Skip to main content

View Diary: Struggle and Faith: How Occupy Has Taught Me To Tolerate Religion (231 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Cute. (0+ / 0-)
    I happen to think that informative discussions happen in a tone of mutual respect.
    So do I. The problem is that your unexamined privilege and prejudice lead you to believe that "respect" requires your social inferiors to remain silent and never question the self-serving ideas that you broadcast.

    You call it "respect," but it's actually subservience. And we members of disempowered and despised minorities have every right to scoff at your demand.

    I think there is a clear line between thoughtful criticism (which I relish)....
    You pretend to "relish" thoughtful criticism. But it's a crock. You declare any criticism that is actually critical as disrespectful and thoughtless. It isn't; that's just your blind privilege talking.

    You'd never have the gall to defend such absurd privilege in these parts if it were any other variety of privilege—white privilege, male privilege, straight privilege, class privilege, ableist privilege. But religious privilege is a generally unchallenged norm even in this community, so you think you can beat atheists up with it. It won't work.

    Rieux chose a discussion with me, opening with a comment in which I could not find any trace of respect or good will.
    No one is obligated to respond to your broadcast of your personal philosophy with "respect or good will" toward that philosophy. That, again, is the arrogant demand of a hegemon accustomed to the unchecked power to silence anyone who dares to question him or her.

    Again, you wouldn't dare to whine about "respect or good will" if the exchange had been about race, gender, sexual identity, class, or ableism. But religion, you think, makes you immune from challenges you deem "disrespectful." Your privilege is showing.

    He clearly rejected that just as he has rejected the main thesis of the diary:  that there is room for tolerance of religious people in progressive causes.
    That is a bigoted lie. Nothing I have said carries the slightest actual implication "that there is" no "room for tolerance of religious people in progressive causes." That is nothing but your bigotry talking.

    Open challenge and debate about religious IDEAS is not, in the real world, hostility to religious PEOPLE. You are so buried in prejudice and privilege that you think that you, unlike anyone else pushing any other kind of idea, deserve deferential silence when you push your theological notions into the free marketplace of ideas. But you're wrong, nastily wrong: your ideas are just as fair game for challenge, critique, and mockery as anyone else's ideas.

    Your pretense that critical challenges to your ideas constitute a denial of "tolerance of religious people" is a hateful lie. Shame on you.

    Rieux may have suffered in some way at the hands of some of the many idiots who claim to be Christian.
    Your sneering ad hominem insult is noted. Again, you would never dare to respond to (say) a GLBT person who criticized a straight-privileged argument of yours by airily hypothesizing about what your opponent "may have suffered" at the hands of homophobes.

    Your atheophobia is disgusting.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site