Im really curious here I probably wont respond much but I want to know your takes on this. I personally have never seen normal people who follow their church to really be a threat to me but say a church organization i definitely don’t trust. Especially prosperity churches
I don’t (yet) live in fear of Christians on a day-to-day basis in the sense that, especially outside the Bible Belt where I am, they are good at minding their own business.
I have always been fine with relatively liberal Christians, who tend to be much more “live and let live”.
The problem is the authoritarian Christians who have a strong need to impose their beliefs outside their own in-group.
In particular, in the US, we are in the throes of a Christo-fascist soft coup largely because of Christian nationalist influences, which is inordinately influential in this country.
In THAT sense, THOSE Christians are a “genuine threat” and “out to get” non-conforming persons – which in practical terms are political liberals, unbelievers, and non-Christians (and probably eventually, insufficiently pious Christians by their standards).
More generically, some of us see the failed epistemology of religious faith as harmful to civil society, to scientific endeavor, and to human progress in the large. The more strident / authoritarian the religious faith, the worse the problem.
A recent book about all these Christian fundamentalist dynamics that is pretty good is Wild Faith by Talia Lavin, if you want to dig into more detail.
3 Likes
The moment religious believers of any sort start moving into Inquisitional territory, they become an existential threat to everyone else by definition. 1,500 years of European history should teach even the novice this elementary lesson.
If anyone doubts for one moment that US Christian Nationalists aren’t moving in this direction, then anyone harbouring this complacency needs to get out more. Not only has the rhetoric from this quarter been increasingly intolerant of anyone outside the doctrinal pale, but the followers thereof have a well-documented habit of following through after delivering their rhetoric. They are genuinely dangerous, and need to be subject to effective countermeasures swiftly.
4 Likes
Countermeasures are, of course, always decried as “persecution” and it is almost completely projection on their part. I always remind Christians applauding the progress of the Christian nationalist agenda that unless they belong to the exact sect that ends up in final control, they will be on the menu, too. Because these kinds of regimes are never satisfied with whatever level of control they get.
I should add that the current regime is an amalgam of Christian nationalists, Proud Boy types, and tech bros, so the irony may well ultimately be that Black Christians will end up persecuted by Proud Boys and White Christians by our new “AI” overlords and the nihilistic economic programs of the “AI” masters. And in some cases, they won’t even realize it; they’ll go down exulting in “owning the libs” and exacting ongoing “revenge” for each new assault on their own deteriorating lives.
I live in a part of England with a growing muslim demographic and a shrinking christian demographic.
I dont think muslims are out to get me either but id say in the UK the religion that has easily the most friction with a secular way of life is Islam.
If youre dressed stereotypically gay, very critical of religion, any type of way that usually annoys the major religions probably the best religious people to do this around is Christians at least where i live.
I attended a mass recently for a family related thing, there was one couple there and an old man, he was crying because his wife had just died i suspect that he wasnt a regular and turned up for comfort. my family made up the majority of people there. I actually felt sorry for them and im not saying that in a nasty way.
A lot of athiests cheer at the demise of christianity but theres areas where Islam is replacing it and that might be worse for athiests than christianity has been.
A christian threat feels totally alien to me but what im talking about probably feels just as alien to an american atheist surrounded by christians in certain areas.
1 Like
Anyone who might have “Jesus take the wheel”; shouldn’t be allowed to hold a drivers license.
I’m not the least bit worried or apprehensive about displaying my Satanic, Atheistic, or anti christian views of the world whenever I’m out in public. If it offends someone, then they simply don’t have to look at it, just like I ignore every christian symbol that I see around me. Whether it’s in our own home, our children’s homes, or out in public, I’ve learned over the decades to just ignore them instead of letting them piss me off.
Otherwise, what are they gonna do?
Given that Islam on a worldwide basis has a higher percentage of fundamentalists than does Christianity (ISTR about double last time I looked, which seemed low but still pretty signifnicant), yes probably given a choice between living in a predominantly Christian vs Islam society, I’d choose Christian.
I’d suggest that the threat of Christian fundamentalism would feel far less abstract to you in the US right now, particularly if you lived in the Bible Belt / bourbon South. Down there, the first question out of random stranger’s mouths is the social triangulation, “so where do you go to church?” and where you can find yourself unable to retain baby sitters or other contractors once they figure out you’re indifferent to their godboy or not worshipful of their Fearless Leader, the Mango Mussolini. Or at least that was my daughter’s experience that was a big factor in her moving back to the Midwest from the South.
I would say living in Colorado has its benefits to some degree as i can be an independent atheist without too much backlash but the issues I’m finding is the increasing number of conspiracy theorists who are Christians. Their arguments are some of the weirdest and most difficult to listen to as they all start with “everything the government does is fake and they’re all reptiles.” Literally logic has left the window with these people. And then when they find out I’m a non-theistic luciferian that just provides them with enough confirmation bias that they won’t listen to reason. It’s a real struggle when my mother is one of these people and it hurts to see her believe in anything that is just a bunch of fairytales.
