Christian Country?

[crazy-tiger]

I'm sticking this here even though it's technically a rant, since I really want Christians to see this...

 

I'm getting sick and tired of certain people making the claim that, since 85% of Americans are Christian, the US is a Christian country... while at the same time stating that various groups of Christians aren't really Christians at all.

 

 

Take Catholics, for example... we've seen it so many times before. Someone tries to distance Christianity from the evils Catholics have done in the past by stating that they're not Christians... that they worship/pray to Mary, that they can't be Christian because of what they did, and so on... yet whenever they feel they have to show the US is a Christian country, all of a sudden the Catholics are Christians again!

 

We see it with JW's, Pentacostals, Mormons... just about every sect of Christianity. If something bad has been done by one of the sects, then out they go... but when they play the numbers game, they welcome them with open arms.

 

They are two-faced, hypocritical fuckers and I'm sick of them.

 

 

 

 

 

If anyone wants to know some of the numbers... Catholics make up approx 30% of the US population, so kicking just them out drops Christians to just 55%. All you need is 15M more to be kicked out, and you Christians are a fucking minority. (and the mormons/JW's together are bloody close to that)

[Open_Minded]

<snip>If something bad has been done by one of the sects, then out they go... but when they play the numbers game, they welcome them with open arms.

 

They are two-faced, hypocritical fuckers and I'm sick of them.

 

If anyone wants to know some of the numbers... Catholics make up approx 30% of the US population, so kicking just them out drops Christians to just 55%. All you need is 15M more to be kicked out, and you Christians are a fucking minority. (and the mormons/JW's together are bloody close to that)

 

Hello Crazy Tiger:

 

Count me as one of those Christians that the fundies count when it's convienent for them and call a heretic otherwise.

 

You're right - they're hypocrits. If you drop all the liberal protestant Christians - and only count the "Bible Believing" literalists - then they are in a real minority (and they know it). After all - only the few will be saved - right.....

[NotBlinded]

How convenient...

 

I am so glad that the thumpers are the minority. Most people do grow up I would think. Their kindergarten understanding of the religion is moronic. Is that a word??

[Fweethawt]

I can hear the little mutating cells right now...

 

"This is a Cancer body! This is a Cancer body!"

 

[Lycorth]

Well-said, CT

 

If this were a Xian country, there would be only one Xian religion. But, except for the sake of argument, there is no such thing. Much like there is no one Ku Klux Klan but rather many different sects, there is no one Xian religion, just a bunch of differing groups. They all in-fight as much as they try to cooperate, and cooperation is usually defined as respecting the Xianity of the other sects for the sake of bolstering their numbers and making their overall religion look bigger than it really is.

 

If this were a Xian country, the very founding documents of America would have a blunt and clear Xian bias. They do not. The earliest laws of America would have a Xian slant, which they do not have. Many laws would exist simply for the exclusive promotion of Xianity and the oppression of all other religions and any other activities which are contrary to Xianity - and we have none of those. The plain text of the founding documents and earliest laws of America do not read like the Xian statues of Xian-founded nation-states in Europe.

 

There would be no such thing as freedom of speech, only freedom to glorify Jebus. There would be no such thing as freedom of the press, only the freedom to write to promote the Xian religion. There would never be any notion of separation of church and state, rather, the church would run the state, as the history of Xian countries shows to always happen.

 

America was never intended to be a Xian country and was never founded on Xian "morality." And that is why, however proud I am of my ancestral European backgrounds, I am also proud to be an American, and will always honor what America was intended to be - a free, inclusive society not governed by the laws of fanatics, religious or otherwise.

 

[Fweethawt]

Ummm... Aren't wolves on the endangered species list?

 

Maybe you should pick a different mascot.

How 'bout a Golden Lab or somethin'?

They're pretty plentiful.

[Kelli]

I saw the title of this thread and thought it was about music.

[crazy-tiger]

I saw the title of this thread and thought it was about music.

Christian Country Music??

[Lycorth]

Ummm... Aren't wolves on the endangered species list?

 

Nah - it's rather fitting. After all, opponents to Xianity were once on the endangered species list, back when Xianity really had power in western civilization. And were demonized, again, like wolves were.

