Growing Hostility towards Evangelical Christians on Atlas

[Non Swing Voter]

In recent weeks, I've noticed a lot of hostility towards evangelical Christianity on this forum.  While most of these posts haven't necessarily been reportable individually, they are currently collectively making it very difficult for evangelicals to post candidly and boldly about our faith.

In particular, recently, the belief that Christianity is the only path to Salvation has been roundly mocked on this forum in recent weeks.  For Christians who take the Bible as the literal and inerrant Word of God, that is a central belief that informs how we interact with the world- because we love everyone and want everyone to have eternal life.

I have also seen mischaracterizations about Christian views on sexuality, suggesting that they are hateful, rather than a commandment from God that applies to all sex- including heterosexual sex- outside a Biblical marriage.  I try to share Biblical Truth as lovingly as I know how (on both of the issues referenced in this post).  I fully acknowledge that I'm certainly not perfect at that, though.

The hostility of many on this forum to evangelical Christianity would never fly if similar comments were said about literally any other religious tradition.  And, before you say that it's because we are "advantaged", I would push back on that.  Evangelicals see very little representation in entertainment, for example (and, when we are represented, it's usually a cartoonish portrayal).

Your moniker is literally "AMERICA NEEDS JESUS CHRIST" - which is essentially shoving your religious views on everyone else.  Get real, that in essence is being hostile to the 70% of the country that doesn't want you shoving your religious beliefs on everyone else.

[Non Swing Voter]

The impetus for this thread isn't "hostility towards Evangelical Christians" - no-one is being hostile towards them.  This is because most people don't agree with them.  It's not democrats trying to make laws that discriminate against evangelicals.  It's evangelicals trying to make laws that discriminate against everyone else (through the courts of course as 70% of the country doesn't agree with them on pretty much anything).

[Non Swing Voter]

The impetus for this thread isn't "hostility towards Evangelical Christians" - no-one is being hostile towards them.

This is obviously false, as we can see from many posts in this very thread.

No agreeing with evangelical views (which are far far outside the mainstream) =/= hostility.  Isn't it your side who calls everyone else snowflakes?

[Non Swing Voter]

The impetus for this thread isn't "hostility towards Evangelical Christians" - no-one is being hostile towards them.

This is obviously false, as we can see from many posts in this very thread.

No agreeing with evangelical views (which are far far outside the mainstream) =/= hostility.  Isn't it your side who calls everyone else snowflakes?

Ah, so it's not that you can't read those posts, it's just that you're making up new definitions for words. While you're on this, please explain to me what exactly "my side" is here.

I don't need to do that.  You've pointed to no specific posts that make my claim false.  I'm not going to give long explanations when you've pointed to no evidence for such an outlandish assertion.

[Non Swing Voter]

Did someone have the "growing hostility toward homophobes" or whatever it said, thread deleted??  How is that not blatant one sided censorship?

[Non Swing Voter]

The past couple years, I've had at least three posters suggest that the state should take away my children and put them in foster care, and another who said that I keep my children chained in my basement and abuse them day and night.

In each instance the poster either made such claims in response to my posting about common Evangelical opinions or practices, and in one case was in response to a post I made opposing hijab bans, and explcitly referenced my Evangelicalism. To top it all off, I don't even spend much time on the nastier subforums like US General Discussion.

The notion that Atlas does not have a signficant minority that are bigoted against Evangelicals is complete and utter nonsense.

Do you think this only impacts blue avatars/evangelicals?

A blue avatar accused me of probably being a literal "murderer" last week because I disagreed with their CA recall projections (which he was wrong about).

[Non Swing Voter]

Xing's post is good.

Religion should not be immune from criticism, and obviously if you express religious-based beliefs that homosexuality is bad, expect as sharp a rebuke on an LGBT-heavy forum as you would if your homophobia was secular-based.  This applies to any religion.  Disliking a religion is not the same thing as say, racism.

Why is criticizing religion good, but criticizing any aspect of homosexuality automatically a "phobia" ?

You can't just decide to be gay one day the way you can decide to be a religious man like Trump did, right before he ran for President.  This is pretty obvious.

Would you criticize someone for being black?