Maybe it’s a little more relaxed in the UK but I’ve never had an issues with religious people.
Having said that, I still don’t like that religious studies is still prevalent in secondary schools.
I’d like it removed or have a seperate lesson to teach against the nonsense of it.
2 Likes
My understanding is that what is taught in UK schools is basically comparative religion, which if literally true seems relatively benign to me, particularly if it helps kids to be tolerant of various cultures and points of view, and to understand how religion has influenced culture – stuff like that. But if they aren’t doing any philosophy of religion – particularly, a critical examination of the epistemology of religious faith and its, er, issues – they are missing an opportunity. My guess is that would not go over well, as it arrives at conclusions that people of faith can’t handle.
But here in the US, we can’t even tolerate giving information to children about religions other than our own, much less teach critical thinking skills in any context whatsoever. It is part of how we have got where we are today here in 'Murica.
This is a big reason I don’t pursue something like the Satanic Temple, arguably the primary formal non-theistic “luciferian” group in the US, which I think does some great practical things to counter theism – particularly Christian Fundamentalism. There are other reasons (I’m just not much of a joiner, for example) but I know the fundamentalist mind by virtue of having been one in the long ago, and I don’t see any reason for the distraction to put off such people before there’s any chance for dialog. Most of them have anything with the word root “Satan” in it filed under “terribly dangerous, opens you up to occult forces, destroys your faith” and that’s the end of it. It’s an even more visceral reaction than to realizing someone is an atheist. At least an atheist might be persuaded, could be just a confused or ignorant soul to them, especially if, like me, you used to be one of them. But a satanist / satan worshipper, which is what you become as soon as you do anything connected with Satan, you are beyond redemption and probably have Satan-cooties that will rub off on them.
It’s certainly not as bad as other countries for sure, but it’s still taught as if its factual… i.e. the resurrection etc…
Which is what i take umbrage to, i don’t appreciate schools speaking in terms of facts but with all that being said, its not horrifically bad and i’m kinda glad in my childrens cases as i haven’t said much to them and let them discover for themselves, but both think its unlikely and aren’t convinced.
I still won’t interfere too much, i think these things are important to find out ourselves.
1 Like
Here (.no), kids get religious studies. It’s basic comparative religion (christians/muslims/hindus believe <insert superstitions>, humanists emphasize <whatever>). The official goal for the subject is to “equip the students with knowledge about religions and world views, to train them to think and reflect ethically, to train the students to live in and with diversity, to develop their judgement abilities in everyday situations as well as when they meet challenges in society.” The schools are supposed to deliver these classes in a neutral fashion, and it is my impression that they largely do that. There can and will of course be exceptions, but by and large I think they do a good job in avoiding proselytising and keep it factual and neutral.
The kids visit churches before christmas, but you can opt out from that. My (self-proclaimed atheist) kids went to the christmas church service once, because they wanted to see what it was like. They found it quite boring (Nordic style Lutheran services are yawn-inducing), so they’re unlikely to do it again.
As for me personally, I have mixed feelings about this subject. On the positive side, they learn quality controlled factual information about different religions. On the flip side, 50% of the subject is dedicated to christianity (due to historical political logrolling). The subject would be much better if they could get rid of the christian bias.
1 Like
Agreed, they can teach religion in churches, chapels, synagogues and mosques etc…there is no reason religious indoctrination should form any part of a child’s state education.
3 Likes
There is a big difference between neutral and factual information about religions (which is useful knowledge, even for the non-believers, and for believers of other religions) and religious indoctrination. The religious studies classes in schools here are not of the indoctrination kind, nor do they state that any of the religious myths are true. They quite simply explain what people believe and outline the religious doctrines of the major religions. And I count that as useful information.
1 Like
I don’t feel that Christians are targeting me personally. What I find irritating about them is the sheltered, narrow perspective they have of the world. I could definitely say the same thing about Islam (probably even more so than Christianity). In a strange way, I almost pity the blind, devoted followers of any major religion. They willingly sacrifice many of life’s pleasures for adherence and loyalty to fairy tale nonsense. It’s quite sad actually.
Any pity I might have for them, evaporates the moment they try to coerce policy making to conform to their pre-scientific mythologies. Especially when this results in rejection of rigorously established scientific fact, and the promotion of bigotry against vulnerable groups in society. The moment they take that route, my view of them swiftly morphs into treating them as a threat.
Oh I agree, that’s why I used the word indoctrination quite deliberately there, teaching comparative religions in a secular historical context I’d have no problem with, though I don’t see that going down too well with some religious apologists.
Indeed, I’ve been suggesting elsewhere for some time, that religions should only be taught in schools, in classes devoted to comparative mythology.