Religion in America
- Thread starter skyraider
- Start date
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
More religiously bigoted (and likely racist as well) hatred from the Christ-shun(ning), Jeebus worshipping crowd I see ...
(jeebus: A name used on progressive blogs to deride intolerant religious rightwingers ("fundies") who use the Christian faith as a flag and front for every one of their nastiest motivations, statements and actions, hiding hate behind professed faith. Basically "jeebus" is a code word for lefties permitting them to mock self-annointed religious frothing biters / ultraconservatives of the social or financial right who advocate selfishness and cruelty (via nutty religious errors) without actually deriding Jesus or Christianity itself which they don't have a problem with. Put alternatively, a person who follows the New Testament loves Jesus; a person who can't wait to take away sick benefits from a dying lesbian because God Hates
s loves Jeebus. Get the diff?
Example:
"Don't you understand? Tax cuts for the rich are good and welfare for sick mothers is immoral! What kind of atheistic radical are you to think otherwise?"
"Jeebus told you to say that, didn't he?")
(above from the Urban Dictionary)
As to those "harmless Christ-shuns" the graphic refers to, might wanna poll that one right now over in the Central African Republic:
French military: Christian anti-Balaka fighters in C. African Republic are 'enemy of peace' | Star Tribune
Anti-balaka militiamen kill Christian MP in Bangui
And then Iraq and Afghanistan after you're done with the C.A.R. ...
(jeebus: A name used on progressive blogs to deride intolerant religious rightwingers ("fundies") who use the Christian faith as a flag and front for every one of their nastiest motivations, statements and actions, hiding hate behind professed faith. Basically "jeebus" is a code word for lefties permitting them to mock self-annointed religious frothing biters / ultraconservatives of the social or financial right who advocate selfishness and cruelty (via nutty religious errors) without actually deriding Jesus or Christianity itself which they don't have a problem with. Put alternatively, a person who follows the New Testament loves Jesus; a person who can't wait to take away sick benefits from a dying lesbian because God Hates
s loves Jeebus. Get the diff? Example:
"Don't you understand? Tax cuts for the rich are good and welfare for sick mothers is immoral! What kind of atheistic radical are you to think otherwise?"
"Jeebus told you to say that, didn't he?")
(above from the Urban Dictionary)
As to those "harmless Christ-shuns" the graphic refers to, might wanna poll that one right now over in the Central African Republic:
French military: Christian anti-Balaka fighters in C. African Republic are 'enemy of peace' | Star Tribune
Anti-balaka militiamen kill Christian MP in Bangui
And then Iraq and Afghanistan after you're done with the C.A.R. ...
Last edited:
Any word requiring such a lengthy explanation seems to be an overly strenuous attempt to create a highly emotional pejorative (once you've educated everyone about just how emotional they're supposed to be after hearing it), in order to make the speaker feel better than, or superior to, those he is attempting to deride. It seems to me that it's a lot easier to just stick with the term which everyone already knows, and and means the same thing:More religiously bigoted (and likely racist as well) hatred from the Christ-shun(ning), Jeebus worshipping crowd I see ...
(jeebus: A name used on progressive blogs to deride intolerant religious rightwingers ("fundies") who use the Christian faith as a flag and front for every one of their nastiest motivations, statements and actions, hiding hate behind professed faith. Basically "jeebus" is a code word for lefties permitting them to mock self-annointed religious frothing biters / ultraconservatives of the social or financial right who advocate selfishness and cruelty (via nutty religious errors) without actually deriding Jesus or Christianity itself which they don't have a problem with. Put alternatively, a person who follows the New Testament loves Jesus; a person who can't wait to take away sick benefits from a dying lesbian because God Hates
Christians
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Skyraider,
You may wish to revisit your "like" of the post above ... as well as either A. your comprehension of it - particularly the part where it says: "... and means the same thing ..." - or B. the wider ramifications that necessarily flow from it.
I'm fairly certain that it is not in any way complimentary ...
You may wish to revisit your "like" of the post above ... as well as either A. your comprehension of it - particularly the part where it says: "... and means the same thing ..." - or B. the wider ramifications that necessarily flow from it.
I'm fairly certain that it is not in any way complimentary ...
tenntrucker
Expert Expediter
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
To conflate being critical of the policies and conduct of a nation-state with the bashing of a particular people (whether that people is defined in terms of religion or ethnicity or both) is the epitome of illogical reasoning ...
Something that Christ-shun(ning) Jeebus followers with the "Israel worship" fetish possess in extreme abundance ...
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
I'm pretty comfortable with the assessment of some who have stated (on more than one occasion) that they have not found my posts to be anti-semitic ...
The namecalling is an admission that reasonable evidence & argument is nonexistent. To paraphrase: use 'em if ya got 'em.
It doesn't mean the same thing: I know some sincere Christians, and others who wrap themselves in the Bible as protective coloration for some truly misplaced beliefs of superiority over others: women, gays, people of different color/beliefs/origins.
All Christians are no more the same than all Muslims, or all any other large group of individuals.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
I don't mind a little namecalling and invective now and then ... Lord-only-knows that I do plenty of it myself ...
My problem comes in when someone can't address the argument or substance of the issue and relies on only on ad hominem attacks and other forms of logical fallacies ...
It just shows how intellectually bankrupt they apparently are ...
Sadly - and this is only anecdotal - this is something I've noticed to be more prevalent on the extreme right of the political spectrum (although I'm sure that there are many to the left of center that do it as well)
This unwillingness to engage takes a number of forms ... from just doing the copy/pasta thing (and personally avoiding debate and argument surrounding the issue at hand) ... to abandoning threads one has started when certain unpalatable and uncomfortable truths show their faces and are brought up (crickets) ...
Probably a number of others as well.
I find it to be rather amusing ... if not also somewhat sad ...
Did I say I mind the namecalling?
JK! Actually, I do mind it. I'd like to see opinions discussed with some civility, as far as possible. The whole "Merica! Love it or leave it!" irritates the bejeebers outta me, as I see patriotism in a different light. It's not insisting we are the best, but trying to find ways to make it so. Or at least, make it better. Fixing flaws is impossible, if said flaws cannot be admitted, much less discussed.
And since when is criticizing tantamount to 'hating', anyway? How can we have a cogent discourse if we can't even use words that mean what we think they mean?
Did the whole 'hate' thing start with criticism of Bush? Or was it in vogue before that?
JK! Actually, I do mind it. I'd like to see opinions discussed with some civility, as far as possible. The whole "Merica! Love it or leave it!" irritates the bejeebers outta me, as I see patriotism in a different light. It's not insisting we are the best, but trying to find ways to make it so. Or at least, make it better. Fixing flaws is impossible, if said flaws cannot be admitted, much less discussed.
And since when is criticizing tantamount to 'hating', anyway? How can we have a cogent discourse if we can't even use words that mean what we think they mean?
Did the whole 'hate' thing start with criticism of Bush? Or was it in vogue before that?
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Well ... no m'dear you didn't ...Did I say I mind the namecalling?
That would be the preferable scenario I would think ...
Same here ... it's rather mindless in my book ...
Yup ... conflating criticism of the United States - either as a nation or simply it's government - with hatred (of either) is a dog that just don't hunt ... because it precludes the possibility of that criticism being borne out of caring and concern ...
Since ... nevah ...
One often has to look beyond the criticism to the underlying motivation(s) ... something that sometimes is not all that easy to do (or discern) ...
Would seem to be fraught with difficulty ...
That fallacy has probably been around since time immemorial ...Did the whole 'hate' thing start with criticism of Bush? Or was it in vogue before that?
Fixed it for you.