[Non Swing Voter]

I also fail to see why we need so many evangelical-related threads and discussions.  If you listened to people here and political talking heads on TV you'd think this country was half evangelical white.  It's nowhere close to that.  Evangelical white christians are a tiny minority of the population and shrinking (16%):

https://www.pewforum.org/2019/10/17/in-u-s-decline-of-christianity-continues-at-rapid-pace/

And as a group they have an outsized influence on politics and political discussions yet somehow challenging those views = hostility?  Even though they already get way more in politics than you'd assume for a group so small (they've basically had the final say in 2/3 of the SCOTUS).

[Non Swing Voter]

I also fail to see why we need so many evangelical-related threads and discussions.  If you listened to people here and political talking heads on TV you'd think this country was half evangelical white.  It's nowhere close to that.  Evangelical white christians are a tiny minority of the population and shrinking (16%):

https://www.pewforum.org/2019/10/17/in-u-s-decline-of-christianity-continues-at-rapid-pace/

And as a group they have an outsized influence on politics and political discussions yet somehow challenging those views = hostility?  Even though they already get way more in politics than you'd assume for a group so small (they've basically had the final say in 2/3 of the SCOTUS).

And if you just watched cable news all day, you'd also think the country was 40 percent black. Down to 12 percent in the latest census and shrinking fast! I fail to see why we need so many threads on BLM. And yet all political discussions today seem revolve around such a small group.

You cite 16 percent for effect and ignore people who for all intents and purposes are ideologically much closer to them than even being in the same ballpark as you.

What a fantastical post.  Nobody is close to them on any important issues.  "Pro-Life" even in the case of rape and incest has never polled even remotely close to 50%. 

[Non Swing Voter]

I also fail to see why we need so many evangelical-related threads and discussions.  If you listened to people here and political talking heads on TV you'd think this country was half evangelical white.  It's nowhere close to that.  Evangelical white christians are a tiny minority of the population and shrinking (16%):

https://www.pewforum.org/2019/10/17/in-u-s-decline-of-christianity-continues-at-rapid-pace/

And as a group they have an outsized influence on politics and political discussions yet somehow challenging those views = hostility?  Even though they already get way more in politics than you'd assume for a group so small (they've basically had the final say in 2/3 of the SCOTUS).

And if you just watched cable news all day, you'd also think the country was 40 percent black. Down to 12 percent in the latest census and shrinking fast! I fail to see why we need so many threads on BLM. And yet all political discussions today seem revolve around such a small group.

You cite 16 percent for effect and ignore people who for all intents and purposes are ideologically much closer to them than even being in the same ballpark as you.

What a fantastical post.  Nobody is close to them on any important issues.  "Pro-Life" even in the case of rape and incest has never polled even remotely close to 50%. 

Yet Catholics and Mormons are excluded from your definition and percentage of the population.

I certainly don't support that but I'm sure their position, misguided as it is, is certainly more grounded in Truth than whatever you believe.

You can't dismiss 1/3 of the country as simply "fringe" just because it's not a majority.

lol.  ignore you go.

[Non Swing Voter]

The impetus for this thread isn't "hostility towards Evangelical Christians" - no-one is being hostile towards them. 

The past couple years, I've had at least three posters suggest that the state should take away my children and put them in foster care, and another who said that I keep my children chained in my basement and abuse them day and night.

In each instance the poster either made such claims in response to my posting about common Evangelical opinions or practices, and in one case was in response to a post I made opposing hijab bans, and explcitly referenced my Evangelicalism. To top it all off, I don't even spend much time on the nastier subforums like US General Discussion.

The notion that Atlas does not have a signficant minority that are bigoted against Evangelicals is complete and utter nonsense.

Do you think this only impacts blue avatars/evangelicals?

A blue avatar accused me of probably being a literal "murderer" last week because I disagreed with their CA recall projections (which he was wrong about).

No one should be throwing around nasty insults, blue or red, and that person shouldn't have said that, but my goodness if that isn't one of the most blatant examples of moving the goal posts I've ever seen.

It's not at all.  When a blue avatar says horrendous off-topic things there is typically no consequence and no threads about how there is hostility to red avatars.

