Why is Christianity so hated?

I believe it's because Christianity is the biggest religion in the country followed by white people (Those who own or run most of the media and other stuff that provides the stuff you're talking about that makes fun of it), so it's the biggest target that people will be able to relate to.
Also, I think the reason they feel the need in the first place is because most people don't take the time to be as spiritual as they used to. If you aren't into that sort of thing, you can't really understand why some people get caught up in it. And without that understanding, all you have is what you can see from the outside, and its easier to see and mock what you don't understand than it is to look deeper and understand what you're talking about.
I have a good experience with Christianity, it's lead me to some amazing enlightenment. But I spent 30 years being agnostic and being one of the people who ridiculed Christianity, but having found God and had the experiences I've had, I have a whole nother understanding of it, and if people looked at it from the viewpoint I do, they would be less closed off to the idea. But it isn't my job to convert anyone, so don't intemperate this as that I'm just attempting to point out that I've seen it from both sides of the fence, and that is why I believe my answer to your post.

I don't think people are becoming anti-christian. I think people are becoming anti-religion in general.

The people are finally waking up to the nonsense that is theism is.

Originally posted by VinceP1974

 

It's amazing how you peolpe think you're so smart and yet you have no clue what's going on in the world.

What "people" would that be that you're lumping me in with? Perhaps you'd also quote me where I'm "think[ing] [I'm] so smart"?
I cant watch YouTube on my phone, so I cant comment on the vid directly, but if its the usual ideas about Muslim immigrants having larger families, you ought to know that the bulk of such notions have been thoroughly debunked as scaremongering sensationalism.
Here's an example on ATS - www.abovetopsecret.com...
Its a long thread so I forget exactly where the issue of population growth came up: somewhere about the middle-ish...
Does that vid address the usually ignored question I asked earlier about why it should be that Muslims would not be like any other group of immigrants to Europe who have historically quickly seen the personal advantages to be gained from smaller families?
Does it also address the millions of non-Muslim immigrants into Europe who also, initially, have larger families than indiginous Europeans & thus can be expected to balance out the demographic?
Finally, in the context of this thread, what is your point exactly? Is it that we should give up hating Christianity to avoid being "overrun" by Muslims, or that we should have more children, or what?

reply to post by Bunken Drum


1 - I'm not your stenographer, if you can't watch video oh well. There are plenty of sources to get infomration about european demographic crisis.

2 - You asked me what I"m telling people to do. I'm not telling people to do anything. I'm not a Leftist.. so I'm not really big on telling people what to think and what to do etc.. I provide information.. people can make up their own minds.

Or at least they used to. Now I'm finding people seem to be getting more stupid and totally unwilling to reconsider their ignorant opinions in light of new information.

So don't insult me with the offensive question of what you should think. What you think is your problem

reply to post by VinceP1974

1 - I'm not your stenographer, if you can't watch video oh well. There are plenty of sources to get infomration about european demographic crisis.

Indeed there are plenty of sources, which is why I asked if the vid was repeating the same old scaremongering that most of those sources contain. I hardly asked for a "stenographer", a simple yes or no would have done. Oh well.

2 - You asked me what I"m telling people to do. I'm not telling people to do anything.

"Should" was a bad choice of words on my part. What I meant to say was more along the lines of 'what exactly do you see as the problem with Muslim immigration?' Which stems from my assertion that the idea that Europe will be "overrun" by Muslims is incorrect. I personally worked out the figures for the UK in the thread I linked before & found that the scare story just didn't add up. Even so, I already knew the idea was balderdash since, FYI, the debate has been going on for a lot longer than 10yrs. I 1st became aware of it in the late 70s, when we were apparently being overrun by Muslims from Pakistan: strangely, it never happened. A corollary to my original mis-phrasing would also be, do you think that the projected doubling of Europe's Muslim population to around 20% has any bearing on why Christianity is so hated, even by non-Muslims?
I note you chose not to answer my question as to which "people" you are lumping me in with, but I am noticing that your tone is becoming steadily nastier, which seems completely @odds with the polite questions & comments I have posted, so I really would like to know what sort of person you think I am that could justify bordering on rudeness?

Well this IS quite the divided thread isn't it?

Rather ironic considering Religion is one of the greatest tools used by TPTB to divide the masses. It instills fear into the people, encourages you to trust others to do the thinking for you and gives you rules to abide by.

Does this thread (and, I am sure there have been others similar to it) just verify that they have been successful?

Belief is one thing that everyone has the right to. It is a very personal issue.

Religion, on the other hand, is institutionalised belief, an organisation used for control. They even have rule books lol.