 

Maybe you should pick a different mascot.

How 'bout a Golden Lab or somethin'?

They're pretty plentiful.

 

I can't very well have a mascot that's cuter and better with the ladies than I am

[Thurisaz]

Take Catholics, for example... we've seen it so many times before. Someone tries to distance Christianity from the evils Catholics have done in the past by stating that they're not Christians... that they worship/pray to Mary, that they can't be Christian because of what they did, and so on... yet whenever they feel they have to show the US is a Christian country, all of a sudden the Catholics are Christians again!

 

It puzzles me anyway that the morontheists think (HA! ) that these tiny details somehow invalidate the fact that the cocklicks still bow to the same evil idol the other jebus cultists do, claim to follow the same commandments (and really break them every chance they get), et cetera ad nauseam.

What remains? Oh right, those infamous Apocrypha™ in da wholly babble of the cocklicks. So what? What do the morons think (HA! ) can be found in there? Some kind of "Seriously now, all the stuff in the rest of the book is bunk! Hail Saaa-taaan!" or what?

[Thurisaz]

Maybe you should pick a different mascot.

How 'bout a Golden Lab or somethin'?

 

Or how about a species that humans have tried to exterminate for literally millennia... in vain? Must be an almost literally blessed species, no?

 

You know what I mean Fwee...

 

[Kelli]

I saw the title of this thread and thought it was about music.

Christian Country Music??

 

Yep. You've never been to the Southern USA I'm gathering. Christian Country is actually a radio format down there.

[Fweethawt]

Or how about a species that humans have tried to exterminate for literally millennia... in vain? Must be an almost literally blessed species, no?

 

You know what I mean Fwee...

:screams: :screams:

THAT is a frukkin' RAT!

 

I am NOT a frukkin' RAT!

:screams: :screams:

 

 

 

 

I just a widd'ol meecey...

[Thurisaz]

THAT is a frukkin' RAT!

 

I am NOT a frukkin' RAT!

 

Eh, what's to say against your larger siblings?

 

From Wikipedia:

 

"Rat is the term generally and indiscriminately applied to numerous members of several rodent families having bodies longer than about 12 cm, or 5 inches. (Smaller thin-tailed rodents are just as often indiscriminately referred to as mice.)"

 

(Sorry couldn't resist... )

[Ex-COG]

If anyone wants to know some of the numbers... Catholics make up approx 30% of the US population, so kicking just them out drops Christians to just 55%. All you need is 15M more to be kicked out, and you Christians are a fucking minority. (and the mormons/JW's together are bloody close to that)

I think the fundy/evangelicals leaders know their sect is in the minority. As said, take away the Catholics, Mormons, JW's, and add to that liberal Protestants who don't follow the conservative agenda, and the evangelical ranks shrink. I think that's the real reason their leadership whips up the followers into a frenzy; they are afraid of being pushed into the background and losing what influence they have obtained. They want special rights for conservative Christians on the books, so that as a minority they can press charges for anything they perceive as violating their status. I think too many people in this country think that the evangelical wing of Christianity is bigger and stronger than it really is; we, and especially other Christians who don't agree with the fundamentalist agenda, need to shout the truth for all to hear it.

[Thurisaz]

I think the fundy/evangelicals leaders know their sect is in the minority.

[...]

I think too many people in this country think that the evangelical wing of Christianity is bigger and stronger than it really is; we, and especially other Christians who don't agree with the fundamentalist agenda, need to shout the truth for all to hear it.

 

Reading this I have to wonder about one thing...

 

...if there aren't such hordes of baindead cultist zombies over there at your places, who the fuck watches TBN, tithes those millions of bucks, buys babblical cretinist/IDiot books for more millions of bucks, et cetera ad nauseam?

Granted that I watch TBN (via RealPlayer) every now and then, for sheer comedy value... maybe most viewers are just like me? Or what?

[Ex-COG]

[...if there aren't such hordes of baindead cultist zombies over there at your places...