And quite frankly, how many of these evangelical threads do we need?  You'd think evangelicals were a tarnished minority group without a voice, when the reality is they are way overrepresented in politics and here.

[Non Swing Voter]

Well I've gone on the record before as saying organized religion and specifically Christianity are not good things, but at the moment there are some people who need religion. The problem is society has failed to develop any kind of reason based secular morality that makes sense and is compelling to a critical mass of people  (i.e, not "speak your truth" post modern crap). In the absence of that we're always going to have religion whether I like it or not.

In particular, recently, the belief that Christianity is the only path to Salvation has been roundly mocked on this forum in recent weeks.  For Christians who take the Bible as the literal and inerrant Word of God, that is a central belief that informs how we interact with the world- because we love everyone and want everyone to have eternal life.

This has never upset me to be honest because I know I'm not going to hell so I don't care if anyone else thinks I am.

I have also seen mischaracterizations about Christian views on sexuality, suggesting that they are hateful, rather than a commandment from God that applies to all sex- including heterosexual sex- outside a Biblical marriage.  I try to share Biblical Truth as lovingly as I know how (on both of the issues referenced in this post).  I fully acknowledge that I'm certainly not perfect at that, though.

A "Biblical marriage" is not an option for gay people though so it's still a bigoted mindset. Some moderate denominations still denounce fornication but support gay marriage which I would view as an acceptable position although I still don't agree with it. Although how much support there is for that from the actual biblical text is pretty questionable.

The hostility of many on this forum to evangelical Christianity would never fly if similar comments were said about literally any other religious tradition. 

Also agree with this although my solution would be for liberals and the left to be tougher on the regressive elements of Islam instead of making excuses while continuing to criticize Christianity as well.

My position is that most of the religious people who have contempt for other religions are very much like the people they have contempt for.  I don't care what religion people practice I just want them to stop shoving it in everyone else's face and that goes equally for all religions.  The reason Islam gets less attention is because you don't have a well cultivated movement in this country surrounding getting Islam into schools, law, government buildings, etc. etc. etc.  If that were the case it would probably be just as big a focus of liberals. 

[Non Swing Voter]

What I find interesting is that in a forum that's 40%+ LGBTQ+ (and has been for a decade of more) as well as overwhelming accepting of such traits, this forum could easily have set rules for itself, based on protecting it's membership, that excluded or outright banned conservative Christians completely for expressing contrary views.

It hasn't. If anything it's been tolerant of such views, even in appointing mods.

A strongly 'queer' space has been far more open and respectful of difference than most online or in person conservative Christian spaces.

If anything, it's been overly tolerant.  Many of the evangelical viewpoints and statements made on controversial topics here would get someone fired from a private sector job for promoting discriminatory views among other things.  Here they are pretty much allowed to say whatever they want under the guise of "free expression," liability be damned.   

[Non Swing Voter]

What I find interesting is that in a forum that's 40%+ LGBTQ+ (and has been for a decade of more) as well as overwhelming accepting of such traits, this forum could easily have set rules for itself, based on protecting it's membership, that excluded or outright banned conservative Christians completely for expressing contrary views.

It hasn't. If anything it's been tolerant of such views, even in appointing mods.

A strongly 'queer' space has been far more open and respectful of difference than most online or in person conservative Christian spaces.

If anything, it's been overly tolerant.  Many of the evangelical viewpoints and statements made on controversial topics here would get someone fired from a private sector job for promoting discriminatory views among other things.  Here they are pretty much allowed to say whatever they want under the guise of "free expression," liability be damned.   

That those views would "get someone fired from a private sector job" may be true, but that doesn't make it right. 

It is one thing to discriminate in employment or harangue people at work to the point where it impacts job performance and rises to the level of a hostile work environment.  That's not right; while people don't have the right to be affirmed by others in their own choices in the workplace, they DO have the right to be left alone and to not be subject to overt appeals (in the workplace) that they have clearly rejected.  It is another thing to hold beliefs and express them in the Public Square (and that includes "online") as to what God sanctions in terms of marriage, sexual activity, and even who is going to Heaven or Hell and why?  The First Amendment provides for free expression of religious beliefs.  Why it should be permissible to fire someone for religious beliefs and the expression of same in the public square is beyond me.  That you don't like my religious beliefs is fine and good.  I don't like your religious beliefs.  Truthfully, I don't like anything about you and I find you an HP, but the fact of the Whole World finding you an HP does not infringe on your Constitutional Rights one bit.  Constitutional Rights are for HPs, and especially for HPs.  When everyone thinks you're an FF you don't NEED the Constitution.  It's when everyone thinks you're an HP that you need it.

