In a Sunday, October 1 op-ed, New York Times opinion columnist David French posits that Christian nationalism may not be "serious," but it is "very dangerous." He argues, "It's not a serious position to argue that this diverse, secularizing country will shed liberal democracy for Catholic or Protest...
These are the most dangerous people in the country. These are often the ones who shoot kids through doors and cars. These are who storm government buildings and plan kidnappings of politicians. We’re pretty fucked.
Indeed. Really any group consisting of people whose zealous beliefs are formed irrationally is a group that has the potential for doing great harm—to others, to themselves, to society, to the environment, etc.
Malicious ignorance is the real pandemic.
A interesting strawman.
An uninteresting display of stupidity
Err… that isn’t a strawman. A strawman is where the argument consists of misrepresenting the opposition’s belief or argument in a way that is much easier to attack than the actual argument.
A good explanation with some good examples can be found here: https://www.txst.edu/philosophy/resources/fallacy-definitions/straw-person.html
I feel like this is one of those words that’s been used so much on the internet that it’s lost all meaning.
That’s what they do. They take words that mean something serious and misuse them until most people don’t understand them anymore.