Oh, there are millions of them, but the horde is still a minority. Problem is, they tend to be loud and pushy enough to look bigger than they really are. The silent majority (liberal Christians, other religious groups, non-belivers) needs to start speaking up and tell the "moral minority" to back off. I keep asking myself how bad things have to get before people start doing it? Maybe every American on this board (including myself) needs to ask themself, "Well, what are you doing about it?"

[Thurisaz]

Quite right. The one thing I blame your moderate/liberal christians for (like I also state on my pathetic little website) is their apparent lack of at least trying to make their own voices heard.

Being peaceful and forgiving doeth haveth its values for sure, but in a life-or-death (tolerance-or-fundyism) situation, you don't fight back, you're history.

Seems indeed like still more must happen.

[Open_Minded]

Quite right. The one thing I blame your moderate/liberal christians for (like I also state on my pathetic little website) is their apparent lack of at least trying to make their own voices heard. Being peaceful and forgiving doeth haveth its values for sure, but in a life-or-death (tolerance-or-fundyism) situation, you don't fight back, you're history. Seems indeed like still more must happen.

 

Easier said than done.

 

First of all I happen to be a very vocal liberal Christian. Both within the small suburban community I live in and the larger metro area that I live near my name is affiliated with interfaith activities.

 

It's easy for me to speak out because my volunteer work is in the area of interfaith dialog and activity.

 

However - one sister - who also lives in the same metro area and is every bit as liberal Christian as I am - is involved in politics. She has been asked during election cycles what her religious beliefs are. Do you really want her (and other politicians like her) to legitimize the illigimate questions of reporters about a politician's religious beliefs by getting into any kind of lengthy discussion on the topic?

 

See we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. Sure - she should say she thinks her religious beliefs have no bearing on her ability to do the job (and she has). And that we need to work for healing between the religions instead of dividing people by using religion.

 

But, it solves nothing. The press is a reflection of the average Joe/Jane on the street. They like nice juicy gossip and will take simple straight-forward answers and turn them into huge mountains to debate. The real issues of a campaign (you know health care, decent wages, environmental issues, etc...) get lost because the politician didn't see a need to discuss his/her personal religious beliefs.

[Thurisaz]

Easier said than done.

 

I never said that it would be easy. Sadly, it never is.

 

However, like I said, it seems to me that hardly anyone ever tries.

[Open_Minded]

Easier said than done.

I never said that it would be easy. Sadly, it never is.

 

However, like I said, it seems to me that hardly anyone ever tries.

Thurisaz - I agree. I've spent years trying to be more outspoken about these issues. Sometimes I succeed and sometimes I fail miserably.

 

I really am asking advice here... when I wrote the following I really was looking for input on how you (and others here) would feel.

Do you really want her (and other politicians like her) to legitimize the illigimate questions of reporters about a politician's religious beliefs by getting into any kind of lengthy discussion on the topic?

 

Let me put this another way. Often - in my own work with interfaith dialog - I find myself in the position of having to build bridges between different perspectives. I don't know - maybe the gift my parents, who left Christianity, gave us children often puts me in a position of seeing both sides of the discussion. I understand the anger and resentment that one can have towards Christianity because I watched my parents deal with it. But, they also refused to pass that anger and resentment onto us children. They taught us to keep an open mind and to understand that these were human problems, not problems associated with any particular group of individuals. So, I've been raised with my feet in the worlds of Ex-C, Mainstream Christian and Liberal Christian. The only world I really don't know is the fundy world.

 

Anyway - it isn't uncommon for me to find myself in a position of having to bridge both perspectives. And, it isn't uncommon for me to find myself in this situation where people of both perspectives are present. So, then it becomes a matter of trying to find language that both perspectives can relate to. This is difficult work - and doing it in the public arena is even more difficult.

 

If - in order to help Christians understand where I am coming from in my willingness to seek relationships outside the Christian community - I need to talk about my own Christian journey then do I allienate those who are not Christian? It's a quandry that I've been struggling with for sometime.

 

If - in my sister's case - she decides to sit down and have an honest discussion with reporters about her own Christian journey (in order to educate Christians about the need to be more open towards people who are not Christian) then does she end up allienating the very people she wants to include - does she end up allienating people like yourself?

