Have Christians hurt their image among non-Christians?

[cynical]

With Christians as with everything else, one size doesn't fit all.  Some Christians are quite secure in their faith and do not need the sanction of government.  They aren't offended to find that not everyone is just the same as they are and a respectful of other beliefs even when they disagree with them.

Others, but very few I have personally met, have a serious belief that their particular version of Christianity is the One True Faith, that all others are infidels and should be suppressed.  

And there are some such as our senior senator who simply use the symbols of Christianity, not its core doctrines,  to create wedge issues and to grandstand.  They prefer to use the holiday season to drive communities apart.  Is that hurting Christianity's image among non-Christians?  It depends on who attracts attention.  Unfortunately, the political grandstanders like Senator Inhofe and Councilor Westbrook have better access to the media with its 24-hour news cycle than those I consider true Christians.  Did anyone appoint either of them to speak for Christianity?  Last I heard they were both elected to secular office.  But they grandstand, they are joined in their outrage by others, and observers are led to believe that they do speak for Christians.  The irony is that to survive constitutional scrutiny when pushed by government, those Christian symbols have to be judicially watered down to mere cultural and historical expressions. That is a disservice to Christianity, but it is self-inflicted.

Incidentally, the phrase "political correctness" has become a buzzword to mask bigotry.  Why do people object to civility?  IMHO it is not bigoted or politically incorrect to sincerely wish someone a Merry Christmas.  It is bigoted to insist that someone else do so as a condition of putting on a community event.  Labeling someone as "PC" for observing that distinction is a cheap cop-out.  

[Conan71]

Your point about people being secure enough in their faith they don't need government sanction is a good one to remember.  I'm surprised at the level-headed approach everyone has taken and we've not attracted one single moonbat response.

Cynical, other than your position that PC masks bigotry, a very well-stated post.  PC representing civility or being ridiculously apologetic is in the eye of the beholder.

[nathanm]

I might ruin the no-moonbat record. Let's see.

I don't have a problem with the parade being called anything its organizers like. I don't even have a problem with Christians having a preference for it being called a "Christmas" parade. I guess what it is I find most annoying about the whole thing is how certain powerful people who are attempting to keep a lock on the evangelist vote have this (most likely completely manufactured) persecution complex.

Christians are not being persecuted in this country. That may be happening in other countries, but it's not happening here. The majority of Americans self-identify as Christian. When the government reduces or eliminates its historical favoritism toward one particular religion, that is not persecution. I guess when we've had many state and local governments in our part of the country promoting Christianity for the past century, it's pretty easy to feel slighted when people of other faiths (or no faith) ask for that promotion to end.

In short, I've got no problem with people of faith right up until they try to shove their faith in my face with color of law, like a certain city councilman stating he won't vote to approve the parade permit unless it's called a "Christmas" parade. Conversely, I actually enjoy having voluntary conversations with people of various faiths about that faith. I think it's interesting to see the perspective they're coming from.

[custosnox]

I might ruin the no-moonbat record. Let's see.

I don't have a problem with the parade being called anything its organizers like. I don't even have a problem with Christians having a preference for it being called a "Christmas" parade. I guess what it is I find most annoying about the whole thing is how certain powerful people who are attempting to keep a lock on the evangelist vote have this (most likely completely manufactured) persecution complex.

Christians are not being persecuted in this country. That may be happening in other countries, but it's not happening here. The majority of Americans self-identify as Christian. When the government reduces or eliminates its historical favoritism toward one particular religion, that is not persecution. I guess when we've had many state and local governments in our part of the country promoting Christianity for the past century, it's pretty easy to feel slighted when people of other faiths (or no faith) ask for that promotion to end.

In short, I've got no problem with people of faith right up until they try to shove their faith in my face with color of law, like a certain city councilman stating he won't vote to approve the parade permit unless it's called a "Christmas" parade. Conversely, I actually enjoy having voluntary conversations with people of various faiths about that faith. I think it's interesting to see the perspective they're coming from.

