There’s such intolerance against Christianity
- Thread starter WV. Rootman
- Start date
My case? Lol.... if this is about potential hypocrisy we are on the same bar table...
I'm not talking about accepting advertising here: in this case it had already been accepted. My question is simply whether the treatment once some complaints started surfacing are equitable to what would have happened when complaints surface against a gay-pride parade advertisement. I'm not terribly sure about Australia, but in this country, in this day and age, you're going to see two completely different reactions to pulling down the ads "for cause" like this.. The ad in question is, at it's base, being pulled down because it is a Christian event. It took a meandering path past "offensive" graphics of a fully clothed guy holding a book, but at some point someone was offended.
On the other hand, you could advertise for the gay pride parade with a huge photo of RuPaul wearing a flourescent speedo, and complaints would go unanswered: nobody would dare make a move toward censoring that in the face of the LGBT mafia..
The problem I see is the winners are the bullies in this case, plain and simple. This promotes this behavior to repeat itself. The fact the Irvine company backed down to the threats of violence (reported in the paper), this can embolden the bullies to take this to the next level in the future, for whatever reasons, because it worked! Who knows if this was Muslim radicals or some radical atheist group, they are terrorists and this situation should have been worked on by the Irvine police dept, or FBI, to trap them into being caught for terrorist threats. They have their ways to find these cowards. But this appears to have gone unchecked, and the Irvine company appeared cowardly and backed down, maybe at the direction of the FBI, who knows? If this is left unchecked, this can evolve to more radical intolerant behavior, instead of taking care of business and finding the bully. If this is an organization with an agenda, it will evolve into something that lives could be lost, because of their religious intolerance. Next thing you know it's going to be offensive to someone for a woman wearing a bikini thong at Newport Beach, and no burka, because it's offensive to someone. The city will post signs at the beach, "No thongs without burkas". We don't know what's going on behind the scenes, but if the FBI isn't working on this terrorist threat, I would be disappointed. That's their job.
LGBT Mafia? Seriously? You had to go there? Thats disappointing but not hugely surprising. Almost without exception when name calling of that nature is resorted to by certain organisations it is an attempt to explain away the observed monumental shift in peoples sentiment towards particular issues. A good example being various religious groups sighting the tactics of what they saw as the enemy during the campaign preceding the same sex marriage survey. I am not close enough to the LGBT community to know how they feel about the name calling- I suspect they are still celebrating the over 60% vote in favour of the same sex marriage issue.
I've met plenty of arrogant atheists that want to prove everyone else is stupid for believing in God. This arrogance often breeds aggressive behavior like this Irvine situation. Add drugs or a cult leader figure, and yes, it could happen. With the right boneheads, stupid groups are created, IE Jim Jones, David Koresh, Marshal Applewhite. I actually added the atheist possibility to show I wasn't biased against a particular religion or non-religion.
Interesting. I think efforts to prove God doesn’t exist are pointless.I've met plenty of arrogant atheists that want to prove everyone else is stupid for believing in God. This arrogance often breeds aggressive behavior like this Irvine situation. Add drugs or a cult leader figure, and yes, it could happen. With the right boneheads, stupid groups are created, IE Jim Jones, David Koresh, Marshal Applewhite. I actually added the atheist possibility to show I wasn't biased against a particular religion or non-religion.
View attachment 102355
As a somewhat neutral observer I'd have to say that complaints of widespread intolerance against Christianity seem both unfounded and hypocritical. Christianity, in general, has a long and distinguished history of intolerance (in common with many religions) and has repeatedly attempted to impose its values on non-Christians, often violently. Atheists, in contrast, have never attempted to impose values on anyone as far as I'm aware. If the worst that Christians suffer is the refusal, by a private company, to carry religious advertising, then I think they need to recalibrate their concept of intolerance.
Yes, I went there.. I honestly don’t know if we are running into a cultural difference here, causing some of this, but that characterization is pretty legitimate. You quite simply can’t say much of anything in this country any more without a legitimate fear of reprisals for perceived slights against the minuscule portion of the population which identifies as lgbt or any of the other thirty letters they are putting on there now. There are people whose lives have been ruined for suggesting that maybe, just maybe, heterosexuality is the biological baseline that the species is arranged around. The infamous cake cases? People lost their business for the crime of free thought and maintaining their own principles. There’s a huge proportion of the population that would be fine with “live and let live”, but can’t even dare assume another’s gender without being characterized as homophobic. “Cis” , a phrase used to designate one who has committed the heinous crime of accepting their born biological gender as accurate, is now often considered an insult, reserved for people who just aren’t enlightened enough to break free of those chromosomal restraints.
However, publicly make the blanket assumption that a good Christian person is an intolerant, violent, racist homophobe, and everything is just fine with that. You see, there is no active Christian mafia to fight such discriminatory, bigoted thought...
It might be the only cultural difference we have of any significance here is that I find science to have a better explanation for everything than religion. You obviously don’t have to be a Christian to be a good person. What I do strongly beleive is that characterisations and generalisations should not be tolerated. There is good and bad In everything and a persons right to find enjoyment in a pursuance of a particular faith or lifestyle choice absent causing harm to others should be respected. No religion needs a “mafia”, they need only seek to rely on their teachings and beliefs as being those that should be practised by all. Thankfully we only see this from a minority. It meets the textbook definition of intolerance.
