Christian Right Leader: Secularists Are Bullies… Punch Them in the Mouth

Where’s the fear? Where’s the silence? Are there really religious people out there who are afraid to speak because of secularists?

Wow, projecting 2 of his own qualities onto others at the same time.  Quite a feat.

Wanting to force his private agenda on others, and acting as a bully by willing to use violence. (oh right, “metaphorically”)

Not only does he not know anything about secularist, he doesn’t know anything about bullies.  The Hollywood story of the “weak bully” is a myth.  The truth is that most bullies are actually completely capable of physical violence. 

Yes, I’m sure all those brave but persecuted Christians dream of a day when they can celebrate Christmas and Easter freely, and perhaps even see an acknowledgement of their high holy days in a store or two. Until then, they’ll just have to continue to fight the good fight for religious freedom against the leftist secularists who are so successfully oppressing their religion.

WWJP?  Who Would Jesus Punch?

Any American Christian who thinks they are “persecuted” should be air dropped into a country where Christianity is illegal with nothing but a bible and a t-shirt that says “I love Jesus”.  I think the experience would be quite eye opening.

The racists said the same thing about the Civil Rights Movement.  “How dare these NAACP bullies come in here and force integration.  We’re just preserving the Southern Way of Life.”  It was BS then and it’s BS now. 

Some smug jackass will label this as a “Godwin”, but the Nazis went out of their way to portray the German people as being oppressed prior to their takeover of the country. State it often enough and the morons that make up the majority of the population will start to believe it. Besides, who doesn’t want to see themselves as part of a heroic underdog movement? American Christians has developed an entire persecution mythos that isn’t going to go away with mere argument. They’re itching for a fight…

The german people were oppressed before the National Socialist party took over. Just because the Nazis did atrocious things doesnt mean you can lump them in to wherever you feel like to try and make a point.

 It would be a short season.

These fucking people lie so big and so often I think they actually believe the bullshit they espouse.

Yes, Christians are so persecuted. How dare we try to remove their special treatment. I mean, what with them getting Christmas breaks, Easter breaks, them trying to co opt. Thanksgiving an a religious holiday etc etc etc

These fucking idiots make black white, le right, and down up.

I am so sick of their hypocrisy and lies.

A bible and a t-shirt. No pants?

Citizen: “No, officer. I refuse to speak as is my right, and if you continue to threaten me I’ll see you in civil court.”

Police Officer: “Stop being a bully!”

quick point of clarification.  In your title, you say “secularists are bullies.”  However, he is ranting about the secular left.   Not all secularists are leftists. 

Wow! Did anybody see that, that whatever it was that went over Rwlawoffice’s head with afterburners on? Sure was fast!

So fighting to stop illegal activity is now bullying. Thanks for clearing that up RW.

Isn’t that what YOU do, as a lawyer?  Tell people to quit it or we’ll sue?  Isn’t that basically what ALL litigation is?

Isn’t it OK for a legal firm (or an activist organization, or an individual…) to identify injustice, call for it to stop, and then progress to legal action when it doesn’t?  Or is it only OK for those who aren’t “secularist leftists”?

What matters is what is being demanded.  If someone demands your milk money, that’s bullying.

But if someone demands that public schools stop endorsing Christianity through administration-led prayer or banners, or that the government recognize marriage equality despite religious opposition, that’s NOT bullying.  Public schools, and our secular government, are not SUPPOSED to be sanctioning and supporting religion, and religious exclusion.  It’s perfectly FINE to demand that they return to a religion-neutral stance for the benefit of ALL students and citizens.

That’s how it SHOULD be.  There’s nothing wrong with demanding that these government institutions operate the way they’re supposed to.  And threats of litigation are perfectly acceptable as a means of ensuring that they obey the law.

ps: i dont own a gun and i dont like in Fla, but can i do something about this man intimidating me? should i buy a gun and move to a state where that is legal and hope i bump into him or stalk him until i find him? ironically, the good old fear of the gay person has been used in freeing killers, so those that support freeing these killers, usually conservative christians, shouldnt thay support me in my idea of stalkin someone like this fool then shooting him because he scares me?

Your ignorance is only surpassed by your crude language. Just because somebody claims it is illegal doesn’t mean it is but when they use the you better not fight it because it will cost alot of money to defend yourself- you are being a bully. 

