Shooting at Colorado LGBTQ club kills 5, injures 18

[Pumbaa]

I propose adding quotation marks. They are “Christians”, not Christians.

 

[Yoused]

But is it really necessary to broad-brush and call out and generalize Christians (or any other religious group/ethnicity/beliefs, as we've seen over many years of history)?

That just stirs up the pot fostering more hate and divisiveness.

If there's some good that comes out of doing that, what is it? I trust it's more than what some probably believe is a snappy social media meme?

It is a difficult issue. Christianity is the dominant religion hereabouts. If it was Islam, or Hinduism or some other religion we might be calling that out for its abuses.

The problem with tolerating religion is tht we end up letting them set the rules. And most religions are themselves divisive by nature – if you are not one of us, we need to fix that, or retire you. How do you tolerate something that, even in a niche part, does not want to tolerate you?

Religious freedom was meant to restrain persecution, but in the end it has had the opposite effect. The real problem is not that people hold religious views but that charismatic leaders are able to dangerously manipulate those views.

Perhaps religious freedom should be retracted from those people who seek to lead flocks (and/or rake in the loot from doing so). We do not need to have megachurches and televangelists in order to have freedom of religion.

 

[Citysnaps]

I propose adding quotation marks. They are “Christians”, not Christians.

Excellent! Thank you.

 

[DT]

@Citysnaps

I hear ya, and agree in concept, but also like the impact of the Christian (or "") line to point out the hypocrisy, because that's a common refrain, that the LGBTQ is full of "anti-Christian" heathens, that a drag show goes against the idea of the Christian god (who I like to call George ...)

I very much agree that every conversation seems to require snarky-meme-speak, which of course is a side effect of Twitter, blah blah blah, hahaha, anyway, the discussion we're having in thread is more insightful than many other places having the same.

 

[Citysnaps]

IMO the blatant hypocrisy and hatred of fundamental Christianity is worth calling out, as it can be the case with any religion, otherwise we're overlooking a key component of what radicalizes these people. Let's remember that it's Christians who are behind the entire anti-LGBTQ legislation, they regularly preach against it, make laws to suppress it and overall seem to have a deep-seated hatred for those who don't conform to their rigid views of some mythical ghost from centuries past.

It's good that you've narrowed the scope a little bit. But it's still broad-brushing and fostering hate as I suspect the majority of those people, despite their views about Christianity, will not be packing guns ready to murder LGBTQ people.

 

[Eric]

The meme nails it, these "Christians" (no problem with quotations here) protest book readings and LGBTQ gatherings where children may be present to "protect" them from these sinful people when in reality, it's the LGBTQ people who need protection from armed and hate filled "Christians".

 

[Eric]

It's good that you've narrowed the scope a little bit. But it's still broad-brushing and fostering hate as I suspect the majority of those people, despite their views about Christianity, will not be packing guns ready to murder LGBTQ people.

Maybe not, but they're still the ones pushing the anti-LGBTQ agenda and are complicit in the radicalization of the one's with guns who want to murder, in many ways they're complicit. Going to agree to disagree here, I see their agenda as hateful, even if packaged up in a nice "we don't hate gay people... but" package.

 

[Citysnaps]

"and hate filled "Christians".

I have no problem with that. Not broad-brushing.

 

[Citysnaps]

Maybe not, but they're still the ones pushing the anti-LGBTQ agenda and are complicit in the radicalization of the one's with guns who want to murder, in many ways they're complicit. Going to agree to disagree here, I see their agenda as hateful, even if packaged up in a nice "we don't hate gay people... but" package.

Some are. I suspect many are not.

 

[DT]

It's unfortunate that label has become such a this-or-that description, but it's because of the loud minority who happen to have weaponized it. So then the label gets used in a retaliatory mode, but of course, in all these conversations, where the two sides are:

"Drag shows are evil, and abomination, and not part of god's plan"

vs.

"Christians are hypocritical murderers"

There's a shit ton of people who, for example, believe in the god as presented in the bible AND go to Drag Shows.

Side note: drag shows are amazing

 

[Citysnaps]

It's unfortunate that label has become such a this-or-that description, but it's because of the loud minority who happen to have weaponized it. So then the label gets used in a retaliatory mode, but of course, in all these conversations, where the two sides are:

"Drag shows are evil, and abomination, and not part of god's plan"

vs.

