The fall of Christianity in America

[LongPhatDong]

I agree. I feel that by attempting to accept the religion of other minorities, the PC movement is oppressing Christianity. Just because its the majority, doesn't make it wrong. I feel that it is a shame that this is occuring in our society. I will continue my beliefs, without oppressing others. And I think it is ridiculous that people find a Nativity scene offensive. If I walked past a display of someone else's religion that didn't have anything crude, violent, or inappropriate in it, I would not be offended. Come on, people, its a baby being born in a barn!
Much of this is stated here (albeit in a less than eloquent way):
http://www.drunkensquirrel.net/inc/no_christmas_for_you.php

Don't misunderstand me; I'm not trying to say that others should not be able practice their religions. I'm just trying to say that one religion should not be favored by the masses over another.

And on another similar "PC" note, I do not understand the double standard in racism. I understand why no one should ever use the "N" word. What I don't understand is the hypocrisy of allowing another race (any) to call a white person "honky" or "cracker". Also, I've been called racial slurs before, but I hardly see anyone fighting for my rights in the public eye. And I also find something hypocritical about the "BET" channel. It appears like self-segregation. And if one race should get their own channel, why not other races? Why is there no "KET" for Koreans?

And in another related story, me and my friend (who happens to be an American-Indian) were talking while waiting in line at a grocery store. I made a remark to him and said the word "Indian". A woman (who happened to be caucasian) turned around and in a very stern tone, told me how I shouldn't use the term "Indian".
"It's Native American," she told us self-righteously.
"Actually," my friend jumped in, "I've grown up knowing myself as an Indian, and the people in my culture prefer 'Indian' over 'Native American'. Most of us think that it is silly to suddenly change what we're called."
She was speechless.

This just shows you that the PC movement is getting out of control. I understand the basis of educating and not offending, but it is just as wrong to favor one religion over another or one race over another. I personally think that most things PC are foolish, self-righteous tripe. But that's just my thought.
Today's rant is brought to you by the letters 'L,' 'P,' and 'D,' and by the number '9.'

:biggrin1:

 

[D_Elijah_MorganWood]

"Actually," my friend jumped in, "I've grown up knowing myself as an Indian, and the people in my culture prefer 'Indian' over 'Native American'. Most of us think that it is silly to suddenly change what we're called."
She was speechless.

This just shows you that the PC movement is getting out of control.

:biggrin1:

I was scolded one time in L.A. for using "African American". A woman turned around and said "I'm BLACK, got it?"

 

[LongPhatDong]

Yeah, it seems like a lot of people in the PC movement are fighting for people who either don't care or don't want a fight. I think censorship is deteriorating America in general. Most Loony Toons cartoons have stopped airing because of censorship. Any cartoons with realistic guns or with Yosemite Sam have been banned. I hardly think that the Loony Toons creators intended for Yosemite Sam to be viewed as a racist. All of the people pushing for censorship are trying to "protect" America's youth from these evils, but the way I see it, is if it were really that bad, we would have a generation of murderers on our hands, but we don't. I'm a second generation Korean and I grew up watching all of those cartoons that are being censored today, and I have not become a violent, ignorant (I hope not, anyways), or racist (admittedly, a type of ignorance) person.

 

[D_Herin_Ghan]

Yeah, it seems like a lot of people in the PC movement are fighting for people who either don't care or don't want a fight. I think censorship is deteriorating America in general. Most Loony Toons cartoons have stopped airing because of censorship. Any cartoons with realistic guns or with Yosemite Sam have been banned. I hardly think that the Loony Toons creators intended for Yosemite Sam to be viewed as a racist. All of the people pushing for censorship are trying to "protect" America's youth from these evils, but the way I see it, is if it were really that bad, we would have a generation of murderers on our hands, but we don't. I'm a second generation Korean and I grew up watching all of those cartoons that are being censored today, and I have not become a violent, ignorant (I hope not, anyways), or racist (admittedly, a type of ignorance) person.

Perfect Case in Point:

Houston now has a professional soccer team playing there. They were originally supposed to be called Houston 1836 in celebration of the city name/founder, and the year it was formed. Somehow, Sylvia Garcia and Univision found those four numbers in that sequence to be offensive.

Their reasoning you ask?

That date is offensive to Mexicans since a few of their forefathers may have served under General Santa Anna You have to be fucking kidding me..right? Santa Anna was one of the worst dictators in Mexican history, a pure fighter who only survived to cause mayhem and shed others blood in battle. But because Houston beat him, it is offensive. It is that absurdity that is the bane to nativity scenes across the nation.


