Top 10 anti-Christian acts of 2012

Christina here…

Every year, this website puts out a list of the “Top 10 Anti-Christian Acts” – 2012 is no different.

I wonder what bad things have happened! Maybe they got billboards vandalized. Maybe prominent public figures blamed Christians for everything from the school shootings to hurricane Sandy. Maybe the army refused to let Christians hold a rock concert…

…Let’s check out their list and discuss!

10. Target took a controversial and anti-family stand when it decided to support homosexual activist groups with the proceeds from a collection of “gay pride” T-shirts sold by Target. They decided to do so even after voters throughout the country, including just recently in North Carolina, have taken a stand against homosexual marriage. But, instead of allowing its customers to voice concerns, Target has decided to block emails.

Sorry kids, but having gay pride t-shirts is pro-family. Pro-family should mean acceptance and promotion of families, but to the readers of DefendChristians, “Pro-family” means “Pro-Christian ideals of the perfect family unit consisting of a husband, wife 2.5 kids, who go to church and try not to sin or cuss”.  “anti-family” apparently means acceptance of anything other than this Christian ideal.  this isn’t an anti-Christian act, it’s a pro-someone-who-probably-isn’t-Christian act.  I guess that means that at one time, people who were against slavery were also anti-Christian. It’s not “anti-Christian” if some business doesn’t  hate gay people sufficiently enough for you.

I guess defendchristianity would consider the sale of any Christian Jewelry or clothing an anti-atheist act.

Oh yeah and maybe you didn’t notice, but voters have approved same-sex marriage in Maryland and Maine.

9. The “chief diversity officer” of Gallaudet University, Dr. Angela McCaskill, was placed on paid leave and faced punishment and the possibility of loosing her job simply for signing a bill that asks for the issue to be put up for a vote so Maryland citizens can decide whether to accept or reject the redefinition of marriage. 

First of all, she signed an anti-gay marriage petition dated July 12, 2012, in favor of overturning the Civil Marriage Protection Act and denying lesbian and gay people the basic right to marry. She was put on paid administrative leave and then her position was reinstated three months later. You’re complaining that she got, effectively, a 3 month vacation?

I guess if an atheist signed a petition banning Christian marriage and was put on paid administrative leave from her job as diversity officer and then had her job reinstated 3 months later, defendchristianity would consider that an anti-atheist act.

8. A group of peaceful demonstrators were recently assaulted in Little Rock, Arkansas during a rally against Obama-care and it’s abortion mandate. Thankfully this was all caught on camera, along with the man’s license plate number. But the police were slow to act, and seemingly had no interest in finding the aggressor 

This isn’t anti-Christian, it sounds more like anti-conservatism. Sorry that happened. Anyway, how do you know why he assaulted these people? Maybe he was on drugs and thought he was Jesus. All he said was, “Praise be to Mary!” and “Get the hell out of here!” so it sounds like he was probably a Catholic.

I guess if a group of pro-Obamacare demonstrators were attacked by some dude saying, “There is no god!”, defendchristianity would consider that an anti-atheist act.

7. At the Minneapolis Pride Festival, a Christian evangelist was pushed into a “free speech” corner by local officials. Organizers from the parade asked the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board to make a “free speech zone” far away from the festival for people who disagree with homosexuality. The Board agreed, and now all opposition to the sin-fest are exiled. 

A Christian Evangelist who wanted to set up a booth to hand out bibles, and the Organizers of the Pride Festival put his booth with the other anti-pride people in their own section. Makes sense, kinda like how all the food vendors are in one section, and the arts and crafts vendors are in one section, and the bible thumpers are in one section, and the organization booths are in one section. I’m pretty sure Pride Fest has the right to choose where they want to put the booth you’re renting.

I guess if… fuck, I can’t even think of a good one for this.

6. A Florida high school teacher was exposed after they invited a terrorist sympathizer to give pro- Islamic lectures in her classroom over the last three years. The speaker, Hassan Shibly, is on record standing up for the terrorist organization Hezbollah and defended a radical Imam who was killed after shooting at members of the FBI. 

