ball of confusion
I recently ran across ( this chain e-mail. )
It was in the blog of someone who characterized it as “racist” (among other adjectives). Now, I have no sympathy whatsoever for whoever wrote the chain e-mail, I think s/he has no understanding of the concept of religious freedom upon which this nation is based and managed to miss the whole point of the bill of rights. (You can read a really good rebuttal of this kind of thing, written by an evangelical Christian (which I think makes it even more powerful), here: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46828.)
That said, I can’t figure out why the chain e-mail is *racist*, specifically. As far as I can tell, it doesn't even allude to race. As I commented in the blog where I found it:
“Maybe it’s just terminology — I use “racist” pretty narrowly to describe ethnic bias. To me, religion is a separate category from ethnicity. And the chain e-mail is serious religious bigotry, no doubt — but I’ve read it more than once, and while it conflates Christian and American, I don’t see where it conflates white with Christian, or white with American. …
“It wouldn’t surprise me if the authors of the e-mail do, in fact, think that American=white or white=Christian. But they don’t actually *say* that. Does reading it as if they do — making a leap that they have avoided making — inadvertently *reinforce* the idea that American=white and white=Christian?”
I invited the blogger to elaborate on why she felt it was racist, but so far she has declined to do so (as she is absolutely entitled to, it’s her blog, not mine). In the meantime, I am still confused about exactly how this chain e-mail is racist (as opposed to all the other ways in which it is undeniably offensive).
Y’all are all smart, can someone explain it to me (preferably in small words)?
It was in the blog of someone who characterized it as “racist” (among other adjectives). Now, I have no sympathy whatsoever for whoever wrote the chain e-mail, I think s/he has no understanding of the concept of religious freedom upon which this nation is based and managed to miss the whole point of the bill of rights. (You can read a really good rebuttal of this kind of thing, written by an evangelical Christian (which I think makes it even more powerful), here: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46828.)
That said, I can’t figure out why the chain e-mail is *racist*, specifically. As far as I can tell, it doesn't even allude to race. As I commented in the blog where I found it:
“Maybe it’s just terminology — I use “racist” pretty narrowly to describe ethnic bias. To me, religion is a separate category from ethnicity. And the chain e-mail is serious religious bigotry, no doubt — but I’ve read it more than once, and while it conflates Christian and American, I don’t see where it conflates white with Christian, or white with American. …
“It wouldn’t surprise me if the authors of the e-mail do, in fact, think that American=white or white=Christian. But they don’t actually *say* that. Does reading it as if they do — making a leap that they have avoided making — inadvertently *reinforce* the idea that American=white and white=Christian?”
I invited the blogger to elaborate on why she felt it was racist, but so far she has declined to do so (as she is absolutely entitled to, it’s her blog, not mine). In the meantime, I am still confused about exactly how this chain e-mail is racist (as opposed to all the other ways in which it is undeniably offensive).
Y’all are all smart, can someone explain it to me (preferably in small words)?