to the next level and question the intelligence of anyone who follows religion. There are many things I think are probably a load of bunk - in religion, in politics, in all sorts of spheres - but I don't think anyone who disagrees with me is automatically to dumb to know better.

[mamakven]

Yikes! probably already been said, but

 

1. the believers of Harold Camping are NOT Christians- They are forbidden to attend any other "church" and believe in HIS "gospel" if you can call it that, its certainly NOT good news. Its a CULT

 

2. Our country is in NO way, shape or form "Christian" It is a secular culture, in which the secular people are labled "Christian" for lack of a better description.

[WishboneDawn]

It's one thing to say "I believe religion is a crock." and a completely different thing to take it to the next level and question the intelligence of anyone who follows religion. There are many things I think are probably a load of bunk - in religion, in politics, in all sorts of spheres - but I don't think anyone who disagrees with me is automatically to dumb to know better.

 

Agreed.

 

I'd think it would still be neat to address my original point though. Is there a way someone could say religion is a crock that we believers wouldn't be offended by? Is it a matter of wording or is the the idea itself so that however a person communicated it the believer would be offended?

 

Is there a way for someone who believes people who don't believe in a Christian God will go to Hell to state that without offense or it it the idea. Personally, I think that kind of statement should be acceptable as well.

 

Neither idea is comfortable for someone to hear who doesn't agree with it but I'm not sure that means those opinions shouldn't be aired. If only because we then get a chance to challenge them.

[mommaduck]

Yikes! probably already been said, but

 

1. the believers of Harold Camping are NOT Christians- They are forbidden to attend any other "church" and believe in HIS "gospel" if you can call it that, its certainly NOT good news. Its a CULT

 

2. Our country is in NO way, shape or form "Christian" It is a secular culture, in which the secular people are labled "Christian" for lack of a better description.

 

Agree with point #2. But for the sake of argument, would you say that any other person that are forbidden to attend another type of church, or that "homechurch" aren't Christians?

[WishboneDawn]

Agree with point #2. But for the sake of argument, would you say that any other person that are forbidden to attend another type of church, or that "homechurch" aren't Christians?

 

Agreed. :) I don't think it's such a big deal to accept that we Christians have our crazy cultish cousins. Every movement and group tends to have its wild fringe. Let's acknowledge their Christianity so that we can have a chance at welcoming back into balance and sanity.

[mommaduck]

Agreed. :) I don't think it's such a big deal to accept that we Christians have our crazy cultish cousins. Every movement and group tends to have its wild fringe. Let's acknowledge their Christianity so that we can have a chance at welcoming back into balance and sanity.

 

Yes, because they may just be Christians...just ones that are severely misled. How many of us have converted from one branch to another, or grown in a drastically different direction than we once were or were raised in and feel we weren't "not" Christian, just felt we were misled or not mature enough to discern well at those times?

[SailorMom]

I do think there is a way of saying you think organized religion is a "crock" in a way that is appropriate and not offensive. In the same way that Baptists disagree with Lutherans, or Catholics with Muslims, etc.

Obviously there are a multitude of beliefs out there, and if you (as in anyone) state a belief in one, you are by definition of belief, stating that you do not believe in the rest. You may not be 100% certian, and there is grey area there, but for all intents and purposes (for example) my being a Deist by default lets people know that I do not believe there is validity in any other faith system.

Now - I don't condemn other's beliefs, and in my case, Deists do no believe their way is the only way - it is just one path of many. But if I agreed with other faiths, I wouldn't be a Deist.

So - I suppose simply by stating that you do not think organize/revealed/whatever religion is a valid faith - you're pretty much saying it's a crock in a nice way.

[Night Elf]

Try being the child in a classroom that gets slapped by the teacher for telling the teacher that they believe it's immoral after a class on the subject (yes, real case). Yes, slapping a student is unacceptable under all circumstances, but the point is, students get targeted in various ways if they don't embrace, not just endure, the status quo.

 

:iagree: The last time my dd13 was in public school was 5th grade. I took her out because the majority of her classmates taunted her about going to hell because she didn't believe in God. The teacher didn't know how to handle it because it was a religious matter. She said she would tell the kids they needed to treat each other kindly. Personally, I didn't see a way for it to be handled either. No matter what, my dd was going to be bullied and harrassed for not being part of the majority. It is what it is. And it sucks to be in the minority no matter which side or belief you hold.