More “anything that isn’t pro-Christian must be anti-Christian” claptrap. The dude just wanted to “teach students about tolerance and clear up common misconceptions about the Muslim faith.” Wow, how anti-christian. How dare we educate them about religions other than Christianity.

I guess if Muslim comes to a school to teach kids about Islam, defendchristianity would consider that an anti-atheist act, too.

5. Over the summer a study came out of the University of Texas, Austin that showed that children of homosexual parents were worse off financially, mentally, and relationship-wise than those with married heterosexual parents. There is a difference between children of married, heterosexual parents and same-sex parents. But the Professor who led the study was placed under an investigation by the University after homosexuals became enraged over the results. 

The study was criticized on it’s scientific merit – that’s what happens in science – your work will get scrutinized. That’s not anti-Christian; that’s how people do science.

I guess if atheist put out a study about how atheists are more intelligent than believers that some other people criticized, defendchristianity would consider that an anti-atheist act.

4.Radical homosexual activist, Dan Savage, made crude insults towards Christian students during a journalism conference for high school students. Savage is famous for producing an anti-bullying campaign that encouraged young people to come out as homosexuals. At the conference Savage engaged in a anti-Christian, Bible-bashing diatribe, hurling insults at the Christian students. 

Big fucking deal. You know how often people on Fox news blame atheists for… basically everything bad in the country? Pretty much every day. Yet Dan Savage saysthe “Bible’s bullsh**” about homosexuality should be ignored — much like how people ignore what the Bible says about slavery and how brides should be stoned to death if they’re not virgins.” – and this is #4 on your list? You guys are a bunch of privileged whiners.

I guess if some pastor at some book conference somewhere told his audience that The God Delusion was a bunch of bullshit, defendchristianity would consider that an anti-atheist act.

3. In Hawaii, a new law can now force churches to make their property available to homosexuals for civil union ceremonies. While the law does protect pastors from having to perform the ceremonies, it does not provide protection for church property. Now, if a church refuses to allow the ceremonies on their property they could be subject to sanctions or fines 

Ugh, why can’t I find a primary source for this? Regardless… can you even read legal documents? Apparently the law states that “churches that perform marriage ceremonies only for their own members don’t have to perform civil union ceremonies. However, churches that allow non-members to marry in the churches are not exempt from the law.”

You know what? You don’t pay taxes, and you rent out your building to non-members for weddings and other functions. That means you shouldn’t be able to discriminate. It’s the law. Suck it up.

I guess defendchristianity would consider is an anti-atheist act if some law somewhere said that the Ethical Society of St. Louis couldn’t ban Christians from renting out their building for a wedding ceremony if they also rented it to other non-members.

2. California legislature voted to stop Christian counselors from providing help for children struggling with same-sex attraction. Now, counselors are unable to even suggest that it’s possible to overcome same-sex attractions. 

The law says, ““Under no circumstances shall a mental health provider engage in sexual orientation change efforts with a patient under 18 years of age, regardless of the willingness of a patient, patient’s parent, guardian, conservator, or other person to authorize such efforts“

The reason this is not allowed is because sexual orientation change efforts have been shown not to work, and to be damaging to people. Why would you want a counselor counseling in a manner which is ineffective?

I thought you Christians wanted schools to stay out of sex-ed. Do you really want someone else teaching your kid about sex?

I guess defendchristianity would consider is an anti-Christian act if counselors were not allowed to try to deconvert patients out of their religious faith.

1. President Obama endorsed homosexual “marriage,” invoking Christ to try to justify his anti-Christ position. In his announcement, Obama said “…when [I] think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated.”

Once again, the “anyone who does not cheer for me must be against me” mentality. The number one anti-Christian act in 2012 is Obama supporting gay marriage? I see…the back of my head, because that’s how far back my eyes just rolled.

