Why they do not call the shooters and haters at reproductive health clinics Christian terrorists is beyond me. Why are they not calling this douche who did two home invasions and murdered a Minnesota legislator a Christian terrorist. That is EXACTLY what they are.
Islam took some bad PR hits because they covered for and ignored the terrorists who were flaunting their religious beliefs as justification for their terrorist mindset; Christianity has the same problem today. They are covering for them and trying to look the other way while they commit heinous crimes in the name of Jesus. The shit is hitting the fan and all Christians are getting sprayed, rightfully so.
Christian Sharia Law is next y'all. What do you think they'll call that?
I've been calling it Christian Nationalist Sharia Law, because that's their goal. (They'll just call it The Law.) They want to force everyone to live by laws governed by the WCN interpretation of the Bible.
I think it's very important for US to call these people radicalized Christian Nationalist extremists and terrorists. Because you're right: People who terrorize folks who are simply going to Planned Parenthood to get birth control pills deserve to be called radicalized Christian Nationalist terrorists.
If only "they" would even come close to living by the rules they demand the less privileged to live by -- that to me is the most infuriating thing. They are intent on continuing and blind to their own hypocrisy. On the other hand -- the nytimes almost always tells the truth. Known for their great (questionable) Puzzle Pages, the best puzzle in the paper is finding the truth buried in a short paragraph deep in the body of a story on page fifteen. It's there. They do still employ competent journalists -- one just needs to get the truth past the editors in this manner, I'll bet.
I am so frustrated by both-sides coverage of political violence. The Guardian has become my go-to mainstream news source because, while not perfect, they do a much better job than most legacy media. The NYT comments are filled with readers calling out the shameful whitewashing and sanewashing, but it continues. Whenever I try to comment pointing out christian extremism or terrorism, it doesn't get posted. For all their whining about being oppressed, conservative Christians remain the only group it's taboo to criticize.
And that's yet another example of how the NYT and other corporate outlets prevent us from calling out radicalized Christian Nationalist religious extremism and terror. You can't even do it in a comment on the NYT site.
Just yesterday I read someone else reporting on how the NYT had such poor coverage of the marches, that this person who had been sticking by them was giving up. I still have a few friends who do not give up on them. I did as soon as the last election cycle started, so none of this surprises me.
While the legacy media influenced by the Trump Kakisocracy supports Christian Nationlist extremists directly, Musk apparently supports Muslim terrorists directly.
These are difficult times. It appears that more and more journalists are leaving legacy media and coming to Substack and Ghost and other such platforms.
Our household gave up on the NYT ages ago. We chose them for this research because of their long history and profile, but I wouldn't be surprised to see even more appalling numbers from other outlets.
I think it is important that you chose the NYT to illustrate coverage because many of my friends refuse to give it up, and thus I see it's insidious influence on their thinking.
See my comment above -- there's more to the nytimes than just their "news" coverage. The "truth" is there -- it's just buried. But also, there is real science, entertainment, healthy living articles. Basically, good diversion from the political shit-show that would otherwise take up all of our mental capacity. And, my paper girl is just too nice and hardworking to abandon. Peace, kids. : )
We subscribed to the weekend paper NYT for years. When we moved to a different spot in the same town (maybe a mile away from our other house), the delivery person refused to drive an extra 2 blocks to give us our paper. It was hilarious. NYT would beg us to keep our sub, but they wouldn’t force their employee to deliver our paper.
Well well, if it isn’t the Paper of Record acting like a monocle-wearing missionary who only sees “extremism” when it wears a hijab. Meanwhile, Christian Nationalists are out here cosplaying as apostles with AR-15s and somehow still getting the “thoughtful traditionalist” treatment.
You’d think after 9,000 Sunday front pages, the Times might notice that white-robed terror isn’t just a Halloween costume in Alabama.
But no, radical Islam gets its own genre. Christian extremism gets a footnote. And somehow, we’re still pretending balance means putting a Bible verse next to a body count without asking who pulled the trigger.
Call it what it is. This is American jihad, rebranded with casseroles and campaign signs.
I've often called Christian Nationalists "The Christian Taliban." If you strip away the religious dogma, their behaviors are the same. It is unconscionable that corporate media outlets refuse to cover one kind of radicalized religious extremism and terror and not the other.
I had a 16 year old FB account permanently suspended for promoting my "overcoming Christian Nationalism meme". I suspect they saw it as attacking Christianity and didn’t want Trump to come down on them. At the core, both these groups have a very hateful God that is less developed than a 5-year-old.
And the platforms protect it, not because they believe in God, but because they fear the algorithmic wrath of his self-appointed marketing team.
They can’t afford to anger the cult that buys pillows, votes in blocks, and cries persecution when someone says “Happy Holidays.”
Pardon me for preaching to the choir here. You’ve been naming this rot far longer and louder than me. I’m just one more voice hollering from the back pew with singed eyebrows.
I'm probably more cynical than you. META has radicalized Christian Nationalist extremists on its leadership team. They actively censor and suspend accounts that don't toe the Christian Nationalist extremist line.
And comment as much as you like. Days like this need a good vent.
Those stats pretty much speak for themselves and I’m getting the message loud and clear: CNs are welcome at best and tolerable, at worst. Every other religion is frowned upon and if you have no religion you’re a spawn of the devil.
The NY Times has become irrelevant, at best. It is the Susan Collins of legacy media.
Good way to put it, Al.
