My new favorite definition - CHRISTOPHOBIC.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jimmy_B

Guest
My new favorite definition - CHRISTOPHOBIC.
CHRISTOPHOBIA -
"An Anti-Christian sentiment which is an opposition to some or all Christians, the Christian religion, or the practices and beliefs found in Christianity. Christophobia or Christianophobia are also names for “every form of discrimination and intolerance against Christians”.
**
**

I think I have found something that all us Christians can agree on, Protestants and Catholic. The next time you’re called " _ _ _ _ -Phobic" (you fill in the blank), because you choice to side with Christianity and the teachings of Jesus Christ, now you can asked if that person is Christophobic.

Also, in America the First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitutionis part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion,** impeding the ****free exercise of religion, abridging the f**reedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assembleor prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

In other words, if you are attacked or criticized by someone for exercising or expressing your religious rights, freedoms or beliefs, you are also being attacked and criticized for exercising your Constitution Rights as an American. Therefore, anyone who criticizes you for doing so, might not only be Christophobic, they may also have a problem with American Civil Liberties.

Your Thoughts?
 
Words and titles can sometimes be powerful and empowering. It’s about time that Christians had a word that is a powerful way to defend Christian beliefs, when you are called “_ _ _ _ Phobic”, bigoted, or anything else. We as Christians are entitled to our own religious beliefs without being called names!
Let this be the year that we spread the word - Christophobia.
 
You’re opposed to Abortion, you must not care about a “woman’s right to choose”…
**
No, maybe you’re just Christophobic…
**
You’re opposed to Euthanasia, Human Cloning and Fetal Stem Cell Research you must be opposed to science…
No, maybe you’re just Christophobic…
**
You’re opposed to Homosexual “Marriage”, you must be homophobic…
No, maybe you’re just Christophobic…
 
"No, Tim Tebow is a target of irrational hatred, not because he’s an iffy quarterback at the NFL level, or a creep personally, or an obnoxious, in-your-face, self-righteous proselytizer. He draws hatred because he is an unabashed Christian, whose calmness and decency in the face of his Christophobic detractors drives them crazy. Tim Tebow, in other words, is a prime example of why Christophobia – a neologism first coined by a world-class comparative constitutional law scholar, J.H.H. Weiler, himself an Orthodox Jew – is a serious cultural problem in these United States."…“Whatever we think of Tim Tebow’s theology of salvation, Tim Tebow and serious Catholics are both fated to be targets of the Christophobes.”

More here at the -

The Catholic Education Resource Center
 
Hi Jimmy B, emotion not reason runs the show in public opinions. I cringe every time I hear the word “homophobic”, to the homosexual activists any opposition whatsoever to what the homosexual activists feel they are entitled to is characterized negatively (intolerance, bias, prejudice, bigotry etc.) The reason why homosexuals can enter public schools and say that love is love no matter the gender, and that homosexual unions are different from but equal to heterosexual unions is because they were able to draw sympathy from the public with their victim mentality. Christians/Catholics don’t draw that kind of sympathy, on the contrary. The Catholic Catechism is clear that we should respect homosexuals and treat them with dignity not grant them the dubious privilege to parody the union of a woman and a man in a consecrated marriage, God’s plan for procreation. Same goes for homosexual couples adopting kids. But you’re right, homosexuals aren’t against Christians or Catholics, they’re really against God and would very much like to silence God’s “still small voice”, the Catholic Church. They’re all for diversity, inclusiveness, tolerance but only when it benefits their cause.
 
I hate this modern use of “phobic”. If you’re phobic you fear something, it has nothing to do with disagreement, dislike, or hate.
 
Indeed - words have power. The left has developed an entire Lexicon for the express purpose of inflicting their perspective on those that dare oppose them. The whole concept of Political Correctness is to subjugate those not in power. Russia employed this technique all to well. How the people of America are allowing this to mechanism to rule them is beyond me. I can only speculate that the general Public spends way too much time in front of the TV.

I also do not like the concept of Hate Crimes. This also starts the ball rolling in terms of creating a special class of specially protected groups. A Law is the Law. One size fits all.

I admire your effort to combat this evil. Yes we Christians need to wake up and understand the knife is at our throats figuratively speaking.

I am also thinking that the Church needs to have a weelky Legal Civil Defense collection along with the other collections.
 
Very amusing, and I completely agree than “~phobia” is used as a kneejerk response to any opinion that doesn’t fall in line with C21st “progressive” “liberal” secularist morality.

