News & Politics

Replies

  • buttersworth
    November 16, 2012 at 10:07 AM

    Thank you, I was trying to find a way to articulate public private vs public governmental and couldn't think of it. That is exactly what I mean.

    Christians are persecuted on the internet in forums all the time. While bashing goes both ways (or all ways, I should say) there seems to be more hatred towards those who call themselves Christians.

     It is my feeling that a form of persecution is also the removal of certain expressions that were common in eras past. For instance, Christmas vacation in public school has exclusively and pervasively become Winter vacation. One might argue that the wording has changed to show tolerance to other religions, but the fact of the matter is that while Christianity is still the dominant religion in this country, Christmas vacation was chosen during that holiday extending to the new year for the sole purpose of individuals and families celebrating it. It is a form of persecution to purposely censor the name of a holiday as to not mention a celebration in relation to Christ.


     

    Quoting romalove:

     

    Quoting buttersworth:

     

    Quoting angelachristine:

    What an idiot! Atheists don't believe in hell so that isn't going to frighten them. Religious symbols have no business on public property on private property sure but not public. We are supposed to have a separation of church and state. Plus if you publicly endorse one religion the door is open for others to demand the same respect but I bet the Christians wouldn't like that either.


    He isn't trying to frighten atheists. He's trying to appeal to religious people. He's trying to look like he shares the opinions of Christians that make up a lot of republicans, which are predominantly his audience. He is not sincere, in my opinion.

    A separation of church and state doesn't mean you can't acknowledge God in a public place. A separation was put in place by the founders so that someone like the Catholic pope did not have persuasion on affairs of the country. If the pope did, that would be unfair because not everyone is Catholic. But most people living in our country in those days were Christian (and actually not Catholic). Religious tolerance was called for when Congrationalists lived amongst Calvinists or Quakers, for example. The basis for our Constitution comes from Christian principles of individual sovereignty. We might not be exclusively Christian anymore, but the whole framework of our country comes from it, and Judeo-Christian laws.

    A separation of church and state makes it so we don't decide legislation based solely on church canon. Like with the abortion debate, or contraception. - we don't follow any church's doctrine. But individuals can make their personal decisions based upon their religious beliefs, and they do, and they get representation, being Americans.

    Christian iconography in public spaces is a freedom of expression, and also, part of our tradition and history.

    Communists are the ones who forbid religious iconography from their public landscape. Theyhave no tolerance for any religion, probably because they see it as a threat to their power. Without religion in their way, they become the moral authority and can compel their people to do whatever they want for the good of their agenda.

    There is no basis for any other religious iconography to be in places such as courthouses, libraries and congressional buildings, etc. Again, that is because our laws are based upon Christian principle. However, there are plenty of other religious iconographies in public places just not necessarilly historic places or those shared by communities, like a courthouse or banks.

     You have to make a distinction between "public private" and "public governmental".

    Meaning, places like shopping malls, which we consider to be public places, are really private, because they are not owned by governmental entities.

    Most of the country is not owned by the government.  Stores, restaurants, bowling alleys, sports stadiums, homes, farms, garages, houses of worship, your personal self, your car, your lawn, beauty salons, shopping malls....most places are owned by private individuals or companies and therefore are "public private".  All expression of religion that the property owner wishes is fine.

    Municipal centers, schools, courthouses, police stations, city hall, these types of places are "public governmental" and are not places that there should be expression of religion, because that would indicate endorsement and be against First Amendment as most of the SCOTUS rulings show.

    What persecution are Christians enduring in America?


  • PamR
    by PamR
    November 16, 2012 at 10:15 AM



    Quote:

    uttersworth

    Thank you, I was trying to find a way to articulate public private vs public governmental and couldn't think of it. That is exactly what I mean.

    Christians are persecuted on the internet in forums all the time. While bashing goes both ways (or all ways, I should say) there seems to be more hatred towards those who call themselves Christians.