[Spy Car]

No president has ever been (and will not soon be) a non-Christian.

 

Not so. Most of the early presidents (Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison) were Diests more than "Christians."

 

Thomas Jefferson most certainly was not a Christian in any orthodox sense of the word.

 

Bill

[mommaduck]

:iagree: The last time my dd13 was in public school was 5th grade. I took her out because the majority of her classmates taunted her about going to hell because she didn't believe in God. The teacher didn't know how to handle it because it was a religious matter. She said she would tell the kids they needed to treat each other kindly. Personally, I didn't see a way for it to be handled either. No matter what, my dd was going to be bullied and harrassed for not being part of the majority. It is what it is. And it sucks to be in the minority no matter which side or belief you hold.

 

Exactly.

[MelanieM]

Agreed.

 

I'd think it would still be neat to address my original point though. Is there a way someone could say religion is a crock that we believers wouldn't be offended by? Is it a matter of wording or is the the idea itself so that however a person communicated it the believer would be offended?

 

Is there a way for someone who believes people who don't believe in a Christian God will go to Hell to state that without offense or it it the idea. Personally, I think that kind of statement should be acceptable as well.

 

Neither idea is comfortable for someone to hear who doesn't agree with it but I'm not sure that means those opinions shouldn't be aired. If only because we then get a chance to challenge them.

 

I think it comes down to the individual interpretation of comments more than the opinion itself. I have no issue with someone believing I will go to Hell because I don't accept their God as my own. It's not offensive to me, because it is completely irrelevant to my life and, as far as I'm concerned, is a crock. ;) (That's meant to be light-hearted, there. ;)) Telling me I'm going to a place I'm convinced doesn't exist is just not going to get my feathers ruffled. BUT... don't be surprised if people think it's goofy to be suggesting such a thing. If a person is allowed to believe non-Christians are destined for hell and it's incomprehensible that they don't want to see the truth in Jesus, then those non-Christians are allowed to feel it's incomprehensible to believe all that stuff in the first place.

 

But some people have thicker skins than others. I'm pretty thick-skinned, and am sometimes surprised to find that people are bothered by things that don't even hit my radar. I think people who are easily offended/upset/insulted should protect themselves however they see fit. And certainly, people should consider those more sensitive types when entering into a conversation. I'm just not sure it's a reasonable expectation to never bump into anything that you might possibly find bothersome on a public forum where group discussion is happening.

Edited May 24, 2011 by MelanieM

[Mejane]

Thomas Jefferson most certainly was not a Christian in any orthodox sense of the word.

 

Bill

 

So much so that he rewrote the Bible sans miracles. :)

[Spy Car]

So much so that he rewrote the Bible sans miracles. :)

 

Yep.

 

Bill

[MelanieM]

I also think a big issue can be whether or not you believe there is only one truth, and how you take it when people disagree with what you believe is true. To be more specific... I can say "well, I don't think that's true" and it doesn't actually mean "you're wrong". It just means that whatever it is we're discussing isn't the truth for me. I still support your right for it to be the truth for you. But if you don't believe in the possibility of multiple versions of truth, or if you are the type to feel defensive in the face of hearing that not everyone agrees with your truth, then it's a stick subject to navigate. Perspective makes a big difference.

[HistoryMom]

:iagree: The last time my dd13 was in public school was 5th grade. I took her out because the majority of her classmates taunted her about going to hell because she didn't believe in God. The teacher didn't know how to handle it because it was a religious matter. She said she would tell the kids they needed to treat each other kindly. Personally, I didn't see a way for it to be handled either. No matter what, my dd was going to be bullied and harrassed for not being part of the majority. It is what it is. And it sucks to be in the minority no matter which side or belief you hold.

 

We homeschool because of this as well. For DD7, it started in first grade.

[Night Elf]

Agreed.

 

I'd think it would still be neat to address my original point though. Is there a way someone could say religion is a crock that we believers wouldn't be offended by? Is it a matter of wording or is the the idea itself so that however a person communicated it the believer would be offended?

 

Is there a way for someone who believes people who don't believe in a Christian God will go to Hell to state that without offense or it it the idea. Personally, I think that kind of statement should be acceptable as well.

 

Neither idea is comfortable for someone to hear who doesn't agree with it but I'm not sure that means those opinions shouldn't be aired. If only because we then get a chance to challenge them.

