Fundamentalists Losing Favor with Public <barf alert>

The Data Lounge ^ | Friday, 6 December 2002 | -- C. Barillas, Editor

[doc30]

Fundamentalists Losing Favor with Public
Friday, 6 December 2002

WASHINGTON -- The American Family Association, a far right lobbying group in Washington, released results from a recent survey that shows mainstream Americans see evangelical Christians as one of the least likeable groups in the country.

Small wonder

Researchers from the Barna survey asked respondents how they felt about evangelicals, born-again Christians, ministers, and other groups of people in society. According to the survey, evangelicals came in tenth out of eleven, narrowly beating out prostitutes.

---

Below lawyers and just above prostitutes.

---

Overview of this issue
>	Far Right - National Strategies
Web Sites
>	Christian Coalition
>	GayVote.com
Other Data Lounge stories
>	Washington DC
Send this article to a friend

Fellow evangelical George Barna, president of the Barna Research Group, said religious conservatives "have a lot of work to do" in combating the general public's negative views.

Speaking to distressed members of the AFA, he said, "We may not be 'evil' people, we may not be 'bad' people -- we may be completely loving and wonderful. But somehow we are being perceived by non-Christians in America as a group of people who are not particularly loving [and] not particularly generous, kind, or understanding."

Particularly galling to the AFA constituency was the country's more open embrace of gay men and lesbians. Gay people, a group conservatives frequently slander and oppose politically, ranked significantly higher in the survey than evangelicals.

"Whether that's because the media portray evangelicals in a negative light or because [religious conservatives have] earned that 'badge of dishonor,' if you will, we've got to figure that out," said Barna, "we have to address that."

Affirming results from other studies, the Barna survey also found the more highly educated non-evangelicals are, the less likely they are to have a positive view of fundamentalist Christians.

-- C. Barillas, Editor

[Prov3456]

In addition to all of that, Jesus said that anyone who follows Him WOULD be hated. (Matt.5:11-12; John15:18-19) Think about it.........

[glory]

Finally, thank you. I still think it didn't have to come to this thread unless FF578 himself was posting here, but whatever...

[Phantom Lord]

I had a good friend in high school and the first couple years of college. Then he was "Born Again" and became a baptist misinster. He will not associate with me at all any more in any way. He has on several occasions told my wife she is going to hell because she is Jewish (and other friends he had who are Jewish), and that I, as a consequence of marrying her am going to hell. It is people like him who are perceived by the public as being the face of and leader of evangelicals. It is people like him, and the medias and lefts promotion of people like him who have caused people to have such a negative veiw evangelicals.

Until evangelicals disassociate themselves from these people and denounce them the public will continue to have a negative view of evangelicals and conservative christians.

[Jael]

I am sorry if it seemed I was demanding. I was just curious as to what this person has done to cause you such anger towards him.


I am just not sure why one person's opinion about the deathly crime of sodomy should make him your enemy.

Are you a Christian?

[Always Right]

I have a feeling this is a bogus article. There is NOTHING on the AFA web site 'releasing' this information, and why aren't the other categories of people listed? Not that there isn't a lot of vile hatred of Christians on the left, but this story doesn't pass the smell test.

[glory]

Thanks, I was there briefly on the thread so I know what was said and there was much goating on that thread to begin with and egging on. I'm taking to task using that as a justification for this view of Christians. It's no more appropriate than me justifying the view that most athiests are kooks because a Newdow exists or most pro-choice folks are lowlifes because a Margaret sanger existed. I just don't think it was necessary to bring that here unless FF578 was over here commenting on this article, especially in the blanket comments that were made as if most evangelicals think and believe in this way.

[Phantom Lord]

Why do you consider him your enemy?

Anyone who wants to jail me and/or kill me through the power of the state for disagreeing with their views is my enemy.

Would you consider me your enemy if I wanted to empower the state to jail and kill you for the simple reason that you are a christian? Well, he wants to grant the state that power simply because I am not christian in his eyes. He and people like him are my enemy, your enemy and the enemy of free people everywhere.

[logos]

I disagree, logos. What PL has done is very instructional to the current thread and current discussion.

Is there a reason why Fundamentalists score so low? Yes. It is because of a vocal few who spout things like what is on the other thread. That is very relevant to what this thread is about.

The thread in reference isn't from a long time ago, it's from yesterday, and it isn't just a single person, it's about 5 or 6 who agree with the advocacy that blasphemy should have jail time associated with it and sodomy should be a capital offense. Don't you find that these types of statements might have something to do with how Fundamentalists are viewed on this site and in society at large?

Because I have to leave now (real life actually does exist, after all), I will use this post to respond to all three of you. I hope you don't mind.

P.L.'s overriding point may very well be valid concerning this one person, but I don't agree that one (or five or six) person's viewpoint can be blamed for the popular view - if there really is such - of fundamental and evangelical Christians. Even so, however, the burden to prove that point is on him, and I'm sorry, but a few links to out-of-context comments don't clear that hurdle of proof. P.L. said far more than one opinion concerning the death penalty for sodomy; he attributed other opinions as well, even though those attributed opinions seem to have dropped out of the discussion at this point. All of P.L.s comments strongly impute motives of a criminal nature to the poster who still hasn't appeared on this thread as I type. The only defense to a charge of slander is the truth of the comments themselves. Are they true? I don't know, but even if they are, one person's views can hardly be blamed for the popular opinion of fundamental and evangelical Christians. That blame, IMO, rests with the prevailing negative portrayal of such people in the popular press, which hardly needs to name a specific person to express those views.

