Which is more dangerous?

[kentuck]

Someone waving a flag and preaching the virtues of a bygone era ?

Or someone waving the Bible and preaching the commands and "shall nots" of God Almighty?

In other words, which is more dangerous, a racist fanatic or a religious fanatic?

Or do you think they are equally dangerous??

[Vinca]

1. They're usually one and the same.

[NRaleighLiberal]

2. Equally dangerous and often they intersect.

[hrmjustin]

3. Both suck.

[NRaleighLiberal]

5. Happy Fourth, friend!

[hrmjustin]

7. You too. I want those tomatoes.

[cwydro]

4. Sigh.

[salib]

6. False equivalence.

[kentuck]

10. How so?

???

[salib]

12. You said.

Someone waving a flag and preaching the virtues of a bygone era = a racist fanatic.

How is that the same?

[kentuck]

14. Because many of them are racists.

And they wave the Confederate flag to promote their cause.

Just as many will wave the Bible, or the Koran, or any "holy" book, and proclaim that they have the word directly from God...

Which is more dangerous? Personally, I think it is those that believe they have the right to punish others in God's name...

[salib]

16. Then you should have added "confederate flag" to your original example.

Then it would no longer be a false equivalency.

[kentuck]

20. It doesn't matter which flag it is...

It can be any flag.

[salib]

21. I think you are missing the point.

Or maybe I am missing what you actually believe. Are you saying that any flag indicates racism?

My point about a false equivalency is that your original post made it clear that you were talking about the "bible", etc. when you then said that is equivalent to religious extremists. However, the racists were simply flag wavers and talking about heritage. I do not see how flag waving and talking about heritage is by definition racism.

Just asking for a little consistency here.

[kentuck]

22. My original post was a comparative statement...or...

Comparing how each, a flag and a Bible, can be waved for ill purposes.

[hifiguy]

8. Six of one,

half a dozen of the other.

Both clear and present dangers to sanity and democracy.

[malthaussen]

9. Fanatics of any stripe can be dangerous...

... individually or in groups. But why limit it to just two fanaticisms? There are other kinds of fanaticism that are equally dangerous, including political and economic (which also often intersect). I suppose historically, the religious fanatics have done the most damage, but religion is often a handmaiden to other forms of fanaticism.

Hell, even sports fanatics can be dangerous under the right circumstances.

-- Mal

[kentuck]

13. True.

I agree.

[scscholar]

11. Either one with a gun (ntxt)

[HassleCat]

15. Religious

We're slowly (more quickly now) losing patience with the racists, and those who will publicly stand up for racist values are few in number, and they lack the support and sympathy of most public figures. Religious fanatics, however, still engender sympathy with their victim talk, enjoy constitutional protection, are able to quote their deity in public, and have the pubic support of many influential Americans.

[onecaliberal]

17. It seems both are willing to die and kill for their causes.

Both are bp very dangerous for different reasons.

[valerief]

18. Religion, because it requires magic thinking. nt

[Little Star]

19. Religious fanatics are more dangerous imo.....

because they are insidious. They intend to entrap and/or beguile.

A racist fanatic is often easy to identify because the usually wear their hate on their sleeve. Most people know and can see exactly where they are coming from.

But I think that most of the time the two intertwine when it comes to racism.