Yeah, this is where I am with it. Maybe the way the sentiment was expressed is upsetting because of the congratulatory connotation, but the fact is that we’re fascinated by people who commit atrocities (small or large) because they defy social norms - “living life on their own terms,” in other words. Morris definitely…

There may well be debate-oriented Christians (just as there are Jews who are not particularly welcoming of debate) but most forms of Christianity don’t especially encourage debate. Those are different things.

Ahhhh, I see! This is connected to the fundamentalists’ love of capitalism. THESE are okay because they can be purchased.

Oh, totally. They’re just ignorant, really. And I don’t even mean that in the pejorative way - they’re actually extremely poorly educated and don’t know a lot about the world or the history of their faith.

Right, hence my specifying “fundamentalist.” And yes, they absolutely would consider Anglicans to be not *real* Christians. Frankly, I doubt most of them could even spell Anglican. But also, the so-called “illuminated Bibles” being described above (those inscribed by hand primarily by monks over the course of hears…

Well, sort of the other way around, I think: submission and lack of dissent are necessary components to a missionary religion. Christianity is a tool of empire; Judaism is not and has never been.

Haha the idea of an Anarchist Catholic is very funny to me - though I know what you mean. It runs deep, and I think the fact that the Catholic Church does allow for *some* measure of free thought, *some* debate, *some* freedom is actually what maintains people’s attachment to it.

Those were the Catholics though. Surely these people are all fundamentalist Protestants.

No, if there’s one thing I learned in 13 years as a Jewish kid at Catholic school (long story) it’s that the concept of “Judeo-Christian” doesn’t really mean anything. We have fundamentally different world views, even if they borrowed some of our customs. The Catholics are okay as far as that goes - they don’t…

Honestly, I think you’ve answered your own question. No, they don’t have better things to debate (because debate isn’t valued the way it is in our religion) and they never have.

Well, SOME white people do - but they call themselves white nationalists.

I actually think that “The Problem of Blackness” and “The Problem of Jewishness” could both be interesting courses - they would just be about basically the same thing as “The Problem of Whiteness,” which of course is that race is a social construct and the product of white supremacy. In that way, the title of this…

I don’t know off the top of my head, but I wouldn’t be surprised. People tend to separate and form social relationships with others of their own ethnic background (not always entirely by choice, obviously), so that would seem to make sense. Also, in the case of rape, given that women are far more likely to be raped by…

Better a “pussy” than a hypocrite, is it not? I don’t think that the State has the right to execute its citizens under any circumstances. Why would I make an exception to that belief? Historically speaking, the death penalty has not been meted out fairly or evenly, and when it comes to the often arbitrary decision of…

The question I ask about this, as a Jew, is okay, so if you’re so much better, why don’t you just......be better? But of course, we know the real answer - this hatred is a means of justifying their own mediocrity. Undeserved privilege, flailing.

I heard a Facebook friend of a Facebook friend saying something along the lines of “all these Black men raping white women” just the other day, and the idea is absurd to me. Black men and boys in this country have been killed for LOOKING at white women the wrong way. How on earth could anyone seriously believe that if…

Well, misogyny in this context constitutes a belief structure, doesn’t it? So you can level a common belief structure (and I certainly would argue that misogyny is not only common but in fact entrenched in American society) to justify your actions and the actions of others. If we accept “X” (women are objects) and “Y”…

Yes. There is no convincing Tomi and others to adopt progressive views because, even if they changed their minds internally, what does it benefit them to actually change their stances? Tomi makes money fueling bigotry. Zukka’s friend is, presumably, white, and benefits from white supremacy. There is no convincing them…

As long as we’re still talking about what women do or do not put on our bodies (or being forced to talk about it), we are having the wrong conversation.

Whaaaaat is that