Religious Acceptance, Intolerance, and Political Influence
While Christians shun atheists and homosexuals from participating in politics, apologists seek to overstate the obvious reasons, while failing to address the psychology of "Pack Mentality".
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/201112/prejudice-against-atheists-is-matter-trust
This is a response to the above article, and I would suggest that it was written for Christians, as atheists have been aware of their persecution for some time. I think the author should have taken the article further, instead of playing it safe to create fairly innocuous content that most people would accept.
Rick Perry had conflicting qualities that could make or break his campaign; he is a Texas Governor, a Christian, a military serviceman, and held a reputation as a straight talker…but, he is also a xenophobe, a homophobe, and he fears areligious people. I think his campaign would have gone so much better, if he knew when to draw down his rhetoric.
His repeated lapses of memory, inability to focus his concentration on debated subject matter, and his abject FEAR of anyone, or anything that is different than himself, is what he will ultimately be remembered for.
To Perry’s voting block, it is alright that Perry dislikes homosexuals, atheists, and brown people; his cardinal error is that his overstatement of his stance…attached to the phrase “Strong Message”, points out that Perry is actually afraid of gays, atheists, and brown people.
Deathly afraid.
Pathologically afraid.
And if Perry is motivated by fear, he is WEAK.
So, the brain-farts and hate-speak might have been perfectly acceptable…even FAVORABLE…to his supporters, but fear and weakness is not a favorable attribute.
Herman Cain claims to be religious, just as Bill Clinton did, and they are both very successful, but they are more interested in tapping ass than running this country.
Cain can claim the moral high-ground over Gingrich, because Cain is still married to the same woman he started his family with (whereas Gingrich changes women as much as he changes his underwear).
Gingrich has proven that he cannot be trusted by his party, his people, and certainly not his wives. He has no loyalty to any god or government, and his faux claim of new found faith will last as long as the election.
Michelle Bachmann was a frivolous lawsuit lawyer (like Edwards) who has been gaming the US tax system for years. Her farm subsidies, and adoption paybacks are legendary, and she has no great love for gays, atheists, or anyone who gets in her way.
Some people like her because she “appears” to be a straight talker, though she has been caught in lies several times (just like Palin). She has moderate sex appeal (again, like Palin). She is hawkish on foreign policy (just like McCain), and she claims to be Christian.
Liked it


-
-
Post CommentSeraphina Navillus
On December 18, 2011 at 1:48 pm
I believe the article in Psychology Today brought to light the prejudice. It was not saying it was okay, just showing that the prejudice exists. It sited this is one reason politicians do all “claim” to be religious.
T J Marcott
On December 18, 2011 at 6:00 pm
@Seraphina, I liked the article. I could not find any issues that I disagreed with. I thought the author did a good job of focusing on some very interesting distinctions pertaining to why “religious” people are disgusted with homosexuals and distrusting of atheists.
What I did not see was the excoriation of so-called-religious people who participate in antisocial gang activity, because they are too inept to take control of their personal lives.
The author did a good job telling us the differences in persecution between homosexuals and atheists, as perpetrated by Christian voters, without analyzing the underlying reasons.
I merely picked up where he left off.
Christian voters who fear atheists and homosexuals have no faith in the god they supposedly worship.