Nor do I agree that it is "fair" or within the rules of this forum to make such comments about a person who has not even participated on this thread. Were I wanting to single out this person, I would have 'pinged' him to the thread and asked him for his opinions. That would be fair. That would be within the rules.

What has happened here sounds far more like one person's disagreement with and disdain for the views of someone else. It has nothing to do with whether I might even agree with P.L. had I the time to research all the threads that the other poster might have participated in.

It is exactly this kind of behavior which detracts from the overall quality of FR, and it should stop.

[F16Fighter]

"When your beliefs including empowering the government to put people to death for engaging in oral sex, forcing unmarried people who have sex to marry, and putting people to death for speaking ill of Jesus you have gone beyond having strong christian beliefs and entered the world of the Taliban and its thinking."

You have obviously "entered the world" of an insane asylum and "it's thinking."

This may indeed be the most idiotic post I have seen at Free Republic in four years -- congratulations.

[glory]

btw, I'm not an evangelical in case the Phantom's of the world were wondering, just peeved at how those comments were applied to a mass of people who have unfairly been portrayed by the media as evil. Muslims probably think worse of sexual deviancy, yet I'm sure they would be ranked considerably higher on how they are viewed. Wouldnt be that in both groups public perception has been molded by a biased media would it? One that hides the bigotry and hatred of one group, yet over reports incidences of such in another?

[jimt]

What we have here is an attack on someone who has not even appeared on this thread.

Perhaps FF578 might want to desist from shotgun vitriolic insulting posts against others. There's a pornography thread from yesterday where this happened a bunch. It adds nothing to the debate, and invites the same.

[steve50]

The witch trials show what happens when religious zealots are allowed to run the legal system. Just tie a rock around their necks and G*d will float the innocent is no way to run a legal system.

[Phantom Lord]

You have obviously "entered the world" of an insane asylum and "it's thinking."

I have entered the world of the insane asylum and its thinking for disagreeing with the beliefs of the poster i spoke of? It is he who needs to be in a padded room, not only for his protection but for ours.

[F16Fighter]

"Perhaps it would help if their organization wasn't led by a walking parody like Donald "Mighty Mouse is doing coke" Wildmon, who sometimes seems to crib his ideas from the Landover Bapist site."

-Eric

Dear Eric from Free Republic,

Please excuse the AFA for NOT checking in with you because you might actually have an "idea" AND clue.

I now return you to your Game Cube...

[timm22]

Agreed!! But in American it is the LEFT and their spread of hatred and intolerence of anyone who does not agree with them; i.e., abortion, homosexuality, socialism, etc.

Most evangelical Christians and Christian rightists I know are admirable people and generally not control freaks. The exceptions, unfortunately, get a lot of publicity. However, every leftist I've ever known wants to control every aspect of my life outside of the bedroom. I think the left is much more dangerous than the religious right.

I suspect a lot of other libertarian-minded people on this website feel the same way. Because the vast majority of FReepers already hate leftism, my attacks against them here are underrepresented. However, since a lot of people on this site agree with some of the more unsavory aspects of the religious right, you'll tend to see more heat thrown in their direction as opposed to preaching to the choir about the evil left.

[logos]

I do have to leave now, but it seems you've missed my point as well. Had the names been reversed, and the attack been made against Phantom Lord, I would have made all the same comments I made already. Should I come across FF578 in future make such "shotgun" and "vitriolic" attacks as you say, I'll not hesitate to take him to task.

We - meaning you and me and all FReepers - have the ultimate responsibility for the "cleanliness of our house," and by and large, IMO, we're falling down on the job. Taking "flame wars" from thread to thread has got to stop, or FR will become just another sandbox for two-year-olds.

And now I'm outta here.

[Phantom Lord]

just peeved at how those comments were applied to a mass of people who have unfairly been portrayed by the media as evil.

That is exactly my point! The press, media, movies, and virtually all information outlets portray chirstians and evangelicals as if they believed like the few fringe wackos out there. Until the mainstream evangelical and christian communites refute and disassociate themselves from these extremists, they will continue to be viewed negatively.

[timm22]

Which in today's world means to not practice your Christian faith at all if it means it may actually come into play in your political views. In other words, Christians are to have no voice in this country. That's the kind of respect people expect. Voice for all unless of course if you happen to be Christian than keep your big yap shut so you don't offend anyone else.

That's not necessarily what it means. I have no problem with Christian picketing, boycotts, letter writing campaigns, speeches, and peaceful demonstrations in support of things they like and against things they oppose.

I just don't believe that Christians, or any other group for that matter, should be able to use government force against activities that do not violate rights. That does not mean they must hide silently in the face of things they oppose. It just means that unless someone's rights are being violated, they shouldn't send in men with guns to enforce their religious preferences.

[Phantom Lord]

The witch trials show what happens when religious zealots are allowed to run the legal system. Just tie a rock around their necks and G*d will float the innocent is no way to run a legal system.

Actually, if you floated to the top you were guilty. If you did not float you were innocent. Either way, the penalty was death.

[jimt]

Your number 115 was well stated, and I believe, accurate.