I think the hatred that the OP was talking about is backlash. Globally, people are becoming more aware, more questioning. Science has permeated the dark areas of what we refer to as religion and the resentment for being lied to and kept in the dark for millenia is bubbling to the top of the pot.

I often think it must be frustrating to have a religious disposition and live in today's times with the kind of laws we have now. eg; 'love thy neighbour' whilst the Gov encourages people to dob them in for breaches of the law....

Just my two cents worth, which I guess is worthless as I live in Australia where we abolished the two cent coin years ago!

Peace, VA

Originally posted by Verum Astrum
Well this IS quite the divided thread isn't it?

Rather ironic considering Religion is one of the greatest tools used by TPTB to divide the masses. It instills fear into the people, encourages you to trust others to do the thinking for you and gives you rules to abide by.

Does this thread (and, I am sure there have been others similar to it) just verify that they have been successful?

Belief is one thing that everyone has the right to. It is a very personal issue.

Religion, on the other hand, is institutionalised belief, an organisation used for control. They even have rule books lol.

I think the hatred that the OP was talking about is backlash. Globally, people are becoming more aware, more questioning. Science has permeated the dark areas of what we refer to as religion and the resentment for being lied to and kept in the dark for millenia is bubbling to the top of the pot.

I often think it must be frustrating to have a religious disposition and live in today's times with the kind of laws we have now. eg; 'love thy neighbour' whilst the Gov encourages people to dob them in for breaches of the law....

Just my two cents worth, which I guess is worthless as I live in Australia where we abolished the two cent coin years ago!

Peace, VA

I see the anti-religion movement as being incredibly shallow and superficial.

For one that side seems to never address the hundreds of millions that were slaughtered in the name of secular collectivism. Why no examination as to why that particular framework has led to so much disaster on such a scale?

Secondly, there is a very ignorant analysis that every religion is the same. All one need to do is compare Europe to the Middle East and you will see the significance of how different religions mold a society in specific ways.


And last, using Europe again... look at what happens when people reject their religion and adopt a fanciful notion of "Multiculturalism" whereby alledged Racism is the new Blasphemy.

And how under the banner, millions of people with a hostile religiously-informed culture have been allowed to form enclaves in many European capitals, living off the State.

Does the Atheist Multiculti Left show any determination to fight against their future cultural annihilation? No they seem to welcome it.

And when other people in Europe do rise up to speak against this therat, or have rallies or demostrations, you will find the Euro-Left counter-protests , often with extreme violence.

So you have a group of people who say that all religion is dangerous. And yet when other people protest the dangers of Islam in their countries, the first group of people protect Islam.

That is the attitude I see very frequently and it makes no sense to me... which is why I am very skepitical of the boasts of people who on the one hand think a Christian Theocracy is right around the corner in the USA and yet on the other mock the notion that there is a global jihad going on right now.

reply to post by calstorm


I wouldn't put Christianity to be the only 'hated' religion out there.
I say in this capacity it would come close to judaism and islam.
Anyway why is Christianity hated:
1) Its intolerent, just as much as Judaism and islam.
2) Its followers are mostly hypocrites: Hypocracy goes right to its core.
3) its followers have so many versions and rationalizations to explain away gobble-de-gook that has no rational explaination.
Id also say have a long look at history also.

Originally posted by KRISKALI777
reply to post by calstorm

 

I wouldn't put Christianity to be the only 'hated' religion out there.
I say in this capacity it would come close to judaism and islam.
Anyway why is Christianity hated:
1) Its intolerent, just as much as Judaism and islam.
2) Its followers are mostly hypocrites: Hypocracy goes right to its core.
3) its followers have so many versions and rationalizations to explain away gobble-de-gook that has no rational explaination.
Id also say have a long look at history also.

Would you say Christians are more or less intolerant than say National Socialists? or Soviet Communists ? or Chinese Communists? or , who is probably no doubt, a hero of our Presidnet, the Cuban Communists?

I honestly ask myself that question everyday.
its like we are normal people then once you say, btw i'm a christian
*heads swivel in disgust*

It seems to me any body who can go along lying ,cheating and
stealing for whatever reason then confess their sins, due their
pennance and be forgiven as often as necessary ,really don't
have the incentive to live anything but an empty,hateful,
bigoted life

Originally posted by Bunken Drum

Indeed there are plenty of sources, which is why I asked if the vid was repeating the same old scaremongering that most of those sources contain. I hardly asked for a "stenographer", a simple yes or no would have done. Oh well.

I have not read this book, but I read a few reviews of it.



I would recommend reading it.

