And, does the media in other countries perform the same disservice to the public it claims to serve?
2006-08-25 07:17:49 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The term is actually used incorrectly, as a fundamentalist would understand the "fundamentals" of the religion to which they subscribe. Radicals or fanatics alone would be more appropriate to descibe those which you speak of.
2006-08-25 07:20:43 · answer #1 · answered by tharedhead ((debajo del ombú)) 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is not the Media who alone made it. Those are the Radicals themselves who prefer to be called Fundamentalists. That sounds more inviting for the fellow believers because the word radical for them connotes something of modernists and those people aren't ready for changes.
2006-08-25 14:25:48 · answer #2 · answered by Rallie Florencio C 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
most media are "liberal elite", they really believe they are smarter than everyone else and it is their duty to make things as simple as possible for the "great unwashed"and so they lump people together in categories,and explain speeches to death for two hours after a 15 minute speech, and try to lead what they consider the "less educated" into an understanding of the world they would have you believe is the norm.
2006-08-25 14:27:11 · answer #3 · answered by Grandma Susie 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is merely a word used to describe an extreme-right, unyeilding, ultra-conservative position. How is that a 'disservice'? It is just expediency... languages evolve, too, you know.
Maybe you can tell me... which of the following sentences, which are essentially identical, is snappier?"
"Pat Robertson, defacto leader of the fundamentalist Christian buttholes, today said that..."
"Pat Robertson, defacto leader of the extreme-right, unyeilding, ultra-conservative Christian buttholes, today said that..."
2006-08-25 14:21:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because they do not move on any basic issue. Like the fundamentals of mathematics. It is just a word that gets thrown around too much.
2006-08-25 14:23:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
For Christian Protestantism, this is why:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0825426332/sr=8-2/qid=1156529954/ref=pd_bbs_2/002-8140240-3575214?ie=UTF8
For all other religions, the label is merely metaphorical.
2006-08-25 14:20:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's easier, and they get to hit two targets at once, marginalizing evangelical Christians by equating them with jihadist Muslims.
2006-08-25 14:23:00 · answer #7 · answered by Sharon C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because they are all lost as a goose. No, all the news media are in cahoots against the Jews, Americans, and Christians.
2006-08-25 14:22:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because they usually are; they are different than the regular, friendly religious folk.
2006-08-25 14:23:19 · answer #9 · answered by chrstnwrtr 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In any religion that term suggests a mis-guided literalism that is often wrong.
2006-08-25 14:20:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