That's the thing that galls me:  When I was younger I found all sorts of folks to be Massive HPs, ranging from the Far Right whack jobs of all stripes to Leftist Anarchists who would destroy America for turds and giggles.  But I supported their right to express themselves, however awful that expression may be.  And I grew up in an era where the vast majority of Americans would consider it HP behavior to advocate for SSM and SSM couples adopting.  Everyone, I believed (and still believe) has the right to freely express themselves, so long as they are not explicitly encouraging harm to others.  Indeed, I believe that most of what people consider "Hate Speech" is protected under the First Amendment.  (I am a Free Speech advocate with some recognition of the idea that speech can become conduct, but a believer that this principle ought to be minimally used.)  A decent amount of what is posted about Evangelical Christians here is "Hate Speech", but the haters never own that. That doesn't mean that I advocate utilizing Hate Speech in people's rhetorical tool boxes, and it doesn't mean that this Forum should not have rules regarding this (rules that aren't always enforced equally, but that's another matter), but it does mean that people have the right to express ideas that are outside the Overton Window.  And I believe that people have these rights to the extent that they cannot be fired for them, any more than someone in a non-political or non-religious occupation can be fired for openly espousing ideas running counter to the organization that hired them when their JOB involves showing congruence between a belief system and the life of the person working there.

When I am Weaker than you, I ask you for Freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am Stronger than you, I take away your Freedom Because that is according to my principles.”

How many people on this Forum fit the description of the above Frank Herbert quote?  More people fit that quote than are willing to admit.

Yes it absolutely does make it right.  Society has spoken on this issue.  The Evangelical right lost.  As it should have.

[Non Swing Voter]

What I find interesting is that in a forum that's 40%+ LGBTQ+ (and has been for a decade of more) as well as overwhelming accepting of such traits, this forum could easily have set rules for itself, based on protecting it's membership, that excluded or outright banned conservative Christians completely for expressing contrary views.

It hasn't. If anything it's been tolerant of such views, even in appointing mods.

A strongly 'queer' space has been far more open and respectful of difference than most online or in person conservative Christian spaces.

If anything, it's been overly tolerant.  Many of the evangelical viewpoints and statements made on controversial topics here would get someone fired from a private sector job for promoting discriminatory views among other things.  Here they are pretty much allowed to say whatever they want under the guise of "free expression," liability be damned.   

That those views would "get someone fired from a private sector job" may be true, but that doesn't make it right. 

It is one thing to discriminate in employment or harangue people at work to the point where it impacts job performance and rises to the level of a hostile work environment.  That's not right; while people don't have the right to be affirmed by others in their own choices in the workplace, they DO have the right to be left alone and to not be subject to overt appeals (in the workplace) that they have clearly rejected.  It is another thing to hold beliefs and express them in the Public Square (and that includes "online") as to what God sanctions in terms of marriage, sexual activity, and even who is going to Heaven or Hell and why?  The First Amendment provides for free expression of religious beliefs.  Why it should be permissible to fire someone for religious beliefs and the expression of same in the public square is beyond me.  That you don't like my religious beliefs is fine and good.  I don't like your religious beliefs.  Truthfully, I don't like anything about you and I find you an HP, but the fact of the Whole World finding you an HP does not infringe on your Constitutional Rights one bit.  Constitutional Rights are for HPs, and especially for HPs.  When everyone thinks you're an FF you don't NEED the Constitution.  It's when everyone thinks you're an HP that you need it.