However, didn’t our Lord tell us to turn the other cheek? Rather than stooping to the level of the sort of people that accuse others of bigotry, don’t we have a duty instead to clearly and carefully explain why our beliefs are true and why Catholic social teaching isn’t bigotry?
 
Callum said:
Very amusing, and I completely agree than “~phobia” is used as a kneejerk response to any opinion that doesn’t fall in line with C21st “progressive” “liberal” secularist morality.

However, didn’t our Lord tell us to turn the other cheek? Rather than stooping to the level of the sort of people that accuse others of bigotry, don’t we have a duty instead to clearly and carefully explain why our beliefs are true and why Catholic social teaching isn’t bigotry?
Click to expand...
Yes we should educate people on the Faith when possible. However I am becoming increasingly aware that it is encumbent upon us to militantly litigate when the oppurtunity arises in the Public Arena at every concievable chance. Too accept public insult in regard to the press is to invite subsequent injury. It behooves us to stand for the Faith.

There is a difference between ‘turning the other cheek’ and cowardice. To assert oneself and Publicly endorse, and fight for one’s Faith is** no** sin.
 
Jimmy_B said:
In other words, if you are attacked or criticized by someone for exercising or expressing your religious rights, freedoms or beliefs, you are also being attacked and criticized for exercising your Constitution Rights as an American. Therefore, anyone who criticizes you for doing so, might not only be Christophobic, they may also have a problem with American Civil Liberties.
Click to expand...
If you weren’t aware, the ACLU defends the civil liberties of Christians frequently.

There’s a webpage dedicated to documenting stories of the ACLU defending the rights of Christians to wear their holy symbols in public, exercise free speech in public, etc.: aclufightsforchristians.com/

But aside from that, which is old news, I think you’re going to have an awfully hard time getting anyone outside your little reality bubble to adopt your newfangled terminology.
 
Nine_Two said:
I hate this modern use of “phobic”. If you’re phobic you fear something, it has nothing to do with disagreement, dislike, or hate.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that is true. The word “xenophobia” means dislike of, or aversion to, strangers.

The modern usage of “-phobic” as simply meaning fear is due to the rise of pop psychology.

As for the OP’s coining of the word Christophobic, I don’t think it works. It implies that Christians are united in their attitudes on the subjects you mention, which I don’t think is true.
 
NonServiam said:
If you weren’t aware, the ACLU defends the civil liberties of Christians frequently.

There’s a webpage dedicated to documenting stories of the ACLU defending the rights of Christians to wear their holy symbols in public, exercise free speech in public, etc.: aclufightsforchristians.com/

But aside from that, which is old news, I think you’re going to have an awfully hard time getting anyone outside your little reality bubble to adopt your newfangled terminology.
Click to expand...
Hello NonServiam,

Thank you for your post. I never said anything about the ACLU. I wrote regarding American Civil Liberties, something we all have and something that should be protected for all Americans, even religious Americans.

The ACLU doesn’t own American Civil Liberties. In fact, many would argue that the only interest they have is to protect the “civil liberties” of the most liberal in America. In my opinion the ACLU has been at war against God for years now but that’s a whole different discussion altogether.

It’s interesting though that you assumed that I was writing about the ACLU and that helps to illustrate the point I made earlier in this thread regarding the power of words and titles.

As far as your comment regarding my own “little reality bubble”… I first heard this term, “Christophobic” while watching TV News and then when I found the article regarding American, professional (NFL) football quarterback - Tim Tebow (link below), I then decided to post this tread.

I didn’t coin the phrase Christophobic, a world-class comparative constitutional law scholar, J.H.H. Weiler, himself an Orthodox Jew did.

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/persecution/pch0290.htm

J.H.H. Weiler

Your thoughts?
 
Jimmy_B said:
Hello NonServiam,

Thank you for your post. I never said anything about the ACLU. I wrote regarding American Civil Liberties, something we all have and something that should be protected for all Americans, even religious Americans.

The ACLU doesn’t own American Civil Liberties. In fact, many would argue that the only interest they have is to protect the “civil liberties” of the most liberal in America. In my opinion the ACLU has been at war against God for years now but that’s a whole different discussion altogether.

It’s interesting though that you assumed that I was writing about the ACLU and that helps to illustrate the point I made earlier in this thread regarding the power of words and titles.

As far as your comment regarding my own “little reality bubble”… I first heard this term, “Christophobic” while watching TV News and then when I found the article regarding American, professional (NFL) football quarterback - Tim Tebow (link below), I then decided to post this tread.