The team has been renamed Houston Dynamo (energy buffs know what a dynamo is)

 

[SpeedoGuy]

I think the very title of this thread is indicative of the type of hyperbole surrounding the issue.

PC causing the fall of Christianity in America? I don't see it. More Americans attend church now than in past generations. Openly fundamentalist Christian politicians are everywhere on ballots and in office. Government policies favoring Christians (like teaching Christian creationism in science class and Faith Based charities) are springing up. Christian and conservative broadcasting networks are a growing part of the media that is supposedly so liberal. Fundamentalist Christians are by far the biggest, and still growing, denomination in the military chaplain corps (and, by the way, who have had to be repeatedly disciplined for aggressive proselytizing). Lastly, abortion looks like its going to be re-reviewed by the Supreme Court (again) with a possible overturn.

Fall of Christianity? Nope. I don't see it.

 

[Dr. Dilznick]

umm, that's a direct contradiction in terms. seperation of church and state is not a matter of degrees - it's either enforced or it isn't. clue time: IT ISN'T.

We can only pray. But I'm sure America is still appealing to those suffering from Third World tyrants, hairy women and filthy drinking water.

I was scolded one time in L.A. for using "African American". A woman turned around and said "I'm BLACK, got it?"

She's right though.

 

[b.c.]

With all do respect (and I was raised Catholic), I have to disagree with you. Christians are by no means being pushed into marginalization.

Many conservative Christians argue that they are being discriminated against and persecuted in America. Why? Basically, because they have lost their once-dominant position in American politics, culture, and law. They can't stand being treated like adherents of every other religion and this, in turn, amounts to persecution in their minds.

If we were dealing with actual rights, like the right to speech, then claims about discrimination and persecution would be justified. As it is, though, the truth is that Christians are losing privileges — they are losing the ways in which they have been treated better than everyone else. Because of this, they are not actually being discriminated against — but the discrimination against others is ending. It’s not unlike how the elimination of “white privilege” was perceived by whites during the Civil Rights era.

Particularly ironic about this is that privileges for religion have not entirely ended — religion in general continues to enjoy a relatively privileged place in society. What’s ending are privileges for Christianity in particular. Thus complaints about “attacks” on religion are really complaints about “attacks” on Christianity, in which the “attacks” are really policies designed to place Christianity on the same (otherwise privileged) level as all other religions.

Religious privilege — and in particular Christian privilege — is one of the few traditional privileges that continues to be openly defended in modern society. Other forms of privilege, like white privilege and male privilege, may continue to exist but it’s regarded as impolite to actually argue in defense of them anymore. Perhaps one day religious privilege will go the way that white privilege and male privilege are going, but it won’t happen without conservative Christians doing a lot more whining first.

Now I would never tell someone s/he couldn't say Merry Christmas. But let's face it - we are living in a world of globalization. As we continue to break down borders, those of us who are in privileged spaces because of those borders will naturally argue against breaking them down.

Absolutely, positively, "dead on", Giozam. I too am Catholic, but am of the opinion that discrimination exists whenever one's rights (minority or majority) unjustifiably tramples on another's (the key word being "unjustifiably").

Therefore while people should not be forbidden to pray, or to say Merry Christmas, those who do, in turn, do not have the right to insist that everyone does so as well.

The problem is that the fundamental Christian operates under the belief that it is their duty to spread the word, and to draw all others into the fold. They seem convinced that their way (their political/social/moral beliefs) is the right way, and the only way. They are unwilling to see otherwise.

I think there is room enough for alternate points of view, alternate beliefs, without the majority having to feel disenfranchised.

"Angels and demons dancing in my head, lunatics and monsters underneath my bed
Media messiahs preying on my fears, pop culture prophets playing in my ears" (Rush)

 

[b.c.]

...And I also find something hypocritical about the "BET" channel. It appears like self-segregation. And if one race should get their own channel, why not other races? Why is there no "KET" for Koreans?
:biggrin1:

I'm sure there probably is something like a KET channel for Koreans...in Korea. Furthermore there are many Hispanic channels (Univision etc.), there's at least one Asian channel (I saw one in Houston), and an Asian-Indian channel as well. These channels exist and serve various interest groups. It shouldn't be considered either hypocrital or self-segregating.

