3 ms·

The most vocal, notice I don't say majority, only seem to pay that ideal the barest minimum of lip service. The most vocal only want to help the worker if the w

The most vocal, notice I don't say majority, only seem to pay that ideal the barest minimum of lip service. The most vocal only want to help the worker if the worker is Unionized, woke, and maybe even only if they are the right minority. Those appear to be the most vocal. You and I know they aren't the majority, but perception matters a lot. I have absolutely no problem with democrats/labor, though I don't share their politics. I'm just aware that the most vocal people professing to be on the left are everything from Antifa to Black Lives Matter. We can probably agree that they aren't the best people to represent the left, but they certainly are the most vocal and are the public face that many people see. For better or worse, you end up with virtual caricatures being the representatives. Do you see how that passage totally misrepresents the whole left and casts it in a bad light? It borders on concern trolling. Can somebody come up with a better name for this than 'the bigotry of hand wringing?' If not, that's what I'm going with. You only see Antifa or Westboro as representative of the groups they pervert if you only consume news from people who want to make you emotional and then show you ads.

KGIII 9y ago
No, I see more than that but that's because I take the time to seek it out. It's not up to me to determine public perception, I am - quite literally - only making the observation. In fact, I'm not sure why you'd think I'm trolling? I live in a very rural area where attending church is mostly the default, and not the exception. I know the majority of Christians aren't like WBC and that they aren't White Nationalists. However, it's the WBC and White Nationalists that people see assembling in public and standing behind the banner of the cross. I'm not sure how you'd think I see only that when I was really careful to point out that I see much more than that. I see the lady pastor who comes by with a pan of lasagna whenever she hears of trouble. I see people who make sure not one person here is hungry, homeless, or more alone than they want to be. I see them stop to shovel the snow of a grumpy old man who is distinctly not very Christian in his behavior. I see them practicing what they preach. At the same time, I see the online comments from the people who believe the WBC actually represents all Christians, or at least the majority. I see a sibling comment who pointed out just that, a comment about them needing to actually adhere to their professed doctrine. I'm not sure why you'd attack me, the messenger. It's not like I control public perception. It's not like I made the sibling comment. Perhaps you're reading things into my comment that weren't stated or intended? Perhaps you're making broad assumptions about me that aren't based on anything I said but are based on your own biases? As I said, I see the Christians and they are usually wonderful people. Unfortunately, many people don't and you end up with the loudest being considered representatives of the whole. You end up with things like the sibling comment. The sibling comment is a fine example of exactly what I mean, and is wonderfully timely. You can feel free to attack me, or you can acknowledge that there is a PR problem and try to resolve it. You can acknowledge that someone already even likened it to Sharia law and wonder why that is. Or, of course, you can attack the guy who points it out and accuse them of trolling. That's fine, I don't mind, but it's not very productive or helpful. Edit: Sorry you're being downvoted, but I had nothing to do with that either. Maybe they are as baffled as I am as to why you'd attack me when I did nothing more than make an observation - an observation handily backed up by some of the comments in this very thread.
soundwave106 9y ago
I don't see this as concern trolling when these sort of negative issues are widely cited in surveys on un-churched Americans. If I were a pastor wanting to reach out to future generations, I'd see this sort of thing as a problem. Example from Barna, an evangelical survey and research group: https://www.barna.com/research/five-trends-among-the-unchurched/ https://www.barna.com/research/five-trends-among-the-unchurc... "Unchurched Americans" have been a growing trend for quite some time. Nearly half of millenials are "post-Christian" in this survey from a few years back. In this study, half of the post-Christians could not identify a single favorable impact of the Christian community. The top things people complained about regarding American churches were violence in the name of Christ, the position on gay marriage, sexual abuse scandals, and involvement in politics. Perhaps more tellingly, in another survey (http://www.christianpost.com/news/how-do-unchurched-americans-view-christianity-30793/ http://www.christianpost.com/news/how-do-unchurched-american...), a full 72 percent of the people interviewed said they think the church is full of hypocrites. Note that "unchurched" does not mean "not Christian", but I think there is plenty of evidence though that says a large portion of Americans believe, at minimum, that the institution of American Christianity is fundamentally broken. I don't think the clickbait-ization of news is the entire story here either. "Nones" have been growing rapidly since the 1990s.

KGIII 9y ago

No, I see more than that but that's because I take the time to seek it out. It's not up to me to determine public perception, I am - quite literally - only making the observation. In fact, I'm not sure why you'd think I'm trolling? I live in a very rural area where attending church is mostly the default, and not the exception. I know the majority of Christians aren't like WBC and that they aren't White Nationalists. However, it's the WBC and White Nationalists that people see assembling in public and standing behind the banner of the cross. I'm not sure how you'd think I see only that when I was really careful to point out that I see much more than that. I see the lady pastor who comes by with a pan of lasagna whenever she hears of trouble. I see people who make sure not one person here is hungry, homeless, or more alone than they want to be. I see them stop to shovel the snow of a grumpy old man who is distinctly not very Christian in his behavior. I see them practicing what they preach. At the same time, I see the online comments from the people who believe the WBC actually represents all Christians, or at least the majority. I see a sibling comment who pointed out just that, a comment about them needing to actually adhere to their professed doctrine. I'm not sure why you'd attack me, the messenger. It's not like I control public perception. It's not like I made the sibling comment. Perhaps you're reading things into my comment that weren't stated or intended? Perhaps you're making broad assumptions about me that aren't based on anything I said but are based on your own biases? As I said, I see the Christians and they are usually wonderful people. Unfortunately, many people don't and you end up with the loudest being considered representatives of the whole. You end up with things like the sibling comment. The sibling comment is a fine example of exactly what I mean, and is wonderfully timely. You can feel free to attack me, or you can acknowledge that there is a PR problem and try to resolve it. You can acknowledge that someone already even likened it to Sharia law and wonder why that is. Or, of course, you can attack the guy who points it out and accuse them of trolling. That's fine, I don't mind, but it's not very productive or helpful. Edit: Sorry you're being downvoted, but I had nothing to do with that either. Maybe they are as baffled as I am as to why you'd attack me when I did nothing more than make an observation - an observation handily backed up by some of the comments in this very thread.

soundwave106 9y ago

I don't see this as concern trolling when these sort of negative issues are widely cited in surveys on un-churched Americans. If I were a pastor wanting to reach out to future generations, I'd see this sort of thing as a problem. Example from Barna, an evangelical survey and research group: https://www.barna.com/research/five-trends-among-the-unchurched/ https://www.barna.com/research/five-trends-among-the-unchurc... "Unchurched Americans" have been a growing trend for quite some time. Nearly half of millenials are "post-Christian" in this survey from a few years back. In this study, half of the post-Christians could not identify a single favorable impact of the Christian community. The top things people complained about regarding American churches were violence in the name of Christ, the position on gay marriage, sexual abuse scandals, and involvement in politics. Perhaps more tellingly, in another survey (http://www.christianpost.com/news/how-do-unchurched-americans-view-christianity-30793/ http://www.christianpost.com/news/how-do-unchurched-american...), a full 72 percent of the people interviewed said they think the church is full of hypocrites. Note that "unchurched" does not mean "not Christian", but I think there is plenty of evidence though that says a large portion of Americans believe, at minimum, that the institution of American Christianity is fundamentally broken. I don't think the clickbait-ization of news is the entire story here either. "Nones" have been growing rapidly since the 1990s.