this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2025
840 points (99.1% liked)

Greentext

5045 readers
1721 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 25 points 5 days ago

Weird story time: My great grandfather was obviously the source of the autism in our family line. Man could not read social subtext to save his life. He felt driven to find some sort to group to belong to that had set meetings and such. For a 5 year span, he joined, like, everyone. Elks, masons, you name it. When we were helping him clean out his house in the early 90s we found a KKK uniform. We asked about it. Apparently it was billed as a men’s group and they just had costumes made. He went along with it for a few meeting and then the extracurriculars were discussed at his last meeting. He finally got the point of it. He got out. We had his calendar book from that year(and every year from the 30s-retirement) and we saw the date where he started crossing out the KKK meeting times.

Why he kept it? It was the best work his wife had ever done.

Several years later I asked my grandfather if his dad was racist. Basically, he said that his dad had gotten in trouble for not understanding the racist, unwritten policies he was supposed to enforce and kept asking why, as there was no logic to them.

[–] [email protected] 80 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (4 children)

Yes. Yes they are. Also, I think a "radical Christian" would be the opposite of the KKK.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 6 days ago (20 children)

I guess I'm a radical Christian then.

I believe Jesus taught tolerance and love, so I try to treat others with tolerance and love. And not fake love like "thoughts and prayers," but real love, which comes with action.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 6 days ago (1 children)

John Brown was a radical Christian, and he's okay in my book.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Pretty telling that he's not mentioned in history books. I didn't learn anything about him until well into adulthood.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (5 children)

It's always funny when I hear this, currently teaching ELA in Florida of all places. So, we all heard of the cuts to education, stop teaching certain bits of history (please fill me in on the correct term, I currently remember trump or Desantis' buzzwords about not teaching slaves being enslaved and them being "indentured" and "learning valuable skills!" the cunt.)

Anyway, our current section for this lesson plan is on Harriet Tubman, underground railroad, teaching the kids how to get characterization from the text and follow context clues, stuff like that. John Brown is mentioned, and in my counties' plans is a side lesson on John Brown, what he did, which works better for me since I should be teaching history regardless. I'm telling these kids all about him, what he believes in, and how raiding that armory is what caused the federal government to come crashing down on him, all the crazy radical badass things this man did.

Now, as I'm teaching these things, in the back of my head I'm thinking "This is surprising.... Isn't this supposed to be forbidden knowledge right know? What got cut?" Anyway, sorry for the walk of text. Slightly drunk, figured it fit here.

Edit: Forgot to mention, I am in a VERY fucking red part of Florida. Lifted white trucks, truck nuts, punisher stickers over blue line American flags, the fuckin works. You guys should see bike week, you'd swear it was the second coming of the führer.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago

The people checking are too dumb to have him tagged as someone to remove? That has to be the reason.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I feel like "tolerance" is the wrong word here. If you instead strive for "compassion" you'd be closer to the mark.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 days ago (1 children)

When I think of tolerance, I think of how Jesus dealt with sinners. He didn't go around pointing out others' mistakes, instead he helped any who came to him. He even asked his father to forgive the people that killed him, saying they didn't know what they were doing.

To me, tolerance doesn't mean ignoring people who live differently, it means quite the opposite: look past the sin and love people for the rest of who they are. Getting into compassion, that also means championing causes that you disagree with, but that help your sinner friends and don't hurt you.

For example, I fully support legalizing the following:

  • gay marriage - I'll even include polyamorous marriage (assuming consent)
  • drugs - any restrictions should merely protect those who don't use it (e.g. BAC limits for driving)
  • prostitution
  • gambling

I'm morally opposed to each of those, but that only applies to my own actions, and others choosing to do those doesn't hurt me. If someone else makes a different decision, that's not my business and I'll continue loving them for who they are. Banning those things causes harm, and legalizing them makes people happy without hurting me, so why should I oppose?

Likewise, a homeless person addicted to drugs isn't any less deserving of love than my local religious leader. Jesus gave two commandments:

  1. Love God
  2. Love neighbor as yourself

He didn't say, "love saints more than sinners," in fact he said we shouldn't judge others at all. So if I love my religious leader and not the homeless person, I need to repent. And I show that love through action (i.e. compassion), otherwise it's just lip-service and I'm no better than the Pharisees that showed piety in public but were incredibly intolerant.

Tolerance without commission isn't love just like faith without works is dead.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Sure, but also "love the sinner, hate the sin." Compassion still feels more appropriate.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Also, I think a “radical Christian” would be the opposite of the KKK.

A millennium and a half of Christianity would say otherwise.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago

Yeah they are reactionary christians. A radical christian would be like the Catholic Workers and Dorothy Day, or the Fasci Siciliani, or Leo Tolstoy

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago

Especially since radical doesn't mean extremist, but seeking the root. You want to know what a radical Christian looks like? MLK. Arguing for equality to be achieved through peaceful means but a positive peace that includes justice.

The kkk are just positive Christians, but unwilling to call themselves that because that would imply that they might be g*rmans and they ain't no stinking deutschbag

[–] [email protected] 55 points 1 week ago (3 children)

They are stupid, yes, but also are against everything's in the Bible so they don't actually care about Christianity.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago

Y'all'quaeda

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

IIRC he also said that jews could be christians while keeping their jewish traditions, which is worse for those fake christians.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 34 points 6 days ago

Without a doubt

[–] [email protected] 27 points 6 days ago (1 children)

They were Protestants and hated Catholics. Still doesn't make sense.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I mean I hate everything about catholicism too. I mean I hate all religions, but catholicism specifically. But I don't burn their symbols. I just avoid any circumstance I would have to be exposed to of it.

