Well, since we're talking about stereotypes allow me to talk about how many people on the left view Conservative Christians...
First off, many Progressive/Liberal Christians don't understand how the two words could even go together.
What you describe here cannot possibly reflect an authentically liberal perspective; it is one of the more illiberal things I have read in its relative lack of respect for diverse viewpoints.
Conservatives have a love of war and money that seems to be the very opposite of what Jesus believed in. Also, their complete obsession with homosexuality, abortion and of all things...guns.
On the subject of war, Christianity has never been an entirely pacifist religion in the manner of say, Jainism. "I came not to bring peace, but a sword." On homosexuality, well, there is Romans. An analysis of early canon law (the
Pedalion of St. Nicodemus the Hagiorite) and ancient liturgical texts (for example, the old Byzantine rite service for the churching of women who miscarried) indicates that the Church, with the exception of a few sects like the rather disagreeable Borborites (see the
Panarion of St. Epiphanius of Salamis, Volume I), always took a dim view of abortion.
On the subject of money however, the excessive love of it is condemned, although I do not see any Biblical or Patristic basis for rejecting free-market economic liberalism, provided proper consideration is given to the poor (see St. John Chrysostom, in particular, the reasons for his exile). On the subject of guns, this is a modern technological issue that should not IMO be regarded as transsecting the religious sphere except by way of an obvious reminder of the Great Commandment, which precludes anything approaching the common law concepts of murder or manslaughter.
Their denial of science is perplexing. Rather than understanding that scientific truths have already reshaped people's beliefs for centuries, they proceed with preposterousness. Swearing that you must believe everything written in The Bible completely literally or you'll be tormented by a loving God forever. Forget what scientists PROVE. No, you must ignore this or you hate Jesus.
I agree.
Ignorance of people of other faiths is pretty much the norm. Especially, if you're brown with a beard. Sikhs often get mistaken for Muslims and attacked because most "Right" Christians don't even bother to learn that these people hold very different beliefs from those who follow Islam.
I know many conservative Christians in the US and Britain, and I have yet to meet one who is anti-Sikh or who conflates Sikhism and Islam.
That said, while I myself much admire Sikhs and the Sikh ethos of the warrior saint, by your own standards, I feel obliged to point out that Sikhism ought to be entirely unacceptable to the pacifist worldview you seem to espouse. The Sikhs represented a conquering, military powerhouse for several centuries of Indian history; their religion glorifies the honourable application of violence, they venerate military hardware, and their Nihangs, like the Hindu Saddhus, are associated with military prowress; however, unlike the Saddhus, this is not a historical or ceremonial association, but an active one; the Nihangs continue to represent an active paramilitary power that seeks to defend, by force, the interests of the Sikh community in India.
I don't object, but I can't see how you could not, unless you desire to hold Christianity to one standard and Sikhism to another. I would further argue that the Sikhs are more overtly militaristic than Islam; one can make a hypothetical argument for a peaceful Islam, by for example, interpreting jihad as spiritual struggle, and such an interpretation is de rigeur among some Sufi sects. One cannot easily make such an argument regarding the Sikh faith; this does not trouble me of course, as there is a relative lack of incidents of Sikhs using violence against Christians compared to Muslims or Hindus.
Not that Muslims deserve any mistreatment, it would just be nice to know who you are attacking. Also, not all Muslims are from the Middle East and even then there's tons of different types. But, that's an entirely different post.
Indeed; a lack of awareness or appreciation for the more tolerant, non-violent forms of Islam such as the syncretic faith of the Alevis/Alawis/Bektashis is a problem.
They always seem to be on the other side of an issue that would benefit people of color. They'll vote against things that greatly benefit the downtrodden, then read the words of Jesus on Sunday and not see their own hypocrisy. Then get totally outraged when you even mention the word "racism" in their company. If you're ALWAYS on the other side of civil rights, what do you call it?
I think this is an unfair accusation, particularly if one considers the history of conservative and classically liberal political movements and examines the current composition of these movements. Particularly, for example,,the prominent role enjoyed by African American Republicans in the past two US election cycles, and the current composition of the parliamentary Conservative Party in the UK.
Are all these things true all the time? Probably not. But, throwing out accusations in the form of a question is relatively easy. How about asking us what we believe instead of making us answer for your own misinformed assumptions?
There is a difference between "liberal" and "progressive," and in the UK the word liberal is still associated somewhat more closely with its original meaning; I see primarily illiberalism in your argument, frankly.