That's the thing that galls me:  When I was younger I found all sorts of folks to be Massive HPs, ranging from the Far Right whack jobs of all stripes to Leftist Anarchists who would destroy America for turds and giggles.  But I supported their right to express themselves, however awful that expression may be.  And I grew up in an era where the vast majority of Americans would consider it HP behavior to advocate for SSM and SSM couples adopting.  Everyone, I believed (and still believe) has the right to freely express themselves, so long as they are not explicitly encouraging harm to others.  Indeed, I believe that most of what people consider "Hate Speech" is protected under the First Amendment.  (I am a Free Speech advocate with some recognition of the idea that speech can become conduct, but a believer that this principle ought to be minimally used.)  A decent amount of what is posted about Evangelical Christians here is "Hate Speech", but the haters never own that. That doesn't mean that I advocate utilizing Hate Speech in people's rhetorical tool boxes, and it doesn't mean that this Forum should not have rules regarding this (rules that aren't always enforced equally, but that's another matter), but it does mean that people have the right to express ideas that are outside the Overton Window.  And I believe that people have these rights to the extent that they cannot be fired for them, any more than someone in a non-political or non-religious occupation can be fired for openly espousing ideas running counter to the organization that hired them when their JOB involves showing congruence between a belief system and the life of the person working there.

When I am Weaker than you, I ask you for Freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am Stronger than you, I take away your Freedom Because that is according to my principles.”

How many people on this Forum fit the description of the above Frank Herbert quote?  More people fit that quote than are willing to admit.

Yes it absolutely does make it right.  Society has spoken on this issue.  The Evangelical right lost.  As it should have.

In other words, it's OK to do it because you CAN do it.

In other words, if "Society" should speak differently in the future and reverse itself, the opposite is OK.

I thank God you are not in Public Office.  You are a person who would be fine allowing the enumerated Constitutional Rights of others to be disposed of.  Not yours, of course; you're part of the Woke Cognoscenti.  

Our right to speak Biblical Truth is the same as your right to claim that Gay Sex and SSM are acceptable practices and institutions are OK.  Once upon a time one would lose their jobs for just BEING gay, let alone engaging in open activism on the issue.  Society said that was OK.  Was it?  After all, Society DID say so?

Constitutional Rights, on the other hand, aren't what Society says.  They are enumerated in the Constitution, which means they don't eminate from whole cloth; you can point to where they come from in Law.  They exist to protect those who would dissent from Society, and are not subject to mere plebescite or up/down vote of Congress.  They are not mere Legislated Rights which the government can give and take away at its pleasure or by a vote of a legislature and the signature of an Executive.

I hope the whole of this forum reads your post and thinks about its implications.  

Yes, it's ok for society to put an end to evangelicals discriminating against everyone, starting wars based on religious bias, justifying atrocities based on the Bible, etc.  Yes indeed. 

[Non Swing Voter]

What I find interesting is that in a forum that's 40%+ LGBTQ+ (and has been for a decade of more) as well as overwhelming accepting of such traits, this forum could easily have set rules for itself, based on protecting it's membership, that excluded or outright banned conservative Christians completely for expressing contrary views.

It hasn't. If anything it's been tolerant of such views, even in appointing mods.

A strongly 'queer' space has been far more open and respectful of difference than most online or in person conservative Christian spaces.

If anything, it's been overly tolerant.  Many of the evangelical viewpoints and statements made on controversial topics here would get someone fired from a private sector job for promoting discriminatory views among other things.  Here they are pretty much allowed to say whatever they want under the guise of "free expression," liability be damned.    

That those views would "get someone fired from a private sector job" may be true, but that doesn't make it right.  

It is one thing to discriminate in employment or harangue people at work to the point where it impacts job performance and rises to the level of a hostile work environment.  That's not right; while people don't have the right to be affirmed by others in their own choices in the workplace, they DO have the right to be left alone and to not be subject to overt appeals (in the workplace) that they have clearly rejected.  It is another thing to hold beliefs and express them in the Public Square (and that includes "online") as to what God sanctions in terms of marriage, sexual activity, and even who is going to Heaven or Hell and why?  The First Amendment provides for free expression of religious beliefs.  Why it should be permissible to fire someone for religious beliefs and the expression of same in the public square is beyond me.  That you don't like my religious beliefs is fine and good.  I don't like your religious beliefs.  Truthfully, I don't like anything about you and I find you an HP, but the fact of the Whole World finding you an HP does not infringe on your Constitutional Rights one bit.  Constitutional Rights are for HPs, and especially for HPs.  When everyone thinks you're an FF you don't NEED the Constitution.  It's when everyone thinks you're an HP that you need it.

