Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
Related: About this forumThe Myth of a 'War on Religion'
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/05/the-myth-of-a-war-on-religion/371438/Last week, the Public Religion Research Institute published a study showing that Americans want their fellow citizens to think they are more religiously observant than they really are. When asked by a live human being on the telephone how often they attend religious services, respondents were more likely to say they attend frequently. When filling out a self-administered online survey, by contrast, they were more likely to admit that they do not.
Surprising? Not terribly. But this may be: Liberals were more likely to exaggerate their religious attendance than conservatives. Liberals attend services less frequently than conservatives do. Yet their desire to be thought more religiously observant than they actually are is greater.
Why does this matter? Because its more evidence that the claim that liberals are waging a war on religion is absurd. You can hardly listen to a GOP presidential hopeful or flip on Fox News without hearing the charge. In 2012, Rick Perry promised that if elected hed end Obamas war on religion. Bobby Jindal recently warned that the American people, whether they know it or not, are mired in a silent war against a group of like-minded [liberal] elites, determined to transform the country from a land sustained by faith into a land where faith is silenced, privatized, and circumscribed. Ann Coulter explains, Liberals hate religion because politics is a religion substitute for liberals and they cant stand the competition.
Notice the claim. Its not merely that liberals are not religious themselves. Its that they disdain people who are, and this disdain creates a cultural stigma (and a legal barrier) to religious observance. Bigotry against evangelical Christians is the last acceptable form of bigotry in the country, Ralph Reed said recently.
Surprising? Not terribly. But this may be: Liberals were more likely to exaggerate their religious attendance than conservatives. Liberals attend services less frequently than conservatives do. Yet their desire to be thought more religiously observant than they actually are is greater.
Why does this matter? Because its more evidence that the claim that liberals are waging a war on religion is absurd. You can hardly listen to a GOP presidential hopeful or flip on Fox News without hearing the charge. In 2012, Rick Perry promised that if elected hed end Obamas war on religion. Bobby Jindal recently warned that the American people, whether they know it or not, are mired in a silent war against a group of like-minded [liberal] elites, determined to transform the country from a land sustained by faith into a land where faith is silenced, privatized, and circumscribed. Ann Coulter explains, Liberals hate religion because politics is a religion substitute for liberals and they cant stand the competition.
Notice the claim. Its not merely that liberals are not religious themselves. Its that they disdain people who are, and this disdain creates a cultural stigma (and a legal barrier) to religious observance. Bigotry against evangelical Christians is the last acceptable form of bigotry in the country, Ralph Reed said recently.
What I found most interesting about this is what the right wing says about secular-leaning liberals in general, some DUers have said about atheists here. That they're attacking believers, intent on destroying religion, or even that they're just bigots deep down and if they didn't hate believers, they'd hate racial minorities or LGBTers. The cries of "religious bigotry" are strikingly similar - and used in the same way: to intimidate, to attack, to divide, to demonize, and to dismiss a point of view.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
12 replies, 984 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
12 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Myth of a 'War on Religion' (Original Post)
trotsky
May 2014
OP
"to intimidate, to attack, to divide, to demonize, and to dismiss a point of view"
Act_of_Reparation
May 2014
#1
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)1. "to intimidate, to attack, to divide, to demonize, and to dismiss a point of view"
Tone trolling, in a nutshell.
Don't you dare complain about what's bothering you... those up the privilege ladder might get offended!
trotsky
(49,533 posts)2. Yup, that's about it. n/t
rug
(82,333 posts)6. Lol, I can think of 6 people offhand who do that.
NT.
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)3. All supposedly in the name of
united everyone towards "common goals" and a better way, but in fact, the exact opposite. To control and to create barriers and divisions between those who support your personal agenda and those who oppose it.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)4. Yep
LostOne4Ever
(9,290 posts)10. About sums it up (nt)
rug
(82,333 posts)5. 'what the right wing says about secular-leaning liberals. . ., some DUers have said about atheists'
Got a link?
okasha
(11,573 posts)8. Do you have any idea
what an "LGBTer" is? Never heard that word before. Maybe it's someone with a "lifestyle. "
rug
(82,333 posts)9. Yeah, that is an odd phrase.
Never heard anyone referred to as a "straighter". Must be privilege talking.
LostOne4Ever
(9,290 posts)11. It means someone belonging to the LGBT movement
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/-er#-er
It can also be someone who supports the LGBT movement
No more privilege involved than calling me a country-dweller or someone from New York a city-dweller or New Yorker.
Denoting a person belonging to a specified place or group:
city-dweller
New Yorker
city-dweller
New Yorker
It can also be someone who supports the LGBT movement
Denoting a person concerned with a specified thing or subject:
milliner
philosopher
milliner
philosopher
No more privilege involved than calling me a country-dweller or someone from New York a city-dweller or New Yorker.
rug
(82,333 posts)12. I know what it's supposed to mean but it's a very odd way of putting it.
A suffix does not constitute a definition.
The way something is phrased reflects on the speaker. Ten minutes in GD will show that.