 

Earlier I alluded to questions about ones religion being illigimate in a campaign. But, is it illigimate - within the current cultural context - for liberal politians to take the attitude, "OK if you want to discuss this - let's discuss it all - let's talk about it all. I'll talk about my own spiritual life, but that will include everything, it will include the fact that I don't think anyone is going to hell. It will include the fact that I believe we humans are capable of destroying ourselves if we don't learn to live with each other". Is that legitimate to do in a political campaign?

 

She and I have actually had these conversations, and we've not found easy answers.

[Lycorth]

I never said that it would be easy. Sadly, it never is.

 

However, like I said, it seems to me that hardly anyone ever tries.

 

Indeed - and I at times need to remind myself of that.

 

Xianity has only been as broken as it has been because of criticism from within. We need to keep up that criticism to finish pushing Xianity back into the grave.

[Open_Minded]

I never said that it would be easy. Sadly, it never is.

 

However, like I said, it seems to me that hardly anyone ever tries.

 

Indeed - and I at times need to remind myself of that.

 

Xianity has only been as broken as it has been because of criticism from within. We need to keep up that criticism to finish pushing Xianity back into the grave.

Varokhar... within the context of my previous post - where I discussed the need to build bridges - can you see where this statement would serve to divide people.

 

I have had Christians accuse me of this very thing - they see my willingness to speak out against the excesses and extremist elements within Christianity as a desire to destroy Christianity.

 

Firstly - I don't believe it's possible to destroy human spirituality. In whatever form, humans will always search for understanding of the INFINITE.

 

Secondly - on a personal level - I've no desire to "push" Christianity into any "grave". I've a desire to see Christianity grow and mature and fullfill itself as a Wisdom tradition.

 

But, there is the perceived notion that criticism from within will make it crumble and die. And then when liberals (like myself) try to productively hold Christianity accountable, our voices are drowned out by those within Christianity who are fearful that we are trying to take their religion away from them.

[Lycorth]

Hey, OM

 

Varokhar... within the context of my previous post - where I discussed the need to build bridges - can you see where this statement would serve to divide people.

 

I see it - but I have no desire to avoid being divisive in regards to certain things. I also have a desire to see people who are involved in severely racist ideologies grow past that and learn to respect other races, but I must always emphasize that racism needs to be destroyed.

 

I simply do not view Xianity any differently.

 

I have had Christians accuse me of this very thing - they see my willingness to speak out against the excesses and extremist elements within Christianity as a desire to destroy Christianity.

 

Funny thing is, pointing out the flaws of Xianity will do just that - destroy it. Even if you manage to turn Xianity into a strictly metaphorical, non-theistic religion, traditional Xianity will be destroyed - and that's what fervent Xians today fight for.

 

For Xianity to be turned into metaphor would be the same as destroying it, especially in their eyes. You'll never convince them you want to do anything else.

 

Firstly - I don't believe it's possible to destroy human spirituality. In whatever form, humans will always search for understanding of the INFINITE.

 

I agree, but there are hundreds of paths human spirituality has taken that have nothing to do with Xianity. The extinction of the Xian cult would in no way harm humanity's spiritual progress - and would improve it vastly, I believe. It's a cult that lends itself too easily to literalist interpretations of its holy books, which opens the door wide for social and personal oppression and fearmongering. For that reason alone I wholly oppose Xianity.

 

I myself regard all religions as metaphor, and find them to be more relevant to my life now than ever. Asatru, which I believed in literally for a time, is a good example of this. I find much truth and meaning for me in it, even though I don't believe the gods exist outside of my own imagination. My spirituality feels just fine, to me - and having lost all respect for Xianity hasn't hampered my spiritual life in any way.

 

Secondly - on a personal level - I've no desire to "push" Christianity into any "grave". I've a desire to see Christianity grow and mature and fullfill itself as a Wisdom tradition.

 

I'd be fine with Xianity being developed into that, a metaphorical concept without any of the very real terrorism that comes along with any sort of literalist interpretation of it. But, like I said above, I believe it lends itself to being taken to literalistic extremes all too easily. The Babble is full of horrible stories and ugly mandates given by God (both in the OT and the NT), things that can only inspire hatred and prejudice of all kinds. Even as metaphor they do not work.