That's the thing that galls me:  When I was younger I found all sorts of folks to be Massive HPs, ranging from the Far Right whack jobs of all stripes to Leftist Anarchists who would destroy America for turds and giggles.  But I supported their right to express themselves, however awful that expression may be.  And I grew up in an era where the vast majority of Americans would consider it HP behavior to advocate for SSM and SSM couples adopting.  Everyone, I believed (and still believe) has the right to freely express themselves, so long as they are not explicitly encouraging harm to others.  Indeed, I believe that most of what people consider "Hate Speech" is protected under the First Amendment.  (I am a Free Speech advocate with some recognition of the idea that speech can become conduct, but a believer that this principle ought to be minimally used.)  A decent amount of what is posted about Evangelical Christians here is "Hate Speech", but the haters never own that. That doesn't mean that I advocate utilizing Hate Speech in people's rhetorical tool boxes, and it doesn't mean that this Forum should not have rules regarding this (rules that aren't always enforced equally, but that's another matter), but it does mean that people have the right to express ideas that are outside the Overton Window.  And I believe that people have these rights to the extent that they cannot be fired for them, any more than someone in a non-political or non-religious occupation can be fired for openly espousing ideas running counter to the organization that hired them when their JOB involves showing congruence between a belief system and the life of the person working there.

When I am Weaker than you, I ask you for Freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am Stronger than you, I take away your Freedom Because that is according to my principles.”

How many people on this Forum fit the description of the above Frank Herbert quote?  More people fit that quote than are willing to admit.

Yes it absolutely does make it right.  Society has spoken on this issue.  The Evangelical right lost.  As it should have.

In other words, it's OK to do it because you CAN do it.

In other words, if "Society" should speak differently in the future and reverse itself, the opposite is OK.

I thank God you are not in Public Office.  You are a person who would be fine allowing the enumerated Constitutional Rights of others to be disposed of.  Not yours, of course; you're part of the Woke Cognoscenti.  

Our right to speak Biblical Truth is the same as your right to claim that Gay Sex and SSM are acceptable practices and institutions are OK.  Once upon a time one would lose their jobs for just BEING gay, let alone engaging in open activism on the issue.  Society said that was OK.  Was it?  After all, Society DID say so?

Constitutional Rights, on the other hand, aren't what Society says.  They are enumerated in the Constitution, which means they don't eminate from whole cloth; you can point to where they come from in Law.  They exist to protect those who would dissent from Society, and are not subject to mere plebescite or up/down vote of Congress.  They are not mere Legislated Rights which the government can give and take away at its pleasure or by a vote of a legislature and the signature of an Executive.

I hope the whole of this forum reads your post and thinks about its implications.  

Yes, it's ok for society to put an end to evangelicals discriminating against everyone, starting wars based on religious bias, justifying atrocities based on the Bible, etc.  Yes indeed.  

You have a scary world view.  I thank God you're not holding public office of any kind.

Hey now, NSV just wants to force us to be free.

I think it's clear which side is trying to force their fairy tale views down everyone's throats.  You aren't much of a "realist."

[Non Swing Voter]

What I find interesting is that in a forum that's 40%+ LGBTQ+ (and has been for a decade of more) as well as overwhelming accepting of such traits, this forum could easily have set rules for itself, based on protecting it's membership, that excluded or outright banned conservative Christians completely for expressing contrary views.

It hasn't. If anything it's been tolerant of such views, even in appointing mods.

A strongly 'queer' space has been far more open and respectful of difference than most online or in person conservative Christian spaces.

If anything, it's been overly tolerant.  Many of the evangelical viewpoints and statements made on controversial topics here would get someone fired from a private sector job for promoting discriminatory views among other things.  Here they are pretty much allowed to say whatever they want under the guise of "free expression," liability be damned.   

That those views would "get someone fired from a private sector job" may be true, but that doesn't make it right. 

