Why "tolerate" people who hide behind religion to excuse their bigotry?

[Misunderestimator]

Seems to me that we have a lot of new anti-progressiveness creeping in from people who defend their personally chosen religion against all attacks, be they reasonable or not (admittedly, it's a certain few and by far not the majority of Christians here, thankfully). How is this any different than tolerating a right-wing fundamentalist conservative who would come in here and defend the likes of Fred Phelps? To me, there's no difference between the hatred of Phelps towards homosexuals and the hatred of the new pope towards us. It's indefensible to me.

[salinen]

1. us?

who does the new Pope hate?

[Misunderestimator]

4. You got it right on the first try...

his first official condemnation was of Spain's progressive gay bill:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1413825

[salinen]

6. Oh!

I've been on vacation for 2 weeks. I missed all the hatred.

[donco6]

2. I can't help but question

why they would even call themselves "liberal." It makes no sense. I mean, if one defends the Church's stand on homosexuality, even coming out to say that they don't condemn it, when we've all seen COUNTLESS examples that they DO, how can we trust anything that person says?

[Finder]

7. Not by ridicule but by education.

Christianity is a good philosophy as are other religious philosophies, but still there are some that believe Jesus was historical and were brought up to defend their faiths at any costs. Memes can be powerful and even the most open=minded, intelligent human is susceptible. Rather than ridicule the doctrine or belief, those of us who have studied an have had the opportunity to put it into perspective need to share and educate--or lead them to self-educate.

[donco6]

9. But, honestly,

in this particular thread we're talking about, people really did stay on topic (for quite a while anyway). The discussion was about issues, not personalities. But this guy just wouldn't hear ANYTHING negative about the church. Nor would he allow anyone to make a point that illustrated the RC Church's wrongheadedness. It was a classic case of knee-jerk defensiveness.

So, one has to wonder, why claim to be liberal?

[LeftCoast]

3. Some people don't seem to understand the difference between

criticizing specific issues and bashing an entire religion.

[Misunderestimator]

5. Exactly.

:thumbsup:

[etherealtruth]

8. Bigotry is always wrong

I'm wondering why "bashing a religion and it's members" is not bigotry?

Approximately 1/2 of all American Catholics align themselves with the democratic party and with traditionally liberal ideals (reflective of the US population in general).

Here's some stats:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-04-05-us-cathol...

The official stance of the Catholic church on homosexuality (among other things) is NOT OK. The stance of ~1/2 the US Catholics is not in agreement----why alienate them?

Should Ted Kennedy, John Kerry ... step aside and let real liberals (read non-Catholics) take over?

I am not trying to be nasty----- I would be defending any religion that is being bashed this way. I'll attack RIGHT WING fundamentalists, but I will not attack all fundamentalist Christians.
I'll attack RIGHT WING (insert religion), but I won't engage in the bigotry that paints every member of a religious, ethnic, sexual orientation ... group with the same broad brush stroke.

edit: spelling corrected

[Misunderestimator]

10. I don't disagree with you, but I specifically made it clear

that I was talking about people who are actually bigots and who hide behind their religion. I also made it clear that I did not think most Christians here feel that way. This is a progressive site... that's my whole point. There are some here who defend their religion against legitimate criticisms, such as the pope's condemnation of gays.

Bashing any group with broad generalizations is wrong. You posting that to me makes me think you think that I don't agree with that. How is it that you interpreted my post?

[etherealtruth]

12. My response was more to the "ether"...

...for whatever reason there IS bigotry against religion on the DU---I'll qualify as you did, certainly not most but a vocal and hateful few.

I assumed your post was intended to speak to a larger issue, and that the example of a "particular guy" was illustrative of the point.

Bigotry often masquerades as religion, as well as a lot of other things. (Don't take that personally, it's not an attack or a personal accusation ) Bigotry IS bigotry.

[Inland]

14. But nobody ever disagreed with that

Did anyone ever defend bigotry or let bigotry hide behind religion? I don't THINK so.

Therefore its natural to assume that you were equating the posts "defending religion" with defending bigotry.

[Misunderestimator]

15. Um, no, assuming that wouldn't be natural at all.

My whole point is that there have been people defending bigotry in the form of defending the pope in discussions specifically about the pope's position on homosexuality. NOT in discussions about Catholicism in general, but about this very specific subject.

What is natural about assuming that I meant that defense of bigotry is the same as defense of religion? I think that is at best misunderstanding me completely and at worst, well, I'm not sure what.

[Inland]

16. because I didn't see that problem.

It is natural to assume that you are addressing some recurring type of post, and I hadn't seen any.