I didn’t coin the phrase Christophobic, a world-class comparative constitutional law scholar, J.H.H. Weiler, himself an Orthodox Jew did.

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/persecution/pch0290.htm

J.H.H. Weiler

Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
An internet search for the word “christophobia” shows about 14,200 results… and it’s mentioned here under “Anti-Christian sentiment” on an online, free encyclopedia site. Apparently 14,200 other people and the web site, cited are also living in their own “little reality bubble”. It would be interesting to see what that same internet search reveals a year or so from now.
  • I’m “just the messenger” people… I didn’t come up with this message regarding Christophobia.
Your thoughts?
 
Dale_M said:
I don’t think that is true. The word “xenophobia” means dislike of, or aversion to, strangers.

The modern usage of “-phobic” as simply meaning fear is due to the rise of pop psychology.

As for the OP’s coining of the word Christophobic, I don’t think it works. It implies that Christians are united in their attitudes on the subjects you mention, which I don’t think is true.
Click to expand...
Xenophobic originally meant an active fear and distrust of foreigners. It was quite likely dumbed down by the same process that dumbed down the use of “phobic”.

“Bigot” is a much better word for anti-Christian progressives anyway.
 
Jimmy_B said:
My new favorite definition - CHRISTOPHOBIC.
CHRISTOPHOBIA -
"An Anti-Christian sentiment which is an opposition to some or all Christians, the Christian religion, or the practices and beliefs found in Christianity. Christophobia or Christianophobia are also names for “every form of discrimination and intolerance against Christians”.
**
**

I think I have found something that all us Christians can agree on, Protestants and Catholic. The next time you’re called " _ _ _ _ -Phobic" (you fill in the blank), because you choice to side with Christianity and the teachings of Jesus Christ, now you can asked if that person is Christophobic.

Also, in America the First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitutionis part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion,** impeding the ****free exercise of religion, abridging the f**reedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assembleor prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

In other words, if you are attacked or criticized by someone for exercising or expressing your religious rights, freedoms or beliefs, you are also being attacked and criticized for exercising your Constitution Rights as an American. Therefore, anyone who criticizes you for doing so, might not only be Christophobic, they may also have a problem with American Civil Liberties.

Your Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Hmmm, “christophobama” 😃

Jon
 
NonServiam said:
If you weren’t aware, the ACLU defends the civil liberties of Christians frequently.

There’s a webpage dedicated to documenting stories of the ACLU defending the rights of Christians to wear their holy symbols in public, exercise free speech in public, etc.: aclufightsforchristians.com/

But aside from that, which is old news, I think you’re going to have an awfully hard time getting anyone outside your little reality bubble to adopt your newfangled terminology.
Click to expand...
Very respectful. “Non serviam” was the infamous phrase pronounced by Lucifer, it’s awesome you thought it was appropriate as a username on a Catholic site!
 
Robertanthony said:
Hi Jimmy B, emotion not reason runs the show in public opinions. I cringe every time I hear the word “homophobic”, to the homosexual activists any opposition whatsoever to what the homosexual activists feel they are entitled to is characterized negatively (intolerance, bias, prejudice, bigotry etc.) The reason why homosexuals can enter public schools and say that love is love no matter the gender, and that homosexual unions are different from but equal to heterosexual unions is because they were able to draw sympathy from the public with their victim mentality. Christians/Catholics don’t draw that kind of sympathy, on the contrary. The Catholic Catechism is clear that we should respect homosexuals and treat them with dignity not grant them the dubious privilege to parody the union of a woman and a man in a consecrated marriage, God’s plan for procreation. Same goes for homosexual couples adopting kids. But you’re right, homosexuals aren’t against Christians or Catholics, they’re really against God and would very much like to silence God’s “still small voice”, the Catholic Church. They’re all for diversity, inclusiveness, tolerance but only when it benefits their cause.
Click to expand...
 
Nimzovik said:
Indeed - words have power. The left has developed an entire Lexicon for the express purpose of inflicting their perspective on those that dare oppose them. The whole concept of Political Correctness is to subjugate those not in power. Russia employed this technique all to well. How the people of America are allowing this to mechanism to rule them is beyond me. I can only speculate that the general Public spends way too much time in front of the TV.

I also do not like the concept of Hate Crimes. This also starts the ball rolling in terms of creating a special class of specially protected groups. A Law is the Law. One size fits all.

I admire your effort to combat this evil. Yes we Christians need to wake up and understand the knife is at our throats figuratively speaking.

I am also thinking that the Church needs to have a weelky Legal Civil Defense collection along with the other collections.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top