US pastor on leave after sexist sermon

[GagaSine 7,464]

5 minutes ago, Economy said:

The exact same can be said about other religions tho. Some denominations of muslim can be even more forceful with religion (my mom is literally friends with a woman who is a refuge from Israel after a family member bombed her car to try to kill her because she left the muslim faith and married a christian)... 

 

And some of those religions control their countries and societies even more.

 

If ur talking about their influence in society or a country sure in the western world as immigrants its less so. But i dont get what that has to do woth dragging the religion as a whole, beliefs or specific individuals

 

I guess this comes from the general modern belief that if someone belongs to a group of ppl perceived as privedlged it gives u a free card to be nasty to them...

 

not only do i disagree with that but i think the logic is also flawed. For started priveledge will also vary a lot from individual to individual. Background or religion is still just 1 factor of many. Its too generalistic and takes away the individualistic factor of people

Yeah absolutely but we’re clearly talking about western society, where Catholicism is the dominant culture. Our national anthem says “God keep our land, glorious and free”, the US constitution also mentions God in a catholic sense. I am not talking about privilege at all I am talking about the fact that Catholicism/Christianity/whatever is the dominant culture that we are all pushed to adhere to in some way because it is part of the history of both US and Canada, Islam and Judaism are not. So it makes more sense that when society is clearly pushing you to adhere to this religion and you don’t, and that religion specifically doesn’t like you or it’s followers interpret it to be against who you are (for example if ur LGBTQ+, have premarital sex, pro abortion etc) that you will push back against it.

and because Religion is so out of step with the dominate culture emerging in the US where everyone is generally more open to homosexuality, transness, casual sex, woman’s rights etc it makes sense that there is conflict like this, because the religion represents conservatism and the “old ways” quite literally which a lot of the younger generations are essentially fighting to leave behind.

Of course there are gay churches and lesbian pastors and catholic/Christians who are open minded, accepting of others, reinterpreting their faith in new ways, 

but a lot of social progress in US was made by fighting the religious right, that is why it is so disliked. Christians literally show up at the funerals of veterans with “God Hates ***s” signs, that is a well knows phenomenon in the US. Priests molesting kids are continually covered up. People know about these things, yes it is not all Christians or people will say those aren’t real Christians but they believe they are the priests are literally supported by the Vatican. 

It’s not individual Christians, it is the institution and the amount of money and power they have and the influence they have had over politics for decades and decades.

 

[GagaSine 7,464]

Also @Economy to me a double standard would be when two people/groups do the exact same thing on a similar level of power and only one is punished (like when two students fight but only one is punished, this happened a lot in school where the kid that hit back was more severely punished than the one that started the fight), I don’t see how a massively wealthy and powerful institution versus left wing people (who are actually a minority but a loud one), gay people etc is a double standard  

[Economy 53,090]

17 minutes ago, GagaSine said:

Yeah absolutely but we’re clearly talking about western society, where Catholicism is the dominant culture. Our national anthem says “God keep our land, glorious and free”, the US constitution also mentions God in a catholic sense. I am not talking about privilege at all I am talking about the fact that Catholicism/Christianity/whatever is the dominant culture that we are all pushed to adhere to in some way because it is part of the history of both US and Canada, Islam and Judaism are not. So it makes more sense that when society is clearly pushing you to adhere to this religion and you don’t, and that religion specifically doesn’t like you or it’s followers interpret it to be against who you are (for example if ur LGBTQ+, have premarital sex, pro abortion etc) that you will push back against it.

and because Religion is so out of step with the dominate culture emerging in the US where everyone is generally more open to homosexuality, transness, casual sex, woman’s rights etc it makes sense that there is conflict like this, because the religion represents conservatism and the “old ways” quite literally which a lot of the younger generations are essentially fighting to leave behind.

Of course there are gay churches and lesbian pastors and catholic/Christians who are open minded, accepting of others, reinterpreting their faith in new ways, 

but a lot of social progress in US was made by fighting the religious right, that is why it is so disliked. Christians literally show up at the funerals of veterans with “God Hates ***s” signs, that is a well knows phenomenon in the US. Priests molesting kids are continually covered up. People know about these things, yes it is not all Christians or people will say those aren’t real Christians but they believe they are the priests are literally supported by the Vatican. 

It’s not individual Christians, it is the institution and the amount of money and power they have and the influence they have had over politics for decades and decades.

 

I get what ur saying about all of this. But what i dont get is why the same actions or opininioms from an individual can go viral and get a lot of media attention and the same stuff said about another religion or background becomes phobic

 

Its one thing to openly criticize an institution as a whole that u feel has influence or power in a system they should not have (such as influence in politics or catholic schools you were talking about)... i think its another to create a double standard on criticism u can give on beliefs or actions which are not directly tied to influence

 

Cuz in that sense it just seems like "group A is more prominent so that gives us a free card to be nasty to them", but "group B your not as influential or priveledged in this country so you get a free pass from criticism we just feel sorry for u and if someone says any criticism we label them as phobic"

 

I just think open criticisms to undue influence should be kept seperate from standards on comments or criticisms. One is not the same as the other and i dont see why one justifies the double standard on the other

 

As u may have noticed im very anti justification when it comes to the idea of 2 wrongs not making 1 right. If 1 thing isnt directly related or the same thing, i dont like excuses.

 

Same kind of idea i have with stuff like justifying stealing from a big chain store on the grounds that society is too inequitable. I dont think 1 wrong makes the other wrong right. U can still have 2 wrongs in my view

 

In this case i agree catholics for example shouldnt have that influence (i always found it stupid they get all these schools but not others too). But i dont think that necessairily justifies the other double standards on criticism when it comes to stuff like the same beliefs or actions being held to different stand. I still think the 2 issues are not the same thing and therefore 1 doesnt justify the other

[Economy 53,090]

18 minutes ago, GagaSine said:

Also @Economy to me a double standard would be when two people/groups do the exact same thing on a similar level of power and only one is punished (like when two students fight but only one is punished, this happened a lot in school where the kid that hit back was more severely punished than the one that started the fight), I don’t see how a massively wealthy and powerful institution versus left wing people (who are actually a minority but a loud one), gay people etc is a double standard  

Because these comments are not always criticizing the institution as a whole. The double standards exist for individuals themselves who say the same thing or act the same way... and on an individual level things change. Power and wealth will vary a lot from church to church and member to member

 

I dont think the same rules can apply when ur talking about specific ppl vs an institution as a whole

 

My original comment was refering to US christians getting dragged way more for the same comments or actions a muslim might do. It was not for a generalized criticism of the system or influence on politics. That would be different

 

Ur example of the bully (ive been there btw ) is 2 individuals where 1 literally got held to a lower standard for the same thing on top of that the one that started it. Im talking about individuals being held to a different standard because of the domination they are from as individuals which i dont think is the same at all

[GagaSine 7,464]

1 minute ago, Economy said:

I get what ur saying about all of this. But what i dont get is why the same actions or opininioms from an individual can go viral and get a lot of media attention and the same stuff said about another religion or background becomes phobic

 

Its one thing to openly criticize an institution as a whole that u feel has influence or power in a system they should not have (such as influence in politics or catholic schools you were talking about)... i think its another to create a double standard on criticism u can give on beliefs or actions which are not directly tied to influence

 

Cuz in that sense it just seems like "group A is more prominent so that gives us a free card to be nasty to them", but "group B your not as influential or priveledged in this country so you get a free pass from criticism we just feel sorry for u and if someone says any criticism we label them as phobic"

 

I just think open criticisms to undue influence should be kept seperate from standards on comments or criticisms. One is not the same as the other and i dont see why one justifies the double standard on the other

 

As u may have noticed im very anti justification when it comes to the idea of 2 wrongs not making 1 right. If 1 thing isnt directly related or the same thing, i dont like excuses.

 

Same kind of idea i have with stuff like justifying stealing from a big chain store on the grounds that society is too inequitable. I dont think 1 wrong makes the other wrong right. U can still have 2 wrongs in my view

Lol well I shoplift occasionally because I am dirt poor so i guess we will never agree (jk loblaws don’t come for me)

i see what ur saying now, like of course there is sexism, homophobia etc in Judaism and Islam as well.

But the thing is how often to gay people burn down a Catholic Church? Personally I never heard about it, but I have heard a lot about white supremacists targeting mosques and Jewish institutions with violence or graffiti.

I get what you are saying but I like personally I know 5 muslims and they are all very open minded people and not fundamentalists at all, they are essentially only muslims by culture. One of them is my boss and she wears crop tops to work and swears and speaks openly against homophobia/transphobia.

while I know many many Catholics/Christians who are regularly homophobic/sexist etc. Of course some are nice or non practicing. 

But that is just my personal experience so of course it does not count for much, but I think people are just sensitive to discrimination against minorities. I have heard homophobic/sexist things from Catholics my entire life but I don’t know enough Jewish or Muslim people to hear those things from them, so of course I would be more critical of Catholicism because it’s all around me.

[GagaSine 7,464]

2 minutes ago, Economy said:

My original comment was refering to US christians getting dragged way more for the same comments or actions a muslim might do. It was not for a generalized criticism of the system or influence on politics. That would be different

I get what your saying but I think this goes back to the dominate culture thing. Catholicism is like Coca Cola and Islam is like some off brand pop no one drinks, of course Coca Cola will get more attention. Christianity effected legislature in the US while Islam almost entirely does not (at least in terms of people making laws justifying things based on Islamic principles specifically).

Of course not all Christians are to blame but if anyone said publicly sexist stuff like this pastor did I would be mad at them regardless of who they are.  Islam does make me uncomfortable because of their teachings about women but it is not my culture and also I don’t hear about it unless I seek it out, so it’s not really my business. But say a Christian member of government trying to ban abortion is. They can talk in church against abortion all they want but when they try to defund reproductive healthcare then that is a much more pressing issue imo.

[Economy 53,090]

2 minutes ago, GagaSine said:

Lol well I shoplift occasionally because I am dirt poor so i guess we will never agree (jk loblaws don’t come for me)

i see what ur saying now, like of course there is sexism, homophobia etc in Judaism and Islam as well.

But the thing is how often to gay people burn down a Catholic Church? Personally I never heard about it, but I have heard a lot about white supremacists targeting mosques and Jewish institutions with violence or graffiti.

I get what you are saying but I like personally I know 5 muslims and they are all very open minded people and not fundamentalists at all, they are essentially only muslims by culture. One of them is my boss and she wears crop tops to work and swears and speaks openly against homophobia/transphobia.

while I know many many Catholics/Christians who are regularly homophobic/sexist etc. Of course some are nice or non practicing. 

But that is just my personal experience so of course it does not count for much, but I think people are just sensitive to discrimination against minorities. I have heard homophobic/sexist things from Catholics my entire life but I don’t know enough Jewish or Muslim people to hear those things from them, so of course I would be more critical of Catholicism because it’s all around me.

I get that. I know not all muslims are extreme (and not all muslims are even technically the same denomination some of which are more hardcore than others.)... the same can also be said about christains too

 

Im talking about when individuals ARE hardcore they do not get held to the same standard. Thats my point. To me, the general power their institution has on the Nation is a seperate irrelevant issue...

 

an individual is an individual and i dont think the status of their group within a nation should provide free cards for anyone to be held to a higher or lower standard thats my point

 

Also btw im less jugmental if ppl steal food to survive. I dont agree with it morally still but its understanble ppl will do what they feel they need to do to survive. I was more talking in the context of just wanting stuff in general (especially wants not needs) and justifying the stealing on the grounds that the person or institution they stole it from has a lot. Tho the disparity is unjust i dont think 2 wrongs make 1 right thats all

[GagaSine 7,464]

Just now, Economy said:

I get that. I know not all muslims are extreme (and not all muslims are even technically the same denomination some of which are more hardcore than others.)... the same can also be said about christains too

 

Im talking about when individuals ARE hardcore they do not get held to the same standard. Thats my point. To me, the general power their institution has on the Nation is a seperate irrelevant issue...

 

an individual is an individual and i dont think the status of their group within a nation should provide free cards for anyone to be held to a higher or lower standard thats my point

 

Also btw im less jugmental if ppl steal food to survive. I dont agree with it morally still but its understanble ppl will do what they feel they need to do to survive. I was more talking in the context of just wanting stuff in general (especially wants not needs) and justifying the stealing on the grounds that the person or institution they stole it from has a lot. Tho the disparity is unjust i dont think 2 wrongs make 1 right thats all

Well I just don’t think the 2 wrongs are equal in the wrongness, not all bad things carry the same moral weight to me.  

I don’t think the institution is a separate irrelevant issue, so we just have fundamental differences in our understanding, I appreciate ur perspective though.

The thing is no one likes fundamentalist muslims, they are considered dangerous and the government of the US  has literally surveillanced mosques. But fundamentalist Christians have much more power and influence in the states. 

[Economy 53,090]

2 minutes ago, GagaSine said:

I get what your saying but I think this goes back to the dominate culture thing. Catholicism is like Coca Cola and Islam is like some off brand pop no one drinks, of course Coca Cola will get more attention. Christianity effected legislature in the US while Islam almost entirely does not (at least in terms of people making laws justifying things based on Islamic principles specifically).

Of course not all Christians are to blame but if anyone said publicly sexist stuff like this pastor did I would be mad at them regardless of who they are.  Islam does make me uncomfortable because of their teachings about women but it is not my culture and also I don’t hear about it unless I seek it out, so it’s not really my business. But say a Christian member of government trying to ban abortion is. They can talk in church against abortion all they want but when they try to defund reproductive healthcare then that is a much more pressing issue imo.

If ud be mad at them regardless and ur talking about legislation then thats not really what i was refering to and i have no issue with anything u said here

 

I was more refering to a situations where someone says or does something problematic and ppl jump on the chance to criticize but if another group that does the exact same thing gets criticism suddenly its phobic

 

Thats what i dont agree with. I dont think ppl should mix issues of general inequality within a political system with double standards on individuals actions because thats not the same thing

[GagaSine 7,464]

2 minutes ago, Economy said:

If ud be mad at them regardless and ur talking about legislation then thats not really what i was refering to and i have no issue with anything u said here

 

I was more refering to a situations where someone says or does something problematic and ppl jump on the chance to criticize but if another group that does the exact same thing gets criticism suddenly its phobic

 

Thats what i dont agree with. I dont think ppl should mix issues of general inequality within a political system with double standards on individuals actions because thats not the same thing

I just don’t see that happening ever but I understand what you mean and agree with the concept as you have presented it, but I have never personally seen that happen at least in the specific context we’re talking about. 

[Economy 53,090]

1 minute ago, GagaSine said:

Well I just don’t think the 2 wrongs are equal in the wrongness, not all bad things carry the same moral weight to me.  

I don’t think the institution is a separate irrelevant issue, so we just have fundamental differences in our understanding, I appreciate ur perspective though.

The thing is no one likes fundamentalist muslims, they are considered dangerous and the government of the US  has literally surveillanced mosques. But fundamentalist Christians have much more power and influence in the states. 

I dont even disagree with that. In the same discussion, i think its MORE unjust amd morally wrong for the system to be so unequal than it is for a poor person to steal a new camera from a rich box store

 

I didnt say i think both wrongs are on the SAME level. Im saying i think 2 wrogs dont make 1 right

 

As in i may not look down on the poor person stealing something (especially if its not for survival) as much as i look down on a giant corporations greed...

 

But looking LESS down on it and justifying it are different thing. Something LESS wrong to me is still wrong. Hence my opinion still 1 that 2 wrongs dont justify trying to pass the other wrong as a right

 

I dont have a black and white thinking on these matters. I dont think theres always someome whos in the right and someome whose in the wrong. I think its possible to have both parties in the wrong

[Economy 53,090]

7 minutes ago, GagaSine said:

I just don’t see that happening ever but I understand what you mean and agree with the concept as you have presented it, but I have never personally seen that happen at least in the specific context we’re talking about. 

I dunno. I feel like i see it all the time... at least on the internet anyway. Not so much in real life cuz ppl dont talk about these things as much openly... but my original comment was refering to observations on internet so internet or not im still gonna go with it

 

But im glad were on the same page in principal even if we disagree with how relevant it is in practice

 

[Chromatography 10,186]

why do i see nasty ass men here saying did he lie when in the body of the text he’s saying sh!t like “women let themselves go after marriage.” big yikes guess i’m already done for the day here 

[gothicdream 39,660]

1 hour ago, GagaSine said:

Christianity effected legislature in the US while Islam almost entirely does not (at least in terms of people making laws justifying things based on Islamic principles specifically).

...

Islam does make me uncomfortable because of their teachings about women but it is not my culture and also I don’t hear about it unless I seek it out, so it’s not really my business. But say a Christian member of government trying to ban abortion is. 

This is an interesting discussion!! This^ sums it up for me.

I disagree with any cultural or religious oppression of women or any other target group. But I am only comfortable actively arguing against something I am truly familiar with and understand the context. I am deeply familiar with the Western Christians that choose to weaponize their faith (my own relatives included), I fully understand our cultural context in America, I am comfortably familiar with the Christian religion. So I feel able to challenge things like this pastor's sermon, and honestly I feel responsible to, given that this group of people argue against and legislate against my bodily autonomy every day.

If we're talking about Islam, though, for instance, I have very little familiarity with the religion as a whole, and I recognize that most of what I have learned about it is through a Western lens. I recall when I was younger, I felt pity for any woman wearing a hijab because I believed that meant they were being oppressed. But then I watched some interviews with women who described wearing hijab as empowering. I'm sure there's a whole range of opinions from women about how wearing hijab makes them feel, but it did open my eyes and made me realize that in these types of situations, I simply don't have the context to make these types of broad judgments, and therefore can't really make valid arguments.

[Cookie Tookie 10,546]

A sexist sermon coming from a major world religion with a man-made fictional book used an an oppressive means of controlling the population? Shocker.