Therefore I would wonder if you are seeing a defense of religion and considering it a defense of bigotry. But maybe we are just looking at different posts. I don't actually go to the doctrinal stuff.

Maybe if there was a way to look at an example, I would know.

[Misunderestimator]

17. I understand that you don't understand the reference...

having not participated, but I sincerely don't understand how you could interpret my post as a generalization. I was exceedingly clear.

As for going to the doctrinal stuff... I don't go to it either, but amazingly it creeps up in the most inopportune places. Should it not be addressed when it rears its ugly head?

[readmoreoften]

18. In a recent DU poll 23% of DU Catholics

said Ratzinger was a good choice. When I tried to get Catholics to engage on the issue of their church's anti-gay stances each and every one has refused to engage, just saying "whatever, go ahead, Catholic-bash."

The only Catholics on DU who are coming to our defense are the same Catholics who are fighting against Ratzinger. Period.

It is not usually their aggressive claims that gay people are wrong. They just don't answer the question. I had an exchange with one Catholic who said, "I'll trust the Cardinals and the Pope, thank you." (When it came to homosexuality.) When I tried to confront him by asking if he condoned the Pope's stance that homosexuals are 'instrinsically ordered towards moral evil' he said "Once again, I'll trust the Pope on this one."

Homophobes on DU have long-learned that it is easier to just SUPPORT vocal homophobes or make innuendos than it is to say that you do not support GLBT people outright. It is easier to claim that you are not a bigot and hide behind someone else's bigotry, then when you are criticized say that it is victimization.

This is the crux of the problem. The question is, are you willing to work with us on this?

[etherealtruth]

20. Good , you agree, "any bigotry is wrong "...

there ARE times when bigotry IS defended under the guise of defending religion, just as there are times when specific issues are highlighted to express bigotry.

I am at a loss to explain why stating that "ANY bigotry is wrong" would hit such a raw nerve. I think we could all use a little introspection and reflection to examine where we are really coming from

If the original poster intended to point out that all bigotry is wrong (I actually do believe that it WAS his/her intent). In that case, I was mirroring their assertion, but also reminding that in this case, bigotry was aimed in both/all directions. I think it is more than a little disingenuous to say that there are no "anti religion" sentiments on the DU-----just as it would be disingenuous to state that Christianity has no anti gay biases. I'm not upset by the thought that neither position is very productive.

Bringing this back to politics----Dems/liberals/progressives can't afford to drive people away; we need to BE the party of inclusion...

[readmoreoften]

22. Not believing in a religion is not bigotry.

Not wanting it shoved down your throat is not bigotry.

This whole issue reminds me of whites during the late 80s and early 90s telling black people that to say "white people have discriminated against blacks" and "racist white people run America" is equally bigoted because not ALLLLLLLLL white people are racist.

The Catholic Church discrimates against gays. Period. Many Catholics do not, but the church itself does. PERIOD. IT IS TRUE. IT IS NOT ARGUABLE. Dignity and other pro-gay religious Catholic groups have been ex-communicated. Currently, the RCC is a discriminatory institution and it is not 'bigoted' or 'anti-religious' to say so any more than it is truthful to say that Jim Crow Laws were anti-black.

[etherealtruth]

24. I can't figure out where you think I disagree with you ...

If you read my posts I clearly stated that the Catholic church discriminates against gay people; I clearly state that is unacceptable bigotry. My point, from which I will not stray, has to do with American Catholics --- American Catholics generally do not agree with that ( 23% agree, 77% disagree; link to stats in earlier post). American Catholics ARE what we have and what effects us.

I can't find a single defense of the Catholic church (?)I am NOT backing away from anything I said. Alienating Catholics from the left will not help in any progressive agenda. You may disagree and there is nothing I can do about that.

I liken the Pope to the Chimp------I am horrified by his (chimp) agenda, his perversion of religion, his policies ... but I'm still an American. I don't defend the Pope, but I do defend American Catholics.

Is your assumption that I am trying to "shove religion" down your throat? I can't find a single "pro religion" statement that I made. In fact, that would be quite out of character for me as I consider myself an agnostic. I fear theocracy, but I don't fear people of faith.

I do identify many statements to the effect that religious bigotry is just as bad as any other kind of bigotry----I stand by that. I guess this is where we disagree (?).

I have obviously provoked a great deal of anger, I'm trying to be reflective about why----what is my responsibility in upsetting people?

My conclusion, at this point, is that this was a thread looking for commiseration (which we all need sometimes), and that I offered no commiseration, but took ideas in a different direction, deflecting attention from it's intended course.

Maybe I'm wrong ...