I hope that isn’t too deep for you.

I’d say you are operating under some sort of revisionist history. The German culture was not “under attack” by any of those things. Maybe you think that American culture is “under attack” by the secular movement? Or by the invasion of foreign cultures via immigration?

Cultures are seldom (if ever) under attack. They do change, of course… by the will of the people. Only the most pathologically conservative mind could consider that change an “attack”.

Actually, the FFRF never really has a loss. When they lose a suit, the status quo prevails. When they win, there is an advancement in secularization of government. So there is always a net gain. Nothing they do results in moving backwards.

 No, because you wouldn’t be the right type of gun owner. You’d be like me…their worst nightmare…a gun toting atheist.

Someone still needs a hug,now off to bed,your getting grumpy

That baby woke you up didnt he/she???

You might need to check your history: at the time we’re speaking about (roughly from 1925 to 1945), France wasn’t a monarchy since more than 75 years (1848, end of the July Monarchy) and Austria was struggling to rebuild itself after the first world war…by the way, the nazi party was a force of social unrest in Austria, culminating with the Anschluss. As for the “attacks” of the jewish media, can’t say I blame them after the Kristallnacht.

“Turn the other cheek??  Yeah, fuck that.”  😀

Agreed. He does seem to play the victim a bit too much here for my tastes. I don’t think anyone needs to bully or fight back or anything like that. Advise for Matt: read the Bible. If a bully intimidates you, ignore them. If he punches you, turn the other cheek. The only physical fight that I’ve been in the 6th grade bully (he should have been in 8th grade) saw that I was chasing down a basketball that went his direction. He waited until it got near him, kicked the ball away from me, fronted me and the proceeded to punch me in the jaw like 5-6 times. I really didn’t know how to respond when he pulled out. Luckily for me I didn’t grow up being a pansy. I took his punches, asked him if he was done yet, grabbed the ball and ran off to tell the teacher with a witness in tow. 

The Bible that Matt says he is a student of tells us to turn the other cheek. No matter how mad a bully, literal or metaphorical, makes you. C’mon Matt do your homework and take a deep breath. Relax there buddy!

FYI the bully is no serving time in prison. What a cool guy he turned out to be!

I like that spin. You should be a politician.  When the FFRF files a lawsuit saying something is illegal and the court says they are wrong and dismisses the suit, that is a loss by any standard. 

Violent imagery is something that the Southern Poverty Law Center knows all too well, as when it calls groups that they don’t agree with called hate groups.

So your response to Matt’s use of violent metaphors is to suggest the SPLC started it?

Please explain how the labeling of ‘hate group’ is akin to ‘violence’ in the same way as playground vigilantism.

 I’ll respond once to your (sarcastic?) query and leave it at that. You can have the last word, if you’re into that sort of thing.
Here’s the deal…
 Fundie conservatives in the United States have shown that they are ALL for freedom of religion and expression as long as it is expressly Christian in nature. Note the number of municipalities that have opted to allow no groups to participate in holiday displays once atheist/secularist groups started petitioning for equal rights. Note the recent case in which a school administration decided to “review” its policy of allowing third parties to set out religious material (Bibles) in the school office for kids to pick up once a Wiccan started leaving Wiccan literature there. Time and time again, the religious right has demonstrated their hypocrisy when it comes to defense of rights established in the United States Constitution. This isn’t news, so my next point shouldn’t come as a surprise.
Trust me buddy, if and when secularists start to even THINK about openly discussing defensively arming themselves, you’ll see quite a few Christian 2nd Amendment advocates making noises about it. They’re all for gun ownership as long as it’s the right type of folks carrying the guns. God fearing, Christian folks.
Human nature is what it is.
The left and the right have been taking this country on a bumpy ride for the last 50 years and I for one, am sick and tired of it.

One more thing: he used to be a heavyweight boxer.  Gives “punch them in the mouth” a whole new meaning.

You act as though being grumpy or angry is a bad thing. It isn’t.

And when dumbasses try to put a spin othe obvious call for violence against those who speak out against Christian bias you damn right I am grumpy.

How do you know when a Christian is lying to you?

Their lips are moving.

 I apologize.  I should have said legal standard.  You are right I am sure the FFRF would view a dismissal as a victory by at least raising the issue.