 

I like to use "I" statements, and I am not responsible for someone putting themselves into my shoes. For example, I can say "I think orange shirts make my skin look sick." But I guarantee someone will come along and be offended that I'm suggesting the color orange can make a person look sick.

 

I do not think it is possible to ever make any statement about anything that won't offend someone somewhere.

[mommaduck]

Personally, I have no problem with someone saying they think it's a crock or equivalent to fairy tales. That's truly what they think. It's not an attack on the person that holds faith in it. There are different levels of feeling on such things. Crock and fairy tales are two of them. I'd be more offended if they blamed everything on Christianity or on religion (however, I would simply disagree with them). True offense would be if they called all people of "name that religion" crazy/fanatical/evil/etc. I think a lot of things are a crock. I think some things have certain worth to them, but don't place my faith or practice in them.

 

But then, I'm straight forward like that.

[Mejane]

I do not think it is possible to ever make any statement about anything that won't offend someone somewhere.

 

I am offended by this statement.

 

 

;)

[mommaduck]

I am offended by this statement.

 

 

;)

 

I'm offended that you would say you're offended.

[Spy Car]

I am offended by this statement.

 

 

;)

 

Me too :lol:

 

Bill

[nmoira]

 

I'd be more offended if they blamed everything on Christianity or on religion (however, I would simply disagree with them).

I'm with Octavia Butler on this one: What will doom us as a species is that we are intelligent and have a tendency towards hierarchical organizational structures. Religion is but one way to organize.

[texasmama]

I'd think it would still be neat to address my original point though. Is there a way someone could say religion is a crock that we believers wouldn't be offended by? Is it a matter of wording or is the the idea itself so that however a person communicated it the believer would be offended?

 

How about, "I don't subscribe to that belief system."

 

OR "I don't understand how people could have faith in God."

 

OR "It seems to me that in order to believe in X,Y,Z religion, one would need to suspend critical thinking."

 

None of those offend me. I have plenty of non Christian friends of all different types of religions or lack thereof. We talk to each other in a way that is respectful and although we disagree, we are not unkind or offensive to each other.

 

On a message board, many things are lost in translation. One must work much harder to express an opinion without offending others. Some people aren't interested in avoiding offending others. Others are so easily offended that no one could disagree with something as closely held as religion without offense being taken.

 

Is there a way for someone who believes people who don't believe in a Christian God will go to Hell to state that without offense or it it the idea. Personally, I think that kind of statement should be acceptable as well.

 

I think this is the harder one to express in a way that is not condemning. I wouldn't ever tell people that they are going to hell. I don't have any personal knowledge of this, after all. My beliefs are my beliefs, but I have no proof. What if I am wrong? I trust God to sort all things out in the end, while I live my life as best I can to honor Him. Most faith is best lived out silently, IMO.

 

(I am a lover, not a fighter, and I hope I don't regret attemting to enter this discussion.;))

[TXMomof4]

Personally, I have no problem with someone saying they think it's a crock or equivalent to fairy tales. That's truly what they think. It's not an attack on the person that holds faith in it. There are different levels of feeling on such things. Crock and fairy tales are two of them. I'd be more offended if they blamed everything on Christianity or on religion (however, I would simply disagree with them). True offense would be if they called all people of "name that religion" crazy/fanatical/evil/etc. I think a lot of things are a crock. I think some things have certain worth to them, but don't place my faith or practice in them.

 

But then, I'm straight forward like that.

 

:iagree: There are things in my own little branch of religion that I think are a crock, but it's not harming me to live with them. I'll identify them if someone asks me, but just because we disagree doesn't mean I tell them I'm smarter/better educated/more enlightened. It means we disagree. If we are having an honest discussion it is much easier to realize they come by their beliefs honestly and with thought, much like I do. We have just come to different conclusions.

 

That kind of respect isn't possible if the broad brush is used to paint anyone with differences as "less than". I don't think I have the intellect or the energy to live up to those kind of judgement calls.

[Lady Florida.]

 

OR "I don't understand how people could have faith in God."

 

OR "It seems to me that in order to believe in X,Y,Z religion, one would need to suspend critical thinking."

 

 

 

 

But there are people, even on this board, who find the above statements to be personally offensive. I agree with Dawn in that it's very difficult to express non-belief in a way that doesn't offend. So the answer is either to never speak about your non-belief or to risk offending.

