I wish the article would tell us how much of the former, and how much of the latter was found in these five countries.
Problem is that anything that isn’t Christian is anti-Christian and therefore literally the devil for these people.
Let me see if I understood this article correctly. In Spain, where I live, the Muslims were forced to flee the country after Reconquista and shortly thereafter the Jews were likewise forced to flee or convert to Christianity. Then came the Inquisition and the auto-da-fé for a few centuries. Christians *here* are being persecuted? Funny, I haven’t noticed.
Why do these claims of victim-hood always resonate among the in-group?
> Discrimination against Christians, there are four main objections or “myths”…
> *“Christians are not facing intolerance or discrimination, but they are losing their historical privileges.”*: Historical privileges are not discriminative towards other religious communities, nor are they negative, and they usually carry a strong feeling of identity and tradition for the population. Therefore, the removal of Christian symbols or withdrawal of privileges related to the Christian tradition constitutes an unnatural break with history
and identity, which can be weaponized and lead to hostility and marginalization.
Eh?! How is it a myth if your defense acknowledges the privileges exist. *My privileges are not negative* is an absurd statement.
While there are certainly examples of intolerance in the reports, half of it is just the cliched privileged finding equality oppressive. Pick a lane. Either they want protection for freedom of religious expression (any religion), or they want to keep christianity’s privileged position in european countries (only France has a properly secular state).
To the privileged, equality feels like oppression. And most of the report smacks of it. A plea to tolerate intolerance.
Unfortunately, it’s something we have to plan for in Ireland if/when a United Ireland comes. British christian fundamentalist groups like the Orange Order in Northern Ireland have become adept at claiming their intolerance as a culture, and claiming equality as an infringement on their rights (to be intolerant). Hardly a surprise most hate crimes in Scotland are against catholics, but the report leaves out it’s ‘christian’ fraternities that are doing it. Exactly the ‘historical privileges’ the report talks about. And the fact they are over represented in the House of Lords shows how deep christian privilege runs in supposedly liberal countries.
The countries are: United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain and Sweden. Guess what they have in common.
The reality is: you take in illegals, you get back crime and violence. Action and reaction.
There’s a few decent points in the report but also a lot of bullshit. Here’s a few examples
Misleading stats like the one about 42% of religious hate crimes are against Catholics. This is true but these hate crimes are mostly sectarian so it’s basically arguing that Christians are suppressing Christians and therefore Christianity is under attack.
There’s also some bullshit about how people feel oppressed because they get judged when they express religious views on things like abortion/gay marriage.
There was a weird complaint about how Spotify taking down an episode of a podcast is a sign of oppression in Germany… But Spotify is an American private company.
Overall, I read maybe a quarter/fifth of the report and found myself getting so annoyed with the bullshit/misleading statements that I was unable to focus on their more valid points. In fact I actually grew sceptical on whether the more serious facts were also being misrepresented. 2/5 would not read again.
I find this report very unconvincing.
For one, they didn’t study all of Europe, they “selected” countries which they believed were doing poorly. The idea that these countries are doing the worst is purely based on feelings. So right off the bat we have no baseline, or anything to compare it with. We also don’t have similar numbers for other religions to compare it with. If you think mosques or temples aren’t being vandalised you are kind of crazy.
Secondly, what they classify as discrimination is extremely varied. They mention a murder of a priest, but they also mention christian speakers not being invited to speak at universities as much. One of these is not like the other. Similarly I would argue there is a lot of difference in vandalism too. They specifically point out that secularism is a threat. Secularism is by definition treating religions the same…
To me this just seems like a victim mentality setting. If you’re going to claim christians are being targeted/persecuted, you need to have numbers that show that christians are being targeted more, and to an unreasonable degree.
The report itself has some really weird and wishy washy definitions of discrimination:
> 8. Secular intolerance and discrimination against Christianity seem to be based on the opposition against more traditional and conservative moral views of Christians. This polarisation also appears to be promoted by sensationalist and religious-illiterate media that stigmatises and marginalises religious voices in the public debate.
> 10. During the state of health emergency due to the Covid-19 Pandemic, churches were repeatedly discriminated against and religious freedom denied in various countries. This happened either by the unjustified and disproportionate use of power by public officials (Spain) or through unproportionate blanket bans on public worship, downgrading it to a non-essential service.
Basically, if the media is not nice enough to christians; thats discrimination. If you oppose traditional conservative christian moral views; thats discrimination. If you close churches during a lockdown; thats discrimination. Never mind that mosques were subject to the exact same COVID rules…
Edit: yeah, this document is straight up propaganda:
> FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE
Freedom of Conscience usually comes into question when controversial services are to be provided, like in the health care system, for pharmacists and midwives. In recent years, the topic has also extended to the question of marriage and gender. Christian medical professionals, medical students, but also Christian leaders and wedding officiants can find themselves in a dilemma between their religious beliefs and the required duty. This has even affected some academics when they were required to sign a statement that did not align with their beliefs.
And
> FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE
Freedom of Conscience usually comes into question when controversial services are to be provided, like in the health care system, for pharmacists and midwives. In recent years, the topic has also extended to the question of marriage and gender. Christian medical professionals, medical students, but also Christian leaders and wedding officiants can find themselves in a dilemma between their religious beliefs and the required duty. This has even affected some academics when they were required to sign a statement that did not align with their beliefs.
They literally argue that adoption agencies which ban gay people should be allowed and that countries which say you can’t do that are discriminating against christians.
7 comments
>vandalism against places of worship and tombs
Terrible.