     It is my feeling that a form of persecution is also the removal of certain expressions that were common in eras past. For instance, Christmas vacation in public school has exclusively and pervasively become Winter vacation. One might argue that the wording has changed to show tolerance to other religions, but the fact of the matter is that while Christianity is still the dominant religion in this country, Christmas vacation was chosen during that holiday extending to the new year for the sole purpose of individuals and families celebrating it. It is a form of persecution to purposely censor the name of a holiday as to not mention a celebration in relation to Christ.

    It seems as if you confuse criticism with persecution.  Being criticized by someone for your religious beliefs is not persecution.  Persecution is when you are not allowed to openly express your faith, worship, you go to jail for being a part of it.  Christians in this country are not persecuted. We even had this topic come up at my church a couple of weeks ago and our pastor agreed - Christians in this country are not persecuted. 

    Whether or not Christianitiy is the dominant religion in this country is irrelevant to what schools call their winter break.  Christmas is not the only religious holiday celebrated in December.  If what your school system terms their vacation time in December, or how you are greeted by a clerk in a store somehow affects your ability to celebrate the birth of Jesus, I would say the problem is yours. 

  • romalove
    November 16, 2012 at 10:21 AM

     

    Quoting buttersworth:

    Thank you, I was trying to find a way to articulate public private vs public governmental and couldn't think of it. That is exactly what I mean.

    Christians are persecuted on the internet in forums all the time. While bashing goes both ways (or all ways, I should say) there seems to be more hatred towards those who call themselves Christians.

     It is my feeling that a form of persecution is also the removal of certain expressions that were common in eras past. For instance, Christmas vacation in public school has exclusively and pervasively become Winter vacation. One might argue that the wording has changed to show tolerance to other religions, but the fact of the matter is that while Christianity is still the dominant religion in this country, Christmas vacation was chosen during that holiday extending to the new year for the sole purpose of individuals and families celebrating it. It is a form of persecution to purposely censor the name of a holiday as to not mention a celebration in relation to Christ.


     

    Quoting romalove:

     

    Quoting buttersworth:

     

    Quoting angelachristine:

    What an idiot! Atheists don't believe in hell so that isn't going to frighten them. Religious symbols have no business on public property on private property sure but not public. We are supposed to have a separation of church and state. Plus if you publicly endorse one religion the door is open for others to demand the same respect but I bet the Christians wouldn't like that either.


    He isn't trying to frighten atheists. He's trying to appeal to religious people. He's trying to look like he shares the opinions of Christians that make up a lot of republicans, which are predominantly his audience. He is not sincere, in my opinion.

    A separation of church and state doesn't mean you can't acknowledge God in a public place. A separation was put in place by the founders so that someone like the Catholic pope did not have persuasion on affairs of the country. If the pope did, that would be unfair because not everyone is Catholic. But most people living in our country in those days were Christian (and actually not Catholic). Religious tolerance was called for when Congrationalists lived amongst Calvinists or Quakers, for example. The basis for our Constitution comes from Christian principles of individual sovereignty. We might not be exclusively Christian anymore, but the whole framework of our country comes from it, and Judeo-Christian laws.

    A separation of church and state makes it so we don't decide legislation based solely on church canon. Like with the abortion debate, or contraception. - we don't follow any church's doctrine. But individuals can make their personal decisions based upon their religious beliefs, and they do, and they get representation, being Americans.

    Christian iconography in public spaces is a freedom of expression, and also, part of our tradition and history.

    Communists are the ones who forbid religious iconography from their public landscape. Theyhave no tolerance for any religion, probably because they see it as a threat to their power. Without religion in their way, they become the moral authority and can compel their people to do whatever they want for the good of their agenda.

    There is no basis for any other religious iconography to be in places such as courthouses, libraries and congressional buildings, etc. Again, that is because our laws are based upon Christian principle. However, there are plenty of other religious iconographies in public places just not necessarilly historic places or those shared by communities, like a courthouse or banks.

     You have to make a distinction between "public private" and "public governmental".

