War On Christianity? Of course not..try telling that to Fox though

I am just putting this out there as anecdote about being raised half-assed Christian (which is often how it is - as perfectly depicted in The Simpsons).

When my parents started their (my) family out in the country, they noticed a local Mennonite church and knew some of the neighbors went there. They figured it was a decent community "thing to do" by taking us kids there and whatever. It was a place to meet other people and have social functions and stuff. For me it was all pretty boring and I don't remember much of it. The youth group was at the point where I split for my own reasons - that's when the authority of the youth pastors can get cultish.

Anyways, over the ensuing years there have been all kinds of ups and downs within the church communities themselves, regular health problems or maybe even more controversial things that inflame bickering and backstabbing in the church, and all kinds of people have left the church and lost their faith. Even the more holy-rolling ones that I know of have left multiple churches over the years for reasons of social politics and feeling like it was all unnecessary or unfulfilling.

So I guess what I am really trying to say is that the modern world and its modern issues, when confronted with so-called modern Christians, will have its own effect on faith that will be on par with a "war on Christianity" - except that it's not at all a conspiracy, it's just a foundation that is falling down on its own. Unfortunately the Christian networks of churches have themselves turned into a kind of business. Pastors, youth pastors, secretaries, the specific denominations church funds and building etc. And there are many competing Christian corporations - sometimes you can see more than 2 churches in one block (just like seeing a Burger King and a McDonalds - yeah I just wrote that).

So... maybe we do need a war on Christianity? I am just sayin...

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Onslaught2996

There are always anti-christian threads on ATS. Vocal minorities try to antagonize with stunts like the Baphomet statue proposed in Oklahoma for instance or atheist monuments which seems sort of an oxymoron. There is clearly some merit whether it is justified or not is a matter of perspective.

How is that anti-Christian? Wouldn't the statue be pro-Baphomet and the monument pro-atheist? What gives Christians the right to measure everything against their standard?

You are really asking how Baphomet, sponsored by self professed satanist( The Church of Satan) in this instance, is anti-christian? That is some nice spin.

Why do atheist need monuments on state property if they have a problem with religious iconography on state property? Two wrongs make a right? Taking the moral...err...taking the materialist approved high ground?

All I am seeing in this thread is a bunch of hypocrisy. I am defending my view you are defending yours but in the end it comes down to fire with fire but that will just leave a smouldering rubble...

The whole thing reminds me of hipsters. If you go around wearing a goofy mustache , dork glasses, and scarves/suspenders or what have you to be ironic isn't there a point where you are the very thing you are parodying?

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: NihilistSanta

I find it funny that those who have taken to atheism are so preoccupied with religion. Why should they even care about things they don't believe in and which have hardly affected legislation (their life) for some years now.

It is hard to believe no one called you on that BS yet. Religious freedom laws that will allow businesses to refuse service to others on religious grounds. Measures such as that are going on in many states and it is just the tip of the iceberg. To say religion has hardly affected legislation is completely false and remarkably uninformed for an ATS member.

Why would anyone care about a force that permeates government of the country they live in.

I see that kind of statement all the time it strikes me as idiotic every time. Some of the politicians sound like they are giving sermons instead of political speeches with all the God name drops.

Once the legislatures show they make decisions based off of reason and evidence instead of their religious denomination at that point you will have a point.

You don't understand what a constituency is do you? Perhaps some of it is in response to a perceived war on Christianity? The rest is just pandering which goes hand in glove with politics. They clearly use some reasoning and evidence it is just not what appeals to you. The reason that force "permeates" the country is because at some point the vast majority wanted it that way...

originally posted by: NihilistSanta

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Onslaught2996

There are always anti-christian threads on ATS. Vocal minorities try to antagonize with stunts like the Baphomet statue proposed in Oklahoma for instance or atheist monuments which seems sort of an oxymoron. There is clearly some merit whether it is justified or not is a matter of perspective.

How is that anti-Christian? Wouldn't the statue be pro-Baphomet and the monument pro-atheist? What gives Christians the right to measure everything against their standard?