Here's a Washington Post book review

"Reflections on the Revolution in Europe" -- an allusion to Burke -- is the latest in a series of pessimistic books, my own included, treating the conflict between post-Christian Europe and a resurgent Islam. Christopher Caldwell, an editor of the Weekly Standard and contributor to the Financial Times, makes arguments that have been made elsewhere: Mass immigration has changed Europe's demography and is rapidly changing its culture. Many immigrants to Europe have failed to assimilate; many retain or have developed an Islamic identity antithetical to liberal European values. But Caldwell makes these arguments unusually well, in a book notable for its range, synthesis of the literature, analytical rigor and elegant tone.

In 1968, Britain's Shadow Defense Secretary, Enoch Powell, described Britain's immigration policy as "mad, literally mad," and warned of a day when native-born Britons were "strangers in their own country . . . their homes and neighborhoods changed beyond recognition." He invoked the prophecies of the Sybil in the Aeneid: "I seem to see 'the River Tiber foaming with much blood.' " Widely viewed as outrageously racist, this minatory speech destroyed his career.

In Caldwell's view, "All British discussion of immigration has been, essentially, an argument over whether Enoch Powell was right." The answer, he says, depends whether we mean right in the moral or factual sense. Caldwell agrees that the language of the speech was inflammatory and malicious, but he argues that Powell's demographic projections and visions of blood were -- factually -- correct. The story, Caldwell observes, has been similar throughout Europe, an assertion he documents with a catalogue of ties between immigrants who do not seem to love their new European homes and violence, crime, rioting and terrorism.
ad_icon

He does not argue that there is a monolithic Islamic identity or a single set of European values, although it is inevitable that he will be accused of this. He argues rather that there is enough of an Islamic identity, and enough left by way of European values -- attenuated though these may be -- that they are not easily reconciled and, if reconciled at all, will not necessarily be reconciled in Europe's favor. He engages carefully with counter-arguments that there is no cause for alarm, and rejects most of them. He is particularly strong in dispatching the claim that on balance immigration is economically necessary and advantageous for Europe.

He is also good at exposing absurdities in the rhetoric of Europe's politicians and intellectual elites. For example, in 2006, 43 baggage handlers at Charles de Gaulle airport were stripped of their security clearances. An official involved in the investigation took pains to stress that no one had come under scrutiny because he was a Muslim. Instead, he said, "Someone who goes to Pakistan several times on vacation -- that raises questions for us." "So," Caldwell replies, "in an attempt to exonerate itself from the suspicion of policing Islam, the government admitted to policing (for Pakistanis) visits home to one's family and (for others) tourism."

Caldwell is right to note that European politicians have until now been extraordinarily timid in defining the limits of European tolerance. French President Nicolas Sarkozy recently declared that the burqa was "not welcome" in France. It is hard to imagine why the burqa should be any more welcome in France than the slave galley, but the head of the French Council for the Muslim Religion, Mohammed Moussaoui, immediately and typically objected to Sarkozy's statement: "To raise the subject like this, via a parliamentary committee, is a way of stigmatizing Islam and the Muslims of France."

As Caldwell notes, Sarkozy established this council in the hope of promoting moderation among France's Muslims by giving them a greater formal voice in society. Moussaoui's statement, however, suggests the limits of such strategies. Does Moussaoui believe that the burqa is essential to Islam? If not, why is Sarkozy's position stigmatizing to Muslims? If so, why shouldn't Muslims be stigmatized? And given that France is a parliamentary democracy, where better to debate this question than in a parliamentary committee -- would Moussaoui prefer the matter be resolved on the streets?

Caldwell's book raises many such questions. It does not answer them. The strength of this book is not in its original reporting, of which there is little, or the solutions it offers, because there are none. What it offers instead is unusual lucidity and comprehensiveness; a reader unfamiliar with the debate would be, upon finishing it, well-informed. One familiar with the debate will be even more depressed.

Originally posted by MagnumOverDrive
It seems to me any body who can go along lying ,cheating and
stealing for whatever reason then confess their sins, due their
pennance and be forgiven as often as necessary ,really don't
have the incentive to live anything but an empty,hateful,
bigoted life

And what about people who think they dont have to repent for anything at all?

reply to post by VinceP1974


What's the difference? We have laws for people
who get caught lying ,cheating and stealing.
Maybe a few years in solitary would make them
change ther ways.

Originally posted by VinceP1974

Originally posted by Verum Astrum
Well this IS quite the divided thread isn't it?

Rather ironic considering Religion is one of the greatest tools used by TPTB to divide the masses. It instills fear into the people, encourages you to trust others to do the thinking for you and gives you rules to abide by.

Does this thread (and, I am sure there have been others similar to it) just verify that they have been successful?

Belief is one thing that everyone has the right to. It is a very personal issue.