    Meaning, places like shopping malls, which we consider to be public places, are really private, because they are not owned by governmental entities.

    Most of the country is not owned by the government.  Stores, restaurants, bowling alleys, sports stadiums, homes, farms, garages, houses of worship, your personal self, your car, your lawn, beauty salons, shopping malls....most places are owned by private individuals or companies and therefore are "public private".  All expression of religion that the property owner wishes is fine.

    Municipal centers, schools, courthouses, police stations, city hall, these types of places are "public governmental" and are not places that there should be expression of religion, because that would indicate endorsement and be against First Amendment as most of the SCOTUS rulings show.

    What persecution are Christians enduring in America?

     

     A few points:

    Money is the root of holidays in America.  What I mean by that is, if enough people are going to need off to celebrate a holiday, at some point it becomes more economical to close.  This goes in particular for schools and government offices.  These days are then incorporated into the "benefits" that a company bestows on the employees.  For schools, they get money for student attendance.  Where I live, we close for Jewish holidays because there are a significant number of Jews who will take off Rosh Hoshanna and Yom Kippur.  A neighboring town, without the number of Jews my town has, does not take those days off, but instead gets other days off.  Btw, the days here are now called Fall Break I and Fall Break II instead of why we actually take the days off.  No different than calling Christmas break Winter break.

    Persecution is a very specific kind of term.  Christians in this country have enjoyed privileges and preferences, and now that the pendulum is changing back to them not having those privileges and preferences, they are feeling persecuted.  It is nonsense.  No one stops a Christian (or anyone, for that matter, of any belief system) from praying, decorating home and hearth and person with their religious paraphernalia, celebrating any holiday they wish, and proudly proclaiming to be part of a religion.  No one stops anyone from attending church.

    If people on the internet are pushing back against Christians, it doesn't make them persecuted.  They can either choose to argue back, state their points, or go away and ignore criticism.

  • Clairwil
    November 16, 2012 at 2:12 PM
    Quoting buttersworth:

    Christians are persecuted on the internet in forums all the time.

    per·se·cu·tion

    [pur-si-kyoo-shuhn]

    noun

    a program or campaign to exterminate, drive away, or subjugate a people because of their religion, race, or beliefs: the persecutions of Christians by the Romans.


    Origin:
    1300–50; Middle English persecucio ( u ) n  < Late Latin persecūtiōn-  (stem of persecūtiō ), Latin:  prosecution, equivalent to persecūt ( us ) past participle of persequī  ( see persecute) + -iōn- -ion

  • ashellbell
    November 16, 2012 at 3:39 PM
    I'm going to hell in every religion. I'm alright with it.
  • _Kissy_
    by _Kissy_
    November 16, 2012 at 3:48 PM

    I do not consider myself an atheist. But I'd rather be in hell with John Lennon, Bill Gates, Gandhi and Einstein then in heaven with O'reilly, Limbaugh, Falwell, Tilton, Swaggart, Robertson. and their ilk.

  • Friday
    by Friday
    November 16, 2012 at 4:13 PM


    Quoting buttersworth:

    Thank you, I was trying to find a way to articulate public private vs public governmental and couldn't think of it. That is exactly what I mean.

    Christians are persecuted on the internet in forums all the time. While bashing goes both ways (or all ways, I should say) there seems to be more hatred towards those who call themselves Christians.

     It is my feeling that a form of persecution is also the removal of certain expressions that were common in eras past. For instance, Christmas vacation in public school has exclusively and pervasively become Winter vacation. One might argue that the wording has changed to show tolerance to other religions, but the fact of the matter is that while Christianity is still the dominant religion in this country, Christmas vacation was chosen during that holiday extending to the new year for the sole purpose of individuals and families celebrating it. It is a form of persecution to purposely censor the name of a holiday as to not mention a celebration in relation to Christ.