…and finally… I guess defendchristianity would consider it an anti-atheist act if… um… okay no, I got nothin’

That’s it? These are the top 10 anti-Christian acts of 2012? What a lush and privileged life you guys lead. It must feel horrible knowing not everyone thinks exactly like you. How do you handle the stress?

Learn more about Christina and follow her @ziztur.

About christinastephens
  • iknklast

    They forgot about the courts making a school in Rhode Island obey the law and remove a prayer. And then the “bully” that made them remove the prayer was allowed to accept donations from supporters for her college fund. And…and…and those evil-atheists made “Evil Little Thing” t-shirts that were essentially LAUGHING at the Christians! How…how…how could they forget such a thing?* My eyes are tearing up just thinking about it!

    *Maybe it’s because deep down inside they realize it isn’t anti-Christian, it’s just pro-American? And they realize we’re laughing at them? Nah…they’re not that insightful. They just forgot.

  • Zinc Avenger (Sarcasm Tags 3.0 Compliant)

    They have an entire year, across an entire nation, to pick from, and this is their evidence of the massive discrimination against Christians?

    The Romans used to throw Christians to the lions to be torn asunder. Today’s Christians would probably drop dead of shock if you were to gently nudge them towards a housecat.

    • RuQu

      Not just across any nation, either. Across the 3rd most populous nation in the world, with 51 major legislative bodies to choose from. That’s a lot of opportunities.

  • Andrew Kohler

    “Oh yeah and maybe you didn’t notice, but voters have approved same-sex marriage in Maryland and Maine.”

    And don’t forget my home state Washington!! We decriminalized pot, too :-) Also, Minnesota rejected a gaybashing amendment. And after this, the Seattle Times ran an article about social conservatives feeling disenfranchised because they were being forced to smoke pot and marry people of the same gender. Only wait: they weren’t being forced to do anything or prevented from doing anything, except for not being allowed to control other people’s lives.

  • Andrew Kohler

    Very well said. If the harrowing examples here are persecution (note that only one, #8, actually involves some being threatened with anything other than words, and as Christina noted this unacceptable action wasn’t even motivated by anti-Christian sentiment), what is denying someone the right to marry the partner of his or her choice? How about having the Pledge of Allegiance and national motto say that your views of religion are wrong? And please note that while we complain about calumnious remarks from the likes of Daniel Lapin and Mike Huckabee and the American Family Association, we don’t whine about them persecuting us; we call them out for being sinister morons. (I think posts on the people named above on this blog will confirm my claim). As JT pointed out recently in his post about that Orthodox patriarch guy in Russia, we don’t say “You have no right to be MEAN to us”; we dismantle their odious remarks and rely on the correctness of our position to speak for itself. Maybe these people should take note that instead of mounting an actual defense for their beliefs, they instead seem only able to cry “persecution” when challenged.

    “It must feel horrible knowing not everyone thinks exactly like you. How do you handle the stress?”

    Ah yes, because the First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of a group that fancies itself the majority to live completely unchallenged by oppositional views.” Oh, wait, actually it gives us all of us the right to say whatever we want, and instead of being happy about having that right these people are spending their lives whining about other people having it, too. The First Amendment is needed precisely to protect us against people like

    One more quibble: if these people are going to say supporting “homosexual ‘marriage’” is an “anti-Christ position,” the least they could do is give some textual support for their claim. Only wait: there isn’t any!

  • Mark

    “. . . atheists are more intelligent than beliefers . . .”

    Was that on purpose?

    • Glodson

      Quote Mining. Don’t do that. Let’s show the full quote.

      I guess if atheist put out a study about how atheists are more intelligent than beliefers that some other people criticized, defendchristianity would consider that an anti-atheist act.

      This is much more mild than the example where anti-gay rhetoric was in a study that was criticized for methodology and bias. At least try to be honest.

      • Mark

        Never mind, you didn’t answer the question and you missed the point.

        • Glodson

          No, there wasn’t a point.

          It was a quote mine. You picked that part of the sentence and presented it out of context. It was present as a replacement for the flawed study in the example.

          If you have a point, make it. Otherwise, what’s the point in even posting?

