The Christian Response to Jason Collins

[JJ Husker]

You're not offering any explanation, you're saying you feel pressured, and that "others" might as well. I'm asking you to explain why. Please do so.

 

I didn't say "I feel pressured" and as I really think about it, I don't feel pressured. I simply saw some comments here, yours included, about the silliness of any perceived persecution complex exhibited by Christians in this country and attempted to search out some factual information for why that may be. I found some demographic information that I believe at least partially explains the phenomena you have noted about Christians claiming to be under fire in a country that is predominately Christian. If you do not feel the decrease in the Christian population from 86% to 76% in only the last 20 years helps explain it, well, I can't help that. As an analogy, look at the reactions of a child who is accustomed to always getting his way. When that situation changes, it is inevitable that there is going to be some adverse reaction on the part of the child. I am not saying the behavior is necessarily childish in nature, just pointing out something I feel is obvious and that should not generate such a lack of understanding for why it occurs. The big man on campus does not like having his status reduced to anything less than being the big man on campus. Nobody likes having their cheese taken away or hidden. Most people are adverse to change. Is any of this helping?

[knapplc]

I think it speaks to a facet of human nature that I don't respect, namely, that we tend to hoard what we perceive as "ours" to the detriment of "them." It's a myopic and self-destructive trait, I think, and I believe that the homogenization of a culture leads to its stagnation, and ultimately to degradation.

 

We're too insulated and isolated here in America, and most especially in the heart of America in the Great Plains where there's very little comparative diversity. I don't think that's a good thing, and I think that adding to the culture of this country, and specifically this region, can only benefit it.

[JJ Husker]

I think it speaks to a facet of human nature that I don't respect, namely, that we tend to hoard what we perceive as "ours" to the detriment of "them." It's a myopic and self-destructive trait, I think, and I believe that the homogenization of a culture leads to its stagnation, and ultimately to degradation.

 

We're too insulated and isolated here in America, and most especially in the heart of America in the Great Plains where there's very little comparative diversity. I don't think that's a good thing, and I think that adding to the culture of this country, and specifically this region, can only benefit it.

 

I respect your view on this. My point was simply stating what the human nature of the situation is. I was not attempting to state how I felt about it or how others should feel about it. Just offering an explanation for why the sentiment exists. It's very hard to go against human nature even when striving for loftier ideals. I can appreciate your feelings on the matter but I also hope you can understand how and why the sense of "persecution" (for lack of a better word) is not all that ridiculous of a reaction to perceived change.

[knapplc]

I can understand why a certain group may feel entitled to things after becoming accustomed to them, but that understanding doesn't mean I think it's right, or that playing the persecution card is any less ridiculous.

[Ziggy]

F tebow(as a football player)....that is all....

[JJ Husker]

I can understand why a certain group may feel entitled to things after becoming accustomed to them, but that understanding doesn't mean I think it's right, or that playing the persecution card is any less ridiculous.

 

I guess it depends on which definition of "ridiculous" is intended. If it is "arousing or deserving of ridicule" then you are certainly entitled to your opinion and may ridicule at will. But, if the meaning is "extremely silly or unreasonable" (as I was using it) then it is not ridiculous for people to react according to their human nature. In reality, it should be expected to some degree.

[HuskerShark]

Yeah, I didn't catch that until after, still whomever made that doesn't have a point.

 

I honestly think he does. But that's me.

 

 

P.S., what's up with that sig?... What have I ever done to you?

[zoogs]

knapplc hit it out of the park in this thread. Well done, sir.

[knapplc]

knapplc hit it out of the park in this thread. Well done, sir.

 

Thanks, but tell me honestly - are you saying that because I used "balderdash?"

[zoogs]

Balderdash!

[lo country]

So if Christians try to defend a position it is ridiculous. ie pointing out perceived persecution. I really think it depends on what side of the fence you are on. You can google all day and see where there is an alarming trend, IMO, to label Evangelical Christianity as hate speech. I do not see the same movement to limit Islamic teachings. That religion is no more hateful than Christianity. It is the fringe elements that are. No evangelical Christianity is not a fringe element. I really do not see that. BUT take your own opinions out of it and look at the issue, again IMO. Limit/defining speech is an attack on our fundamental rights to freedom of speech and religion. If the government or business world can define free speech in a manner to limit it, what else can they limit.

 

Chic-Fil-A possibly denied building permits for their views o Homosexuality. What if the town mayor was pro gun and did not allow any anti-gun businesses to move in based upon their verbal and written statements? A mayor denies a business license to a company that supports LGBT issues etc.... Just like people arguing to ban guns yet are up in arms about the lack of Miranda for the Boston bomber or the warrantless searches, etc.....A limit on any Constitutional right can ultimately end up being a limit on others. Including the ones you choose to like and/or support.