+1

[RecycleMichael]

I appreciate the posts so far.

I started this thread after hearing some very mean-spirited comments by some non-Christian friends whom I thought were among the most tolerant people I know. It really caught me off-guard and quite frankly, scared me.

I love a good discussion and want people to express their thoughts and feelings and when possible back them up with facts, but these were not healthy discussions. These were very pissed-off people. I got wrapped up in it too. I muttered and sputtered about Christian intolerance and religious pandering. I got mad at friends who ranted against all displays or exclamations of faith. It truly disturbed me.

Councilor Rick Westcott was quoted in the paper saying that he was glad the parade caused this public discussion. I disagree. I am sad we had a fight about a name on a parade permit.

[Conan71]

I am sad we had a fight about a name on a parade permit.

And that really is the sum total of what happened.

As an individual, Jim Inhofe has a right to boycott a parade.  I'm assuming the only reason it's been relevant for him to ride a horse in the parade is because he's a Senator. 

Councilor Westcott and Senator Inhofe were elected to represent all their constituents, regardless of religious affiliation.  I believe both reached into an area which goes beyond their job description.  If neither were in public office no one would have cared what they thought about the issue, correct?

As a Christian, I've personally heard and seen a lot more open cynicism and criticism in the last 20 years or so and it seems to ratchet up a notch every year.  I don't push my spiritual views on anyone and I really don't see how pushing an anti-Christian rhetoric is any different than someone pushing the Gospel on everyone else.  I say it half-joking, but there's a certain level of seriousness in it when I talk about people trying to convince others Christianity is an out-moded religion.

[Hometown]

Cynical said:

And there are some such as our senior senator who simply use the symbols of Christianity, not its core doctrines,  to create wedge issues and to grandstand.  They prefer to use the holiday season to drive communities apart.  Is that hurting Christianity's image among non-Christians?  It depends on who attracts attention.  Unfortunately, the political grandstanders like Senator Inhofe and Councilor Westbrook have better access to the media with its 24-hour news cycle than those I consider true Christians.  Did anyone appoint either of them to speak for Christianity?  Last I heard they were both elected to secular office.  But they grandstand, they are joined in their outrage by others, and observers are led to believe that they do speak for Christians.  The irony is that to survive constitutional scrutiny when pushed by government, those Christian symbols have to be judicially watered down to mere cultural and historical expressions. That is a disservice to Christianity, but it is self-inflicted.

Outstanding observation.  I would like to add that througout history a rise in religion has been accompanied by a decline in education and science.  

[TulsaMoon]

I am not trying to put words in anybody's mouth. I am asking questions here. If you are a Christian (or not), tell us what you think the image is and has it changed locally because of local events?

The image of Christians in the world really has taken a beating IMO. With all people / groups that decide to stand up for themselves when they feel they are threatened they tend to get a bad rap. Doesn't matter if its a gay movement, race movement or religion of any sort, when they start to voice opinions they get blasted by another group, the media or even the government.

I am a Christian and I hold my faith dear to me, but to me alone. My relationship with my believed creator is between me and Him. Christians do have an image issue, but no more than Muslims or any other faith really, each will always have image issues.

[guido911]

I am a Christian and I hold my faith dear to me, but to me alone. My relationship with my believed creator is between me and Him. Christians do have an image issue, but no more than Muslims or any other faith really, each will always have image issues.

Apparently some Muslims have an image problem at this place.

http://www.thehopeforamerica.com/play.php?id=6263

[Conan71]

Cynical said:

Outstanding observation.  I would like to add that througout history a rise in religion has been accompanied by a decline in education and science.  

And that would explain the intellect level of people who embrace liberalism as their personal religion. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

Well, that lasted two full pages.  As if the people who disagree with the RWRE are somehow not "Christian" enough, huh, Conan?

