Poll: Usage of the term "Social Justice Warrior"

[Archon_Wing]

Not really. Mike Pence basically sells himself as a theocrat. There are a lot of Congresspeople who are pretty open about their allegiance to their religion before the country. Now obviously these are all lies to control a lot of poor people, but that's generally what religion has been throughout human history.

Then there are also a lot of forms of religious oppression that aren't literal theocracy. The Church covers up a lot of pedophilia in America, for example, and there are Christian death squads active in a lot of areas of the world, including (sadly) my family's homeland, the Philippines.

Yea, well, I was talking about literal theocracy that existed back then. The presence of these elements isn't the same, however bad, regardless of how you slice it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord's_Resistance_Army

Also Christians in Africa burn witches all the time

Somehow I doubt those are the same people that Luiz grew up with, but hey. I did say, mostly dead.

Bringing up extremists isn't exactly pushing the point. I mean, are all Muslims terrorists? Or is it okay to not generalize them, but Christians?

 

[inthesomeday]

Nobody here generalized Christians except luiz.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Well, I mean, point is that you can find extremists of all kinds. Trying to extrapolate that to the whole is, well, pick your word.

My point here is that mainstream Catholics and other Christians for the most part don't do that stuff to the same extent; ie I don't have to live in fear that the pope is going to send inquisition after me because I'm not a Christian or that witch burnings are still common place, at least where I live, in the US, and I assume many modernized countries.

But of course you have claimed absolutely nothing has changed (or "not really at all") and the majority of Christians would approve of these same things.

Now you're certainly free to believe the US is a theocracy since it clearly is the root of all evil; most modern Western Democracies aren't? At least the ones most would find civilized?

 

[inthesomeday]

Of course, I did not make that claim. I also do not generalize all Christians based on the actions of a few. I agree that there are people who are barbaric in every religion. You, however, started the argument by saying that Christians are somehow more civilized in general than members of other religions, which is the point of contention here. I disagree. By disagreeing with this statement, do I make some broad generalization about all Christians? I don't.

 

[Archon_Wing]

You, however, started the argument by saying that Christians are somehow more civilized in general than members of other religions, which is the point of contention here.

Actually while I did bring that up (though I said some other religions, that doesn't mean them all) , that's not the point of contention.

This was quoted at first, here: https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...l-justice-warrior.622606/page-3#post-14871921

Christians have moved on from that sort of barbarism though

and....

Not really at all but ok

and.,...

'm not expecting the Spanish Inquisition. (Or maybe I should?). I think comparing modern day Catholics to a particular breed of Spanish ones 400 years ago is more than a bit unfair.

Christian theocracy is mostly dead.

Then this is what you said.

Not really. Mike Pence basically sells himself as a theocrat. There are a lot of Congresspeople who are pretty open about their allegiance to their religion before the country. Now obviously these are all lies to control a lot of poor people, but that's generally what religion has been throughout human history.

Then there are also a lot of forms of religious oppression that aren't literal theocracy. The Church covers up a lot of pedophilia in America, for example, and there are Christian death squads active in a lot of areas of the world, including (sadly) my family's homeland, the Philippines.

===
It's honestly a very simple proposition.

 

[inthesomeday]

I was specifically responding to "Christian theocracy is mostly dead", I agree that the average modern day Catholic is far removed from the Inquisition-era Catholics.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Which is quite a tangent. Obviously my point about theocracy being mostly dead is compared to the inquisition times.The existence of theocratic factions now does not contradict such a statement.

And then my point of generalization based on extremists is in response to Lexicus's post, so of course I wasn't even responding to any argument you made. You then contended that no one made any such generalization.

Honestly, this is quite the discussion over nothing.

 

[inthesomeday]

Agreed. There's not much need to argue here.

 

[Archon_Wing]

And FYI I don't have a high opinion of organized religion. In the "civilization" level when it comes to atrocities as a whole, I think the ones based off of Abraham seem rather violent. And that is a generalization.

There are certainly many good religious people, mind you. I believe they are genuinely trying to do their deity's work. But this is in regards to their leaders.

 

[Lexicus]

Bringing up extremists isn't exactly pushing the point. I mean, are all Muslims terrorists? Or is it okay to not generalize them, but Christians?

Do you not think this is a bit of an offensive and incorrect generalization?

Christians have moved on from that sort of barbarism though. I can't say the say the same for certain other religions....

 

[Archon_Wing]

Do you not think this is a bit of an offensive and incorrect generalization?

Why deflect the question?

 

[Lexicus]

It's hardly a deflection. By whatever standard you use to claim that "other religions" have not "moved on from that barbarism" you have to concede that Christianity has also not "moved on" either. The only reason I was "generalizing" Christians was for the sake of argument, to illustrate why your initial generalization was untenable.