          • Mark

            Still, no answer.

          • Heather

            Maybe he was just asking if she was saying “beliefers” to be funny or if she’d meant to say “believers”? Being a grammar Nazi myself, I may have pointed that out had someone not said anything first.

          • Mark

            Was it on purpose?

    • Baal

      “That” is vague. Also, I was hoping you’d hit on the criticism of the piece rather than take umbrage at a non-standard usage.

    • Cubist

      Since the letters “f” and “v” are right next to each other on a standard QWERTY keyboard, I’m gonna go with “unintended typing error”…

  • Glodson

    Damn, tag fail in my last post here. Oh well.

    Anyway, I didn’t have high hopes for this list. And it was worse than I had thought.

    Seven showed a very strong anti-gay bent. Hell, I could easily say eight of them could be guilty of that, depending on how I take the “Free Speech” zone one. That one…. “Hey, they made that Christian follow the law!”

    You know what would drive them up the wall? Making a list of the bigotry done in the name of the Church.

    • Andrew Kohler

      Then they’ll say that’s not real Christianity/don’t judge us by our extremists, while continuing to hold us accountable for some guy assaulting people protesting Obamacare (regardless of whether or not this person was even an atheist).

      • Glodson

        I still think it is funny to see Christian Churches who actively fight against gay rights and actively say that gay people are going to hell for who they love try to denounce Westboro as “extremists.” They both have the same message to gay people, and people not apart of their flock, but because Westboro is rude about it, they are extremists.

        And yea… like all atheists are liberals. It isn’t like there are rabid libertarian atheists that hate Obamacare….

        It is even funnier when you realize that part of the problem is that Christians are often used to dogmatic thinking, and so project that quality unto atheists.

  • ah58

    I popped over to their site to see if there were any comments on their article. There’s a comment box but no comments listed. The date of the article is Jan 2, 2013. “Hmmm,” I thought, “that’s interesting.” So I checked a few of their other articles. All the same. A comment box and no comments. Typical Xian censorious behavior.

    I assume they’re just using the “comment” option to harvest email addresses so they can spam you.

  • Baal

    To the first point on Target – In MN, Target gave a pile of cash ~ 2years ago to a dark money group that was trying to get (and they did) the ban on gay marriage into State constitution. When that detail leaked, there was a strong response from the community in the form of a boycott. The company said “oops we didn’t mean it” and has been working to rebuild support of community. They have done well enough that the boycott was called off. Given that bottom line feedback, Target knows where its interest lie. I’m not surprised that Target decided to quit listening to the xtian lobby. I was expensive the last time they did.

    On Dan Savage, he’s not a radical. Radicals demand exemption from recognizing the harms they cause*. Dan doesn’t do that. He did 1) ask xtians to ignore the anti-LGBT parts of the bible exactly the same way they step away from slavery (today at least though there are a few (R) who aren’t on board) or eating shellfish or wearing clothes of 2 materials 2) called a staged xtian protest “cowards and sissies”. He’s since apologized for the name calling.
    His general message is to live and let live and that bullying is bad. Those aren’t radical either and neither are his arguments or words short on nuance.

    *Creating harm may be justified but you need to affirmatively argue for it. You’re otherwise in a position where the ends justifies the means.

  • Anonymous

    Rm -r *

    • Zinc Avenger (Sarcasm Tags 3.0 Compliant)

      Injection attack.

      • Nate Frein

        I wondered what that was…

  • John short

    The moment you draw your last breath, you will instantly become pro Christian, but it will be too late because the heat will be more than 2000 degrees for you to spend eternity.

    • Glodson

      Threats of hell, which is an Argumentum ad baculum. Nicely done, and a complete fallacy. You also assume both the existence of a Christian God, and Hell. Which makes your Christian god supremely evil willing to allow people to be tortured forever because they find the lack of evidence for his existence to be sufficient grounds to dismiss his existence being real.

      Your take, though, is useful as it shows the lack of humanity required buy into hell.

