Anti-Christian Bigotry?

[GostHacked]

Exactly. That distinction by definition is discrimination of the religious. If one were to say this about Blacks, that they are mentally deficient but they should still have all the rights that anyone else has, that statement would be considered bigoted by all but bigots.

That's more ignorance than bigotry. If you hated them because they were retarded, then that is bigotry, *ism discrimination.

[sharkman]

Excellent post.

Sharkman, your comparisons between blacks and Christians throughout the last few pages are ridiculous. They're logically incomparable.

People like you on this thread feel they can discriminate against people of faith and somehow not be tainted by it. What is ridiculous is you thinking it's okay to discriminate against christians who are applying for work, when our constitution clearly says you can't. Our constitution, the UN and any dictionary definition of discrimination clearly defines race(whether they be black or white, etc) and religion on the same footing. So saying blacks are stupid is the same discrimination as saying christians are stupid.

And yet mightyac and you refuse to see what's plainly in front of you. It's kind of sad, really.

Edited September 22, 2013 by sharkman

[dre]

We've got people on the forum who feel smugly superior to religious people, who think all religious people are less intelligent, who attribute items that have nothing to do with religion to religious nutjobs - I'd say there's definitely evidence of bigotry against religious people on the forum.

Sounds like a made up story to me. Who said that "all religious people are less intelligent"?

[dre]

People like you on this thread feel they can discriminate against people of faith and somehow not be tainted by it. What is ridiculous is you thinking it's okay to discriminate against christians who are applying for work, when our constitution clearly says you can't. Our constitution, the UN and any dictionary definition of discrimination clearly defines race(whether they be black or white, etc) and religion on the same footing.

Trying to paint a disagreement on theology as being the same as racial discrimination is silly. Theres a debate between people with different belief sets, and its quite normal for people on all sides to belittle the conclusions and the mental process that lead to them, of their opponent. This is called an argument, and one of the hallmarks of an argument is the the folks on one side, always think the folks on the other side or wrong, and that their conclusions are based on either bad information or a bad thought process.

It WOULD be descrimination for an atheist to suggest Christians be barred from certain jobs, or certain public places, or to suggest they oughtta have the same bathrooms. But its not descrimination for them to argue over this one aspect of a persons character, and call each other crazy.

[sharkman]

It is discrimination to THINK that blacks are stupid. Whether one acts on his thoughts, or whether they just come out in attitudes is besides the point, same thing with people of faith. Again, READ THE UN DEFINITION AND THE CANADA CHARTER OF RIGHTS.

Edited September 22, 2013 by sharkman

[dre]

It is discrimination to THINK that blacks are stupid. Whether one acts on his thoughts, or whether they just come out in attitudes is besides the point, same thing with people of faith. Again, READ THE UN DEFINITION AND THE CANADA CHARTER OF RIGHTS.

No thought is not descrimination. Its not defined that way in either the charter or the UN.

Descrimination as defined by the UN is when thoughts become descriminatory actions....

Discrimination: When beliefs turn into actions

Discrimination is an action that treats people unfairly because of their membership in a particular social group. Discriminatory behaviours take many forms, but they all involve some form of exclusion or rejection. You may have witnessed individual acts of discrimination, such as a student who won't let people of a certain race sit with them at lunch. Often, these individual acts reflect a larger system of exclusion. Consider a school that won't let girls take the same classes as boys, or a business that doesn't hire people or certain ethnic backgrounds.

On a national level, discrimination can take the form of official laws and policies. The enslavement of Africans in the United States, the official domination of Blacks by Whites in South Africa, or Hitler's widespread extermination of Jews are some historic examples of systematic, legal discrimination. When discrimination becomes is part of a systematic use of power and is "just how things are," it is known as an "ism." Racism and sexism are a few "isms" you may be familiar with.

Reflection for after Part D

1. What can happen when we let biases and prejudice affect our actions toward others?

2. Have you ever not wanted to have someone as a friend because of where they live or what they look like?

3. Has anyone rejected or excluded you for similar reasons?

4. What do you think can be done to prevent or eliminate discrimination? What do you think you can do?

[Bob Macadoo]

Thinking a group is stupid based on general characteristics is bigotry but not discrimination. You have to act on those thoughts in order to be accused of discrimination

Edited September 22, 2013 by Bob Macadoo

[Guest American Woman]

Sounds like a made up story to me. Who said that "all religious people are less intelligent"?

I said "think all religious people are less intelligent;" I didn't ascribe that exact quote to anyone. Perhaps next time you could try reading through the thread, or simply ask for verification, before insinuating that I made something up.

Quote Mighty AC: "I do happen to think those that believe in gods, ghosts, unicorns, a living Elvis, Feng Shui or homeopathy are a few cards short of a deck."

few bricks short of a load and few cards shy of a full deck; few cards short of a deck; not playing with a full deck; two bricks shy of a load

Fig. lacking in intellectual ability.

Quote Mighty AC: Anyway, more to your point I do feel that belief in gods, ghosts or grumpkins would lower my internal, subconscious ranking of your intelligence.