 

I have also seen statistics that have been posted identifying this nation as 77% Christian. I wish. There is a complete difference in identifying as a Christian and being one. A Huge difference. Religion vs Relationship. When one thinks of a Christian, IMO, it is a person who has salvation in Jesus. Billy Graham one time stated that approximately 15% of the church was actually saved (relationship with Jesus Christ). Other evangelists are slightly higher or lower. Huge difference than what people claim.

 

Tolerance goes both ways. It is funny a Christian tries to defend a position and is openly mocked, ridiculed etc..... That isn't tolerance. Every group, right or wrong, can always find a way to put themselves on the receiving end. Look at comments in this section alone. Not a lot of tolerance or seeing other peoples views.

[JJ Husker]

I guess if you're in a majority category on an issue your views and opinions don't have to be tolerated by others. It would appear that in many cases you are relegated to the expectation of only having to tolerate others views and must keep your opinions to yourself or run the risk of public ridicule. I'm not sure I fully get it yet but it seems like some people are saying "you can't have your cake and eat it too, and if you're in the majority, you already have your cake" or something to that effect.

[Someone]

Recently, the Kansas Catholic Conference supported a bill that makes it legal to fire someone, kick them out of the apartment you are renting them, refuse to provide them with any service your business might offer, -- basically treat someone like a black in the south between 1870 and 1960-something -- just for being gay.

 

Further, if you work for the state (such as a University professor) you are free to opt out of your employer's anti-discrimination policy--think "I am not allowing that gay student in my class: I don't care if he needs it to graduate". Finally, no local government can enforce their own (non-federally protected) anti-discrimination policy.

 

All under the pretext of protecting individual religous freedoms.

 

Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another group. I have to say, it is hard for me to NOT see the Kansas Catholic Conference as the persecutors in this situation.

[strigori]

So if Christians try to defend a position it is ridiculous. ie pointing out perceived persecution. I really think it depends on what side of the fence you are on. You can google all day and see where there is an alarming trend, IMO, to label Evangelical Christianity as hate speech. I do not see the same movement to limit Islamic teachings. That religion is no more hateful than Christianity. It is the fringe elements that are. No evangelical Christianity is not a fringe element. I really do not see that. BUT take your own opinions out of it and look at the issue, again IMO. Limit/defining speech is an attack on our fundamental rights to freedom of speech and religion. If the government or business world can define free speech in a manner to limit it, what else can they limit.

 

Chic-Fil-A possibly denied building permits for their views o Homosexuality. What if the town mayor was pro gun and did not allow any anti-gun businesses to move in based upon their verbal and written statements? A mayor denies a business license to a company that supports LGBT issues etc.... Just like people arguing to ban guns yet are up in arms about the lack of Miranda for the Boston bomber or the warrantless searches, etc.....A limit on any Constitutional right can ultimately end up being a limit on others. Including the ones you choose to like and/or support.

 

I have also seen statistics that have been posted identifying this nation as 77% Christian. I wish. There is a complete difference in identifying as a Christian and being one. A Huge difference. Religion vs Relationship. When one thinks of a Christian, IMO, it is a person who has salvation in Jesus. Billy Graham one time stated that approximately 15% of the church was actually saved (relationship with Jesus Christ). Other evangelists are slightly higher or lower. Huge difference than what people claim.

 

Tolerance goes both ways. It is funny a Christian tries to defend a position and is openly mocked, ridiculed etc..... That isn't tolerance. Every group, right or wrong, can always find a way to put themselves on the receiving end. Look at comments in this section alone. Not a lot of tolerance or seeing other peoples views.

The problem of "not seeing other peoples' views" is more on the Christian end. The Christians tend to try to legislate their views onto the general population for 'their own good' which is not what the non-religious are doing. "Keep religion out of the law" is not the same thing. Christians are free to believe what they choose, but telling those not in their group how to behave is at issue. And honestly, Christians in this country donning the martyr cloak is getting old. Telling me to 'tolerate' their views while trying to legislate them on me is hypocrisy at its finest.

 

To those inside, they will never see the hate coming from the Evangelicals. If you think the likes of Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson are tolerant... What they have said, on TV even, can't really be viewed in any other light.

 

You don't see people decrying Islamic teachings here, because no one is shouting them on street corners, TV, Twitter, Facebook or any other host of media. If an Islamic group started pushing for women to have rights taken away, and start covering their heads in public, I assure you the backlash would be fierce.

