Top 7 Acts of Christian-Bashing and Why it's Okay to Bash Christianity

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by SkinWalker, Nov 23, 2007.

  1. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    The OP requested that her name be removed as the author of the thread. It was a tricky task, but one I was able to pull off. In fact, I challenge my fellow mods to figure out how I did it without admin powers. (hint: I'm not actually a god, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express recently).

    Last edited: Dec 21, 2007
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Revolvr Registered Senior Member

    I would add
    The Folsom Street Parade and Pelosi's support for it.
    Persecution of Christians in Islamic states
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2007
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Revolvr Registered Senior Member

    Liberals have this false notion that an Orwellian police state would evolve from a conservative ideology. But this is wrong both historically and philosophically. It is the Left that is most interested in restricting freedoms and giving the police and other federal agencies more and more power over individuals. Nazi fascism for example evolved from left wing philosophy (National Socialists) not right wing.

    Hate crimes legislation is a good example of moving down the police state path. For the first time we punish people for what they think, not just what they do. If you've read Orwell you know this as a Thoughtcrime.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    I'm glad you posted this since its evidence of the complete and utter nonsense that the superstitious resort to in the defense of their superstitious beliefs.

    The New Life Church attack was conducted by a Christian (quibble over "true" xian all you want, the guy believed in God and expected an afterlife), so this is an example of a Christian "bashing" Christians.

    The Federal Hate Crimes Bill? Making it criminal to incite hatred is bashing Christians? What a bunch of nutjobs.

    The Golden Compass isn't bashing Christianity however you'd like to cut it. Go see the movie or read one of the books, then come back and tell us how this is the case.

    Hitchens scathing remarks about Jerry Falwell was bashing Jerry Falwell. The guy was nutcase and deserved it, particularly postmortem since there were so many accolades being given to the guy after he died. Nutjobs like that should be remembered in death for what they were: nutjobs.

    With regard to the rest, I concede that there is a bit of "bashing." Much of it, however, is fair criticism and could only be considered "bashing" by the most deluded and ignorant of the Christians claiming this to be the case. Particularly with regard to the CNN documentaries.

    Lets face it, if this were a matter of "bashing" someone's economic ideologies, political ideologies, what football team they favored, or culinary opinions -then no one would bat an eye. Christians prefer to keep in place the taboo against questioning, criticizing, and ridiculing religion -particularly their own cults.

    Sorry, sandy. That shit doesn't fly in modern times. The cat is out of the bag and religion, particularly Christianity, is fair game for criticism, inquiry and ridicule -just like all other human endeavors. If your "faith" is actually worth anything, you wouldn't care since not a single question, critique or ridiculing statement would be able to waiver it or threaten it in anyway.

    Obviously this isn't the case since Christians like you whine so much about 'bashing,' calling any criticism, ridicule or inquiry of your religion 'personal attacks.'

    Let me clarify: It's okay to bash Christianity.
  8. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Well said SkinWalker. This list is utter lunacy.

    Revolvr, the National Socialists were socialist in name only. A common mistake.
  9. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    So apparently Sandy's chosen authorities do recognise Falwell as representing Christians in the US.

    How come bashing Ted Haggard didn't make the list ? That was a lot bigger deal than Edward's campaign bloggers.

    Seems like the Pope came in for some controversy, as well - lots of Pope bashing. Is that the same as Christian bashing ?
  10. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    With regard to "pope-bashing:" some Christian bigots minimize the bashing of Christians they don't like because they're not "the right kind" of Christian. This is where you'll usually see statements like "he/she isn't a true Christian," which is easily interpreted as "he/she isn't my kind of Christian."
  11. Revolvr Registered Senior Member

    Wow Skinwalker, that's quite a tirade! Sandy sure hit a hot button didn't she? I didn't realize how emotional you have become, how fearful of God you are. You have become a theophobe and it consumes you. Too bad it has clouded your judgment. The Golden Compass is not anti-religion? Even the author states it is. In the series he kills God! Duh.
  12. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    A typical reaction from a theist. They cannot contemplate rational decision making, and so attribute skeptical remarks to "hate" or "fear".

    I do agree the Golden Compass, at least the book, was written with an atheistic perspective. So what was The Passion of the Christ? The Chronicals of Narnia? ...every freaking Christmas special we are assaulted with?
  13. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    where does Fred Phelps fit into all of this?
    Is he a basher or is he being bashed?
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2007
  14. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Falwell can't be bashed enough. He paid lip-service to Christianity while using his position to enrich himself and his own political power. If there were a hell, he would be burning in it.
  15. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    If we can see past your ad hominem remarks, which comprise about 75-90% of your post, we find that you really haven't made any argument at all.

    First, my "tirade" as you put it has no anger in it nor any evidence of "theophobia" that is "consuming" me. This type of ad hominem argument is frequently encountered by those who dare question or criticize those deluded by superstitious, paranormal and pseudoscientific notions, and is intended to poison the well.

    I'm pleased, actually, that you responded with such a fallacious post, since it underscores my point above. Christians are truly threatened by inquiry, criticism and ridicule, and nearly always whine and cry when its done in a public forum (not limited to internet forums), in the hopes that enough others will respect the taboo.

