Calbeck wrote:And which of these have become a matter of serious social contention? In other words, WHY would anyone burn a church down, ASIDE from the fact that it represents a specific religion? As I said before, I can think of a few reasons, but all of them put together would likely amount to a minority of burnings.
Are you seriously suggesting that race and class aren't
a matter of serious social contention? We have three hundred a year to explain, itself a spurious number, the source of which was never cited. If a dozen were becuase of unrelated arson by pyromania, off the top of my head, that's 4% right there. Combining our reasons (which surprises me that you discount all of my contributions in your 'very short list' to come up with something significantly less short), we have, thus far:
Hatred of individuals connected to church
Disagreement with policy
Disagreement with theology/dogma
Disagreement with policy/theology/dogma of organization that uses the church
No, I said from an investigative standpoint. And, in fact, we have not yet addressed whether or not anti-abortion attacks are indeed the "most common cause" of abortion clinic burnings.
Are these non-legal investigations? Illegal investigations? A band of roving meddling teenagers with an anthropomorphic object/animal who can't speak quite right?
And, while we techinically haven't, I did mention that the disparance between two chruches is greater than the disprance between two abortion clinics, which reduces the amount of reasons one would torch a clinic by comparison. Namely, several points on the list (racism, theology/dogma) would be eliminated, and several (policy, anti-Christian, anti-religion) would have to be combined into a hatred of abortion.
And since that is precisely what is being said, thank you.
Most church burnings do in fact incorporate parallel acts of vandalism, to include anti-Christian phrases. Mind you, I do not discount the possibility of fraud in at least some of these cases, but the fact remains that the apparent motive which drives this core of burnings does indeed appear to be irrational hatred of Christianity.
Where is the source for this? It's hard to debate things that are stated as fact and yet aren't backed up. This is similair to the question about the original number, which has yet to be answered.
First, hate remains hate whether it is "proportionate" or not. Indeed, given that the ultimate issue Ralph was addressing had to do with Christianity's supposed "favored religion" status in America, mere parity alone would tend to prove his point.
That hate exists was not the point; actually, it's the opposite
of the point: Hate exists disproportionate to Christianity in comparison to other religions, races, etc., and that it's being swept under the rug by a major anti-Christian cartel that exists in the modern media/the internet/society at large/whatever is convenient. Saying that you can't compare in refutation of what was, by origin, a comparison, is incredibly specious.
How does parity prove his point? If found equal, his point of disproportion is proven wrong
, not right. So, what if we find that twice as many mosques are burned as churches? How would this prove RH right
, even by the furthest stretch of the imagination?
Second, Judaism is a tiny yet vocal and highly-recognized religion in America. A SINGLE attack on a synagogue would be enough to account for "parity" with at least a hundred churches. Does that mean we discount a hundred church burnings because we do not find a synagogue to match?
I'm finding it difficult to understand exaclty what you're trying to say.
We're talking about proportion, so let's use a basic hypothetical model to try and clear this up: You're proposing that a hundred churches are equal to a synogogue. This would mean that there are a hundred Chrisitian churches for every synagogue in America. Let's assume that there are a similiair number of mosques. So let's say there are five hundred churches, five synogues, and five mosques. Here, of course, we'd have to split 'Churches' into the Catholics, Protestants, and Eastern Orthodox. And, then again, we'd have to split the Protestants into Anabaptist, Anglican / Episcopal, Baptist, Evangelicalism, Lutheran, Methodist / Wesleyan and the Holiness movement, Pentecostal and Charismatic, Quakerism, Reformed/Congregational /Presbyterian, Restoration movement, Seventh-Day Adventists, and Non-denominational, among others. And we'd have to get the Greek Orthodox from the Eastern Orthodox. And then some.
So we have five hundred churches, itself split into an unknown and possibly unknowable amount of ways, and five synogogues and five mosques. I suppose we could split the mosques into Sunni and Shi'a, but there aren't all that many Sunni's in America, so it'd be like asking for Oriental orthodox in the Chrisitan split. You could, however, argue for a split between Hasidic, Orthodox, and Modern Judaism. But that'd be about 1-2-2 split, abouts.
So, if one synagogue and one hundred churches get burned, that would be even, thus disproving RHJ's original idea of disproportion. But could one really believe the one hundred churches were burned down because somebody hated every single one of these divisions, and not for one hundred different reasons? Is it really even likely that a hundred different churches were burned down for one reason, in comparison to one mosque?
No, if we find that one hundred churches were burned and no mosques or synagogues, then the evidence would be much more in favor of your supposition. That you dodge this idea is telling, to say the least.
I would have hoped to say something meaninful, or possible inciteful. But, alas.
How goes the world today? From right to left or left to right? Perhaps it runs round mad reels, turning in on itself only at long last to blow away with the leaves and gutter-trash.
How goes the world today? Top to Bottom or Bottom to Top? Perhaps it will rise high enough so that it may see the back of its own head, in a maddening tunnel of infinity.
How goes the world today? Clockwise or Counter? Perhaps it will spin itself mad, curling a spring-from into endlessness.
Or maybe, today, it will just stop.