 

I'm annoyed but not offended by proselytizing. Like a PP said, how can I be offended that someone thinks I'm going to a place I don't believe exists? I get annoyed because the person is (speaking of IRL here) using my time to try and convince me of something I'm not going to change my mind about. I'm not annoyed by discussions of different beliefs and levels of belief. That's an entirely different thing.

[texasmama]

But there are people, even on this board, who find the above statements to be personally offensive. I agree with Dawn in that it's very difficult to express non-belief in a way that doesn't offend. So the answer is either to never speak about your non-belief or to risk offending.

 

These people are covered under my quote below:

 

Others are so easily offended that no one could disagree with something as closely held as religion without offense being taken.

 

I agree that it is hard, but one can only do one's best (if choosing to discuss it at all). No one statement will be universally unoffensive to all, whatever their religious belief or non-belief.

[Night Elf]

I'm offended that you would say you're offended.

 

Oops, I have to do schoolwork with ds14, but I had to ask if anyone has heard of the term offensensitivity. It is from the Bloom County comic strip. :)

[Mejane]

Oops, I have to do schoolwork with ds14, but I had to ask if anyone has heard of the term offensensitivity. It is from the Bloom County comic strip. :)

 

Had to look it up, and I found this blog article. I think he may be on to something.

 

http://archvillain.wordpress.com/2010/10/09/offensensitivity/

 

(Warning: some bad language)

[sassyscrapperinid]

The Camping thread is not the first time I've been baffled here by the idea of someone who is American and Christian bringing up persecution. How does that play out on a personal, political, our societal level? I just don't get it. The US as I see it is overwhelmingly Christian. No president has ever been (and will not soon be) a non-Christian. No one is protesting the building of new churches. Please help me out here.

 

I'd prefer if this weren't turned into a debate thread, but hoping is the limit of my special powers. :001_smile:

 

I really hesitated to respond to this but I just wanted to say that from an LDS point of view, there is still persecution. I have left the church myself but can remember all too well going to temple open houses and having to walk by protesters. Also, I realize that some feel that if you can walk away from a religious situation then you dont understand persecution.... well, the LDS church puts on a pageant every year in New York. It is a really nice and spiritual event that my family and I had the privilege of attending 2 years in a row while we lived in Vermont. While we were waiting for the event to begin and while in line in our vehicles to leave, we got to listen to the taunting of "christians". So much so that my children were crying. Have you ever been in a situation where you went to a christian gathering such as the huge harvest ministries gatherings where they "save" thousands of souls and had to encounter people taunting and protesting your existence? I have been to one of those many years ago and didnt see one protester. It baffled me and my family as we drove out of the parking lot of this event to pass these people who had their very very young children out there at 11 at night just for the sole purpose of yelling things at us as we left and the children were doing a fine job emulating their parents behavior. This isnt the only time we have encountered such protesters. Have you had to look into the face of your sobbing 11 year old dd and try to explain why they are being so hateful?? Do those "christians" really think they were going to turn any of us from our faith by this behavior? I do have to say that it is behavior like that that keeps me from describing myself as a christian today. I and many others believe it has nothing to with it. They were not trying to "save" us from our faith. At any rate, I want it known that these people had nothing to do with my leaving the church. Also, not to start something else but what about the family on Sister Wives? I do not agree with polygamy AT ALL but what is happening to that family is wrong! If that isnt religious persecution I dont know what is. Why doesnt anyone seem to care about that? I know that there are sicko-s out there- full grown men marrying 12 year olds in some polygamists sects which is disgusting and wrong and by the way, has anyone ever seen the program on tv with people who were not in any way LDS affiliated who are polygamists?? The people married in the Sister Wives situation are all well over 18. They arent hurting anyone but yet they have been forced to uproot their family and move to have some peace in their lives. Some might argue that their children are being hurt by this lifestyle. I would say they arent being hurt anymore than my birth children have been by my adopting 5 RAD children. So, yes there is still religious persecution in the US. And from my point of view, it continues to happen sadly in the name of Christ.

Leaving now, hoping not to get slammed for my post. Sorry if I got on to a rant but this really bugs me.

[nmoira]

 

Leaving now, hoping not to get slammed for my post. Sorry if I got on to a rant but this really bugs me.

