• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Excuses for Persecution?

thomas t

non-denominational Christian
Lately I came across some what I consider excuses for the persecution of Christians. This may apply to the persecution of any other religion (or non-religion), too:

One poster said he'd be in favour of an anti-proselytising law with strong enforcement.

Moreover, another poster said that there are resentments that can contribute to persecution arising.

My conclusion: even if there are resentments because of proselytizing or other... these can not count as a valid reason for persecution.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Lately I came across some what I consider excuses for the persecution of Christians. This may apply to the persecution of any other religion (or non-religion), too:

One poster said he'd be in favour of an anti-proselytising law with strong enforcement.

Moreover, another poster said that there are resentments that can contribute to persecution arising.

My conclusion: even if there are resentments because of proselytizing or other... these can not count as a valid reason for persecution.
...repeat and fade......
 

MNoBody

Well-Known Member
maybe.....don't just tell people about it,
just do it and people will beat a trail to your door.
no need to convince people then..... hmmm?
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Lately I came across some what I consider excuses for the persecution of Christians. This may apply to the persecution of any other religion (or non-religion), too:

One poster said he'd be in favour of an anti-proselytising law with strong enforcement.

Moreover, another poster said that there are resentments that can contribute to persecution arising.

My conclusion: even if there are resentments because of proselytizing or other... these can not count as a valid reason for persecution.

Proselytizing is annoying. You are telling everyone else they are wrong about their beliefs.
If enough people feel annoyed by it, they are going to pass laws against it. that's kind of all the justification that is needed. There's a rule against it on the forums because it is, well I don't know why the rule is there but I'm glad it is because it is annoying.

You maybe consider such rules as persecution, I just see it as limiting the amount of annoyance people have to deal with.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Proselytizing is annoying. You are telling everyone else they are wrong about their beliefs.
If enough people feel annoyed by it, they are going to pass laws against it. that's kind of all the justification that is needed. There's a rule against it on the forums because it is, well I don't know why the rule is there but I'm glad it is because it is annoying.

You maybe consider such rules as persecution, I just see it as limiting the amount of annoyance people have to deal with.
The OP steadfastly refuses to try to put himself in the shoes of the other party and look at things from their point of view. Without some ability to do that, there is not much to talk about. This is now the 3rd thread in which he has recited the same unedifying, un-nuanced standpoint, regardless of attempts to engage him in discussion.
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
Lately I came across some what I consider excuses for the persecution of Christians. This may apply to the persecution of any other religion (or non-religion), too:

One poster said he'd be in favour of an anti-proselytising law with strong enforcement.

Moreover, another poster said that there are resentments that can contribute to persecution arising.

My conclusion: even if there are resentments because of proselytizing or other... these can not count as a valid reason for persecution.

I'm a fan of speech being as free as reasonably possible. I'd be against a rule criminalizing proselytism, as long as it doesn't cross over into harassment or something. But that also means counter-proselytism should be legal, which means you can't claim persecution if others try to convince you that you shouldn't be Christian, or your version of Christian.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Proselytizing is annoying. You are telling everyone else they are wrong about their beliefs.
If enough people feel annoyed by it, they are going to pass laws against it. that's kind of all the justification that is needed. There's a rule against it on the forums because it is, well I don't know why the rule is there but I'm glad it is because it is annoying.

You maybe consider such rules as persecution, I just see it as limiting the amount of annoyance people have to deal with.

I'm against it at that fundamental level, going in any direction, and I'm a partly a member of my religion or sect simply because it doesn't proselytise. I respect diversity, and everyone's rights to a belief. When somebody comes along with the very basic false assumption that they have something that another person NEEDS, with regard to belief, then I'm against it. One silly guy lost his life going to North Sentinel Island over it, despite dire warnings. The government of India decided long ago to protect the North Sentinalese, and keep an indigenous people alive. Was that poor chap who got killed persecuted, or was he just stupid?
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
Lately I came across some what I consider excuses for the persecution of Christians. This may apply to the persecution of any other religion (or non-religion), too:

One poster said he'd be in favour of an anti-proselytising law with strong enforcement.