I have acquaintances who were taught growing up that Catholics are 'Communists'.  Literally.  I don't believe it, from personal experience of all the Catholic friends and family I have.  Nor do I believe Baptists have all been co-opted by the "Christian Coalition", by way of exact same basis, all the friends and even more family who are Baptist.  Leaving just poor little ol' me here in the middle with the Methodists!

[Hometown]

Speaking of the "Dark Ages."

The Dark Ages – Faith vs. Enlightenment

The Dark Ages were a tumultuous time. Roving horse-bound invaders charged the country sides. Religious conflicts arose; Muslims conquered lands. Scarcity of sound literature and cultural achievements marked these years; barbarous practices prevailed.

Despite the religious conflicts, the period of the Dark Ages was seen as an age of faith. Men and women sought after God; some through the staid rituals of the Catholic Church, others in Protestant forms of worship. Intellectuals view religion in any form as, itself, a type of "darkness." These thinkers assert that those who followed religious beliefs lied to themselves, creating a false reality. They were dominated by emotions, not fact. Religion was seen as contrary to rationality and reason, thus the move towards enlightenment -- a move away from "darkness." Science and reason gained ascendancy, progressing steadily during and after the Reformation and Age of Enlightenment.

http://www.allabouthistory.org/the-dark-ages.htm

I don't know about you folks but I never expected to see the world drift into a "New Dark Ages."  I grew up in Tulsa Schools during the ascendancy of humanism when our schools were famous for quality of education and I was thoroughly instructed in civics and I never expected that late in my life I would see Oklahoma Public Schools offering Bible Study as part of their curriculum.

[cannon_fodder]

One size does not fit all, but the general perception annd image of Christians has become one of:

You are either with us, or against us.

If you are not in line with what they want, its open season.  Negotiation and compromise is weakness.  Their beliefs should translate to law.  All other beliefs are inferior. And the more fundamentalist, the more "christian" they are, the more it applies.

I used to be very religious.  I met my wife at a church function. I was elected to church council a couple times for a large parrish.  I still regularily communicate with clergy and pastors of several faiths .  And I saw and fought this attitude back then.  It is far worse here and now.

The "holiday" fight is just an extension of this.  If you won't call it what I want it called, government shouldn't allow it.  If another religion wants to build where I don't want them to, we must stop them.  If my religious teachings do not conform with our laws, the laws should be changed.  My religious beliefs > your religious beliefs and our secular laws.

Most non christians feel many, probably a majority of christians in oklahoma anyway, would be perfectly happy in a theocracy.  So long as they controlled it.

Imposing your will and excluding others, just like jesus taught...

[guido911]

One size does not fit all, but the general perception annd image of Christians has become one of:

You are either with us, or against us.

If you are not in line with what they want, its open season.  Negotiation and compromise is weakness.  Their beliefs should translate to law.  All other beliefs are inferior. And the more fundamentalist, the more "christian" they are, the more it applies.

I used to be very religious.  I met my wife at a church function. I was elected to church council a couple times for a large parrish.  I still regularily communicate with clergy and pastors of several faiths .  And I saw and fought this attitude back then.  It is far worse here and now.

The "holiday" fight is just an extension of this.  If you won't call it what I want it called, government shouldn't allow it.  If another religion wants to build where I don't want them to, we must stop them.  If my religious teachings do not conform with our laws, the laws should be changed.  My religious beliefs > your religious beliefs and our secular laws.

Most non christians feel many, probably a majority of christians in oklahoma anyway, would be perfectly happy in a theocracy.  So long as they controlled it.

Imposing your will and excluding others, just like jesus taught...

Yep. Those mean ol' Christians out there just making life miserable for everyone.

[Townsend]

Yep. Those mean ol' Christians out there just making life miserable for everyone.

You got it right there.  The mean ones do make it miserable.

By all means, have a faith.  Keep it to yourself. 

If you have to push it out there, do good things with it.  Don't send threats to a guy backing a parade to bring people closer to his business.

Jackasses.