Growing Hostility towards Evangelical Christians on Atlas

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Because your whole religion is not real and will cause you to go to rot in hell for eternity, and you must be converted from your religion so you can be saved.

Tables turned.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

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" ?

Homosexuality is not an ideology or belief system.

It's use as a core identity category with specific ethical and social implications absolutely is.

[All Along The Watchtower]

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" ?

Homosexuality is not an ideology or belief system.

It's use as a core identity category with specific ethical and social implications absolutely is.

What do you mean by "use?"

[TDAS04]

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" ?

Homosexuality is not an ideology or belief system.

It's use as a core identity category with specific ethical and social implications absolutely is.

Would you say the same about race?

[afleitch]

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" ?

Homosexuality is not an ideology or belief system.

It's use as a core identity category with specific ethical and social implications absolutely is.

Heterosexuality is equally a 'core identity category' with said implications, no?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

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" ?

Homosexuality is not an ideology or belief system.

It's use as a core identity category with specific ethical and social implications absolutely is.

Would you say the same about race?

Yes, of course - to the extent that people believe that their race says something important about them, or what they should do, or be allowed to do.  And if no one ever did, then race would not have developed as a relevant social category.

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

Can a transgender person enter a Biblical marriage? [...] If I had my very Christian but very allied brother officiate, would I have a loophole (provided my prospective wife was a cisgender woman, of course)?

Just want to make sure ER sees this and actually answers me before this thread is inevitably locked for being the damnable sh**tfest it is.

[Hindsight was 2020]

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" ?

Homosexuality is not an ideology or belief system.

It's use as a core identity category with specific ethical and social implications absolutely is.

Would you say the same about race?

Yes, of course - to the extent that people believe that their race says something important about them, or what they should do, or be allowed to do.  And if no one ever did, then race would not have developed as a relevant social category.

So you think that criticizing someone for the political ideology they choose and criticizing someone for the sexuality they were born with is on the same morality level?

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

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.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Large portions of the world, including most of the Atlas Forum hate you and always will. If they don't, you are probably doing something wrong. That's simply a result of standing for something. Truth is inherently divisive. Never change your beliefs from pressure.

They will hate you and you have to love them anyway. And until that is something an outsider sees from the Christians they know and not from everyone else, it's going to keep getting darker outside.

It's extremely generous for you, as a Catholic, to refer to Evangelical beliefs as "truth," when the vast majority of them would never do the same back to you.

You're committing the common fallacy here of assuming that almost all evangelicals are hostile to Catholics like it's still 1928 or whatever. That's not true at all today. For one look at how many evangelicals supported Rick Santorum in 2012 and Marco Rubio in 2016. Also try to find a Catholic bashing article in Christianity Today. Etc.

Would you refer to Catholic doctrine as "truth" ? Would right-wing Evangelicals?

I can't speak for TJ obviously but I assume by "the truth" he meant socially conservative doctrine on homosexuality and abortion the Catholic Church also holds to. I wouldn't call that "the truth" obviously but I would be willing to say that for things like the divinity of Jesus even if it was a Catholic arguing for it.

[Horus]

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 choose your religion, you do not choose your sexuality.

[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%. 

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

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.

[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.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

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" ?

Homosexuality is not an ideology or belief system.

It's use as a core identity category with specific ethical and social implications absolutely is.

Would you say the same about race?

Yes, of course - to the extent that people believe that their race says something important about them, or what they should do, or be allowed to do.  And if no one ever did, then race would not have developed as a relevant social category.

So you think that criticizing someone for the political ideology they choose and criticizing someone for the sexuality they were born with is on the same morality level?

I don't know if criticizing people over politics vs. sexuality is the same morality, but I do think *concepts and actions* should be open to criticism in each case. 

It's also not clear at all that people are born with a sexual orientation in a way that isn't also the case for political orientation.  Studies in behavioral genetics give both similar heritability estimates - about 0.3 - meaning significant genetic influence, but quite a bit less than obesity or IQ (for example).  So if there's a difference in whether each should be subject to criticism, it needs to be for other reasons besides being "born with" one but not the other.

[NOVA Green]

Regarding the OP's statement on both the Thread Title as well as follow-up post (not a question):

1.) "Growing Hostility towards Evangelical Christians on Atlas

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."

I guess the first question here without trying to attempt to quantify or code hostility, would be what evidence that such behavior is worse than it has been in the past?

The next question would be, are there specific examples of systematic patterns of harassment or behavior in general, or have these been expressed in a handful of threads from a small number of posters?

Personally in the event of harassment based upon self-identification based upon religious orientation (or lack thereof), I would imagine there are remedies for posters to report & escalate, since likely there are ToS clauses which could cover that.