 

I applaud your desire to turn Xianity away from such literalism, but I hope you can understand that I, personally, cannot support Xianity at all.

 

But, there is the perceived notion that criticism from within will make it crumble and die. And then when liberals (like myself) try to productively hold Christianity accountable, our voices are drowned out by those within Christianity who are fearful that we are trying to take their religion away from them.

 

Like I said, those people who think you are trying to destroy Xianity wholly will continue to think that. Their literal take on their religion makes them believe this, I think. I used to have such a perspective, myself. I thought Jebus was real, thought he really foresaw that people would try to oppress Xianity, and when I saw that people were criticizing it, I took it as fulfillment of what Jebus said. I never stopped to think that the critics had real concerns to voice, or weren't criticizing to be deliberately "evil" like my literalist views said they were.

 

You can try to be as constructive about it as you like, but any criticism of Xianity will always be seen as oppositional by fervent Xians. It'd be like people criticizing Communism within a fervently Communist state; unless that state has adopted any enlightened laws, the state will oppress all criticism as treason.

 

Given the fact that traditional Xianity is propagandized and touted with the same sort of fanaticism as fervent Communism, there is no such thing as constructive criticism. Either you think it's flawless or you're an antichrist. Know whadda mean?

[Open_Minded]

Hello Varokhar

 

Before I respond, I'd like to take a few moments and affirm some things - just so there is no misunderstanding. I do recognize and honor the following:

• This is Ex-Christian.net and it is a place of support for those leaving Christianity. As such, this is YOUR home and I am the visitor.
  
• I've absolutely no desire to tell you (or anyone else) what they should say and do - especially in their own home.
  
• What I write here is in the context of this thread - where sentiment has been expressed that liberal Christians should speak out more (as well as Ex-Cs) in the larger culture.
  
• This issue - of finding productive ways to "speak up" in the larger culture is near and dear to my heart. What follows are not my answers to problems I have been dealing with for years. They are my mussings and I welcome input from anyone reading this.
  

OK, now that the disclaimer is out of the way....

 

Varokhar... within the context of my previous post - where I discussed the need to build bridges - can you see where this statement would serve to divide people.

I see it - but I have no desire to avoid being divisive in regards to certain things. I also have a desire to see people who are involved in severely racist ideologies grow past that and learn to respect other races, but I must always emphasize that racism needs to be destroyed. I simply do not view Xianity any differently.

I am making an assumption here - so please do correct me if I am wrong. If you have come out of an extreme form of Christianity, I can certainly understand why you affiliate Christianity with racism.

 

Having said that, it is also fair to point out that many of us have never been exposed to extreme forms of Christianity (well never been expected to buy into it anyway). For many, many, many people Christianity is the core of a productive and well-rounded belief system.

 

I have had Christians accuse me of this very thing - they see my willingness to speak out against the excesses and extremist elements within Christianity as a desire to destroy Christianity.

 

Funny thing is, pointing out the flaws of Xianity will do just that - destroy it. Even if you manage to turn Xianity into a strictly metaphorical, non-theistic religion, traditional Xianity will be destroyed - and that's what fervent Xians today fight for.

Christianity is not metaphorical to me (and millions of other people). It contains metaphore - but it is not ALL metaphore. It is NOT my desire to "turn" it into a "strictly metaphorical or non-theisitic religion". I am theistic, most liberal Christians are.

 

You are right about one thing though - in the eyes of literalists - whatever form of Christianity liberals abide by is NOT Christianity to them.

 

Firstly - I don't believe it's possible to destroy human spirituality. In whatever form, humans will always search for understanding of the INFINITE.

I agree, but there are hundreds of paths human spirituality has taken that have nothing to do with Xianity.

Here we agree.

 

The extinction of the Xian cult would in no way harm humanity's spiritual progress - and would improve it vastly, I believe.

That is your belief, arrived at by your own experience and you have every right to that belief.