Quote Mighty AC: [...]I think belief in magic beings makes one a nutjob[...]

nut·job

ˈnətjäb/

nouninformal

1.

a crazy or foolish person.

Fool·ish

ˈfo͞oliSH/

adjective

1.

(of a person or action) lacking good sense or judgment; unwise.

"it was foolish of you to enter into correspondence"

synonyms: stupid, silly, idiotic, witless, brainless, vacuous, mindless, unintelligent, thoughtless, half-baked, harebrained, imprudent, incautious, injudicious,unwise;

Edited September 22, 2013 by American Woman

[sharkman]

Dre, I don't know why you didn't provide a link, you want me accept your position without links when you won't accept mine without links. It seems you think discrimination is only an act though.

Anyway, the Charter of Rights:

• 15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

• Marginal note:Affirmative action programs

  (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. (84)

And the UN, I just chose one at random:

Recalling that all States have pledged themselves, under the Charter of the United Nations, to promote and encourage universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion,

Reaffirming that discrimination against human beings on the grounds of religion or belief constitutes an affront to human dignity and a disavowal of the principles of the Charter,

So the question is, what is the definition of discrimination?

Religious discrimination is valuing or treating a person or group differently because of what they do or do not believe. Specifically, it is when adherents of different religions (or denominations) are treated unequally, either before the law or in institutional settings such as employment or housing.

Merely valuing a group differently because of what they do or do not believe is discrimination.

And then a definition:

treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.

So merely considering a person differently based on the group they belong to, rather than on individual merit is discrimination.

Yes, an act or words against a person of such a group is discrimination. But so is merely thinking less of them without any actions or bigoted words. Where do you think the actions come from?

Edited September 22, 2013 by sharkman

[sharkman]

Thinking a group is stupid based on general characteristics is bigotry but not discrimination. You have to act on those thoughts in order to be accused of discrimination

You could be right there, and at the end of the day both are wrong.

[kimmy]

You're the one who pointed out that "many items on the list had nothing to do with religion" - as you attributed the list to "religious nutjobs."

Soooo. "Many have nothing to do with religion" - according to you - as "many or most do have something to do with religion." Not sure how the math works out there, but ... ok.

If you go back and reread what I've had to say, it's attributing "many items on the list" that "have nothing to do with religion" to "religious nutjobs" that I've been critical of.

Ok, I think I've got it. Many items have nothing to do with religion - while many of the issues do - but "religious nutjobs" are to blame for all of it. Yeah, that doesn't sound biased or bigoted at all. Just criticizing the policy, eh?

I don't know why so many religious nutjobs align themselves with political and social causes that have nothing to do with religion; you'd have to ask them, not me.

-k

[Guest American Woman]

I don't know why so many religious nutjobs align themselves with political and social causes that have nothing to do with religion; you'd have to ask them, not me.

I didn't ask you. Just pointing out that you attribute it to religion - even though it has nothing to do with religion.

[kimmy]

I didn't ask you. Just pointing out that you attribute it to religion - even though it has nothing to do with religion.

No, I don't attribute these causes themselves to religion. I pointed out that (for whatever reason) they receive political support from the religious right.

-k

[cybercoma]

Religion may not be the cause of people supporting ridiculous political causes. Both could co-occur because they are caused by some third variable, like being willing to suspend reason and logic.

[Moonlight Graham]

People like you on this thread feel they can discriminate against people of faith and somehow not be tainted by it. What is ridiculous is you thinking it's okay to discriminate against christians who are applying for work, when our constitution clearly says you can't.

If I were that employer I would not be discriminating against all Christians (and I wouldn't be a "anti-Christian bigot"), just those (and Jews and Muslims and even atheists) who express the belief that the earth is only 4000 years old and humans walked the earth as the same time as dinosaurs. In fact, by definition maybe that wouldn't be discrimination since not all Christians believe those things. Not sure. Also, if I were an employer looking for a very good scientist, and I had MLW member betsy and another person as my 2 applicants I had to choose from, and each had similar education and work experience, I wouldn't choose betsy because the fundamentalist beliefs she's expresses shows a lack of critical thinking and logic and anti-science bias, which would hurt her work as a scientist. If you had to hire a lifeguard, would you hire a person whose religious beliefs didn't let them enter any body of water larger than a bathtub? Or any other belief that made them less than qualified for a job? Can't beliefs sometimes be a category that is included in determining someone's individual merit, ie: when their beliefs will affect their ability to complete fundamental tasks of a job?

If I got hauled into court because of those decisions, so be it. I would willingly challenge it in court. I'd challenge Section 15 of the Charter and ask that it be permitted via Section 1 of the Charter, the "reasonable limits" clause. IMO, not hiring a person to be a lifeguard because their religious beliefs don't allow them to swim is a "reasonable limit" to their equality rights.

Edited September 22, 2013 by Moonlight Graham

[Moonlight Graham]

Just because you disagree with the beliefs that some or even all Christians have, that doesn't make you a bigot. If you paint them all as nutjobs or idiots, then IMO that would make you a bigot.