"Christians are hypocritical murderers"

There's a shit ton of people who, for example, believe in the god as presented in the bible AND go to Drag Shows.

Side note: drag shows are amazing

Totally agree!

 

[shadow puppet]

Go Pete, GO.

 

[lizkat]

IMO the blatant hypocrisy and hatred of fundamental Christianity is worth calling out, as it can be the case with any religion, otherwise we're overlooking a key component of what radicalizes these people. Let's remember that it's Christians who are behind the entire anti-LGBTQ legislation, they regularly preach against it, make laws to suppress it and overall seem to have a deep-seated hatred for those who don't conform to their rigid views of some mythical ghost from centuries past.

To me the ones carrying on like that are "self-described" Christians, or else just lost.... since they don't seem to be very focused on central tenets of practical Christianity, e.g. care for the poor and vulnerable, love of the neighbor. I suppose it's unfair to say they never get engaged in those aspects of their professed religion, but if and when they do, then they would also have to be masters of compartmentalization.

 

[rdrr]

It's good that you've narrowed the scope a little bit. But it's still broad-brushing and fostering hate as I suspect the majority of those people, despite their views about Christianity, will not be packing guns ready to murder LGBTQ people.

While Ia agree that we shouldn't broad brush Christianity by a few recent bad apples. There are good Christians who actually mean well, and those who claim to be "Christians and spread hate. However, Christianity isn't complete blameless in its history. I know it is distant history, but it did violently persecute a groups of people that they deemed "sinners".

 

[lizkat]

While Ia agree that we shouldn't broad brush Christianity by a few recent bad apples. There are good Christians who actually mean well, and those who claim to be "Christians and spread hate. However, Christianity isn't complete blameless in its history. I know it is distant history, but it did violently persecute a groups of people that they deemed "sinners".

Behold the absurdity of historical bitterness between the Roman Catholics and Protestants of Tudor England... the One True God of their common plea must have been rolling eyes over all the calumny and violence, not to mention looking askance at the pillaging of the competing religions' soldiers raiding palaces and treasuries and kidnapping royal cousins whenever they had a chance. Brings to mind those lines from the band Editors in their dance anthem "Papillon" in the 2006 album In this Light and on this Evening:

"If there really was a God here​

He'd have raised a hand by now."​

 

[Pumbaa]

Probably just a matter of time before they call the shooting “legitimate political discourse”…


Or maybe not… Will be interesting to see if the tone changes now that the defense leaked a claim that their client is non-binary. Sounds awfully convenient for the narrative to distract from the grandfather’s political affiliation and the culpability of hatemongers.

 

[Pumbaa]

Or maybe not… Will be interesting to see if the tone changes now that the defense leaked a claim that their client is non-binary. Sounds awfully convenient for the narrative to distract from the grandfather’s political affiliation and the culpability of hatemongers

Surprised Pikachu face. Sigh.

 

[rdrr]

Surprised Pikachu face. Sigh.

I read those same thoughts yesterday, and wondered how does they being non-binary get the GOP off the hook with the violence that the right pushes on LGBTQ+ community, and fighting for gun rights over "the right to live without fear of being shot up by a maniac with a gun?"

 

[Pumbaa]

I read those same thoughts yesterday, and wondered how does they being non-binary get the GOP off the hook with the violence that the right pushes on LGBTQ+ community, and fighting for gun rights over "the right to live without fear of being shot up by a maniac with a gun?"

Beats me. But it is a common pattern for the indefensible: Distract and derail.

Just have a look in the “Garland appointing special counsel” thread… Throw as much shit as you can on the wall and suddenly people are talking about the shit on the wall instead of the indefensible, sorting through what kind of shit it is and possibly how it got there.

 

[ronntaylor]

I read those same thoughts yesterday, and wondered how does they being non-binary get the GOP off the hook with the violence that the right pushes on LGBTQ+ community, and fighting for gun rights over "the right to live without fear of being shot up by a maniac with a gun?"

Especially given his immediate family. They are loud and proud GOP bigots.From his maternal grandfather that was a homophobe that praised the Jan 6th thugs (and wished for more of the same on Inauguration Day), to his mother who praised her dad for his outlandish yelps, and his biological dad that raised him in a hateful environment. They molded Aldrich to be hateful. Whether that includes self-hate has to be seen/proven as anything a lawyer utters on behalf of their client is suspect.