[readmoreoften]

25. Well, it is the GLBT area. We do commiserate here.

But I don't think anyone here is being bigoted towards Catholics. No gays are chanting for the death of Catholics or saying Catholics should lose their rights to be happy or go to church or...pretty much do anything.

All we have been doing FOR DAYS NOW is saying: NO, we won't be bullied by this church. That is not bigotry.

[etherealtruth]

26. I picked up this discussion out in the "discussion area" ...

Where discussion threads from all over come up. The truth, I would not have interrupted this discussion had I realized that it was in the GLBT forum (with out paying attention I thought GD). Everyone needs a place to commiserate, to discuss issues which impact them with out having to worry about the greater good of the "party" (that's where my "it's not productive to alienate other liberal voters" spiel comes in...)

I APOLOGIZE, I would have not entered into someone else's forum (knowingly) with critical views. At this point I feel bad because I did not mean to be a disruptor in anyone's forum.

[Misunderestimator]

27. Your apology is appreciated...

...though there is no reason to apologize for posting in a GLBT forum. Many non-gay people post in this forum.

You're more than welcome to post here, it's not disruption. That said, it still doesn't make sense to me that your first response to my original post was to misinterpret me as generalizing about Christians.
That misrepresentation has nothing to do with this being a GLBT forum.

[etherealtruth]

28. I think I had just had it with "Catholic bashing" on the DU in general...

I didn't read your post carefully enough---but my intent was to point out (not accuse you) that assuming Catholics in general were right wing bigots --- Catholics are right wing bigots in the same percentages that the rest of the country is ... I don't think this was the right place to do it though.

Until this AM I could not figure out why this conversation was only focused on the issue of mistreatment of Gay people --------gee duh, probably the same reasons that misogyny of the Catholic hierarchy would be prominently discussed in the womens forum.

I would/will not hesitate to post here if I have something pertinent to say, but I'm not going to come here to remind you that Not all Catholics are... (NO YOU didn't say all anybody is anything). That would be like someone coming over to a Catholic forum post and reminding everyone that the Church has a hateful stance on homosexuality or abortion---or pointing out that you don't recall Jesus hating anybody... every couple of responses.

That is why I apologized---I feel like I did that.

As odd as this will sound the DU is the only place I regularly defend Catholicism ...

[Misunderestimator]

29. And I've had it with people crying "Catholic bashing"

when I haven't seen any... I'll say it again... I have seen a lot of criticism of specific positions taken by the church and the pope, but I have not seen any wholesale bashing of catholics. Why do you take criticism of the church so personally?

[etherealtruth]

30. As we both know...

There is prejudice and bias out in the world and "we" posses the same faults and frailties of the world in general. I do not have the time to scour recent and archived threads in order to give you links to specific examples and I am doubting that you would accept a narrative description ... That may not be the case and I would encourage you to contact me if you wish to explore a differing opinion (I suspect neither of us has any more time for this).

Most people who post here are quite thoughtful and respectful of others, some have specific criticisms or are angry about issues and some are simply hostile fools who seek (I don't know what...self aggrandizement through hostile attacks on the out of favor position or group du jour). If you truly have not noticed any "bashing" on the DU that's great ... because reading through posts that simply bash anyone is a waste of ones time.

[Misunderestimator]

31. You're right...

Not worth chasing our tails over this. I have a feeling you define catholic bashing or christianity bashing differently that I.

[donco6]

11. We did NOT

bash people indiscriminately in this particular thread. In fact, we didn't bash any people at all. But yes, a number of people rose up when one guy defended the RC Church's stand on homosexuality. He made repeated statements denying that the Church condemned homosexuality, and said the Church does not teach that gays are "eternally cast out" (making some sort of fine distinction there.)

Now, that may have *felt* like bashing, but in actuality, it was simply the result of shouting FIRE in a crowded theatre. People react. I don't see anything wrong with it whatsoever.

[etherealtruth]

13. Didn't accuse anyone of bashing in THIS thread...

... I understand that people react... What is offensive about the statement, "Bigotry IS bigotry," ? The church's bigotry is wrong...

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

19. nevermind..misread

[ladeuxiemevoiture]

21. I'm seriously entertaining the notion of leaving the RCC

Things just are getting so ugly. They aren't owning up to the pedophilia, they are employing age-old techniques of deflecting scandal by scapegoating gays, now they've elected this controversial character with a tainted personal history to lead the church. I'm disgusted, and I don't think I want to be part of it anymore. Seriously.

[foreigncorrespondent]

23. Yep!

I am getting tired of seeing the old they are the victims bullshit, because we decided to call a spade a spade.

Great post!