Why they do not call the shooters and haters at reproductive health clinics Christian terrorists is beyond me. Why are they not calling this douche who did two home invasions and murdered a Minnesota legislator a Christian terrorist. That is EXACTLY what they are.
Islam took some bad PR hits because they covered for and ignored the terrorists who were flaunting their religious beliefs as justification for their terrorist mindset; Christianity has the same problem today. They are covering for them and trying to look the other way while they commit heinous crimes in the name of Jesus. The shit is hitting the fan and all Christians are getting sprayed, rightfully so.
Christian Sharia Law is next y'all. What do you think they'll call that?
I've been calling it Christian Nationalist Sharia Law, because that's their goal. (They'll just call it The Law.) They want to force everyone to live by laws governed by the WCN interpretation of the Bible.
I think it's very important for US to call these people radicalized Christian Nationalist extremists and terrorists. Because you're right: People who terrorize folks who are simply going to Planned Parenthood to get birth control pills deserve to be called radicalized Christian Nationalist terrorists.
If only "they" would even come close to living by the rules they demand the less privileged to live by -- that to me is the most infuriating thing. They are intent on continuing and blind to their own hypocrisy. On the other hand -- the nytimes almost always tells the truth. Known for their great (questionable) Puzzle Pages, the best puzzle in the paper is finding the truth buried in a short paragraph deep in the body of a story on page fifteen. It's there. They do still employ competent journalists -- one just needs to get the truth past the editors in this manner, I'll bet.
They'll call it "Obama/Hillary/Biden/Lib's" fault.
Yep.
I am so frustrated by both-sides coverage of political violence. The Guardian has become my go-to mainstream news source because, while not perfect, they do a much better job than most legacy media. The NYT comments are filled with readers calling out the shameful whitewashing and sanewashing, but it continues. Whenever I try to comment pointing out christian extremism or terrorism, it doesn't get posted. For all their whining about being oppressed, conservative Christians remain the only group it's taboo to criticize.
And that's yet another example of how the NYT and other corporate outlets prevent us from calling out radicalized Christian Nationalist religious extremism and terror. You can't even do it in a comment on the NYT site.
Just yesterday I read someone else reporting on how the NYT had such poor coverage of the marches, that this person who had been sticking by them was giving up. I still have a few friends who do not give up on them. I did as soon as the last election cycle started, so none of this surprises me.
While the legacy media influenced by the Trump Kakisocracy supports Christian Nationlist extremists directly, Musk apparently supports Muslim terrorists directly.
https://www.muskwatch.com/p/starlink-turbocharges-lethal-jihadist?r=f0qfn&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
These are difficult times. It appears that more and more journalists are leaving legacy media and coming to Substack and Ghost and other such platforms.
Our household gave up on the NYT ages ago. We chose them for this research because of their long history and profile, but I wouldn't be surprised to see even more appalling numbers from other outlets.
I think it is important that you chose the NYT to illustrate coverage because many of my friends refuse to give it up, and thus I see it's insidious influence on their thinking.
I hope this persuades a few more of them.
See my comment above -- there's more to the nytimes than just their "news" coverage. The "truth" is there -- it's just buried. But also, there is real science, entertainment, healthy living articles. Basically, good diversion from the political shit-show that would otherwise take up all of our mental capacity. And, my paper girl is just too nice and hardworking to abandon. Peace, kids. : )
We subscribed to the weekend paper NYT for years. When we moved to a different spot in the same town (maybe a mile away from our other house), the delivery person refused to drive an extra 2 blocks to give us our paper. It was hilarious. NYT would beg us to keep our sub, but they wouldn’t force their employee to deliver our paper.
Well well, if it isn’t the Paper of Record acting like a monocle-wearing missionary who only sees “extremism” when it wears a hijab. Meanwhile, Christian Nationalists are out here cosplaying as apostles with AR-15s and somehow still getting the “thoughtful traditionalist” treatment.
You’d think after 9,000 Sunday front pages, the Times might notice that white-robed terror isn’t just a Halloween costume in Alabama.
But no, radical Islam gets its own genre. Christian extremism gets a footnote. And somehow, we’re still pretending balance means putting a Bible verse next to a body count without asking who pulled the trigger.
Call it what it is. This is American jihad, rebranded with casseroles and campaign signs.
I've often called Christian Nationalists "The Christian Taliban." If you strip away the religious dogma, their behaviors are the same. It is unconscionable that corporate media outlets refuse to cover one kind of radicalized religious extremism and terror and not the other.
I had a 16 year old FB account permanently suspended for promoting my "overcoming Christian Nationalism meme". I suspect they saw it as attacking Christianity and didn’t want Trump to come down on them. At the core, both these groups have a very hateful God that is less developed than a 5-year-old.
And the platforms protect it, not because they believe in God, but because they fear the algorithmic wrath of his self-appointed marketing team.
They can’t afford to anger the cult that buys pillows, votes in blocks, and cries persecution when someone says “Happy Holidays.”
Pardon me for preaching to the choir here. You’ve been naming this rot far longer and louder than me. I’m just one more voice hollering from the back pew with singed eyebrows.
I'm probably more cynical than you. META has radicalized Christian Nationalist extremists on its leadership team. They actively censor and suspend accounts that don't toe the Christian Nationalist extremist line.
And comment as much as you like. Days like this need a good vent.
Every day is days like this.
I believe it.
Those stats pretty much speak for themselves and I’m getting the message loud and clear: CNs are welcome at best and tolerable, at worst. Every other religion is frowned upon and if you have no religion you’re a spawn of the devil.
That's the message. Absolutely.
Brilliant.