DiscussMormonism.com

Religion really isn't distinguishable from politics. It's essentially the same thing wrapped up in different language. In America our politics might be polarized between two parties, but of course there are thousands of polarizing religious "parties."

If someone were to make grand, sweeping generalizations about people of a certain political party (which happens nightly on Fox and MSNBC), we might reasonably object on the basis that they're making generalizations without real statistical evidence, that they're oversimplifying, that they're allowing partisanship to cloud they're thinking, etc. But we'd never call them bigots for doing so.

Why is religion treated any differently?

Buffalo wrote:Religion really isn't distinguishable from politics. It's essentially the same thing wrapped up in different language. In America our politics might be polarized between two parties, but of course there are thousands of polarizing religious "parties."

If someone were to make grand, sweeping generalizations about people of a certain political party (which happens nightly on Fox and MSNBC), we might reasonably object on the basis that they're making generalizations without real statistical evidence, that they're oversimplifying, that they're allowing partisanship to cloud they're thinking, etc. But we'd never call them bigots for doing so.

Why is religion treated any differently?

Good point!

Personally, I tend to think of bigots as people who dislike (hate) other people because of things that they can't change. Race, skin color, gender, sexual orientation, etc.

Disliking a religion is like disliking a person's choice in apparel. It can be easily changed and shouldn't effect how you feel about someone as a person.

Disliking a religion is like disliking a person's choice in apparel. It can be easily changed and shouldn't effect how you feel about someone as a person.

But disliking a religion can lead to forcing a person to-as you say, wear what you want them to wear. Within limits, people should be given the right to self-expression-- wearing what they want to wear.

I think there is such a thing as bigotry towards a political class. If you harbor negative obstinate prejudices about a class of people, you are a bigot. I know a person who seriously thinks all conservatives should be executed for the good of society. That person is bigot. There are well-known posters here who plainly strike me as bigoted when it comes to thinking about their political opposition and their treatment of them.

As for why religion gets more associated with bigotry, that's because we are sensitive to bigotry when we know about groups of people who have systematically faced unfair treatment on account of their status. In America, this is more understood as happening to religious groups than political groups. That isn't always the case, however. The same issue is true of economic status.

Quasimodo wrote:Disliking a religion is like disliking a person's choice in apparel. It can be easily changed and shouldn't effect how you feel about someone as a person.

You can disapprove of someone's beliefs without making wildly unfair generalizations about them or needlessly discriminating against them on that basis.

If you refuse to let Catholics eat at your restaurant just because you don't like dirty Catholics, you're a bigot.

Quasimodo wrote:
Good point!

Personally, I tend to think of bigots as people who dislike (hate) other people because of things that they can't change. Race, skin color, gender, sexual orientation, etc.

Disliking a religion is like disliking a person's choice in apparel. It can be easily changed and shouldn't effect how you feel about someone as a person.

I don't think that religion is necessarily so easily changed, Quasi. Religious bigotry is still bigotry. For that matter, prejudice against someone because of their apparel is bigotry, too.

EAllusion wrote:

Quasimodo wrote:Disliking a religion is like disliking a person's choice in apparel. It can be easily changed and shouldn't effect how you feel about someone as a person.

You can disapprove of someone's beliefs without making wildly unfair generalizations about them or needlessly discriminating against them on that basis.

If you refuse to let Catholics eat at your restaurant just because you don't like dirty Catholics, you're a bigot.

I suppose that's true. I was thinking from the other direction, I guess. That there is no need to hate a people because their beliefs are different. I mean that dislike of a religion or philosophy doesn't make one a bigot.

by the way, some of my best friends are both Catholic and a little scruffy.

Glad to see you back, Quasi.

Morley wrote:I don't think that religion is necessarily so easily changed, Quasi. Religious bigotry is still bigotry. For that matter, prejudice against someone because of their apparel is bigotry, too.

Hi Morley!

My fault for wording things badly. I have friends (one in particular) who's choice of clothing is a fashion nightmare. I love them still. It's the clothes I hate. The analogy was only to highlight the difference between hating people and hating certain philosophical points of view.

I truly understand (from just hanging around here) that changing a religion can be very difficult. Still, it's much easier than changing one's race or skin color.

My point is only that those who have been branded "anti-Mormon" (myself included) are not being bigoted when expressing their dislike of Mormon philosophy. It's not a hatred of Mormons.

Morley wrote:Glad to see you back, Quasi.

Thanks Morley!!!

I haven't been far away, just overly busy.