Moreover, another poster said that there are resentments that can contribute to persecution arising.

My conclusion: even if there are resentments because of proselytizing or other... these can not count as a valid reason for persecution.

Proselytizing is the same as persecution to those that don't want to hear it. People will go inside there house, use there money to by signs or fences, hide from the door bell ringing to avoid Proselytizing or cross the street. Proselytizing is an act of persecution\aggression against those that don't want to be bothered.

If you want to put up a booth with signage announcing your views and allow people to come to you that is fine. If you go out of your way to aggressively push your views on to others that is wrong.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Lately I came across some what I consider excuses for the persecution of Christians. This may apply to the persecution of any other religion (or non-religion), too:

One poster said he'd be in favour of an anti-proselytising law with strong enforcement.

Moreover, another poster said that there are resentments that can contribute to persecution arising.

My conclusion: even if there are resentments because of proselytizing or other... these can not count as a valid reason for persecution.
The term 'persecution' is thrown around pretty indiscriminately. Christians in the US often use the term when they no longer experience their traditionally privileged social and legal positions and are being treated like everyone else.

If you mean actual persecution, where Christians are systematically deprived of liberties, social access, arrested, imprisoned, beaten, tortured, or murdered a disproportionally higher rate than the average because they are Christians - that does not happen in the Europe or the Americas.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Proselytizing is the same as persecution to those that don't want to hear it. People will go inside there house, use there money to by signs or fences, hide from the door bell ringing to avoid Proselytizing or cross the street. Proselytizing is an act of persecution\aggression against those that don't want to be bothered.
I think of this as harassment. I don't think I am being persecuted until there are some sort of punitive consequences to not listening or not believing.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Lately I came across some what I consider excuses for the persecution of Christians. This may apply to the persecution of any other religion (or non-religion), too:

One poster said he'd be in favour of an anti-proselytising law with strong enforcement.

Moreover, another poster said that there are resentments that can contribute to persecution arising.

My conclusion: even if there are resentments because of proselytizing or other... these can not count as a valid reason for persecution.


Proselytizing is persecution. So fair is fair, if you want to persecute others the don't be surprised if you get the same in exchange.
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
I think of this as harassment. I don't think I am being persecuted until there are some sort of punitive consequences to not listening or not believing.

You can of course believe what you want but here's a definition for you.

Persecution: persistent annoyance or harassment. Notice the harassment has to be persistent. 3 times a year Jesuits come down my street trying to preach. Some preachers are on street corners shouting everyday. Both meet the requirement of persistent.

Harassment comes up as a synanon of Persecution
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Persecution: persistent annoyance or harassment. Notice the harassment has to be persistent. 3 times a year Jesuits come down my street trying to preach. Some preachers are on street corners shouting everyday. Both meet the requirement of persistent.
I saw that definition. I don't think that its entirely wrong, but incomplete enough that I would argue that it contains lies of omission. People come to my door every year selling magazines. It's persistent and unwanted, but I am not being persecuted by them.

I think the Wikipedia definition is much more in line with common usage of the word:
"Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group. The most common forms are religious persecution, racism and political persecution, though there is naturally some overlap between these terms. The inflicting of suffering, harassment, imprisonment, internment, fear, or pain are all factors that may establish persecution, but not all suffering will necessarily establish persecution. The suffering experienced by the victim must be sufficiently severe. The threshold level of severity has been a source of much debate."
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
I'm against it at that fundamental level, going in any direction, and I'm a partly a member of my religion or sect simply because it doesn't proselytise. I respect diversity, and everyone's rights to a belief. When somebody comes along with the very basic false assumption that they have something that another person NEEDS, with regard to belief, then I'm against it. One silly guy lost his life going to North Sentinel Island over it, despite dire warnings. The government of India decided long ago to protect the North Sentinalese, and keep an indigenous people alive. Was that poor chap who got killed persecuted, or was he just stupid?
He was very stupid indeed. I'm afraid when I read that story, I laughed. He had it coming and there was no excuse, especially as he was breaking the law.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
You can of course believe what you want but here's a definition for you.