Then again, it all depends on how you view bigotry. If I think people who are active members of the KKK are a-holes, does that make me an anti-KKK bigot? If it does, that doesn't really bother me.

Edited September 22, 2013 by Moonlight Graham

[Guest American Woman]

Just because you disagree with the beliefs that some or even all Christians have, that doesn't make you a bigot. If you paint them all as nutjobs or idiots, then IMO that would make you a bigot.

Then again, it all depends on how you view bigotry. If I think people who are active members of the KKK are a-holes, does that make me an anti-KKK bigot? If it does, that doesn't really bother me.

Thinking active members of the KKK are a-holes doesn't make you a bigot. Their purpose, their intent, their actions, their beliefs are all intolerable. Furthermore, the members of the KKK are a select group; it's not comprised of millions of people worldwide, all with a varying degree of beliefs even within the same religion, and a wide degree of different beliefs among the different religions. It's not unfair or intolerant to judge the KKK members negatively while it is unfair and intolerant to judge all religious people because of their belief in a God. Edited September 22, 2013 by American Woman

[Guest American Woman]

double post

Edited September 22, 2013 by American Woman

[sharkman]

Just because you disagree with the beliefs that some or even all Christians have, that doesn't make you a bigot. If you paint them all as nutjobs or idiots, then IMO that would make you a bigot.

Then again, it all depends on how you view bigotry. If I think people who are active members of the KKK are a-holes, does that make me an anti-KKK bigot? If it does, that doesn't really bother me.

I would simply direct you to the various definitions I linked to above. If you are valuing a person differently based on their race or religion, then you are discriminating. Disagreeing with their views is of course, not discriminating. It doesn't depend on how you or I view bigotry, it depends on what the meaning of the term is, and the interpretation of our courts and constitution.

If you are an employer who won't hire a christian who thinks the earth is 4000 years old to be a clerk, then you have issues.

Edit: Having said that, I have a feeling that you would still help jump start my car if I was broken down in a parking lot and had a fish bumper sticker.

Edited September 23, 2013 by sharkman

[Moonlight Graham]

Thinking active members of the KKK are a-holes doesn't make you a bigot. Their purpose, their intent, their actions, their beliefs are all intolerable.

That the beliefs of the KKK are intolerable is subjective. Some people think the beliefs of God-worshippers are intolerable, also subjective. Being a bigot has nothing to do with how anyone feels (ie: its moral or scientific legitimacy etc.) about the group one is being a intolerant against. Being a bigot is about being intolerant of another group of people (usually based on beliefs, religion, race, politics etc.).

Furthermore, the members of the KKK are a select group; it's not comprised of millions of people worldwide, all with a varying degree of beliefs even within the same religion, and a wide degree of different beliefs among the different religions. It's not unfair or intolerant to judge the KKK members negatively while it is unfair and intolerant to judge all religious people because of their belief in a God.

This makes no sense. Being a "select group" is still a group, a group one can be intolerant of. Also, people within the KKK have varying beliefs (different visions and goals of what the KKK should be and should do). People within al-Qaeda have varying beliefs, but couldn't one be a bigot vs members of al-Qaeda? What you or I feel morally or personally about a group shouldn't be a factor of whether of not it's qualified to be bigoted against (I don't see anything in any definition of "bigot" that says otherwise). You're setting a double-standard against people you (or the majority of society) agree or disagree with. The difference between violent Muslim extremists and evangelical Christians is the moral worth and the philosophical and overall legitimacy of the beliefs these people stand for and the actions they take part in...which is of course completely subjective.

If you think all violent Muslim extremists are intolerable and nutjobs, then you are a bigot. If you think all evangelical Christians are intolerable and nutjobs, then you are a bigot. What's the difference? Some people may feel about evangelical Christians similar to what you and I feel about violent Muslim extremists.

edit: maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the law and the majority of society does indeed determine what is bigotry or not. Not sure...need to think about this some more.

Edited September 23, 2013 by Moonlight Graham

[Moonlight Graham]

It doesn't depend on how you or I view bigotry, it depends on what the meaning of the term is, and the interpretation of our courts and constitution.

Yes maybe you're right. Maybe it depends on what the law and what the majority of society views as "bigotry".

If you are an employer who won't hire a christian who thinks the earth is 4000 years old to be a clerk, then you have issues.

Obviously that would be bigotry, because those believes have nothing to do with the job. That would just be vile intolerance and wrong.

Edit: Having said that, I have a feeling that you would still help jump start my car if I was broken down in a parking lot and had a fish bumper sticker.

Yes, but not if you had a "I Love Harper" bumper sticker.

[sharkman]

Duly noted, I'll order emergency "Layton the Legend" bumper stickers and stash them in our glove boxes in case I break down.

Edited September 23, 2013 by sharkman

[dre]

If you are an employer who won't hire a christian who thinks the earth is 4000 years old to be a clerk, then you have issues.

If you an employer and you even ASK about a persons religion you have issues.

[Bonam]

If you an employer and you even ASK about a persons religion you have issues.

Similarly, if you are an employee and start loudly making your religious views known at work, you have issues.

[dre]

Yup.