>universities don’t invite creationist speakers
Not very terrible.
I wish the article would tell us how much of the former, and how much of the latter was found in these five countries.
Problem is that anything that isn’t Christian is anti-Christian and therefore literally the devil for these people.
Let me see if I understood this article correctly. In Spain, where I live, the Muslims were forced to flee the country after Reconquista and shortly thereafter the Jews were likewise forced to flee or convert to Christianity. Then came the Inquisition and the auto-da-fé for a few centuries. Christians *here* are being persecuted? Funny, I haven’t noticed.
Why do these claims of victim-hood always resonate among the in-group?
> Discrimination against Christians, there are four main objections or “myths”…
> *“Christians are not facing intolerance or discrimination, but they are losing their historical privileges.”*: Historical privileges are not discriminative towards other religious communities, nor are they negative, and they usually carry a strong feeling of identity and tradition for the population. Therefore, the removal of Christian symbols or withdrawal of privileges related to the Christian tradition constitutes an unnatural break with history
and identity, which can be weaponized and lead to hostility and marginalization.
Eh?! How is it a myth if your defense acknowledges the privileges exist. *My privileges are not negative* is an absurd statement.
While there are certainly examples of intolerance in the reports, half of it is just the cliched privileged finding equality oppressive. Pick a lane. Either they want protection for freedom of religious expression (any religion), or they want to keep christianity’s privileged position in european countries (only France has a properly secular state).
To the privileged, equality feels like oppression. And most of the report smacks of it. A plea to tolerate intolerance.
Unfortunately, it’s something we have to plan for in Ireland if/when a United Ireland comes. British christian fundamentalist groups like the Orange Order in Northern Ireland have become adept at claiming their intolerance as a culture, and claiming equality as an infringement on their rights (to be intolerant). Hardly a surprise most hate crimes in Scotland are against catholics, but the report leaves out it’s ‘christian’ fraternities that are doing it. Exactly the ‘historical privileges’ the report talks about. And the fact they are over represented in the House of Lords shows how deep christian privilege runs in supposedly liberal countries.
The countries are: United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain and Sweden. Guess what they have in common.
The reality is: you take in illegals, you get back crime and violence. Action and reaction.
There’s a few decent points in the report but also a lot of bullshit. Here’s a few examples
Misleading stats like the one about 42% of religious hate crimes are against Catholics. This is true but these hate crimes are mostly sectarian so it’s basically arguing that Christians are suppressing Christians and therefore Christianity is under attack.
There’s also some bullshit about how people feel oppressed because they get judged when they express religious views on things like abortion/gay marriage.
There was a weird complaint about how Spotify taking down an episode of a podcast is a sign of oppression in Germany… But Spotify is an American private company.
Overall, I read maybe a quarter/fifth of the report and found myself getting so annoyed with the bullshit/misleading statements that I was unable to focus on their more valid points. In fact I actually grew sceptical on whether the more serious facts were also being misrepresented. 2/5 would not read again.
I find this report very unconvincing.
For one, they didn’t study all of Europe, they “selected” countries which they believed were doing poorly. The idea that these countries are doing the worst is purely based on feelings. So right off the bat we have no baseline, or anything to compare it with. We also don’t have similar numbers for other religions to compare it with. If you think mosques or temples aren’t being vandalised you are kind of crazy.
Secondly, what they classify as discrimination is extremely varied. They mention a murder of a priest, but they also mention christian speakers not being invited to speak at universities as much. One of these is not like the other. Similarly I would argue there is a lot of difference in vandalism too. They specifically point out that secularism is a threat. Secularism is by definition treating religions the same…
To me this just seems like a victim mentality setting. If you’re going to claim christians are being targeted/persecuted, you need to have numbers that show that christians are being targeted more, and to an unreasonable degree.
The report itself has some really weird and wishy washy definitions of discrimination:
> 8. Secular intolerance and discrimination against Christianity seem to be based on the opposition against more traditional and conservative moral views of Christians. This polarisation also appears to be promoted by sensationalist and religious-illiterate media that stigmatises and marginalises religious voices in the public debate.
> 10. During the state of health emergency due to the Covid-19 Pandemic, churches were repeatedly discriminated against and religious freedom denied in various countries. This happened either by the unjustified and disproportionate use of power by public officials (Spain) or through unproportionate blanket bans on public worship, downgrading it to a non-essential service.
Basically, if the media is not nice enough to christians; thats discrimination. If you oppose traditional conservative christian moral views; thats discrimination. If you close churches during a lockdown; thats discrimination. Never mind that mosques were subject to the exact same COVID rules…
Edit: yeah, this document is straight up propaganda:
> FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE
Freedom of Conscience usually comes into question when controversial services are to be provided, like in the health care system, for pharmacists and midwives. In recent years, the topic has also extended to the question of marriage and gender. Christian medical professionals, medical students, but also Christian leaders and wedding officiants can find themselves in a dilemma between their religious beliefs and the required duty. This has even affected some academics when they were required to sign a statement that did not align with their beliefs.
And
> FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE
Freedom of Conscience usually comes into question when controversial services are to be provided, like in the health care system, for pharmacists and midwives. In recent years, the topic has also extended to the question of marriage and gender. Christian medical professionals, medical students, but also Christian leaders and wedding officiants can find themselves in a dilemma between their religious beliefs and the required duty. This has even affected some academics when they were required to sign a statement that did not align with their beliefs.
They literally argue that adoption agencies which ban gay people should be allowed and that countries which say you can’t do that are discriminating against christians.
This is propaganda.