Help Me To Understand Why Many People Feel Personally Put-Apon...

[arwalden]

... when someone else criticizes the policies put forth and supported by their religious leaders and/or their religious organization itself?

Why do the religious claim that they are being personally "bashed" or personally discriminated against when specific, easily identifiable sub-groups of their religion are the target of criticism or scorn?

Have the definitions of "bashing" and "bigotry" changed? Or do I just not have a realistic understanding of what those words really mean?

Will any criticism of any church or any church leader be automatically judged to be "snide" or "harassment"?

Will people always have to devote half of the time given to each discussion explaining why it is that criticizing a church's policy isn't really anti-Christian bigotry?

Do religious people honestly believe that they are being "persecuted" and that they have suffered some great injustice? Or... is it just a convenient (and distracting) device that's used to deflect the original criticism?

-- Allen

PS: If this has been discussed before, there's no need to rehash it all again. Just let me know and I'll search for it, or if you have a link to the original thread, that will be fine too.

edit: typo

[Redstone]

1. They do it because it's a lot easier

than facing the truth.

Redstone

[Alpharetta]

2. It's because you paint with a broad brush

Why do the religious claim that they are being personally "bashed" or personally discriminated against when specific....

"the religious" is a mighty big tent you've built there, arwalden.

[arwalden]

5. So If They're Not Complaining... Then Obviously I'm Not Referring To Them.

:eyes: Context is everything.

Do you have anything to say that would help to answer my original question about why so many religious people feel put-apon when someone criticizes their church leader or their church itself?

[izzie]

6. You are pointing out they may be wrong.

That is really scary to some people. They want things to stay the same so they will feel safe. Show a fundamentalist an abstract painting and it will give you a clue of their thinking.

[Skinner]

7. Actually, I have to agree with Alpharetta

You may think that your meaning is understood. But being clear about what you mean is vitally important when discussing sensitive issues like this. When I read something that says "Why to the religious _______?" or "why do the non-religious ____________?" it looks like a broad-brush, even if it was not intended.

Also, I have to comment on your observation that "context is everything." Yes, it is. I think that most people here, regardless of their belief or lack of belief in religion, are quite aware of context -- in both the narrow and broad sense. I think most people on DU are willing to have an honest and open discussion about anything -- even controversial topics -- if the topic is raised in a respectful and non-confrontational manner. But no amount of respect and non-confrontation in a single post can undo a long history of postings from lots of people that are not respectful and are extremely confrontational. That is another part of "context."

Considering that the broader "context" here on DU is one of hostility and distrust between believers and non-believers, I think it is totally rational to interpret some of the bashing of religious leaders as being motivated by hostility toward religion in general. Particularly when the posts bashing religious leaders often come from the very same people who have shown hostility to religion over and over again.

[Az]

8. Its not just DU

The dialog between believers and nonbelievers has never been wonderous. But of late our society has atrophied in supporting any notion of communication between various positions. We have all drifted into our own little niches and snipe at each other from secure bunkers.

This has to end. The very nature of our freesociety relies on progress coming from communication. Without various opposing sides coming together to discuss contentious issues the situation will quickly devolve into tribal systems where the larger group will simply dominate the smaller group. And from there lies only chaos.

We have to learn how to talk about things that we stridently disagree on. We have to find ways to focus not on forcing one's truth over another. Rather we need to find a way to build a society that can move forward (whichever way that happens to be) and respects and involves all voices in the community.

Unfortunately the nature of progress becomes contentious. There are always going to be factions that see any change as dangerous or unwarranted. The real art is finding a way to convince these groups to move forward with the rest of us. I don't know that we can reach all such groups but together, believer and nonbeliever, we may be able to bring more than if we just shouted at them on our own.

[DemBones DemBones]

15. Thank you, Skinner. nt

[Alpharetta]

9. your original question

was "the religious".

asked and answered.

I have no answer for your reworded question. I'm not capable of speaking in those kinds of generalities on behalf of so many religious people.

[Patiod]

3. It helps solidify the base - "they're" out to get "us"

Any time you can make a group feel they're under attack, it unifies the group

[thefloyd]

4. Neo-Christians crack me up

I think Christians talk about being persecuted to feel like Jesus. I watch Pat Robertson sometimes for giggles and Pat has a little segement
about Christians being persecuted around the world, Brings up China. I am thinking "Well Pat, China is communist". Or the best is Pat talking
about persecuted Christians in Islamic states. "oh we are getting persecuted just like Jesus" Jews were persecuted

[Igel]

10. There's a bigger generalization.

People dislike having what they consider dear bashed. They take those things/ideas as extensions of themselves, and bashing is personal. Let's not paint Xians as some aberration to the general state of affairs.

I've learned not to tell my mother that the latest ceramic whatever she made is hideous.

Suggesting to my wife that her (and my) darling 1-year-old is less than perfect gets me a withering stare.

Last October, to say that Kerry was less than Christ would get you flamed and the alert button pushed. To criticize his hair would get you excommunicated from DU.

To say nasty things about Reagan to a conservative doesn't exactly let you feel the love. Unless "Love" is the conservative's nickname for his baseball bat.

To say imply that socialism has a bad record gets the same response as saying that Islam or Christianity have a bad record: those people that did the killing (maiming, oppressing, etc.) weren't "real" socialists/Muslims/Christians.

[Zhade]

11. Martyr Syndrome?

NT!

[nemo137]

12. because, esp. on this board, that criticism is generally either

a.) Accompanied by a comment along the lines of "Oh, those Xians and their immaginary friend, Mr. Sky-God" (and if you don't see what's insulting about that, I'm afraid there's no helping you), or
b.) Accompanied with a broad generalization, usually slanderous, i.e. "All priests are pedophiles" or "all evangelicals are closet homosexuals" or "Xians are clearly of a lower intelligence."

That's not really conductive to any sort of discourse.

In a broader sense, the manipulative pharisees to whom I hope you refer do it to gain support, or perhaps to assuage their consciences while they persecute others.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

13. I get expasperated mostly when

people's attacks on religion are based on misinformation, sort of like when Republicans attack Democrats for loving North Korea. Then if I try to correct their misperception, I'm "claiming persecution" or somehow in league with the fundamentalist parents who beat them up when they were little.

I realize that some people on DU have personal issues because of bad experiences with clergy or relatives, but it sometimes feels as if we get dogpiled when we try to explain that not all religious people are like that.

Personally, in four years on this board, I have never seen a long-time DUer bash atheists. Not once. I have seen arguments between theists and atheists, most notably on this forum, but I've never seen a DUer start a flamebait thread about "atheists going to hell" or "atheists having no morals" or any other such nonsense. (Freeper disruptors may be an exception, but I can't recall any offhand.)

Religious faith is experiential rather than logical. I KNOW that God didn't create the world in six days and that Noah didn't keep a zoo on a small boat for months, etc. etc. and I'm tired of being taunted for believing things that I don't believe.

If someone bashes your religion, it's exactly like someone telling you that you're stupid to love the person you love because the basher can't see what's so great about him/her.

To sum it up, I don't feel persecuted, but I do feel seriously annoyed.

[DemBones DemBones]

16. Well said, Lydia. nt

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

14. I try and be tolerant

and take any bashing of Islam and of Sufism in particular as coming from a lack of understanding. I usually don't respond if the posting or the person talking is hostile, but if they look to be open, I attempt to explain my faith-not to convert, but to simply give enough information so people can base their opinions on fact and not some unsubstantiated rumor they got from an email (I'm referring here to the infamous "9:11 Quote" from the Qur'an). I truly think the only way we can learn to get along in the world is to be informed of other people's belief systems and to try our best to respect them.