     



    I've been on CM for almost 6 years and have seen way more instances of Christians bashing other Christians for not having identical beliefs 'you're not a true Christian if you don't believe ______' than I have of non-Christians, especially Atheists, bashing Christians. I won't even get into the bashing of Muslims and Atheists by 'Good Christians'.

    Disagreeing and even criticizing, isn't persecuting. Not by a long shot.

  • Friday
    by Friday
    November 16, 2012 at 4:14 PM


    Quoting _Kissy_:

    I do not consider myself an atheist. But I'd rather be in hell with John Lennon, Bill Gates, Gandhi and Einstein then in heaven with O'reilly, Limbaugh, Falwell, Tilton, Swaggart, Robertson. and their ilk.

    If some of the 'Christians' I've seen on CM will be in Heaven, I'd rather go to Hell. Most of the fun and interesting people will be there.

  • Debrowsky
    November 16, 2012 at 4:29 PM


    Quoting buttersworth:


    Quoting angelachristine:

    What an idiot! Atheists don't believe in hell so that isn't going to frighten them. Religious symbols have no business on public property on private property sure but not public. We are supposed to have a separation of church and state. Plus if you publicly endorse one religion the door is open for others to demand the same respect but I bet the Christians wouldn't like that either.


    He isn't trying to frighten atheists. He's trying to appeal to religious people. He's trying to look like he shares the opinions of Christians that make up a lot of republicans, which are predominantly his audience. He is not sincere, in my opinion.

    A separation of church and state doesn't mean you can't acknowledge God in a public place. A separation was put in place by the founders so that someone like the Catholic pope did not have persuasion on affairs of the country. If the pope did, that would be unfair because not everyone is Catholic. But most people living in our country in those days were Christian (and actually not Catholic). Religious tolerance was called for when Congrationalists lived amongst Calvinists or Quakers, for example. The basis for our Constitution comes from Christian principles of individual sovereignty. We might not be exclusively Christian anymore, but the whole framework of our country comes from it, and Judeo-Christian laws.

    A separation of church and state makes it so we don't decide legislation based solely on church canon. Like with the abortion debate, or contraception. - we don't follow any church's doctrine. But individuals can make their personal decisions based upon their religious beliefs, and they do, and they get representation, being Americans.

    Christian iconography in public spaces is a freedom of expression, and also, part of our tradition and history.

    Communists are the ones who forbid religious iconography from their public landscape. Theyhave no tolerance for any religion, probably because they see it as a threat to their power. Without religion in their way, they become the moral authority and can compel their people to do whatever they want for the good of their agenda.

    There is no basis for any other religious iconography to be in places such as courthouses, libraries and congressional buildings, etc. Again, that is because our laws are based upon Christian principle. However, there are plenty of other religious iconographies in public places just not necessarilly historic places or those shared by communities, like a courthouse or banks.

    Impressive write up you got here.   best answer I've seen yet to these questions. 


  • Farmlady09
    November 16, 2012 at 4:59 PM

    Going to church is far from the only way that Christians practice their religion. Whether you don't know that, don't understand that, or don't care is immaterial. Christians are effectively being bullied and/or harrassed at this point into silence and hiding.

    Yes, I said bullying. If a group of kids constantly makes fun of another child and causes them emotional pain, it is called bullying.

    If a group of adults do this to another adult, it is called harrassment.

    Unless you're a hypocrite, if you consider a Christian student telling a gay student they believe it is wrong, or they will go to hell  or to go back in their closet ~ than it's JUST as wrong for any Atheist to tell a Christian they have an invisible friend or they need to keep it in their home/church.

    Either both situations are wrong, or both are ok. Personally I think both are wrong. It's obvious that there are quite a few people who make do with situational ethics.


     

    Quoting LucyMom08:

    When have Christians been stopped from going to church?

    Quoting SallyMJ:

    This stuff is both funny and absurd. Many Americans seem to forget that the First Amendment freedom of religion consists of two parts:

    1) Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

    2) Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

    The last 10-20 years, liberals seem to forget about the "free exercise" portion of religious freedom.


News & Politics