[Junior]

So if Christians try to defend a position it is ridiculous. ie pointing out perceived persecution. I really think it depends on what side of the fence you are on. You can google all day and see where there is an alarming trend, IMO, to label Evangelical Christianity as hate speech. I do not see the same movement to limit Islamic teachings. That religion is no more hateful than Christianity. It is the fringe elements that are. No evangelical Christianity is not a fringe element. I really do not see that. BUT take your own opinions out of it and look at the issue, again IMO. Limit/defining speech is an attack on our fundamental rights to freedom of speech and religion. If the government or business world can define free speech in a manner to limit it, what else can they limit.

 

Chic-Fil-A possibly denied building permits for their views o Homosexuality. What if the town mayor was pro gun and did not allow any anti-gun businesses to move in based upon their verbal and written statements? A mayor denies a business license to a company that supports LGBT issues etc.... Just like people arguing to ban guns yet are up in arms about the lack of Miranda for the Boston bomber or the warrantless searches, etc.....A limit on any Constitutional right can ultimately end up being a limit on others. Including the ones you choose to like and/or support.

 

I have also seen statistics that have been posted identifying this nation as 77% Christian. I wish. There is a complete difference in identifying as a Christian and being one. A Huge difference. Religion vs Relationship. When one thinks of a Christian, IMO, it is a person who has salvation in Jesus. Billy Graham one time stated that approximately 15% of the church was actually saved (relationship with Jesus Christ). Other evangelists are slightly higher or lower. Huge difference than what people claim.

 

Tolerance goes both ways. It is funny a Christian tries to defend a position and is openly mocked, ridiculed etc..... That isn't tolerance. Every group, right or wrong, can always find a way to put themselves on the receiving end. Look at comments in this section alone. Not a lot of tolerance or seeing other peoples views.

 

 

First, if you have evidence of anyone labeling "Evangelical Christianity as hate speech", I'd be curious to see it. Outside of the desire to see the discrimination against gays end, what are you talking about?

 

Second... Really? Are you joking? You don't see a movement to limit Islamic teachings? I can provide evidence of groups trying to legislate against Islam. Ready. Set. Go:

 

 

http://www.huffingto..._n_1768915.html

 

That's when the Islamic center received permission to construct a new mosque to replace their overcrowded space in an office park. Since then they have had to deal with public protests, vandalism, arson of a construction vehicle and a bomb threat. Opponents of the project held a protest rally and then sued the county to stop construction.

Their attorneys claimed in court that Islam was not a real religion deserving First Amendment protections. They also claimed that local Muslims were part of a plot to overthrow the U.S. constitution and replace it with Islamic law.

They were unable to prove those claims, which were thrown out by the judge, but construction was nearly halted anyway when that judge ruled in May there was not sufficient public notice for the meeting where mosque construction was approved.

Last month, a federal judge granted the mosque's request for an emergency order that would open the building in time for the holy month of Ramadan, which is still under way.

 

http://m.livingstonp...19bb2963f4.html

 

Rep. Valarie Hodges, R-Watson, says she had no idea that Gov. Bobby Jindal’s overhaul of the state’s educational system might mean taxpayer support of Muslim schools.

“I actually support funding for teaching the fundamentals of America’s Founding Fathers’ religion, which is Christianity, in public schools or private schools,” the District 64 Representative said Monday.

 

“I liked the idea of giving parents the option of sending their children to a public school or a Christian school,” Hodges said.

 

“Unfortunately it will not be limited to the Founders’ religion,” Hodges said. “We need to insure that it does not open the door to fund radical Islam schools. There are a thousand Muslim schools that have sprung up recently. I do not support using public funds for teaching Islam anywhere here in Louisiana.”

 

 

http://www.boston.co...omney_suggests/

 

In remarks that caused alarm among civil libertarians and advocates for immigrants rights, Romney said in a speech to the Heritage Foundation that the United States needs to radically rethink how it guards itself against terrorism.

 

''How many individuals are coming to our state and going to those institutions who have come from terrorist-sponsored states?" he said, referring to foreign students who attend universities in Massachusetts. ''Do we know where they are? Are we tracking them?"

 

''How about people who are in settings -- mosques, for instance -- that may be teaching doctrines of hate and terror," Romney continued. ''Are we monitoring that? Are we wiretapping? Are we following what's going on?"

 

http://www.theblaze....ng-a-hijab-and/

 

She ought to be in prison for wearing a hijab,” the commentator said. “This immigration policy of, you know, us assimilating immigrants into our culture isn’t really working.”