personally, i think you're worrying too much about this. you can't please all the people all the time, and frankly, i'm deeply suspicious of anyone who manages to be offended by "judeo-christian" on the grounds that it implies that judaism is a subset of christianity. "judeo" comes first, and to me it implies that christianity is a subset of judaism. which i'm pretty sure is actually true.
admittedly, i say this as an atheist. but i say it as an atheist who was raised by a lapsed catholic and an agnostic baptist, and the majority of whose friends are either jewish or are pagans who were raised jewish. i can't help thinking that people offended by such a term may be more interested in finding something to be offended by than actually concerned about accurate terminology. some people just aren't happy unless they feel like an oppressed minority; i'm put in mind of someone who told me he was hesitant to put a christian fish symbol on his car because he feared anti-christian vandals. in this country, that makes about as much sense as whining about what a tough time white college-educated males have of it.
i'm very outspoken -- as you know -- and i hope i haven't managed to offend anyone today. but as a writer, i can't help but be a little offended myself by the verbal contortions to which some people go in an attempt to avoid offending anyone, by which they often succeed only in being vague, wordy, and sometimes ridiculous. (personhole cover, anyone?)
precision in language is a good thing, but unnecessary detail is not. most people can be trusted to get the idea when you use a term like "judeo-christian", but if you're really concerned about it, i suggest using words that everyone will know: "jewish, christian, and islamic". inventing your own term will only create more confusion.
that makes about as much sense as whining about what a tough time white college-educated males have of it.
I see your point, but I'm not sure that's actually equivalent. Vandalism is real, and if he feels the need to protect his car by not marking it with things that make some people angry, that's reasonable. It's possible he was implying anti-Christians are more numerous, or more dangerous, or something, but my first thought would be that he feels being identified with *any* group makes one a target.
well, i can see your point too -- but in this case, the person specifically said he felt he'd be targeted for being a christian. while it's unfortunately true that there are a few rabid anti-christians running around out there, i think he was more likely to have his car vandalized because it wasn't an american car. or because it had virginia plates. or because he looked like he might be gay. so yes, identifying as a part of any group could theoreticlaly make you a target.
but man, what a crappy way to live life, obsessing over all the people who might be out to get you. as dglenn knows perhaps better than anyone, people can be surprisingly tolerant if you give them the chance to be, instead of walking around with a chip on your shoulder daring them to be offended -- or to offend you.
i think he was more likely to have his car vandalized because it wasn't an american car. or because it had virginia plates. or because he looked like he might be gay.
Or because some people think vandalism is fun, and he was there. Yeah, I agree. Just trying to see all sides. (I'm a Libra, but if that bothers you, I can change... ;))
(no subject)
admittedly, i say this as an atheist. but i say it as an atheist who was raised by a lapsed catholic and an agnostic baptist, and the majority of whose friends are either jewish or are pagans who were raised jewish. i can't help thinking that people offended by such a term may be more interested in finding something to be offended by than actually concerned about accurate terminology. some people just aren't happy unless they feel like an oppressed minority; i'm put in mind of someone who told me he was hesitant to put a christian fish symbol on his car because he feared anti-christian vandals. in this country, that makes about as much sense as whining about what a tough time white college-educated males have of it.
i'm very outspoken -- as you know -- and i hope i haven't managed to offend anyone today. but as a writer, i can't help but be a little offended myself by the verbal contortions to which some people go in an attempt to avoid offending anyone, by which they often succeed only in being vague, wordy, and sometimes ridiculous. (personhole cover, anyone?)
precision in language is a good thing, but unnecessary detail is not. most people can be trusted to get the idea when you use a term like "judeo-christian", but if you're really concerned about it, i suggest using words that everyone will know: "jewish, christian, and islamic". inventing your own term will only create more confusion.
(no subject)
I see your point, but I'm not sure that's actually equivalent. Vandalism is real, and if he feels the need to protect his car by not marking it with things that make some people angry, that's reasonable. It's possible he was implying anti-Christians are more numerous, or more dangerous, or something, but my first thought would be that he feels being identified with *any* group makes one a target.
(no subject)
but man, what a crappy way to live life, obsessing over all the people who might be out to get you. as
(no subject)
Or because some people think vandalism is fun, and he was there. Yeah, I agree. Just trying to see all sides. (I'm a Libra, but if that bothers you, I can change... ;))
(no subject)
i'm a capricorn, but if that bothers you, check back in 20 years. *grin*