Thank you for sharing. :001_smile:

[SailorMom]

I really hesitated to respond to this but I just wanted to say that from an LDS point of view, there is still persecution. I have left the church myself but can remember all too well going to temple open houses and having to walk by protesters. Also, I realize that some feel that if you can walk away from a religious situation then you dont understand persecution.... well, the LDS church puts on a pageant every year in New York. It is a really nice and spiritual event that my family and I had the privilege of attending 2 years in a row while we lived in Vermont. While we were waiting for the event to begin and while in line in our vehicles to leave, we got to listen to the taunting of "christians". So much so that my children were crying. Have you ever been in a situation where you went to a christian gathering such as the huge harvest ministries gatherings where they "save" thousands of souls and had to encounter people taunting and protesting your existence? I have been to one of those many years ago and didnt see one protester. It baffled me and my family as we drove out of the parking lot of this event to pass these people who had their very very young children out there at 11 at night just for the sole purpose of yelling things at us as we left and the children were doing a fine job emulating their parents behavior. This isnt the only time we have encountered such protesters. Have you had to look into the face of your sobbing 11 year old dd and try to explain why they are being so hateful?? Do those "christians" really think they were going to turn any of us from our faith by this behavior? I do have to say that it is behavior like that that keeps me from describing myself as a christian today. I and many others believe it has nothing to with it. They were not trying to "save" us from our faith. At any rate, I want it known that these people had nothing to do with my leaving the church. Also, not to start something else but what about the family on Sister Wives? I do not agree with polygamy AT ALL but what is happening to that family is wrong! If that isnt religious persecution I dont know what is. Why doesnt anyone seem to care about that? I know that there are sicko-s out there- full grown men marrying 12 year olds in some polygamists sects which is disgusting and wrong and by the way, has anyone ever seen the program on tv with people who were not in any way LDS affiliated who are polygamists?? The people married in the Sister Wives situation are all well over 18. They arent hurting anyone but yet they have been forced to uproot their family and move to have some peace in their lives. Some might argue that their children are being hurt by this lifestyle. I would say they arent being hurt anymore than my birth children have been by my adopting 5 RAD children. So, yes there is still religious persecution in the US. And from my point of view, it continues to happen sadly in the name of Christ.

Leaving now, hoping not to get slammed for my post. Sorry if I got on to a rant but this really bugs me.

 

 

I think it is horrible what those (insert expletive) people did to your family and fellow LDS members. It is a sign of ignorance, arrogance, and cruelty.

 

I'm not LDS, and I don't understand ploygamy on a personal level, but I do find it odd that while polygamy was standard practice in the Old Testament - and still is in many parts of the world - Christians are so against the choices of the LDS members. However, I can say that underage marriage isn't ok no matter what culture you're in, though.

 

That being said - I still do not think it is at the level of persecution some are refering to in this post. Not to split hairs, but I do think semantics are important- especially on boards where the only interaction is written. I think the word "harrasment" is probably more in line with what those (bleep)s were doing.

 

Considering that the words torture, tyranny, and torment are synonyms for persecution might make the above posters intent more clear.

[Sputterduck]

I know a blind JW who was sprayed with a hose while walking down the street. He wasn't even visiting that house. Someone had to come to his aide because he was disoriented and in the street and didn't know how to get back to the sidewalk.

 

I also know one who had an attack dog sicced on him for knocking on someone's door. He was a Green Beret before becoming a JW and he killed the dog, unfortunately, in protecting himself.

 

Is that persecution?

[Haiku]

In the United States,

 

 

• Are Christians afraid to meet for church because, if they are discovered, they might be arrested?
  
• Are Christians afraid of being lynched?
  
• Are Christians afraid of being Christian-bashed?
  
• Are Christians forced to pay a special tax due to their religious beliefs?
  
• Are Christians the subjects of forced conversions?
  
• Is Christianity outlawed?
  
• Are Christians forced to live in Christian-only ghettos?
  
• Are Christians forced to wear distinctive clothing or emblems on their clothing?
  
• Are Christians barred from entering certain establishments or from occupying certain places in a public space?
  
• Are there "No Christians Need Apply" signs next to the "Help Wanted" signs?
  
• Are Christians subject to a curfew?
  
• Are Christian churches frequently bombed or burned down as a means of inciting terror?
  