 

[LongPhatDong]

Point taken, bc. I'm not trying to say that these channels are bad. I just think that its hard to find a level ground for what "fair" is. It just seems to me that one special interest group should not necessarily have priority over another. If we want true "equality" then everyone should get their fair share or everyone should just be treated equally. Sure, there may be Asian channels in Houston, but you'll not find these channels on cable or satelite or on a national level. Not that I've seen, anyways. And this is the only problem I have. Sorry if I came off as rude or brash earlier. I did not intend to offend.

 

[b.c.]

Point taken, bc. I'm not trying to say that these channels are bad. I just think that its hard to find a level ground for what "fair" is. It just seems to me that one special interest group should not necessarily have priority over another. If we want true "equality" then everyone should get their fair share or everyone should just be treated equally. Sure, there may be Asian channels in Houston, but you'll not find these channels on cable or satelite or on a national level. Not that I've seen, anyways. And this is the only problem I have. Sorry if I came off as rude or brash earlier. I did not intend to offend.

Oh, none was taken dude. You're absolutely right. Everyone deserves their piece of the pie, their moment in the sun.

 

[SurferGirlCA]

Well, I'm a practicing Catholic and I don't have a problem with the separation of church and state at all. As much as the government f*cks up almost everything it gets involved in, I don't need it getting into my spiritual life, thanks.

As far as I know, any student can pray any time they want. It's just that one religion's practices shouldn't be endorsed over another's by having a specific prayer led by a school administrator. If there are instances of public schools leading students in Islamic, Buddhist, Confucist, Hindu, Sikh, or Zoroastrianic prayers, then, yes, that should stop.

As for the Christmas brouhaha, well any private group that wants to display a creche/nativity scene can still do that, can't they? It just shouldn't be paid for out of the government budget. If local taxpayers are being asked to foot the bill for Menorahs or Kwanzaa displays on city property, then that would be wrong, too.

People can be sued for defaming Scientology, so what? People can sue for anything (especially in the U.S.), but that doesn't mean they will win. I'm sure you could sue someone for defaming the Catholic Church, but most of the people you'd be sueing would be lapsed Catholics. :wink:

Meanwhile, the idea of "political correctness" being a mainstay of American society is very 1990s, imo. It seems to me it's far more fashionable to be virulently racist and xenophobic now, especially after 9/11.

 

[madame_zora]

Yeah, I have a tough time seeing Christians as being marginalised.

I was in high school in the 70's. There was NO mention of religion or prayer in the school, and we talked about birth control- like rational human beings. Well, at least as rational as teenagers can be. We learned of the existance of other religions although we neither studied them nor Christianity. Good, public school ain't the place for that.

Tax exempt status for churches (Christian churches at the time) was a deal negotiated as the only way to convince the then Christian majority that it was in their best interest to stay out of government. A business deal giving priveledge to Christians not afforded others. Bullshit.

Two weeks ago I had the tv on Saturday night, and I was still up as the sun rose, I got to see Robert Schueller and his Chrystal Palace. It's been a long time since I've been THAT offended. Now granted, I could have turned off the tv, but I thought perhaps it was important to see what these people were spending their time on in their place of "worship". At least 20 minutes, I kid you not, was spent discussing specific laws, naming them by number and telling the congregation they could find them on his website. He specifically told people how God wanted them to vote on these issues, aimed only at furthering their own cause. Another goodly protion of the hour was spent hawking wares in a most used- car salesman manner. Now I ask, is it reasonable to enjoy tax exempt status while you're campaigning, and merchandising?

Christianity isn't the problem, really. Most Christians are fairly nice people, but the religion, as well as most others, has been misused so badly that what people see it the flagrant corruption, and it baffles an outsider as to why nothing is being done from within. I went to some heavily Pentecostal churches, from the Church of God of Prophecy, Christian Assemblies, Churches of Christ, and ended up at an open denominational church before I finally lost faith in the general idea.

Denial is a powerful thing, and as long as we have leaders lying to us and then telling us to keep "the faith", we're in a convoluded mess. Sadly, too many look to leaders for leadership- big mistake.

Separation of church and state needs to be vehemently REintroduced and enforced. Pastors or priests who campaign should also forfeit tax exempt status for their flock. All religious observances should be at the expense of private citizens and none should appear on government property. The same for all. Oh yeah, it's in the constitution, which is fairly good reading. The bill of rights ain't half bad either.

 

[PussyWellington]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't your constitution completely secular? The Founding Fathers were not all christians, in fact most tended towards deism or freemasonry.