It is one thing to discriminate in employment or harangue people at work to the point where it impacts job performance and rises to the level of a hostile work environment.  That's not right; while people don't have the right to be affirmed by others in their own choices in the workplace, they DO have the right to be left alone and to not be subject to overt appeals (in the workplace) that they have clearly rejected.  It is another thing to hold beliefs and express them in the Public Square (and that includes "online") as to what God sanctions in terms of marriage, sexual activity, and even who is going to Heaven or Hell and why?  The First Amendment provides for free expression of religious beliefs.  Why it should be permissible to fire someone for religious beliefs and the expression of same in the public square is beyond me.  That you don't like my religious beliefs is fine and good.  I don't like your religious beliefs.  Truthfully, I don't like anything about you and I find you an HP, but the fact of the Whole World finding you an HP does not infringe on your Constitutional Rights one bit.  Constitutional Rights are for HPs, and especially for HPs.  When everyone thinks you're an FF you don't NEED the Constitution.  It's when everyone thinks you're an HP that you need it.

That's the thing that galls me:  When I was younger I found all sorts of folks to be Massive HPs, ranging from the Far Right whack jobs of all stripes to Leftist Anarchists who would destroy America for turds and giggles.  But I supported their right to express themselves, however awful that expression may be.  And I grew up in an era where the vast majority of Americans would consider it HP behavior to advocate for SSM and SSM couples adopting.  Everyone, I believed (and still believe) has the right to freely express themselves, so long as they are not explicitly encouraging harm to others.  Indeed, I believe that most of what people consider "Hate Speech" is protected under the First Amendment.  (I am a Free Speech advocate with some recognition of the idea that speech can become conduct, but a believer that this principle ought to be minimally used.)  A decent amount of what is posted about Evangelical Christians here is "Hate Speech", but the haters never own that. That doesn't mean that I advocate utilizing Hate Speech in people's rhetorical tool boxes, and it doesn't mean that this Forum should not have rules regarding this (rules that aren't always enforced equally, but that's another matter), but it does mean that people have the right to express ideas that are outside the Overton Window.  And I believe that people have these rights to the extent that they cannot be fired for them, any more than someone in a non-political or non-religious occupation can be fired for openly espousing ideas running counter to the organization that hired them when their JOB involves showing congruence between a belief system and the life of the person working there.

When I am Weaker than you, I ask you for Freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am Stronger than you, I take away your Freedom Because that is according to my principles.”

How many people on this Forum fit the description of the above Frank Herbert quote?  More people fit that quote than are willing to admit.

Yes it absolutely does make it right.  Society has spoken on this issue.  The Evangelical right lost.  As it should have.

In other words, it's OK to do it because you CAN do it.

In other words, if "Society" should speak differently in the future and reverse itself, the opposite is OK.

I thank God you are not in Public Office.  You are a person who would be fine allowing the enumerated Constitutional Rights of others to be disposed of.  Not yours, of course; you're part of the Woke Cognoscenti.  

Our right to speak Biblical Truth is the same as your right to claim that Gay Sex and SSM are acceptable practices and institutions are OK.  Once upon a time one would lose their jobs for just BEING gay, let alone engaging in open activism on the issue.  Society said that was OK.  Was it?  After all, Society DID say so?

Constitutional Rights, on the other hand, aren't what Society says.  They are enumerated in the Constitution, which means they don't eminate from whole cloth; you can point to where they come from in Law.  They exist to protect those who would dissent from Society, and are not subject to mere plebescite or up/down vote of Congress.  They are not mere Legislated Rights which the government can give and take away at its pleasure or by a vote of a legislature and the signature of an Executive.

I hope the whole of this forum reads your post and thinks about its implications.  

Yes, it's ok for society to put an end to evangelicals discriminating against everyone, starting wars based on religious bias, justifying atrocities based on the Bible, etc.  Yes indeed. 

You have a scary world view.  I thank God you're not holding public office of any kind.

Ironic statement.  I think it's safe to say that your world view is far far far outside of the mainstream in 2021.  And probably far to the right of mainstream 1985.

[Non Swing Voter]

Ironic statement.  I think it's safe to say that your world view is far far far outside of the mainstream in 2021.  And probably far to the right of mainstream 1985.

I can't imagine you have any idea what the mainstream was in 1985.

I have a pretty good sense.