 The way to handle a bully is to stand up to them and not back down. When the SPLC calls a group a “hate group” they do so to try to make everything they say hate speech and to intimidate them just a bully would. So the metaphor used by Barber is appropriate.

 Fuckin’ eh

I personally don’t care if the whole world is theist and stays that way, as long as people leave me alone. If activist atheists/new atheists were more concerned with preserving/protecting our rights than with making fun of those who believe in deities, I think we’d have far less conflict. If fundies were more concerned with leading their own flocks than with messing with the rest of us, there would be far less conflict. Call me crazy.
Yes, I believe that the religious are deluded, but does that make them stupid? I was religious. Does that mean I was stupid? If so, how was I “cured” of my stupidity? I’ve seen plenty of atheists that I’d say qualify as bona fide idiots.
Also, there are many ethnic atheist Jews who openly identify as “secular Jews” or “cultural Jews”. Why is it that atheists rarely (if ever) give them a hard time? I was raised both Muslim and Christian and consider myself to be culturally Christian (in some aspects at least), but nonetheless a committed, hardcore atheist. It’s not necessary for any of us to be pigeonholed into this or that category. In fact, it’s wrong.
I’d fight to the death to defend your right to religious freedom. I’d also fight to the death to defend my right to be free of religious influence in my personal life, my taxpayer funded schools and my government.
Extremists from both sides have really made a mess of things. The Consitution is neither left  nor right in it’s proscriptions or permissions and it would behoove us ALL to keep that first and foremost in our minds.

Jesus Ass-Licking Christ, 

how can you believe what you say? Seriously….did you have a botched lobotomy a few years ago or what?

You are a vile person. And you just FINALLY said what we all suspected for so long, which is YOU ARE LYIng AND FULL OF SHIT.

A few weeks back I asked you why you were here and you gave a faux-polite, well rehearsed diatribe of “wanting to learn, be kind etc….” yet here it is – you believe we are liars and thieves. Yet, the evidence does not bear this out; the evidence does show a consistent pattern of deceit, criminal behavior and downright vileness from the christians – especially catholics.

You don’t even live up to the rule-book you so vigorously defend. How can any christian be trusted?

As said before, how can you tell when a christian is lying to you?

Their lips are moving.

You have got to be kidding me?

When was the last time you heard anyone from the SPLC tell the SPLC members to bomb an abortion clinic, punch a catholic, or bully heterosexual kids in school for their beliefs?

You are a frightening “human”. Thing is though, what is most chilling is that you aren’t alone in your delusions. You and your ilk make the world a worse place by mere existence.

You are an oxygen thief.

Well said Edmond. Well said.

 It implies that the other group is engaged in violent activities.  For example a hate crime is not just a set of different ideas, it is used when there has been violence that is motivated by racial or gender hate. The labeling of certain groups by the SPLC as hate groups is used to invoke that same feeling.  So it lumps an organization like the Family Research Institute  with Neo Nazi groups and the Ku Klux Klan

 The phrase used by Christians if used sincerely is not sarcasm.  It is a reflection of how God loves us- God hates sin, but he loves the sinner. We are taught to do the same.
 
Not all sins are crimes- sins include anger, hatred, adultery, pride, etc.. 

Just as you would say that homosexual behavior is not a sin or something that you would consider immoral, I am entitled to my belief that it is.  If you asked me that is what I would tell you. But just because you think it is moral, why do I have to agree?

I agree that beliefs can be questioned and subjected to investigation and exploration. I also agree that belief in God is founded on reality.  You obviously don’t and that is your provocative.

I agree that all discussions should be conducted respectfully  ( point obviously missed by Fsq), but what gives you the say on when the belief you don’t believe in is to the point that it can be mocked and ridiculed like Dawkins suggested at the Reason Rally?  

Sigh.  Christianity.  Punishing humans for being human.

There’s something inherently GROSS about your list of “sins”.  Adultery is the ONLY one that is necessarily a harmful act against another person (maybe there are better ones hidden in your “etc”?).  Anger, hatred, and pride are EMOTIONS.  Everyone feels them, no one is “flawed” for feeling them, and no one should feel like there’s some mysterious father figure who’s “disappointed” in them for it.  Any one of these emotions can lead to very positive actions.  This is what I meant by some “sins” meriting NO negative reaction.  Christians frown on the most BIZARRE things.

If you want to tag homosexuality with the “label” immoral, you need to explain WHY it’s immoral.  “Because god said so” is NOT an explanation.  Who does it harm?  Why is it wrong for the people who feel same-sex desire?  Why ARE there people with same-sex desire, and what are they supposed to do about companionship, couplehood, love and sex?

Why is it “immoral” for my to guide my own life as I see fit, but it’s “moral” for Christians to interfere and place bans on my life?  By what standards do you judge something “moral” or “immoral”?

As for when a belief may be mocked or ridiculed, the answer is: anytime.  There remains no law on mocking or ridiculing beliefs.  The public forum is, and always will be, wide open for this, for both me AND you.  Don’t just EXPECT respect for your beliefs.  If you want them to be respected, then first be sure that you HOLD beliefs which MERIT respect, beliefs which can be explained logically and supported by evidence.  You can’t be all THAT surprised when you’re knocked for believing stories about talking animals, or impossible boat rides through impossible world-wide floods.

But adults being free to make choices with other free adults?  This is neither immoral nor mockable.  It is a right that EVERY human expects.  There’s going to be a real problem every time someone jumps up and says that we’re immoral for pursuing that freedom.

Ask your boyfriend if its ok, heh how do you know when an athiest is lying, they are typing

If Christians are bigots because they dis agree with somthing ,dosent that make athiests anti-christian bigots???

Well said

 Sorry, long night. ended up taking the boy to the ER this morning. All’s good…just no sleep.

 Believe me…I know. This is my second marriage & third child for me, her first. My first two from my previous marriage are in college. 🙂

“God’s Word” equates to “Because I said so”, which is the very definition of subjective morality. Please stop lying.

 Using social disorders for cheap insults. Classy.

You can believe that if you want, of course, but I wonder if you truly do.  You opened that post by saying that, like me, you will define morality “any way you want”.

This is what everyone does.  If there were an “objective” morality, which was universal for everyone, then everyone would agree on what it is.  But even among Christians there is no consensus on what this morality should be.  If the god of Christianity were the source of this “objective” morality, then we should expect that every Christian would give a matching description of it.  It’s hard enough to find TWO Christians who agree on what all of these moral points are.  Everyone has their own ideas.  Even Christians.

The ONLY way to develop a common system of morality is to form societies, and see what works.  As members of society interact, certain actions will cause undesirable results.  These actions come to be called “immoral”.  Actions like killing or violence, theft, and lying.  These are fairly common morals across all cultures, because few societies would succeed if these things weren’t frowned on.

But more detailed morals, concerning more “grey” areas, will change depending on the culture, and depending on the century.  They don’t reflect an “objective” morality that rigidly never adapts with culture, they refect a morality that is defined by the populace, and shifts with public opinion.

I am saying that morality is relative, but I am NOT saying (nor have I ever said) that everyone should define morality for themselves.  I said that people should be free to guide their LIVES for themselves.

Can you support a morality where Christians are given the authority to tell non-Christians how to live?  If I’m gay, and I enjoy being gay, and this is how I want to live, is there something in this “objective” morality of yours which suggests that it’s moral for Christians to attempt to enforce legislation which makes my life more difficult, or which bans certain actions that other free citizens enjoy?

You asked me, what makes my morality the “correct” one.  The only thing “correct” about it is that it agrees with our national laws that adults may live freely without answering to anyone else, provided they aren’t committing crimes.  At least when I believe something is “immoral”, I’m able to explain why.  I can give detailed reasons why it’s bad.  I’ve been debating the issue of homosexuality with Christians for YEARS, and I’ve YET to hear a cogent explanation for what’s “morally wrong” with homosexuality.

But the question works for you, too:  What makes YOUR morality the “correct” one?  Your own claims that it came from a supernatural being or realm?  Is that how we judge things to be “correct”, their level of supernaturalism?  What puts your claims ahead of those of other religions?  How can we investigate your claims and confirm that you’re right?  What information do we have about these supernatural elements, and how does it help us infer an “objective” morality?

And most importantly, why don’t ALL people within your religion agree with you 100% on every point of morality?  Are you the ONLY Christian who’s gotten it right?  Or are you all simply striving to find a common understanding of morality which applies to our modern world, like the rest of us?