 

[madame_zora]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't your constitution completely secular? The Founding Fathers were not all christians, in fact most most tended towards deism or freemasonry.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! However, in our current state, history has been rewritten to paint George Washington as a faithful Christian, when it is in no way true. When any group starts rewriting science and history to validate their stance, you may well understand why so many Americans are afraid of our government.

 

[solong]

Maybe it's time for Christianity to fall. After all, my religion (which produced the Crusades, the Inquisition, Northern Ireland, 30- and 100-years Wars, etc.) hasn't done too well the last couple of centuries. Maybe it's Buddism's or Hinduism's turn.Ceg

Frankly, I think Christianity has already fallen and can't get up. That's because nobody wants to stand up for the principles. Churches want the largest number of "members" so they dare not "offend" new guests with powerful sermons that preach faith, standing for what you believe to the death, knowing wherein you stand, etc. They become "holding cells" for the faithful, who aren't really faithful anymore because they teach that everybody is going to heaven, regardless. So... what's to do, as long as "you are all going to heaven anyway?"

I'd say that, listening to what most "Christians" hear today, they haven't really lost anything if the rest of society doesn't want to hear about it any longer. Why don't we call it CHURCHIANITY? It isn't Christianity.

If I blame anybody, it's the churches, themselves. These outfits have degenerated into the lowest form of con-artistry... A tax-free money funnel for their insurance companies, hospitals, and other enterprizes. It didn't used to be quite this bad, but things don't get better and better. They get worse and worse.

So when they tell you take remove your cross off your neck or you get kicked out, then do it, because you have no advocates. There's nobody with the guts to take your side. You are screwed, you're alone, and not your minister, or their lawyers, or anybody else is going to stand up for YOU! You attend church for yourself. You pay money for that. You got what you paid for, and now you feel better about yourself. (Pass the collection plate)

We brought it all on ourselves, we deserve what we're getting.

 

[Dr Rock]

I guess what I'm saying is that moral relativism is cowardly.

... not, however, anywhere near as cowardly as designating ultimate power and responsibility to a fictional entity.

 

[steve2727]

I still think that at some level those with core beliefs (not fundie shit) are more on track than those with none. I guess what I'm saying is that moral relativism is cowardly.

... not, however, anywhere near as cowardly as designating ultimate power and responsibility to a fictional entity.

I'd also say that standing by your moral principles in the belief it will save you from some sort of awful eternal punishment after you die is more cowardly than standing by your moral principles solely because you believe them to be right.

I don't accept that moral relativism equates to a lack of personal morality or not believing in anything. Just because one believes that morality cannot be separated from the social, political, technological and cultural environment it exists in (something in my past study of history I have found to be self evident) does not mean one cannot have strong and sincere opinions about the moral values that the society you live in and others you are knowledgable about should hold, or that those views cannot significantly vary from the social norm.

 

[Peter Wood]

I’m living in Europe, The Netherlands, and as a Dutchman I understand most of what all of you have written, but my English isn’t that good that I can reply. What keeps coming in my mind is this. For ages people from Europe went to the other side of the Atlantic because they wanted freedom. Freedom of religion, freedom of speech etc. Too many wars in Europe were based on religious differences, one religion overruling the other, the power of the catholic church, the power of catholic or protestant royalty. Of coarse many went also because of the adventure and the possibilities to get wealthy or at least to find a life less poor.
How is it possible that after many generations of Americans have forgotten why their grand-grand-grandparents came to the United States?​

 

[RideRocket]

Christianity isn't the problem, really. Most Christians are fairly nice people, but the religion, as well as most others, has been misused so badly that what people see it the flagrant corruption, and it baffles an outsider as to why nothing is being done from within.

That's exactly right, and it applies to other religions as well. Look at Islam and see how it's being hijacked by extremists bent on subjugating everyone to Islamic law.

I do think there is an active campaign to push Christian elements out of the public picture (and I'm not talking about church/state issues). I think this 'push' is a result of people in society feeling pressured/forced to submit to moral standards prescribed by Christianity when those 'in charge' don't do it themselves.

However, I think this recent resurgence of Christianity in politcs/society/etc is a backlash from Christians in an attempt to 'regain' their status in light of minority groups being pushed to the forefront.

 

[SurferGirlCA]

... However, I think this recent resurgence of Christianity in politcs/society/etc is a backlash from Christians in an attempt to 'regain' their status in light of minority groups being pushed to the forefront.

Good point, Rocket, but the cynical gal in me would also suggest that opportunistic politicians have also been only too happy to try and make political hay out of that backlash. :smile: