Why do Europeans seem to hate Christianity?

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRwiH18QwpU

Lol, the whitehouse burned burned burned~ :3 Very informative

I totally agree with you rideforever, I've heard that too, Americans are seen as delusional and robotic and down right psychotic. So are the middle eastern nations which our politicians seem to be sparking a Holy War with.

To the OP, We don't need totalitarianism, or a resurgence of communism, we need a socialist democracy based upon logical principal. I can only partially agree with you, but then again it doesn't seem like your answer is much better than the problems brought on by religion either.

nevermind this f****d up site put my post on the wrong thread AGAIN!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!

MacBeth, I also think if we've been in any war, 1960's and after, possibly before in places, the greatest asset a military enemy has had is our politicians.

Hey, why not send THEM as cannon fodder then; kill two birds with one stone.

Ya know...

Oh, that's right.. They are lazy little buggers who prefer to send others out to do their job for them and get killed in the process, while they stay at home making millions and enacting stupid laws that don't even make sense (banning of baggy trousers in Atlanta Georgia, for eg). Then when the boys come back home in those flag-draped coffins they say a couple of things about how they gave their lives for the good of the country, and 5 years down the track it's 'Bobby Who?' I think required reading for a politician should be i) an atlas, so he knows where the f*ck all these other countries are; ii) an Encyclopaedia Britannica so that he can find out about these countries he is planning on invading; iii) an Oxford dictionary so he knows what diplomacy and peace mean; and a copy of the Constitution so he'll know what acts forbid him from doing half the things he is planning on doing. Forget the bible, that's why all this sh*t started in the first place; religion causes wars, because everyone is trying to prove there's is better than the other.

Nah, what I really mean is like Vietnam - we lose lives taking a hill, they make our troops give it up, and then tell them to take it again. Or like in Iraq, rather than either doing it all the way or just pulling out (better yet in that case - not going in at all) we halfass it to make everyone happy. We'll leave the troops in but give them less funding and less of the trainers they need to get the Iraqi military up and running, brilliant solution.

i guess what you refer to, chuchulainn, is composed of several things:

for one, as mentioned, religion is considered much more of a private and personal matter - it is rarely a subject of "popular" discussion. therefore, its kind of suspicious to us that something that should only be of concern to your innermost self is turned into something almost political at your place.

also, the vogue christianity in the states (or what we get to know of it) is not only very political in its ways, but also quite rigid: creationist, only taking the bible literally, etcetera... that kind of concepts, the masses over here associate with the middle ages. the more educated amongst us know that most middle ages thinkers were beyond that kind of practise already.

so, from our point of view, the phenomenon of new american christianity is:
strange - werent the united states supposed to be secular? then how comes bush can play the religious dictator?
anachronistic in its ways - especially creationism being understood as an alternative scientific theory, not an alternative TO scientific theory (as in: literal creationism being an alternative viable take to scientific theory of evolution - instead of thinking of religion as a way to answer the WHYs, whereas science answers the HOWs)
and overall, its just too reminiscent of other theocracies in the world.

so, its nothing at all about christianity, its about a certain way of christianity that seems infantile, twisted and obsolete to our eyes. to most of us, its quite frightening to see something like that gain so much political momentum.

Europeans persecuting Christians is nothing new--of course, most of the persecution came from other sects of Christianity, starting with the Reformation and going up to the IRA in the 1980's, and arguably beyond.



Bin Laden leads a country?

Bin Laden practically had an army the size of a small country... once.

Its been said that America was not at war in Vietnam for ten years, but went to war in vietnam once, ten times, or words to that effect. Refers to the habit of rotating everyone out after a year, so there was no continuity to strategy, nor accumulation of jungle and urban fighting skills amongst the troops, with certain notable multiple-year exceptions, which were obviously not enough to make a difference.

The politics will ALWAYS make a shocking mess of any cogent military strategy, and its quite likely that if the various militaries of the world were simply left to their own devices, the world would be a very different place. (Possibly a nuclear wasteland though.)

Of course, religion too has influenced military strategy over the years, but in the west it seems to be more of a cynical excuse these days, rather than actual belief, and is much less prevalent in european militaries. As has been mentioned, the christian elements in America have much greater influence on the state than they do here.

Generally speaking, with the exception of certain extreme groups, Christians are not hated here. They do occasionally become targets of aggression (such as the Black Metal penchant for setting fire to churches in Scandanavian nations) and there was a greater degree of anti-catholic/anti-protestant feeling during the Irish Troubles.

Probably the closest to hatred atm is a lot of cases of discrimination against christians in an official capacity recently. Such matters as people being fired for wearing christian icons, whilst sikh, muslim, hindu etc co-workers are permitted to follow their own religious dress codes without intervention. However, this is just part of a generic state-driven discrimination, which seems to go against public opinion, and occurs with everything. (Such as the case for sikhs to be allowed to wear turbans whilst riding motorcycles or piloting aircraft.)

The only other cases I can think of for an anti-christian sentiment in europe are individual cases of irritating door-step advertisers, the occasional loud placard-bearing git, and the general feeling of contempt towards catholicism in regards to certain homosexual acts against children. TBH if there is an anti-religious sentiment here, it is directed towards more eastern religions.

Interesting you mention the Troubles ... Britain might have thought of itself as 'anti-catholic' - but in reality it was just anti-getting blown up by the IRA, the Catholic thing was just an easy label. The religion itself meant nothing. And the Irish (republic) were angry at the local superpower stealing the top 20% of their land - if they were 'anti-protestant' well it's just a label, the religion means nothing.

Underneath it all was a superpower that used its power to take anything it could, including the North Sea oil fields from the Scots - and the victims of this got angry - religions : irrelevant.

US vs Middle East. It's not really Christian vs Muslim, it's US using its power to take what it wants from the region and people fighting back - something we can all understand directly. The religions, well they are just labels.

Politicians (on both sides) use the Christian vs Muslim thing to increase their own power - it has little bearing on the cause of the problem out there which is simple : the US uses its power to take from other people.

The troubles go a lot deeper than that, but the fact remains that Eire is a predominantly Catholic country, and the UK is not, and that division followed over into the actual fighting. Many Catholics were seriously harmed by protestants, and vice versa, and whether they supported the partition or not was frankly irrelevant. Were the schoolchildren who got bricked walking to school political? No, they simply happened to be of a different religion. The very reason that the two states are different religions is rooted in discord over catholicism, and that discord has extended through the issues in Ireland, but also caused other conflicts, such as wars with Catholic Spain. To suggest that religion is simply a convenient label, is a touch simplistic and mostly incorrect.

AS for the oil.. True to a degree, but I debate that the North Sea Oilfields could really be "taken" from the Scots. We are, after all, supposed to be a United Kingdom, rather than yet another balkanised collective of mini-states that cant get on.

Also, its debatable that the US vs Middle East is as simplistic as the US taking what it wants from various regions and the indiginies responding. Middle Eastern powers are opposed to the west, and some of that IS religion-driven. The fact that the West uses it cynically does not mean the east does as well. Besides, what exactly IS there in Afghanistan that the US could possibly take? Unless its opium.

I'm not debating that politicians do use religion to fire up public opinion sometimes in a very cynical manner, but I disagree that it is always just an easy cover story for other activities.

Yeah, over here we have a lovely little agency called the ACLU - pretty much does the same thing, runs around anywhere that there's been any kind of Christian display in public (or even private) and asks people if they're offended, sometimes when they can't find anyone they'll keep badgering people till someone says "The more I think about having you all here and having to deal with this crap - if it makes you go away yeah, I guess I am offended". We also have problems with immigration, like a small township in Pennsylvania slowly going bankrupt because its population doubled and its tax revenue stayed the same - they tried to implement real rigid employment rules and ways to get them all out, an activist judge (like we have all over our judicial system) said that what they mayor wanted to do was harming their - noncitizens, illegal's - rights.

Yeah, I'm definitely not for religious zealots, I'm definitely not for any religion forcing its views, but there are certain things which I think the conservative right understands better whereas the left is too naively out of touch with.