 

[Ajidica]

Eh, if we are talking about religions "moving on", I'd be very concerned with the self-professed Christians in Congress and punditry eagerly expressing the desire to burn civilians alive and lacerating bodies with metal fragments from high explosives.

 

[Archon_Wing]

It's hardly a deflection.

It is a deflection because I asked you a question, and you decided to go target something else I said that is unrelated. Whether or not what I said is offensive is irrelevant to the question i asked you.

And it's a very simple question. Just as it is wrong to claim that extremnists define Islam, it's wrong to have it define Christianity. I am not sure how hard it is to deny that all Muslims are terrorists.

By whatever standard you use to claim that "other religions" have not "moved on from that barbarism" you have to concede that Christianity has also not "moved on" either.

You know, I worded it rather carefully. I didn't want to name anything in particular, so I said specifically

I can't say the say the same for certain other religions....

Note that I didn't say "other" religions. I said "certain other religions", not suggesting the superiority of Christianity. And honestly I could care less about which religion is superior.

But it is certainly irrelevant. My criteria for moving on is from the 15th century.

 

[Lexicus]

It is a deflection because I asked you a question, and you decided to go target something else I said that is unrelated.

It is not unrelated. It is what led to this whole line of discussion.

 

[Archon_Wing]

It is not unrelated. It is what led to this whole line of discussion.

Again, I asked you a question. And then you didn't answer it.

 

[Narz]

Not entirely related, but I will add this to the discussion : I'm always suspicious of people who are obsessed by a cause. No matter how noble the cause is. It can be racial or gender equality, LGBT rights, communism, anti-communism, environmentalism. I think people who obsess about causes lose perspective on our own limited importance in this world, and what's more, when they start framing every issue under the lens of the cause they obsess about, they become a pain in the butt.

As a good Latin raised catholic, I'm always suspicious of the zeal and quest for moral purity that cultural protestants so often exhibit. I take it as a sign of mental issues.

I dunno, the environment is pretty damn important. I can understand thinking people obsessed with the rights of deaf midgets are weird but the health of mother Earth supports us all.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Eh, if we are talking about religions "moving on", I'd be very concerned with the self-professed Christians in Congress and punditry eagerly expressing the desire to burn civilians alive and lacerating bodies with metal fragments from high explosives.

That's because they want to move backwards, but fortunately there is just enough sanity to not allow them to actually make words become reality. Though there are certainly many places in the world, as suggestsed previously, that haven't moved on as much since the 15th century, and the results are horrific as to be expected, which means that I definitely don't take that kind of thing for granted. The concept of human rights as we know it now is pretty young and it unfortunately took a lot of blood to realize these inquisitions and wars weren't worth the cost of human lives. I am simply glad I can take about my attitudes towards spirituality without getting shot or having worse done to me.

I understand it is quite sad to realize that people do not know about the 1st Amendment and we cannot have that kind of religous favoritism.

Honestly, I think the strides made against all of bigotry has been rather large in the last 20-30 years. But this is also why the reactionary wave is so strong too. They sense that they are dying and unfortunately they are not going down without a fight. This so called fear of SJW seems to me of a similar nature and it is a bit scary what turning the clock would really do.

Of course most of these so called professed Christians aren't moral by any means, but it does speak on behalf of their base when they ignore and even condone it.

 

[luiz]

haha what

Like, saying that the people who literally gave us the concept of an Inquisition - which, y'know, you even referenced in a later post! - have nothing to do with "zeal" and "moral purity" kind of blows my mind.

The Inquisition was frequently a tool for political control. If you look at victims of actual religious nutcases and moral panic - say, people executed for witchcraft - then that list will be entirely dominated by protestant countries. The moral panics of Americans are a constant source of both amusement and perplexity to the Catholic world (a boob was exposed on open tv! Bring out the pitchforks!).

Calvinists are almost by definition religious nutcase, the pilgrims were religious nutcases, and SJWs behave like religious nutcases. An example of a religious nutcase engaged in a good cause? John Brown. I'm sure he is seen as a good role model by SJWs, but the man clearly had grave mental issues driven by an extreme religious zeal.

 

[luiz]

TIL Akka somehow thinks he's left-wing

He is. He has defended left-wing causes in thia forum long before you showed up (long before you were born)? Distribution of wealth, opposition to the American wars, right to abortion, he has participated in all those debates vigorously, always on the side of the left.

He defends what I called earlier the "traditional left-wing causes". It was only some years ago that the left started being dominated by SJW weirdos. Akka didn't move, the left did (and it's no wonder the left is less and less relevant in the world).