It’s a simple exercise of basic logical principles – in this case, syllogisms; you know the IQ tests that ask you questions like: If all A’s are B’s, and all C’s are A’s, then are all C’s B’s?
Just as not all Middle Easterners are Muslims, and not all Muslims are extremists who want to blow themselves up for Allah, so too not all Christians are arming themselves against the government, not all Christians hate homosexuals, etc. Too often outlier members of a group taint the name of the entire group, and people jump to unwarranted assumptions about other members of that group.
Recent headlines about the arrests made of members of Hutaree, a Christian militia group, which may have been plotting to murder police officers, came as a shock to those who can’t quite picture Mother Teresa strapped with Uzis and hurling grenades at law enforcement officers. Yet to others this is just another example of a religious Right that has grown dangerously edgy ever since the Left took power under Obama’s rule.
Hutaree brings to mind other instances where the appellation of ‘Christian’ is often attached to shady and distasteful (to put it mildly) subjects, such as the infamously hateful Westboro Baptist Church or even the self-entitled Christian missionaries who were accused of trying to traffic Haitian orphans out of the country without proper documentation in the wake of the deadly Haiti earthquake. Such spectacles would make many avoid acknowledging their Christian faith in order to avoid the stigma being associated with the beliefs and actions of these outliers.
The problem lies in the linkage between the ‘particular’ (Hutaree) and the ‘universal’ (all Christians everywhere); group membership is often identified by use of a name (Christian), which is used both for the particular as well as the universal, and so the name connects the identity of the particular to the identity of the universal along with any reputation held by the particular.
This problem is not limited to Christians (think of the increased profiling of people of Middle Eastern decent by airport security after 9/11) or even to religious groups, but extends into every type of identity grouping known to mankind – political parties, ethnic groups, racial groups, people from the poorer side of town, Hollywood stars, and on and on. Too often people make crack assumptions about members of these groups based upon no other evidence than their group membership. This is unfair bias, and is a way of thinking not too far off from racism – making unchecked assumptions about a person’s worth, ability, or intentions, even their very humanity based upon the group that they identify themselves with. Such cases are unproductive and inaccurate, as these people latch onto stereotypes and refuse to consider any sort of revision to what they initially think. Far more productive is to hold things in abeyance until more information is gleaned. In the case of identifying threats to national security, although an eye for identifying potential terrorists is vital, caution must also be taken to make sure that there is no assumption that appearances are always correct.
While you can use known idiosyncrasies and tendencies of a group as a way to guess at what kind of person one member of that group might be, it should never stand as the be-all, end-all of who they are; further investigation is necessary, including most importantly communication with that individual to discover if indeed they do fit the stereotype. More often than not, stereotypes are merely hand-picked generalizations influenced by uneducated bias towards outlier members of a group, giving them distorted accuracy and crippling their efficacy in giving knowledge about a group member.
With deeply divided and antagonistic political lines in America right now this is an important issue to keep in mind, and people must maintain propriety and fairness in dealing with those who belong to the ‘other’ group. While there may indeed be Democrats with Communist leanings, does that mean all Democrats are Communists? And while there may be racist people who vote for the Republican party, does that mean all Republicans are racist? The answer to both is no! Demonizing of the ‘other’ is always an easy way to try to gain an edge over your opponent, but it is not an honest tactic and it only perpetuates hatred and misunderstanding between groups. If judgments are to be made fairly then the same rules ought to apply to all parties in a conversation. Individual identity, beliefs and actions should take precedence over group membership when making assumptions about someone.
Hutaree may claim the title of ‘Christian,’ but such a small sampling of those who claim that label is hardly representative of approximately one quarter of the world’s population who also claim the label 'Christian.' Indeed here is just one example of a Christian (with uncommonly Left leanings in fact) who were quick to speak out about the issue, arguing for Christ’s teachings of non-violence rather than Hutaree’s violent call to arms. If progress towards mutual understanding and cooperation is to be made between Democrats and Republicans, between Muslims and Christians, indeed between all groups of people, assumptions must be set aside and communication between groups made a priority in order to combat the kinds of misunderstandings that escalates distrust and violence between people.