Persecution: persistent annoyance or harassment. Notice the harassment has to be persistent. 3 times a year Jesuits come down my street trying to preach. Some preachers are on street corners shouting everyday. Both meet the requirement of persistent.

Harassment comes up as a synanon of Persecution
That's interesting. I've never heard of Jesuits preaching in the street. That's typically more the sort of thing the Jehovah's Witnesses do. Whereabouts is this?
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
I saw that definition. I don't think that its entirely wrong, but incomplete enough that I would argue that it contains lies of omission. People come to my door every year selling magazines. It's persistent and unwanted, but I am not being persecuted by them.

I think the Wikipedia definition is much more in line with common usage of the word:
"Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group. The most common forms are religious persecution, racism and political persecution, though there is naturally some overlap between these terms. The inflicting of suffering, harassment, imprisonment, internment, fear, or pain are all factors that may establish persecution, but not all suffering will necessarily establish persecution. The suffering experienced by the victim must be sufficiently severe. The threshold level of severity has been a source of much debate."

Severe in their Opinion. People have individual standards on what is severe, you can't enforce your standards on others.

My point is that if you don't want anyone standing on your lawn and a person or group more than once after being told not to comes and does it again you can get aggressive and you may decide to persecute the entire group.

I'll give you a personal example a group of Jesuits came to my house. I politely declined to talk and asked them to insure that they did not bother me again. They said they maintained a list and could insure I was not visited again. I am still being visited. At what point in your mind is is something I can take action against. At what point do you consider it a severe experience for me.

If a person yelled FU every time you saw them is it ever persecution of you or do words not matter ever.
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
That's interesting. I've never heard of Jesuits preaching in the street. That's typically more the sort of thing the Jehovah's Witnesses do. Whereabouts is this?

My bad Jehovah's Witnesses is correct. The guy preaching on the street, I have no idea who he was. I had to take a certain walking route to a job in NYC for 2 weeks he was on this one corner everyday when I was younger. I don't think they get away with that today at least I haven't seen a NYC preacher in a while.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
My bad Jehovah's Witnesses is correct. The guy preaching on the street, I have no idea who he was. I had to take a certain walking route to a job in NYC for 2 weeks he was on this one corner everyday when I was younger. I don't think they get away with that today at least I haven't seen a NYC preacher in a while.
Phew! You had shaken my whole coordinate system for a moment there. Not the Js' style at all. ;)
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Lately I came across some what I consider excuses for the persecution of Christians. This may apply to the persecution of any other religion (or non-religion), too:

One poster said he'd be in favour of an anti-proselytising law with strong enforcement.

Moreover, another poster said that there are resentments that can contribute to persecution arising.

My conclusion: even if there are resentments because of proselytizing or other... these can not count as a valid reason for persecution.

Not far from where I live there is an anti-proselytising bye-law in place already. Nobody is allowed to door-knock at all on several large estates.

You write UK English........ do you live in the UK?
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Severe in their Opinion. People have individual standards on what is severe, you can't enforce your standards on others.
The corollary of which is that I am not forced to accept all standards. RIght?

My point is that if you don't want anyone standing on your lawn and a person or group more than once after being told not to comes and does it again you can get aggressive and you may decide to persecute the entire group.
In that situation. Sure. But that is only a subset of proselytizing behavior.

I'll give you a personal example a group of Jesuits came to my house. I politely declined to talk and asked them to insure that they did not bother me again. They said they maintained a list and could insure I was not visited again. I am still being visited. At what point in your mind is is something I can take action against. At what point do you consider it a severe experience for me.
I would say you should be able to take legal action against them now. And I would argue that you should file for a restraining order. Whether you find it to be "severe" or merely annoying.

If a person yelled FU every time you saw them is it ever persecution of you or do words not matter ever.
That's not enough information. Harrassment, certainly.
 
Top