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

[ksen]

That all depends on what you mean by "born-again." What do you mean, exactly? ;o)

I mean just what Jesus meant. ;^)

A person is "born again" if they believe in Jesus Christ as payment for their sins. But I think you already know that. ;^)

[Phantom Lord]

You must realize the validity of God's word in regard to salvation.

I have no issue with, nor deny the validity of God's word. I take issue with those who claim to speak for God and want to impose their beliefs on me, through the power of the states guns, and to use those guns against me if I am not behaving in a way that they personally approve of.

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

Well, do we not rightfully malign Muslims who state that all non-Islamists should be subjugated to Muslim laws. That is their opinion and they have no power to implement it, but we still condemn it, don't we? Do we not also then criticize other Muslims who do not speak out against such opinions?

Why would an non-religious world see any difference between the two types of rhetoric? They wouldn't, thus the results of this survey.

Christ said that all those who follow him will be hated, but he did not say try to get as many people to hate you as possible. He wants us to be the salt and light of the world. And yes, many will hate us because we speak the truth, but many more will be drawn. Now ask yourself, did Christ come to condemn the people of this world or save them? If he came to condemn them, then we need to execute those who sin. If he can to save them, then we need to love them and let them see that their sin seperates them from God. Which of the two, condemn or save, do you think the rhetoric on that thread yesterday represents?

[RAT Patrol]

It is damning in the context of this thread. On the subject of "why they don't like us" as it pertains to Christians, the point was made that Christians get a bad name when they say things like sodomy should get the death penalty.

My opinion of FF578 is a positive one based on my experiences. However, I can see their point on that comment and similar ones. FF578 might need to clarify the issue. I can't support those statements. If I misunderstood them then please let me know. Since I wasn't there and I haven't read the entire thread maybe I shouldn't say. I can't fathom a context that would make that appropriate though.

Christians get a bad name too when Swaggart and Bakker preach to others while living immorally themselves. I love Christians and all they stand for. But we are not above criticism and we are not perfect. There are times we deserve criticism and should heed the advice and humbly change our ways. That's just being human.

I've said plenty of things online that I wish I could take back. I try to apologize or clarify when I am wrong without being too hard on myself (everyone's entitled to a quirk of two, LOL). It really isn't that big of a thing to do. And again, I am not really condemning FF578 at all since I wasn't there. But I am willing to give validation to those who took that comment badly. They have an excellent point and I feel the same way if the comment can be taken at face value.

I hope I qualified all my comments sufficiently, LOL!

[doc30]

If the world hates us because we are jerks, there is no honor in that. But if the world hates us because we are faithful in proclaiming the truth, then bring it on.

THat is one of the problems. Some zealous evangelicals can be very pushy regarding their efforts. I've heard some that will spout the "you are going to Hell unless..." type of argument to the unchurched. The problem, IMHO, is that these are arguments and creat a confrontational atmosphere. Also, some can be more persistent that a used car salesman. These are both turn offs to the person they are trying to evangelize. How is this communicating the grace of Christ?

[doc30]

I see your point. That is one problem when writing an article about someone else's survey. It is always important to check the original source itself.

http://www.barna.org/cgi-bin/home.asp

THis is a much more comprehensive analysis and doesn't try to sensationalize the results.

[RAT Patrol]

I know what you mean about the "you're going to hell" crowd. (I'm a believer in Heaven and Hell, btw.) My husband was not a Christian in college and he used to get sooo mad at the track people who would say stuff like "I feel sorry for you.." How RUDE is that? Duh!

I went to a Bible study one time, as a 19 year old I think, and even though I was a Christian some guy walked up to me and asked in a disbelieving tone "Are you a Chrisitian?" Well, I instantly felt defensive. I said in a snotty tone "Yes!" (How Christian of me, LOLOLOLOL.)

Anyway, I guess I've come to understand that those people mean well. Every group of similar interests has people like that who just do not seem to understand human interaction and what is appropriate or offensive. They honestly mean well most of the time. If it happened again I would just be polite and let it roll off my back. LOL! With age comes wisdom. LOL!

Christians can develop a form of heart myopia too. They forget that they became a Christian to receive FORGIVENESS for their own SIN! That alone should give us compassion for others--unless we forget. (..and that's not to say that Christians do not struggle with sin themselves...blah blah blah...)

[Always Right]

Thanks for the actual source, this gay propagandist who wrote the article gave it an incredible spin as I suspected:

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.

What wasn't said is that 'mainstream Americans' meant non-Christian Americans. Also, it was interesting to see even Lesbians had higher negatives than evangenlicals amoung these non-Christians, but somehow the gay propagandist failed to mention that.

[weikel]

On FF578's planet I think of him like all other collectivist radicals.

[Always Right]

Interesting that what the survey actually showed, is that non-Christians have a negative view of most poeple.

[weikel]

Not just sodomy fornication. If you execute every American who ever fornicated you'd be a biiger mass murderer than even Mao.

[weikel]

The "poster" in question suggested nothing of the sort that called for "death" for "oral sex" or "speaking ill of Jesus," OR your inane analogy that he'd "entered the world of the Taliban."

Check his posting history. The scary thing is he is a cop.

[axel f]

Are you a youth minister? I think you should be!

[Ask_Y_First]

fundamentalist christians: What exactly is that? I find that most of my fundamentalist brothers, are actually rather uninformed on the fundamentals of our CHRISTian leader, The Christ. What a weird topic.

[Ask_Y_First]

What I find in fundamentalism (of most religions) is that they basically pick a few context-challendge passages of holy writ and align it to their particular paradigm.

[PFC]

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."

Here's a pointer for them - stop refering to all non-Evangicals as non-Christians.

[realpatriot71]

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.

It's simple, mind your own business, quit trying to legislate your morals onto everyone else.