• Are Christian clergy members incarcerated for preaching their faith?
  

 

 

No? Then Christians in the United States are not persecuted, and any Christian who claims they are either has very thin skin, does not believe in freedom of speech, or has a very shoddy knowledge of history. Or all three.

 

Tara

[Sputterduck]

In the United States,

 

 

• Are Christians afraid to meet for church because, if they are discovered, they might be arrested?

• Are Christians afraid of being lynched?

• Are Christians afraid of being Christian-bashed?

• Are Christians forced to pay a special tax due to their religious beliefs?

• Are Christians the subjects of forced conversions?

• Is Christianity outlawed?

• Are Christians forced to live in Christian-only ghettos?

• Are Christians forced to wear distinctive clothing or emblems on their clothing?

• Are Christians barred from entering certain establishments or from occupying certain places in a public space?

• Are there "No Christians Need Apply" signs next to the "Help Wanted" signs?

• Are Christians subject to a curfew?

• Are Christian churches frequently bombed or burned down as a means of inciting terror?

• Are Christian clergy members incarcerated for preaching their faith?

 

 

No? Then Christians in the United States are not persecuted, and any Christian who claims they are either has very thin skin, does not believe in freedom of speech, or has a very shoddy knowledge of history. Or all three.

 

Tara

 

In that case:

 

"During the 1930s and 1940s, some US states passed laws that made it illegal for Jehovah's Witnesses to distribute their literature, and children of Jehovah's Witnesses in some states were banned from attending state schools. Mob violence against Jehovah's Witnesses was not uncommon, and some were murdered for their beliefs. Those responsible for these attacks were seldom prosecuted.[Need quotation to verify][69]

After a drawn-out litigation process in state courts and lower federal courts, lawyers for Jehovah's Witnesses convinced the Supreme Court to issue a series of landmark First Amendment rulings that confirmed their right to be excused from military service and the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance.[citation needed][when?]

The persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses for their refusal to salute the flag became known as the "Flag-Salute Cases".[70] Their refusal to salute the flag became considered as a test of the liberties for which the flag stands, namely the freedom to worship according to the dictates of one's own conscience. It was found that the United States, by making the flag salute compulsory in Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940), was impinging upon the individual's right to worship as one chooses — a violation of the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause in the constitution. Justice Frankfurter, speaking in behalf of the 8-to-1 majority view against the Witnesses, stated that the interests of "inculcating patriotism was of sufficient importance to justify a relatively minor infringement on religious belief."[71] The result of the ruling was a wave of persecution. Lillian Gobitas, the mother of the schoolchildren involved in the decision said, "It was like open season on Jehovah's Witnesses."[72]

The American Civil Liberties Union reported that by the end of 1940, "more than 1,500 Witnesses in the United States had been victimized in 335 separate attacks."[73] Such attacks included beatings, being tarred and feathered, hanged, shot, maimed, and even castrated, as well as other acts of violence.[74] As reports of these attacks against Jehovah's Witnesses continued, "several justices changed their minds, and in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), the Court declared that the state could not impinge on the First Amendment by compelling the observance of rituals."[75]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Jehovah%27s_Witnesses#United_States

 

"With the Missouri extermination order Mormons became the only religious group to have a state of the United States legalize the extermination of their religion. Their forcible expulsion from the state caused the death of hundreds due to exposure, starvation, and resulting illnesses. The Mormons suffered through tarring and feathering, their lands and possessions being repeatedly taken from them, mob attacks, false imprisonments, and the US sending an army to Utah to deal with the "Mormon problem" in the Utah War. A government militia slaughtered Mormons in what is now known as the Haun's Mill massacre. The Founder of the Mormons, Joseph Smith, was killed in Carthage, Illinois by a mob of about 200 men, almost all of whom were members of the Illinois state militia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution#Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints

[sassyscrapperinid]

That being said - I still do not think it is at the level of persecution some are refering to in this post.

 

Thanks for your comments here. I just wanted to say though that what I have witnessed does indeed fit into the literal definition posted by a PP of persecution. Just because my family and I were never physically assaulted doesnt mean we were not persecuted. Do I realize that some are dying for their faith? Ofcourse. But I also know that it really wasnt all that long ago when LDS people WERE killed for their faith. Ran from their homes while their homes were on fire.

I do appreciate your supportive comments though. :001_smile: