https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting
This is a sensitive topic for some people, so please do your best to have civil discussions. Let’s do better than the average social media.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting
This is a sensitive topic for some people, so please do your best to have civil discussions. Let’s do better than the average social media.
As in most things: it depends. Your question is too broad for an answer lacking nuance. But why did you ask?
Ohh was just musing on it from a legal perspective. It’s the one thing I can think of that’s a decision driven protected class.
It is funny how attacks on the protected classes seem to rhyme. Homosexuality is presented as being a decision to try attack it. Gender identity is presented as being a choice to try and discredit it.
Now I’ll agree that religion is a class someone can move through, from Christian to muslim, to atheist and finally Buddhist for example. But I don’t think that particularly matters. Someone can realise their sexual identity later in life, then realise they are wrong and it was something else. I don’t think that’s them making decisions, so much as learning more about themselves and the world. So how someone can move around a religious space doesn’t really interest me in terms of what it means as a protected class.
Muse away, transphobes have trodden a lot of ground if you want a head start.
Don’t really understand your last sentence there. Seems inflammatory though. Religion is something you are not born with that’s my point. It’s akin to your favorite sports team as far as I’m concerned.
“There is no gay gene, people arent born gay” it rhymes. Lately it’s being used to question trans-rights to suggest they aren’t born that way either.
All moot though, born that way, not born that way, doesn’t matter at all. It’s a way of making one protected class feel lesser than another in order to discredit them.
This was my “are we the baddies” moment, some 15 years ago btw. Someone pointed out that my anti-thiest rhetoric and the “just asking questions” I was asking were incredibly reminiscent of the other bigots. Of course, in the moment “they were wrong”, “I was right”, “yada yada yada”. But, later when I had time for some introspection, I asked myself why do anti-thiests quack like the other bigots, and more importantly why was I quacking too.
Well I’d say being anti religion is not the same. For one it’s punching up at the moment. I don’t care what you practice with yourself but growing up in a system that uses Christianity as a cudgle has really pissed me off. I also don’t agree with those morons saying homosexuality is a choice, that’s categorically false imo. To be honest I don’t feel that religion should be a protected class when I see it solely used to hurt others. I think you’re also just trying to associate me with those bigots for some weird reason and honestly I don’t appreciate it.
Yup, I covered your response in my comment above “you’re right”, “I’m wrong”, “yada yada yada”. For my own part I realised anti-thiests were, by and large, just another load of bigots that justify their bigotry as being “justified” or “not the same” like all bigot do. Some idiots, like me get taken in. Anyway 15 years later my then idol, Richard Dawkins, famous anti-thiest comes out as a transphobe too. Who knew bigots are bigots right? I’m just saying if you don’t like being compared to ducks stop quacking.
Also, you replied to yourself. Maybe you forgot to sign in to an alt, maybe it’s a failed edit, maybe it’s a bug. As to your response “blacks have weaponsied racism against the whites and use it as a cudgel” is not an uncommon sentiment, “feminism is being used to oppress men” is another, you’re still quacking.
If you don’t believe religion should be a protected class you agree people should be able to oppress you for your athiesm. Athiesm shouldn’t be seen as a default any more than white, straight, cis, able-bodied, etc. “I don’t think religion should be protected class because I am persecuted for my religious stance” is an interesting position to take. Have you considered anti-thiesm isn’t about defence at all? Quack
My response to myself was a follow up to my thought. Why do you think I have some inauthentic narrative here? So far you’ve accused me of being a transphobe and creating sock puppet accounts. With zero rational. I have no interest in some troll ust lobbying unfounded accusations. I suggest you seek help as you seem very paranoid. I’m also done with this conversation as you’ve proven to be unhinged.
Where have I accused you of being a transphobe? Please quote me.
Let’s recap. You mused on what not being born a protected class means for a protected class, in your previous comment you said religion shouldn’t be a protected class. Putting it all together: a protected class one is not born into shouldn’t be protected. Which rhymes incredibly with the rhetoric transphobes and homophobes use. Note: I am not calling you a transphobe, I am saying you quack like one. Re-read the above until you see the destinction.
You also said that you feel like people are using their protected class as a weapon. Which rhymes incredibly with the rhetoric racists and misogynists use. Note: I am not calling you a sexist or misogynist, I am saying you quack like one. Re-read the above until you see the distinction.
Once again: whether someone is born a protected class means nothing. For starters there are no “defaults” to which differing means you become a protected class. Secondly, whether someone is disabled from birth or comes to it later in life, they deserve the same protections. This is a strategy used by homophobes to attack the lgbt and it’s used by transphobes to attack trans people. If you don’t want to be associated with them, don’t quack like them.
I know I know, I am an idiot. I am a big meanie saying you drink babies blood, whatever you need to dismiss me and call this a win. I’ve been there. But later, when you have some time for introspection, ask yourself why anti-thiests quack like all the other bigots? Pull out and examine your own ideas, do you see the rhymes?
When I was quacking away with the anti-thiests, sounding eerily similar to all the other bigots was I a bigot? There’s certainly an argument for it, and one I wouldn’t push too hard against. I prefer to think of myself then as an idiot. I was raised believing in god and there’s no-one more pationate than a convert. I remember seeing a video called “the alt right pipeline”, or something like, it that traced the path from skeptictube to anti-thiesm to right wing, to alt right “all the isms”, and being glad I got off that train. Also, Richard Dawkins was the face of anti-thiesm when I was in it. So him coming out has being more than one kind of bigot was self affirming.
When religion is used to deny others their human rights then religion can fuck right off. I don’t see any of these other protected classes using that protection as an offensive tool.