But yeah, still doesn't make sense to burn a symbol you share with the people you hate. This is just their silent screams of self hatred. Not loud enough to drown out the "everything besides white people" hatred, but still somehow present. I guess they can't even like themselves. Too busy hating.

Gotta get that hate-love ratio under control.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

What makes you hate catholics specifically over other religions?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago

Not the regular people. I've got no problem with them. Known several, never had any issues.

This is more of on the scale of a "big pharma" kinda thing. I think the biggest benefit that idiotic system could ever have to have any hope of getting even half way back to breaking even on their good/bad balance is completely dissolving and actually donating their billions of dollars to something besides buying a new golden throne, and secondly, to execute every priest in their ranks who did the CSA.

Then there's the whole spreading their beliefs by force thing.

I mean they probably all have secrets that are terrible, but that group in particular hasn't been good, ever.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 6 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 6 days ago (8 children)

Don't wanna argue with the premises here. But isn't Christianity also a bit stupid for praying towards the instrument that's been used to torture and kill their leader.

Just imagine you are Jesus and come into a modern church. You'd run away screaming with all those crosses triggering your PTSD. And that's before you've even heard of all the atrocities they're doing there in your name.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Not just their leader, early christians were violently prosecuted, they turned their symbol of oppression into the symbol of their faith in an ultimate act of defiance as well as love and forgiveness.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Sacrifice is a big thing in Christianity, the cross is the symbol of the biggest sacrifice that God did for us, on Christianity canon.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Totally. And it really makes sense when you think about it...

God is all-powerful, all-knowing and all-loving and he created man in his own image... And then doomed them all to an eternity of suffering because... reasons.

God was known for being petty and jealous, so he forced humans to destroy their food to prove that they love him.

God, being all powerful, I guess changed his mind about wanting people to burn for eternity, so being the all-powerful, all-loving being that he is, he changed his mind and deleted hell so that all humans could enjoy eternity with him... LOL jk.

No, instead he split himself into another being and became a human with the sole purpose of being murdered in 30 years so that humans didn't have to burn for eternity...? Actually, I kind of lose the thread at this point. It's never been clear to me why an all-powerful god would need to create such a bizarre, convoluted, byzantine means for redemption when he could have just snapped his fingers and made it all go away.

But all of that makes sense when you think about it as just another sacrifice to prove to god that you love him, and our rudimentary understanding of symbolism is all we need to prove this. After all, there's no need to read any other books, therefore this has to be the deepest, most profound thing ever written. I mean holy shit, Jesus is the "lamb of god" that needed to be sacrificed! Just like when we burned our food! Wow, talk about deep connections. No human could ever think up such an amazing story with such deep symbolism!

Anyway... I lost my train of thought.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 days ago (6 children)

As a Christian, I've always found that stupid, so I don't do that and don't attend churches that do. The second commandments says:

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.

I'm pretty sure a cross counts here. I also believe Jesus taught a higher law, meaning the 10 commandments are outdated, and the only thing Jesus said to do to remember him is breaking and sharing bread and sharing wine (Communion in many churches). That's it, that and "feed my sheep" (teach and help others).

I don't get where everyone is getting the "wear and rub a crucifix for luck" idea. A silent prayer should be a lot more effective than directly violating the second commandment.

I choose to remember Jesus' life. His death was an event, his life was full of teaching and wisdom, so I focus on how he treated others instead of how others treated him.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago

The core of Christianity is originally the redemption, not the threat that necessitates it and often is more prominent.

The cross is a symbol of the sacrifice made to redeem people from the threat of hell. More relevant here is that sin separates humans from God, and through that sacrifice, the connection is restored. It is a catalyst of redemption and reunion. In that sense, they don't so much pray towards an implement of torture as an implement of liberation, salvation and mercy.

Given that those are hard things to put in a visual, tangible form and that humans tend to place a lot of value in visual, tangible representations, it's basically the simplest symbol you could come up with as a nascent cult.

It's not the only symbol, and particularly during the rise of the Roman church, you'll note that icons of saints become very common too. Some places will even have the Crucifix feature the crucified Jesus as well, to drive home the point about sacrifice and gratitude.

Protestants later held that the worship of saints was tantamount to idolatry and did away with them again, leaving just the core of the message of redemption. There was in some places a conscious choice to pick the "empty" cross rather than the crucified saviour as a symbol that he is no longer dead.

All in all, given his divine wisdom and love for metaphors and similes, I'd think Jesus would understand the point of the cross...

...then proceed to trash the place out of rage over the waste of money and effort that went into gaudy churches and gold-embroidered robes instead of helping the sick and poor.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'm not Christian but isn't it just very emblematic of the Christian victim complex? Praying towards the instrument of your faith's victimisation is sort of like taking the power back from that symbol and acknowledging the victimisation your belief system has gone through... As far as I can understand it at least 😂

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t the democrats start the KKK and were they not as religious? Or is there something else?

Also does modern kkk still burn crosses?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

I don't know what to tell you if that was the first thing that tipped you off.

load more comments
view more: next ›