Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


(4,452 posts)
12. No, it doesn't necessarily do so.
Mon Jan 16, 2017, 04:18 AM
Jan 2017

I've put a lot of thought into this. I think it's more a case of religion amplifying people. People who are rigid, inflexible, authoritarian by nature, are fundamentalists. Rule followers. People who want to impose their particular religious code on others. On the other hand, people who are compassionate, empathetic, kind, and care for the rights of others are not - they become Methodists, Presbyterians (USA), Unitarians, etc. In the absence of religion, fundamentalists would focus on something else (probably patriotism or regionalism) and find a different way to tell others how to live.

The article wasn't about Christianity. It was about fundamentalism. Christianity, in and of itself, is not bad. Last time I went to church - PCUSA - there was a female pastor, several same-sex couples, a transsexual clearly in transition, and everyone was welcome. It's something much more rare than it should be, but I don't think it will be as rare in another generation.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Great article on the rigi...»Reply #12