    There's usually an attempt, also, to associate the godless and atheists to "liberals," but, being a rational-conservative, I have some criticism for liberals myself. Indeed, I think that there is a tendency among liberal atheists to support the taboo against criticizing religious beliefs. I think these atheists are completely wrong.

    Finally, its apparent that it really is *you* that felt the "hot button" pushed, since I can't believe you wouldn't have noticed that I didn't say The Golden Compass isn't anti-religion. What I said was, The Golden Compass isn't about bashing Christianity. There's a difference. First, criticizing and bashing are different things. Second, what Pullman is criticizing is all-controlling dogma. In his own words, The Golden Compass is "a story that attacks such things as cruelty, oppression, intolerance, unkindness, narrow-mindedness, and celebrates love, kindness, open-mindedness, tolerance, curiosity, human intelligence (Butler 2007)."

    Please cite the book and page on which Pullman "kills God." A metaphorical quote from a secondary source doesn't count.

    Butler, Robert (2007). An Interview With Phillip Pullman. More Intelligent Life.Com
  16. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    Moderator's Note: Updated the thread title to avoid the need for two threads on the topic
  17. Revolvr Registered Senior Member

    I don't make common mistakes.

    National Socialist is quite correct. Look at Nazi party beliefs and compare to the left wing:

    • Higher taxes
    • Gun Control
    • Punish profits and demean big business
    • Anti Capitalist
    • Attacking the rich and well born
    • Champion the working poor.
    • Regulate business to death
    • Etc Etc Etc

    Hitler himself said: ""We are socialists. We are enemies of today's capitalistic system"

    You have fallen for the Big Lie. The Nazis were Socialists, no matter what our tainted academia and corrupt media wishes us to believe.
  18. Revolvr Registered Senior Member

    My remarks were fair criticism of your tirade, not ad hominem attacks. It was you who used words like: Nutjobs, nutcase, deluded and ignorant, that shit, utter nonsense, superstitious.

    That sounds rather emotional to me. Have I said any such words about atheists?

    Does that sound objective? Our respective posts will stand on their own merit.
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2007
  19. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    None of those describe the actual behavior of the NAZI Party in power in Germany.

    Rich and powerful men, and their corporations, have always had a friend in fascism - Germany was no exception.
  20. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    Yes, some of these *are* ad hominems. The difference is that they're directed at WorldNutDaily and other nutjob organizations that promote hatred, bigotry, and downright anti-social behavior among their fellow humans. And, as a humanist, I find this appalling and deserving of ridicule.

    However, the words "deluded," "ignorant," and "superstitious" are not ad hominem, but, rather, logical conclusions based on evidence.

    Thank you for giving me the opportunity to use your reactions as an example of how the superstitious (assuming that you do, indeed, believe in the literal truth of biblical mythology, either completely or in part) will seek to poison the well against criticism and conflate words to obfuscate legitimate criticism and arguments against them:

    1) If biblical mythology is not the divine word of a god, then it is a literary construct of man.
    2) There are many religious doctrines, written and oral, that exist and have existed throughout man's history.
    3) Each of these doctrines are different and contradict or disagree with each other on a substantial number of points.
    4) Obviously, each of these cannot, then, be considered divine works.
    5) Each has an equal probability of not being divine unless there is independent evidence to support the divinity of any one.
    6) There is no independent evidence to support the divinity of the Christian bible.
    7) Therefore, Christian biblical mythology is not the divine word of god.

    If Christian biblical mythology is not the divine word of god, those that believe it is are deluded.
    Christian biblical mythology is not the divine word of god.
    Those that believe it is are deluded.


    Those that believe criticism and inquiry are unfair bashing are ignorant of why inquiry and criticism are important.
    WorldNutDaily refers to the criticism and inquiry of CNN documentaries as unfair bashing.
    WorldNutDaily is comprised, at least in part, of people who are ignorant.


    Superstition motivates habits and actions based on a belief in something not justified by reason or evidence and often driven by fear.
    The argument above concludes that Christianity is a delusion. Those deluded by its doctrine have habits and behaviors that are predictable and distinct among their population, which are motivated by beliefs that are not justified by reason or evidence. They are, therefore, superstitious.

    These are not ad hominem remarks but
    It isn't emotional unless you argue that concern is an emotion. If not, what emotion, specifically, are you referring to? Moreover, much of what I've said about religion and the staff at WorldNutDaily wouldn't apply to most atheists, at least not rational skeptics who happen to be atheists. I concede that there are many irrational atheists out there, fortunately, I rarely encounter them.

    Indeed. I would have it no other way.
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2007
  21. Revolvr Registered Senior Member


    Oh, I see now. It's called socialist, it has socialist policy, Hitler says it's socialist, but they really didn't do socialist-like things?

    Study your history son, and don't believe everything you read.
  22. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    Oh, and your critique of my "tirade" was only fair if we allow for obfuscation, avoidance, red herrings, and straw men on top of the abusive ad hominem.
  23. wsionynw Master Queef Valued Senior Member

    Including the bible.

Share This Page