There’s a difference between judging people on a category they don’t choose vs. a set of beliefs they choose to follow.
If I tried to claim all brown-eyed people are evil, I’d be bigoted because eye color does not determine who you are as a person. But if I claimed that all members of the Puppy Kickers Club are evil because they literally believe in kicking puppies and require doing so frequently as a requirement for membership, then my claim is valid.
Isn’t that a distinction without a difference? If it’s acceptable to judge people based on group membership because it aligns with behavior, people will ascribe abhorrent behavior to group membership. “Oh, you’re a (insert religious group here)? Those people literally rape children!”
Are you a member of a religious group where raping children is a core belief? Yeah, you’re a bigot if you’re making false claims about religion, but what about true claims?
Yes, we should hold people accountable for their religion if their religion is based around doing shitty things. If someone is literally a member of the Westboro Baptist Church, they are literally supporting a hate group by virtue of being a member. Regardless of whether they are literally holding a “God hates fags” sign in that moment, they’ve given time, money, and support to those who do and are directly culpable for that behavior as long as they remain a member.
Again, if your religion revolves around kicking puppies, then you are to blame for kicking puppies. If you don’t want to be associated with puppy kicking, don’t literally make it your religion.
There’s a difference between judging people on a category they don’t choose vs. a set of beliefs they choose to follow.
If I tried to claim all brown-eyed people are evil, I’d be bigoted because eye color does not determine who you are as a person. But if I claimed that all members of the Puppy Kickers Club are evil because they literally believe in kicking puppies and require doing so frequently as a requirement for membership, then my claim is valid.
Isn’t that a distinction without a difference? If it’s acceptable to judge people based on group membership because it aligns with behavior, people will ascribe abhorrent behavior to group membership. “Oh, you’re a (insert religious group here)? Those people literally rape children!”
Are you a member of a religious group where raping children is a core belief? Yeah, you’re a bigot if you’re making false claims about religion, but what about true claims?
Yes, we should hold people accountable for their religion if their religion is based around doing shitty things. If someone is literally a member of the Westboro Baptist Church, they are literally supporting a hate group by virtue of being a member. Regardless of whether they are literally holding a “God hates fags” sign in that moment, they’ve given time, money, and support to those who do and are directly culpable for that behavior as long as they remain a member.
Again, if your religion revolves around kicking puppies, then you are to blame for kicking puppies. If you don’t want to be associated with puppy kicking, don’t literally make it your religion.