Religion, on the other hand, is institutionalised belief, an organisation used for control. They even have rule books lol.

I think the hatred that the OP was talking about is backlash. Globally, people are becoming more aware, more questioning. Science has permeated the dark areas of what we refer to as religion and the resentment for being lied to and kept in the dark for millenia is bubbling to the top of the pot.

I often think it must be frustrating to have a religious disposition and live in today's times with the kind of laws we have now. eg; 'love thy neighbour' whilst the Gov encourages people to dob them in for breaches of the law....

Just my two cents worth, which I guess is worthless as I live in Australia where we abolished the two cent coin years ago!

Peace, VA

I see the anti-religion movement as being incredibly shallow and superficial.

For one that side seems to never address the hundreds of millions that were slaughtered in the name of secular collectivism. Why no examination as to why that particular framework has led to so much disaster on such a scale?

Secondly, there is a very ignorant analysis that every religion is the same. All one need to do is compare Europe to the Middle East and you will see the significance of how different religions mold a society in specific ways.


And last, using Europe again... look at what happens when people reject their religion and adopt a fanciful notion of "Multiculturalism" whereby alledged Racism is the new Blasphemy.

And how under the banner, millions of people with a hostile religiously-informed culture have been allowed to form enclaves in many European capitals, living off the State.

Does the Atheist Multiculti Left show any determination to fight against their future cultural annihilation? No they seem to welcome it.

And when other people in Europe do rise up to speak against this therat, or have rallies or demostrations, you will find the Euro-Left counter-protests , often with extreme violence.

So you have a group of people who say that all religion is dangerous. And yet when other people protest the dangers of Islam in their countries, the first group of people protect Islam.

That is the attitude I see very frequently and it makes no sense to me... which is why I am very skepitical of the boasts of people who on the one hand think a Christian Theocracy is right around the corner in the USA and yet on the other mock the notion that there is a global jihad going on right now.

I see anti-secularism as being woefully dogmatic. In all honesty it is tiresome!
Why shouldn't church and state be separate? Why on earth should I be made to swallow the theo-pill when I hold other beliefs?

I do not hold the belief that all religions are the same....I do however think that religion as an organised, state-based institution is dangerous, discourages humans from free thinking and unbaised decision making. This 'institution' is a means to an end for those in power.

I am not prepared to argue the differences between different cultural religious dogma with you, purely because I have been educated in none of them! The OP's question was about anti Christianism (which you believe is shallow) and which I had a view on.

I also do not agree that multiculturalism is fanciful.....I believe it is neccessary to procure eventual peace on this planet. But that is simply my belief.
VA

reply to post by Verum Astrum


My browser messed up and caused me to lose a brilliant piece of writing.. an achievement that causes any vain attempt on my part to recreate it to be rendered inauthentic

I'll have to begin anew in the morning.

reply to post by VinceP1974

Although the divisive line between politics and religions are blury sometimes , and in the case of Israel, Saudi, etc. My comments where not to be taken as a comparison between Christianity and communist factions etc.
Your response is just a 'Knee-jerk' and intolerent as I would expect anyone 'Hell-bent' on protecting their own beliefs.
Intolerent is a word I use for individuals that cannot grasp the fact that others may have different beliefs than themselves- is this what you are trying to portrait???
If so you've made a good start.

Ugh...religion is a term used loosely. I think of religion as a collective effort that has been manipulated by man to suit it's needs. Spirituality is what we should focus on. Not necessarilary a God or anything of that sort, altho I do believe in God.

I believe once we get down to the nitty gritty of it all... It's about treating each other with kindness and respect. It's not about which religion is right or wrong. And that's where a lot of the hatred stems from.

Man has successfully molded religion into a divider, if you will. It divides the masses into smaller groups which are more easily manipulated.

Everybody has an opinion and if one doesn't agree with it' then naturally they will speak, or even act in extreme cases, out against it. Humans have a tendency to have a 'know it all' aura about them. I think once we can all get passed the fact that different beliefs have been a mainstay of human culture since the beginning of time, the world will be a much more accepting place.

Undoubtedly, it won't end everything, but I do believe it will be much more tolerable.



Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by VinceP1974


"Mass immigration has changed Europe's demography and is rapidly changing its culture"
And unfortunately this is bleeding into North America too. If we are to preserve this great land then limits have to be held. Zero tolerance for Sharia law! All US lawmakers, lawyers, and judges need to be educated about this plague.

[edit on 20-8-2009 by JJay55]

reply to post by Agree2Disagree


You are describing pluralism, Islam is not plural therefore a peaceful coexistance is not possible. Please understand that they don't think like the West.