[Detector]

First I want to say while this thread was inspired by various posts/posters it in no way targets a specific post or poster(s). The objective of this thread is to promote thought noting more.

Why is it nothing warrants a swifter retaliation response than one attacking religion or politics? Now religion and can understand because its like attacking ones moral values and beliefs which is personal, but politics? Whats up here? How can two so different subjects trigger the same defensive, and often hot, response?

First lets look at religion. This one I can easily speak of from experience having been drawn into many hot religious topics. Why is this topic so hard to manage without slipping into attacks on posters personally? This should be pretty easy to understand but for those atheists, the answer may be shadowed from view making it hard to understand. Then it could also be they know very well what they do, but realize the weakness is in having an unfair advantage in an unarmed opponent.

I like to think myself fairly thick skinned. Not so much by choice as by fire. Some of you long time posters may remember years back when my family and I were subject to uncalled for personal attacks over at DCT. I chose not to whine to the webmaster but instead waited for the Cavalry in the form of the Admin or fellow posters which never arrived. I assumed either the attackers were friends of the admin and posters, or 'personal attacks' is subject to the poster being attacked. In any case I took my knocks and the results was a thicker hide.

In religion there seems to be, for some, open grounds for attacks were the attacked's only form of defense is either to suck it up and take the knocks, or retaliate. So how does one retaliate against someone who has no religion? A personal attack is bound to be the result at which point the attacked screams foul and sets back content in their bubble as the feathers fly against the poster for a personal attack.

Religion, for me, has little to do with what supposedly happened in the past, and every thing to do with the present. I view religion as the adopted set of moral values or rules we all set for ourselves. As such if you think about it, then all of us have a form of religion and thus subject to attack. I found this out the few times I responded to an attack on my religion with an equal attack on those that think themselves as non religious, only to find out they also have a soft spot in personal beliefs they just don't think of it as a religion.

Because of my exposure to the Christian values while growing up and because they still closely fit my personal beliefs I call myself a Christian. Much like calling myself a Republican because their values seem to better fit my own. As a Christian, when some one attacks the Christian faith directly I tend to take it as a personal attack because they are in fact attacking my values and beliefs, and find myself wanting to, and often responding in kind. I soon find myself to be tagged the bad guy of the thread although I feel I was personally attacked first. I can call a Christian whatever I want but I best choose my words very carefully when talking about others. Although I see no difference.

The Christian persecution: Often I see references to the crusades when attacking Christians, and comparing them to Hitler. Clearly nothing but a personal attack because it has no value as anything else. Hitlers attempt to conquer the world was only 60 years ago the crusades happened a thousand years ago. HELLO! most people still wiped their butts with their hands a thousand years ago. Besides, there isn't a one of you non Christians that can claim your ancestors didn't kill thousands of innocent people in the name of conquest. At least the Christians, depending on your belief of course, had the idea to rid the earth of sin not just killing to take their stuff.

To be continued: Feel free to respond.