      • Anonymous

        He also makes the assumption that we’ll automatically support all Christians just because we go to hell and don’t get to be with “god.”

        I’d pretty much curse any god who’d do that to people. And the followers of that god.

        • Glodson

          Let’s look at this god.

          From the holy book, we can see that he’s a petty tyrant. He has routinely killed in the legends, maniplulated events to increase bloodshed, bloodthirsty David is called a man after god’s own heart, has archaic rules that have led to the torture and murder of many, set up events as to justify throwing mankind out of his garden, tortures Job to prove a point, kills his own kid to forgive us, uses a major threat in the form of Hell to get us to comply.

          And Heaven is an eternity of worshiping this tyrant. Heaven is implied to be a place of prefect bliss. This sounds horrifyingly boring. Worse, what about your loved ones who is not in Heaven? Well, John Short here seems to be a complete sociopath, so this person likely has no fucks to give about others tortured forever given the way this person crows over the idea. But most functional human beings would be sickened by the thought of their loved ones, or anyone really, being tortured forever. In order for Heaven to be prefect bliss for these people, they either need to be changed in order to remove some of their empathy, or forget their loved ones ever existed.

          The alternative is that this petty tyrant declares them to be tainted, and casts them into Hell as well.

          If Hell exists, we are all fucked.

          • M

            Or not-fucked, as the case may be. If there is a Hell, mutual sexy times and orgies are probably right out.

      • Zinc Avenger (Sarcasm Tags 3.0 Compliant)

        I had to go and look up “argumentum ad baculum”, because my high-school biology education rendered that as “argument from cock-bone“.

        • Glodson

          Well, it is a kind of a stick.

    • Zinc Avenger (Sarcasm Tags 3.0 Compliant)

      More than 2000 degrees? Farenheit, Celsius, or Kelvin?

      But, you know, it’s not really that hot. Brookhaven National Laboratory used the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider to collide gold ions to briefly create a plasma with a temperature 250,000 times hotter than the core of the Sun. It’s a shame your imagination is so limited, but hey, it’s not as if your ilk prize thinking, is it, cupcake?

      Anyway, to return to your point: Wow. Threats of Hell. I assume you will be up in Heaven watching us poor sinners roast? Will you watch us be tortured in an unimaginably horrible way for a few centuries, lean back on your cloud, munch on popcorn, and idly chat with your fellow Heavenly citizens about which team God wants to win the Super Bowl this year? Then go back to watching us get tortured? You’re super compassionate™!

      I couldn’t watch you being tortured and enjoy it. No, that’s what we call “empathy”. Just think what it says about you if you think an eternity of unimaginable torture is something you can watch and cheer on. Because that’s what you’re saying, isn’t it? We deserve eternal torture?

      How long could you watch someone being tortured in real life? An hour? A day? How many months of agonized screams could you endure before you start to empathize and wonder if it’s a good thing? What about a century? That isn’t even a flicker in eternity. Imagine those horrific sex-dungeon cases where a kid is locked up for years by a lunatic and tortured and raped, and now imagine that 24/7 you have a camera feed from that dungeon because the torturer loves you, and He doesn’t love the one being tortured. And just think of the horrific tortures that can’t be used in real life but could in Hell, because there are some things you simply can’t do to a human body without killing it, and Hell has no such limitation! Maybe it wouldn’t bother you in Heaven because they’re sinners and you’re not and somehow magically seeing people tortured won’t bother you. After all, it’s Heaven! But if you need your empathy removed so you can enjoy the non-consensual sadism show in Heaven, what does that say about Heaven? Remember, the torture doesn’t end and you get a front-row seat with popcorn. How long before watching people get tortured either turns into a torture for you as you start to empathize, or the constant sight of torture burns the empathy and humanity from you?

      Or maybe the entire thing is a sham, an absurd threat coupled with a ridiculous promise to ensure obedience in the one world we have evidence for.

      Your threats of Hell are roughly as convincing as threats to send us to Gre’thor, the Klingon afterlife where dishonored warriors are sent after death.