English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

When I think of "crusade" I think of the Latin Church attacking Muslims, Jews, Cathars (no big problem there), the Greek Church and eventually Protestants.

If someone calls themself any type of a crusader, isn't that indicative of violence, intolerance, and hate? I almost think the word "crusader" should be considered hate speech.

Opinions? Or am I totally out of it here...

2007-10-22 04:45:34 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Catholic Crusader; Oh, we got a bright one here...

2007-10-22 04:52:50 · update #1

Ooohh! Hate speach from Catholic Crusader!

2007-10-22 04:59:01 · update #2

26 answers

yeah, catholic crusader is a complete dick head--but then you are what you eat....

2007-10-22 04:51:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6 1

It does have negative connotations. However, only because an event in history was called "The Crusades" does it bear a negative feeling.

Much like Jihad, it means something close, but it doesn't need to be violent.

Crusade is defined as:

Campaign: a series of actions advancing a principle or tending toward a particular end; "he supported populist campaigns" - Princeton Dictionary

Never use when describing an evangelism event. Also, avoid campaign. Use meeting, series, or public evangelism outreach.


Jihad is defined as:

The essential meaning of jihad is the spiritual, psychological and physical effort exerted by Muslims to be closer to God and thus achieve a just and harmonious society. Jihad literally means "striving" or "struggle" and is shorthand for Jihad fi Sabeel Allah (struggle for God's cause).

I think you are flawed in your belief that "crusader" should be banned as hate speech.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a "crusader" for black civil rights.

Although the word has picked up some bad connotation, it should be used more often in its proper context (e.g. "Crusaders" for Women's rights was a popular name amongst feminists in the late 20's)

Although the Crusaders were similar to Nazis (motivated more by money than by God?), its important to remember that the Turks weren't very "nice" either.

Everybody back then was a complete ars*.

Oh, well.

2007-10-22 05:02:30 · answer #2 · answered by CanadianFundamentalist 6 · 3 0

Crusader Definition

2016-10-05 03:26:59 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Calling it "hate speech" may be taking it a tad too far, yes. Especially since the word "crusader" is also applied to anyone who passionately works for a cause. Google "Al Gore" with the word and you'll find many instances where he has been termed an environmental crusader. And he may even use it to describe himself, for all I know.

In other words, a crusader isn't necessarily a bad thing. You'd have to evaluate each "crusader" by what he or she says otherwise and not just that label in order to determine if they're spouting hate speech.

2007-10-22 04:56:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

To Muslims and "religious libertarians", "Crusader" does indeed have negative connotations.
They picture a peaceful realm of enlightened, tolerant Islam into which brutal, smug armored European upper class thugs intruded for the purposes of conquest, wealth, and joy of killing, all hypocritically wrapped in "Dark Ages" religious fanaticism.

In this view, "Crusader"=bully

The older, western view, which I share, is that a crusader is someone who sacrifices their own interests and welfare for an idealistic activity.
This use of the term "crusader" would mean any active reformer, including suffragettes, civil rights workers, and those Medieval knights who dedicated their lives and professional fighting skills to liberating the holy places of Christ's life (especially Jerusalem and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher--oops! it had just been rebuilt because the Muslims had burned it down a decade before, and would do so to the new structure when Saladin re-conquered the city)

In this view, "crusader"=idealist

2007-10-22 05:05:30 · answer #5 · answered by mongoemperor 3 · 2 0

Anyone that is literate in human history would have to have some similar thoughts. The Crusaders were violent murderers and rapist. They were some of the most vile forms of humanity to ever walk the face of the earth and rate with the Nazi's and Hitler's regime for attempts at genocide.

Look at the definition: Exert oneself continuously, vigorously, or obtrusively to gain an end or engage in a crusade for a certain cause or person.

In other words - Press the agenda and let nothing stand in your way.

So when I hear someone professing to be a crusader I am automatically thinking I need to be wary, I may have a nut job here. You can also see this in the people that claim to be crusaders here. Look at the text of their posts.

2007-10-22 04:56:20 · answer #6 · answered by Atrum Animus AM 4 · 3 1

Yes, it does. I went to a Catholic school, our basketball team was the Corupus Christi Crusaders. A nice, alliterative title, but we had to change it because it had negative connotations. This was decided within the school system, as Christians like to think of Crusaders as righteous, many others perceived them as barbaric.

2007-10-22 05:11:32 · answer #7 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0 0

it's only negative to republicans, my friend. actually, it's only the extreme Libs that get under most people's skin. but, yes, the Liberal party here in the States is supposedly for all those things that your Liberal party stands for. But, the extreme Libs take it too far. they strive for those things at the expense of sensibility and reason. Extreme Right (republicans) do this as well, but in my opinion, are a little less ignorant to the truths of politics and life in general. the Libs have a tendency to follow blindly behind the likes of Kennedy and Nancy P. without hesitation. both parties are guilty of disagreeing with the other party just b/c of their associations or pressure from their colleagues and/or Lobbyists. that's why i do not class myselft in either political party. that's how it should be, formulate your OWN opinion, do your OWN research, be EDUCATED in politics. Do not agree or disagree based on your party affiliation or b/c CNN or the Washington Post tells you what you should do.

2016-05-24 04:13:50 · answer #8 · answered by iva 3 · 0 0

i think that there is a difference between the crusades and being a crusader.

maybe it's because i don't offend easily...or maybe it's because people have become so easily offended.

when i hear the word crusader i think activist...like being a crusader for the environment, or for charities.

just my thoughts

bright blessings to you

2007-10-22 05:36:42 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I think of a country baseball field behind the school house and the lights like at the carnival. There are trucks to look at and trailers and all sorts of things. There is a tent and there is an Evangelist on Crusade. Everybody and his brother in the whole county is there. There is singing and whooping and hollering and preaching. There are men, women, and children. As a young boy I played games and fought out behind the tent. As a somewhat older boy I played games with girls out behind the tent. When I got a little older, I quit going to the revival and started going to town.

2007-10-22 04:57:22 · answer #10 · answered by What? Me Worry? 7 · 0 2

Are there any positive connotations to the word crusader?

Even when used in a "positive" way it implies someone who is not willing to compromise or even think of their consequences.

2007-10-22 05:24:19 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers