Intolerance

Does this offend you?

There are two distinct themes running through this post – the obvious one of intolerance towards other people’s beliefs and the other one connected to it – the use of language “slides” or altered definitions to follow political agendas.

You could add to those lack of logic.

In a post on physics versus astrology, Ian Hills commented:

Once upon a time the church was intolerant and bigoted towards science. The priesthood of scientific quackery is intolerant and bigoted too, and I am not impressed by their “antics”, to use AKH’s disparaging expression with regard to a much older system of belief, astrology.

The point is that [capital S] Science is just as dogmatic, just as demagogic, just as much the orthodox religion as any system of faith or “take” on the world, including astrology. I for one do not see astrology as quackery but rather as a way of interpreting phenomena, as is Buddhism and Hinduism. Astrology has been around since the beginning.

It seems to me that they have elements of the truth but fail to grasp other metaphysical realities and let’s not get into the historic tete-a-tete with the church at this point – this post is not about that.

The most famous case in recent years of failure to live and let live is the removal of the cross from the William and Mary chapel, an issue even Mr Eugenides was moved to condemn, simply for its rank intolerance. In that situation, a powerful lobby lambasted the atheists who had perpetrated the deed and the decision was reversed.

Logic dictates that in a Christian chapel, a cross takes pride of place. Logic dictates that in a Jewish synagogue, their symbols take pride of place. Simples.

Yet the rank intolerance of people who would pride themselves on their tolerance is amazing. I put up a list of 20 questions the other day and they were dismissed by one commenter in one glib sentence – actually quite erroneous but I let it slide because there was no convincing him otherwise. As Yuri Bezmenov said in a different context:

To “change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent that – despite the abundance of information – no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.”

This multi-stage process requires media complicity/mediocrity, control of educational policy, widespread corruption in politics and industry, and the unlimited money/credit of the international bankers.

We are up against a long, slow process of drip, drip, drip and so many are manipulated – in fact all of us are to an extent. So, as one wise person wrote to me yesterday on the feminist issue: “You’re never going to convince them, no matter what facts you lay down.”

Ian Hill said:

Astrology will outlive both the church and quack science.

Actually, the course of history begs to differ because astrology is the other side of the coin to deist religion and both will be present at the end, as will real science which, after all, is merely an interpretation of observed phenomena. Now if I, as a Christian, can tolerate those other explanations in a “let’s wait and see” manner, then why the intolerance, particularly of Christianity in recent years?

In fact people go out of their way to attack it, from the ridiculous renaming of Christmas as Winterval [yeah yeah, I know about Winterval’s pagan roots] to something altogether more sinister. This is a raw translation from Le Figaro on the attacks on the church just outside of Jerusalem:

These extremists are very active in the West Bank have been practicing for months what they call a ‘price to pay’ which is to revenge for attacks or acts of vandalism targeting Palestinians and the Muslim places of worship and Christian government decisions they deem hostile to colonization. An activist of this trend, Baruch Marzel, has established a link with the attack against the monastery. “We have warned that the evacuation of Migron would provoke anger,” he says.

Important point, the attack on Latrun is not an isolated incident. In February, anti-Christian graffiti had been daubed on the walls of a Baptist Church and Monastery of the Cross in Jerusalem. The Catholic bishops of the Holy Land have denounced the series of desecrations.

“What is it in Israeli society that Christians become scapegoats, targets of violence? What kind of teaching of contempt against the Christian dispensation is done in schools? Why are the guilty never arrested or brought to justice?” asked the bishop in a statement.

Yes, why indeed.

Now very interesting is the justification for roping Christian churches in. With the Muslims – well that’s simple – their hotheads are dedicated to wiping Israel from the face of the earth. We shouldn’t condone this violence but it can at least be understood.

But what was the justification for attacking a little church? That “Christian” governments had done great wrong? Governments?  Christian?

Isn’t it interesting that when it comes to all the good Christianity has done – succour, hospices, Salvos, the wine industry and so on – that’s not mentioned but pogroms carried out by those who are anything but Christian – those deluded by Them and wearing white tunics with red crosses prominently displayed in order to drag the name of the cross down – that gets attributed to Christianity.

People are really sucked in by false definitions and false constructs, by strawmen and scapegoats. You’ve all heard of CINOs – conservatives in name only. Well substitute Christian for conservative and it’s the same thing.

And then we come to:

Christians ‘must choose between job or their faith’: Government lawyers claim at European court

Ho ho ho! Here it comes – yo. What was it Revelation said? That no one could buy or sell in the end times if he is Christian? Mind you, I don’t like people ostentatiously pushing their beliefs down other people’s throats and it really depends how far these people were doing that. If I were to stand in front of you, in a “nyah nyah ny nyah nyah” way, waving my cross fanatically, you’d be well in order to be cross.

That’s just about respect and common decency.