2.) OP 2nd Paragraph:

"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."

OK--- The overwhelming majority of the population on Planet Earth does not subscribe to that perspective, despite the fact that this is central tenant of many (but certainly not all Christians).

Mocking the religious beliefs of other is not cool in my book, especially in such a small community such as Atlas, where in theory people of different spiritual paradigms should be able to interact together on the basis of mutual respect, human dignity, and recognizing that we might fundamentally disagree on so many items.

3.) OP 3rd Paragraph:

"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."

Never quite understood why 3/7 of the World's largest Religions, including all of the Big 3 in terms of "Western Religions" (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) are so obsessed with Human Sexuality.

Not an expert at all on Hinduism, Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism, but really stands out in my book when you look at the decline in support for organized religion within the Americans and various parts of Europe at a minimum.

4.)

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).

Not totally sure that is true IMHO.

5.) We are not talking about a Larry Flynt style of mockery, who in perhaps the most famous / infamous example got sued for a cartoon he published in Hustler Magazine involving Jerry Falwell, his Mother, somewhere in an outhouse back in '83, which made it all the way to the Supreme Court and Larry won.

We are not talking about people mocking and denigrating the prophet Mohammed on Atlas, as is frequently the case on so many Global Christian Forums.

We are not talking about individuals promoting all of the nasty stereotypes of Jews over so many Centuries and beyond...

6.) I do believe that to some extent the perspective of Evangelical Christians on Atlas is misrepresented.

    A.) Reality is that there are a significant % of Evangelical Christians who are not "Anglo".

    B.) Some of the more dramatic increase in % of self-identified "Evangelical Protestant Christians"
         are directly correlated to various Missionary movements throughout the world, perhaps most
         significantly within the US in terms of Central American Evangelicals.

   C.) Missionary work is rough and tough and not for everybody's flavor (Especially 1st world
         nationals doing service in much poorer countries).

        i.) My Dad's 2nd wife, who I love dearly and consider her my mother in many ways, served
            multiple years of service in the former Soviet Republics of Central and Eastern Europe, within
            an extremely oppressive political climate in the post USSR era, to both spread her version of
            Christianity while also opposing Political Dictatorships.

Personal, slightly OT note--- way back in the early '90s there is an alert that there will be a "book burning event from evangelical Christians nearby".

About (30) of us show up from down the road and maybe another (25) from the Neighborhood and it is later in the evening as Fall creeps in.

We hit the neighborhood in inner West Dayton, and the "Book Burning" was a Black Evangelical Pastor with some of his flock, who were burning books considered to be part of "Satan" with a huge City approved bonfire thing.

There were roughly about (6) Dayton Police Officers around just to make sure the fire wouldn't get out of hand, but yeah.... sometimes assumptions about what constitutes Evangelical Christian isn't always what 90% of Atlas posters thinks it is.

Still.... I think Torie might have said a simple one sentence post earlier which I recommended, which perhaps might say things so much better than I can or might be able to do on this topic.

Peace, Love, & Solidarity.

NOVA Green

[Hindsight was 2020]

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" ?

Homosexuality is not an ideology or belief system.

It's use as a core identity category with specific ethical and social implications absolutely is.

Would you say the same about race?

Yes, of course - to the extent that people believe that their race says something important about them, or what they should do, or be allowed to do.  And if no one ever did, then race would not have developed as a relevant social category.

So you think that criticizing someone for the political ideology they choose and criticizing someone for the sexuality they were born with is on the same morality level?

I don't know if criticizing people over politics vs. sexuality is the same morality, but I do think *concepts and actions* should be open to criticism in each case.  

It's also not clear at all that people are born with a sexual orientation in a way that isn't also the case for political orientation.  Studies in behavioral genetics give both similar heritability estimates - about 0.3 - meaning significant genetic influence, but quite a bit less than obesity or IQ (for example).  So if there's a difference in whether each should be subject to criticism, it needs to be for other reasons besides being "born with" one but not the other.

Umm yes it is, that is like arguing that it’s not clear if your taste in music is different than your eye color

[John Dule]

I try my best to mock Islam just as much as I mock Christianity. The other cults are equally stupid but not as dangerous.

[Santander]

I try my best to mock Islam just as much as I mock Christianity. The other cults are equally stupid but not as dangerous.

Hindus are much more dangerous than Muslims.

[John Dule]

I try my best to mock Islam just as much as I mock Christianity. The other cults are equally stupid but not as dangerous.

Hindus are much more dangerous than Muslims.

I wish.

[Never Made it to Graceland]

This is officially one of the dumbest threads ever.

[Santander]

I try my best to mock Islam just as much as I mock Christianity. The other cults are equally stupid but not as dangerous.