You are really asking how Baphomet, sponsored by self professed satanist( The Church of Satan) in this instance, is anti-christian? That is some nice spin.

Why do atheist need monuments on state property if they have a problem with religious iconography on state property? Two wrongs make a right? Taking the moral...err...taking the materialist approved high ground?

All I am seeing in this thread is a bunch of hypocrisy. I am defending my view you are defending yours but in the end it comes down to fire with fire but that will just leave a smouldering rubble...

By the same token, is a Christian statue anti-Satanist? How dare those Christians put up a statue to aggravate the Satanists. Atheism isn't a religion.

I'm guessing the atheists were trying to make the point that religious iconography doesn't belong on state property. Did you really not get that?

Perhaps if the Christians took the high road, pun intended, and minded their own business and stopped proselytizing and claiming they were under siege, all this crap would stop.

a reply to: Onslaught2996

Since you aren't Christian, (or don't sound like one), you can't even possibly have a clue that Christians are or aren't under attack, although many people who aren't Christian, can see it plain enough.

I can see it, although I would bet Fox news might be embellishing a bit as all news media do. Or ignoring it when it happens like all the rest do.

By not being Christian and making this claim it is a ridiculous notion, you are also attacking.

The recent killing of Christians was just a fluke maybe?

Same as when someone is abused in some way and people tell them it must be something they did to warrant it. That is how it looks when people jump on board and play down these things.

a reply to: greencmp

Yes. Why would you do that? Read what I said.

Talk about wild leaps of circular logic!

1. Only Christians can know if there is a cultural/societal attack underway on Christians.

2. Not being Christian and claiming that there is not attack underway, is an attack.

3. The recent killing of 21 Christians by terrorists represents a worldwide attack on Christianity.

4. If one says there is no unified attack on Christians, that is the same as telling an abused person that they are to blame for their abuse.


The first is utterly absurd; prime example of "special pleading." There's no characteristic of non-Christians that prevent them from detecting attacks made on others.

The second merely extends the definition of "attack" to anything any Christian claims it to be. So watch the tightening spiral of illogic ... only a Christian can detect an attack, and an attack is anything the Christian claims it is.

The third is frankly nothing, in my opinion, but gutless capitalization on a horrible, disgusting terrorist act to manufacture evidence for something that patently doesn't exist. How many Muslims died the same day in Iraq and Syria killed by ISIS? Yet, if we described that as an "attack on Islam" we'd be shouted down for playing the race card or some such nonsense.

The fourth is perfect evidence of the victim complex that so many Christians evince. Say anything that any Christian doesn't like, and it's abuse or attack. Argue that it's not abuse, and you're blaming the victim.

What nonsense!

a reply to: NihilistSanta

Family Guy also referred to Islam with the line "But not a smelly brown God"...



Please tell me more about Family Guy's singular attack on religion?

Maybe we could discuss American Dad which lauds Jesus in every episode while denigrating Islam?


Btw, I'm not calling this persecution...

Just wondering about how people feel about that happening as well?

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: Gryphon66

So, can you love someone by paying someone else?

Since I'm fairly certain you're not referring to prostitution ...

What do you mean?

Earlier you said:

Exactly, he notably did not say, go form a government which will then do those charitable and religiously significant things.

Jesus didn't have a lot to say about governments, did he? Beyond "pay your taxes."

What's your point? Jesus didn't say a lot of things. If I believed in Him, I'd guess that he thought we were given brains and empathy and a sense of right and wrong to allow us to draw conclusions on our own.

Big IF admittedly.

I took this to be a defense of socialism, government economic intervention and wealth redistribution.

I understood what you meant...


But I've yet to see a single post of yours explain why teaching Socialism should be banned in schools?

Maybe next time don't say "no ideologies" when clearly you're advocating for others to remain.




As someone else asked, how do you feel about censorship?
Against it?
How does your first post in this thread not relate to censorship?
For it?
Pretty unconstitutional, yes?


Whatever...
Floats your boat!

Is it an attack to say that there is no proof that Jesus Christ was the Son of God?

Is it an attack to say that in my experience most Christians are self-righteous and controlling?