But to wear a small cross discreetly is an entirely different matter. And as for the burqua – it is in no way just clothing – it is every bit a symbol. Anyway, this is the land of the Enemy – just pop up to Rosslyn Chapel to see the symbolism or head round to Tavistok House [Chatham] and there’s the Enemy in all its glory.

The Royal Society was no accident.

To wind this theme up, I’d just say that:

1. Those most convinced of their tolerance are anything but and are some of the worst bigots around;

2. That not everything should be tolerated. For example:

Earl Jones from Boone County, Kentucky, killed Lloyd (Adam) Maxwell after the intruder broke into his home at 2am on Monday with two accomplices.

He told the Enquirer: ‘These people aren’t worth any more to me than a groundhog. They have our country in havoc. We got so many damned crooked people walking around today.’

… to which a commenter wrote:

Good for him!!! Saved the taxpayers quite a bit of money! I hope the thieves of that area take note.

Amen to that and it does illustrate, in the Byrd’s words drawn from Ecclesiastes, that there is a time for everything, including a time to eliminate. Eliminate, yes, when directly threatened. Eliminate, yes, when your traditional way of life is threatened to be overrun.

But to eliminate, suppress, marginalize, when it is just someone’s belief?

That’s the crux of the matter.

8 comments for “Intolerance

  1. David A. Evans
    September 5, 2012 at 11:51 am

    CINOs! I reckon they’re pants. 😛

    DaveE.

  2. Voice of Reason
    September 5, 2012 at 1:45 pm

    The problem is that astrology has been tested against facts (all of the different astrologies), and found severely wanting.

  3. Furor Teutonicus
    September 5, 2012 at 2:16 pm

    XX But to eliminate, suppress, marginalize, when it is just someone’s belief? XX

    When as a result of that belief they would themselves eliminate, suppress, marginalize, when it is just someone’s belief, then yes.

    • September 5, 2012 at 3:33 pm

      The problem is that astrology has been tested against facts (all of the different astrologies), and found severely wanting.

      Far be it for me to go into bat for astrology, VofR, being on the other side and all that but of course it is found wanting against astronomy. And what? It’s metaphysical.

      • Voice of Reason
        September 5, 2012 at 11:55 pm

        Sorry, no. There are predictions made which match up with later observations in astronomy. Nothing specific at all matches with astrology, not to mention that it doesn’t even make sense from an Earth-based perspective.

  4. graham wood
    September 5, 2012 at 8:13 pm

    “Christians ‘must choose between job or their faith’: Government lawyers claim at European court”

    But the claim is entirely spurious, subjective, and arrogant. By what right has any lawyer to claim jurisdiction over the conscience, or religious belief of another person? The claim is tantamount to saying that a Christian cannot undertake the obligations of his/her employment simply on the basis of being a Christian. It is arbitrary.
    The very same “claim” could be levelled at any other religious believer of any faith or none. Totally wrong.

  5. Greg Tingey
    September 6, 2012 at 8:51 am

    You are talking UTTER BOLLOCKS, as usual where religion is concerned, I’m afraid.

    The cases of “religious symbols” were nothing of the sort.

    One was a uniform ban on wearing ANY jewellry at work, other than (I think) stud-type ear-rings & simple finger-rings.
    The other was a hospital worker who was told she could wear a cross, if she really wanted to, but she could not have a “dangly” one on a hanging chain, because she was working in a hospital, as it would be both a possible contamination hazard & a patient might grab it, or it might (equally) get caught in something.

    All the “persecution of christians” stuff spouted by MP’s and the Mail are just propagandistic LIES.

    Talking of which, & I quote you:
    “The point is that [capital S] Science is just as dogmatic, just as demagogic, just as much the orthodox religion as any system of faith or “take” on the world, including astrology.”
    Really? Evidence, or are you just spouting off more nonsense?
    I reealise you are specifically referring to your I-don’t-believe-it-&-don’t-want-to-believe-it-so-it-can’t-be-true bonnet-bee of climate change, but you are applying your label to the whole of science.
    NOT THE CASE.

    And, again:
    “why the intolerance, particularly of Christianity in recent years?”
    Indeed, you have yet to produce any evidence at all that this is the case.
    Rather than people finally waking up to the fact that religions have had privelige and power for far too long.
    Even the hated BBC (hated by you that is) crawl to religious sensibilities in a quite sickening manner, allowing religious spokesthings of all believers in various forms of BSF to spout the most amazing collection of intolerant and ridiculous nonsesne, that no mere politician would be allowed to get away with for 2 seconds.

  6. September 6, 2012 at 9:23 am

    “why the intolerance, particularly of Christianity in recent years?”
    Indeed, you have yet to produce any evidence at all that this is the case.

    William and Mary – before even bothering to grace this bollox of yours with further reply. Typical left-liberal tactic to offer no proof of any kind and when gthe other offers many proofs, you ignore that and say he hasn’t offered a scrap of evidence.

    This is not even rational, not even worth bothering with. I wish someone would actually come along from that side and at least address the issues raised, one by one. They won’t though – because they have no leg to stand on.

Comments are closed.