There is no Christian dominated country in existence today that demands you be the same faith before having the right to rule....except the Vatican. Even so, for every one you mention, I can mention five more.
You can’t say the same about Muslim countries, though. Being Muslim is a requirement to rule in many of them. If any major Christian country did this today, the world would catch on fire.
You can’t mention five misogynistic and religiously restrictive countries without three of them being Islamic.
You have the luxury today of thinking “forcing” is when a Christian walks up to you and tries to preach. You’re cozy in America not knowing how actually forcing works. If you wanna know what forcing looks like, start with Nigeria and the Middle East religious minorities.
When you're kidnapped for your faith, your family is killed, your entire community is ransacked and you're held at gunpoint to change religion, while it's being broadcasted for the world to see, maybe then you'll know what FORCING actually looks like
I’d be an idiot to ignore that. My argument isn’t “it never happened.” It’s about adding nuance. The societies and communities that exist today in most Christian majority countries don’t have institutional power or laws in place that prohibits changing religion.
It did happen historically. YES. My issue is why people are more motivated to write long paragraphs about “forcing” like they’re actively being oppressed by Christian majority nations (in reference to their religion) right now, while ignoring countries built by their own faith that are much worse to religious minorities today.
The conversation about not forcing gay people or orchestrating against them is still actively happening even within Christian circles in Christian majority countries. The fact that it’s even a topic to discuss should tell you, it's not black and white. A Christian doesn't have to become gay or drop his faith to know treating someone with hate is wrong. That's why the conversation exists in the first place.
The same can’t be said for many other heavily religious countries. Some of the first and only countries to approve gay rights/marriage are still Christian majority nations today. And no this is not me trying to point at a "bigger" bad.
But at the very least, keep your outrage consistent.
That was an oversight on my part. But it's too late to take back what I said so....
The point I was making is that, as of today, some people’s definition of “forcing” religion is a pastor approaching them to preach or seeing a church banner.
It ticks me off when people who make this criticism come from faiths with similar historical backgrounds and active, far worse oppression today..... both against women and in forcing religion in general.
I agree that authoritarianism should be condemned. Faith is supposed to be something someone willingly chooses, not something forced on others. A lot of the political moves made by the “Christian” side in different countries are questionable by the standards of the religion itself.
@UnequivocallyB@OGButthorn@NobodyIn4K Six of them should be basic human morality.
Are we talking about the same commandants or are you larping the Bible.
Also are you deliberately ignoring the last part of my comment??
@maozedongIII@CJames1602@NobodyIn4K If you assumed that my message which could have been refined to contain less grammar errors and mistakes, was written by AI, then I can only assume that the person I'm speaking to isn't particularly bright . I'm sorry 💔
First off, I never said anything about gay people.
Secondly, this specific topic is not black and white.
I won't be giving an argument for something I don't support or something I do support as it's irrelevant to the conversation here.
If it makes you feel better, here's a link to wiki on what you asked about.
I'm tired of typing long paragraphs.
https://t.co/Z9hMPzSWdj
@maozedongIII@CJames1602@NobodyIn4K Then just because you're uneducated and can't form coherent sentences with coming off as a retard, does not mean I'm using AI.
Are the school in America only for shooting??
@maozedongIII@CJames1602@NobodyIn4K AI is when your grandparents were killed by Islamic terrorists so you did a lot of digging into the religion history, in relation with your faith. Go off I guess
You’re treating a few examples of relative coexistence like they disprove the broader pattern. Historically, non Muslims under Muslim rule were in some cases allowed to live and practice their religion, but they were not equal. They paid the "jiizya" tax, faced restrictions on public worship, and lived under secondclass legal status(Even TODAY). That is not the same as full religious freedom.
In Nigeria the population is roughly 50/50, yet there are still large terrorist groups that target Christians for killing and forced coercion. One or a few peaceful places don’t erase that. I can point to dozens of European or historically Christian countries where Muslims may face social hostility, but they are not systematically blocked from holding office or practicing openly. Muslims could even faced physical harm (which is not something to be taken lightly) but that's usually a member of society doing it, NOT the government, the people and the entire system all at once.
The same cannot be said for a good majority of Muslim dominant countries though.
Bringing up Egypt is actually a detriment to your point. Even if they aren’t actively forcing conversions, the legal foundation of the state is explicitly Islamic.....Islam is the state religion and Sharia is the main source of legislation.
Now apply the same logic to any majority Christian country today that wants to make the Bible, the foundation of its laws and you’ll all call that imposing religion. Quit selective outrage and keep the same energy for everyone #GlassHouse