 

However, it is my belief that the "extinction" of Christianity would severely harm humanity, just as the extinction of any other world religion would harm humanity. My heart ached as I watched extremists blow up ancient statues of the Buddha - on the nightly news - for good reason. Buddhism is a reflection of one part of humanity. Christianity is a reflection of another part of humanity. And we need all the lessons of ancient history, all of them - even the lessons of horror and war. We will continue to repeat the mistakes of the past unless we learn from them.

 

There are literalists in every religion - extinquishing religion does not rid the world of extremists. I have had Christian/Buddhist dialog with Buddhists who literally believe their scriptures. I am no less amazed at the ability of the human brain to twist Buddhist scripture to ones own end than I am amazed at the ability of the human brain to twist Christian scriptures. It's quite mad, actually. But, the word "extinquish" denotes a touch of force (at a minimum) or violence (at a maximum). Very little is solved by force.

 

I applaud your desire to turn Xianity away from such literalism, but I hope you can understand that I, personally, cannot support Xianity at all.

I do understand. I watched my father and mother go through years of aching and anger and frustration at Christianity. And somehow in the midst of all of it, they freed us children from that same pain. I am grateful to them and yet I still remember their aching.

 

But - here's the deal -

 

It's no secret that I am involved in interfaith dialog and activities. Sometimes these things are easy and fun and enjoyable and I get a "high" off the participation. But.... there are times when it becomes very challenging. And - over the years - I've learned certain unspoken ground rules. The first ground rule that I've learned - and the most important - is to recognize that the other person(s) or group(s) are part of the picture. They are there, they aren't going to go away.

 

This may seem quite silly - but as I often tell my children, "you can't change other people, you can only change yourself". In essence the most important rule of interfaith dialog is to go to the table with that attitude. An attitude that says, "I am not here to change them. I am here to grow myself. If two people can not sit down at a table and acknowledge each others right to exist - then no amount of "dialog" will bring peace.

 

I am not writing this like I have it all figured out. I don't. I refuse to participate in dialog with fundamentalist Christians - and I have actively refused when others have gone. I can't do it - I can't sit at the table and in the depths of my heart acknowledge that they (as a group) have a right to exist to spout the hatefilled garbage they spout. And I feel a sense of failure in NOT being able to sit at the table with an Open Mind (and I use those two words intentionally). It is easier for me to sit at a table with literalist Hindus than it is for me to sit at a table literalist Christians.

 

But - even in all of my frustrations with that mindset - I do believe it would harm humanity to destroy an entire religon. It is productive to expect a religion to "grow up" to "mature". But, to "destroy" any religion would only lead to violence.

 

I will acknowledge your point - that in the mind of literalists any form of Christianity that is not their own is a "destruction". But, do you see my point - within a cultural discussion (ie -sitting across the table from said literalist) it only serves to cause harm, to divide by using language like "destroy" or "extinquish", etc... ?

 

You can try to be as constructive about it as you like, but any criticism of Xianity will always be seen as oppositional by fervent Xians. It'd be like people criticizing Communism within a fervently Communist state; unless that state has adopted any enlightened laws, the state will oppress all criticism as treason.

 

Given the fact that traditional Xianity is propagandized and touted with the same sort of fanaticism as fervent Communism, there is no such thing as constructive criticism. Either you think it's flawless or you're an antichrist. Know whadda mean?

Yes I do, actually. And there-in lies the rub. I understand the sentiments in this thread that liberal Christians should speak up more - as well as Ex-Christians. But - finding a way to do this without causing more harm is challenging to say the least.

 

For the sake of discussion - I have often wondered how a team of Ex-Christians, non-Christians, and liberal Christians would be received in mainstream churches for discussion. I go to a mainstream church and many people have told me that my outspokeness on these issues have helped them to let-go of some of their more traditional beliefs. And so - I wonder - in the back of my mind.... what would happen if I put a team of people together to go out and speak on Sunday mornings to area churches.

 

I think mainstream churches would be open to the idea and I'm getting closer to just doing it..... So much of my effort these past years has been invested in just buildng an interspiritual group. And that still needs a lot of work - but I can also feel myself getting restless for something more.