Hindus are much more dangerous than Muslims.

I wish.

Islam is a religion of peace.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Can a transgender person enter a Biblical marriage? [...] If I had my very Christian but very allied brother officiate, would I have a loophole (provided my prospective wife was a cisgender woman, of course)?

Just want to make sure ER sees this and actually answers me before this thread is inevitably locked for being the damnable sh**tfest it is.

I will pray about how to answer that question and PM you the answer.  I haven't responded because I want to make sure I answer it right.

[America Needs R'hllor]

Idk what's going on in this thread, but just dropping another reminder that there's a difference between religions and political movements. When you want to change laws or pass policies because of your religious beliefs, you become a political and ideological movement.

Considering the type of politicial Christianity promoted by ER or Fuzzy is one of the most extreme anti-LGBT and anti-abortion movements in the western world, well- expect backlash!

[America Needs R'hllor]

    While Atlas hostility towards Evangelicals is very bad, the response from the left to this thread make it clear that this hostility is largely based in a secular liberal conviction that everything is political and that Evangelicals merely have the wrong politics. If that hostility is growing (which I am unsure of given my long-term experience on the forum), it is primarily because hostility in society as a whole is growing and a drive to be charitable to your opponents is decreasing.

Because “attacks on my religious freedom” like OP is going on about when pressed upon comes down to the political issues of gay rights and abortion. Whenever people in this country complain about Christianity and in particular evangelicals being under attack they aren’t talking about the right to go to church or worship god, they are talking about their perceived god given right to discriminate against gay people

     Funny how I remember being denied the ability to go to church for an extended period last year and Atlas lefties assuring me that I didn't really need to be there anyway. Guess that never happened.

Oh god grief PIT it was a public health crisis and evens churches were encouraging people not to physically come in over streaming.

     Good grief, indeed. We did not close our doors until the governor forced us to. Two months in, when the restrictions were first loosened ever so slightly, my parish re-opened while negotiating the various rules put into place, because my priest understood that nothing is more important for the faithful than being in church and receiving the Eucharist. When that happened, new people started attending from other parts of the Bay Area, where the local authorities were ensuring that churches remained closed for public health reasons, so they could also worship and partake of the Eucharist.

     Point being, our right to go to church was very much under attack last year. That it was justified in your eyes does not change the fact that millions of Christians understood it as a threat to our free exercise of religion. If anything, it merely proves my point that secular leftists attack Christian conservatives from a place of misunderstanding. If you don't wish to understand, that's your business. You certainly are not alone in that regard.

No I get that people were upset about churches being closed and felt why it shouldn’t of been regardless of COVID. But to try and act like that is what OP is referring to you run into the trouble of OP’s posting history pointing to the fact he is more likely than not referring to homosexual rights and the fact these concepts and terms were being pushed long before COVID

     Tying back to the OP and the idea that there is hostility on the forum, there are numerous posts that outright condemn conservative Christians as a bloc. Like the recent topic in USGD entitled "The Religious Right Needs to Disappear... and We need to aggressively campaign against them." Or a long-deleted post I recall that said that Evangelicals should be made to feel afraid in society, just like how Nazis are. There is pushback against certain beliefs of Evangelicals, which is naturally fair game on a political forum, but it strikes me that there is also pushback against Evangelicals as a concept that illustrates a view of them as a political entity, fundamentally little different from any other political entity.

Ok I gotta respond to this bunch of intellectually dishonest drivel.

First you make some baseless claim about how the liberals who see everything as politics are the problem, when it's just faith. Then someone tells you explicitly that no, it's a political issue and gives you a concrete example- LGBT rights and abortion are political issues in which political evangelicals want to change and make actual laws and policies. Then you latch onto something he said to make several paragraphs about how Christians were persecuted during 2020's covid lockdowns (even though synagogues and mosques, as well as a myriad secular institutions and sites, were closed too so it's obviously a bullsh**t dishonest claim).

And when pushed to get back to topic, you mention a long-deleted post (which means that we don't tolerate these types of posts here) and... talk about the religious right. Yes, the religious right is a political movement that aims to delegitimize LGBTs and pass rigid abortion bans, of course we want to campaign against them!
And then you finish with "it strikes me that". No concrete examples given.

And by the way, disagreements with a religion are fair too- if ER says that he thinks Jews and Muslims will burn in hell, we can say that we think his belief system is extreme. Just had to cover this point too, and I don't think I saw any other attack on ER here.

So sure, Christians can be unfairly persecuted like every other religion, but please stop pretending that people, for example, deeply caring about gay rights (especially as a gay person who's suffering every day from both political and personal homophobia) is actually about you.