Is it an attack to say that Christians in the US typically support government overreach and intervention so long as it matches their belief agenda?

Is it an attack to speak the truth about Christianity?

originally posted by: NihilistSanta

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Sremmos80

We've been chatting in another thread about just how many socialist (and communist and Marxist) elements Christianity actually has.

I'm sure that now is not the time to bring that up here.

I wonder though, do you think Christians understand that they want everyone to either share in their beliefs or stay quiet about it if we don't? And that anything else is going to be exaggerated to the level of hatred, bigotry, and "war"?

It's a very "all or nothing" system.

Hard to believe with the hatred spewed about the religion just how crucial it was in abolishing slavery, the civil rights movement, setting up free education, spreading ideas of charity ( still the most giving religion by far and most involved in humanitarian efforts).

Really? How do you assert that Christianity played such a significant role in the abolishment of slavery while in the same breath, continuing to assert that it was the intent of our founding fathers to create America as a Christian nation?

Where were their Christian beliefs when they allowed for legalized slavery in the Constitution?

Where were those beliefs when they determined that a black man was only worth 2/3 of a white man?

Furthermore, in case you didn't know it, the KKK was an organization who's roots were founded in Christianity and white supremacy. They met in and were protected by churches all across the south, they fought for "separate" education of blacks and supported segregation to the bitter end.

If Christianity has played a significant role in equal rights, (of any kind) it's heavily weighted towards limiting those rights, as opposed to enhancing them.

It's no wonder the religious right in Oklahoma is trying to abolish advanced placement history classes. God forbid we teach the truth about our history, much less the consequences brought on by religious influence.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

But I've yet to see a single post of yours explain why teaching Socialism should be banned in schools?

Maybe next time don't say "no ideologies" when clearly you're advocating for others to remain.

Living and cooperating with others for mutual benefit unmolested is not an ideology.

As someone else asked, how do you feel about censorship?
Against it?
How does your first post in this thread not relate to censorship?
For it?
Pretty unconstitutional, yes?

There should be no censorship and no government funded education. As long as the two remain true, there is no conflict of interest.

When government funded schools begin to oppress communists, I will back you up. I am not kidding either, just don't expect me to agree with you.

Whatever...
Floats your boat!

I wish I could believe that you meant that.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: greencmp

Yes. Why would you do that? Read what I said.

Pardon, my mistake, I probably was in too many conversations at once.

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: Sremmos80

Capitalism is simply a euphemism for free private interaction, how do you prevent that?

Socialism also allows for private enterprise. Really really should start checking into the many different forms of Socialism.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Just spent a little time mulling over your question with a little more objectivity.

I must concede that if I were to be a teacher at your child's school, I could not reasonably consider myself to not hold an ideology.

Therefore, my original assertion that there should be no public education really is the only way to guarantee free (as opposed to no cost) education.

a reply to: buster2010

All forms of socialism seek to make 'public' the resources of a nation, communism specifically seeks to make the world's resources 'public'.

“The Third Way is the fastest way to the Third World” -Václav Klaus

originally posted by: xuenchen
Great deflection away from the massive verbal effort against Christianity.

They shout, scream and yell loudly.

Eh, still, in the US Christianity is by far the majority, and for hundreds of years people have been oppressed in the name of Christianity, both within our countries and externally. Colonialism, the oppression of the Native Americans, and even slavery were justified often in the name of Christ.

All that happening is a righteous backlash against Christianity's stranglehold AND the fact that slowly, it's hold over laws, gay rights, women's empowerment, etc, is slipping.

Taking away Christianity's oppression of others is not a "war on Christianity," lol. It is a war on Christian bigotry.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

All of which has nothing to do with what I pointed out.



Great tangents and red herrings.

a reply to: Gryphon66

No

Yes: vast majority of Christians don't care about what you do in your home.

Yes: most of the Christians I met in oklahoma want govt out of their lives as much as possible.

Yes: your opinion is not a fact.

Edit: a lot of what I read in this thread from "enlightened " people were nothing more than passive aggressive attacks..