You sure have that wrong.
Christians put alot of time and money into evangelizing. When they are not doing that, they are trying to force you to convert. When they are not doing that, they are killing folks that don't.
And when they are not doing that? They are claiming to be the victim.
Where did you find this fantasy?
Dark Ages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Crusades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Spanish Inquisition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Charlemagne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Oliver Cromwell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
On the Jews and Their Lies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pogrom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Christian views on slavery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Utah War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
CONVERSION TO CHRISTIANITY - JewishEncyclopedia.com
Reichskonkordat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUMkcBctE7c]The Inquisition - YouTube[/ame]
I won't argue with this. Historically, Christians have been DICKS! Grew up in Church, and one of my problems with it was always that so many of these followers of Christ can't seem to wrap their mind around the whole judge not thing. Luckily, it's not all Christians. I've also met some Christians in my life who are holy shit amazing people, even if I disagree with their governing philosophy.
What I do wonder, Sallow, as I read your response which implies that current Christianity is responsible, as a whole, for the historical wrongs of individuals who practiced it, is if you view the entire world in the same way.
Is "Communism" responsible for Stalin and Mao murdering millions of their own people? I've read Das Capital and The Communist Manifesto. Don't recall Marx or Engels ever actually saying dissenters should be murdered, or that large portions of the proletariat should be starved out.
Is "Islam" responsible for terrorism? If I said, "Muslims spend a lot of time protesting against anyone who disagrees with Islam. When they're not doing that, they're forcing everyone around them to convert to their particular sect of Islam including other Muslims, and when they're not doing that, they're suicide bombing anybody who doesn't agree with their exact interpretation of the Koran", then posted links to examples of Muslims doing horrible things to people, would you simply concede that I was correct, as you obviously assume that you are correct in this case?
Shit, furthermore, does this only apply to religions and philosophies, or can we apply the same logic to any sort of demographic? Are "the Mexicans" smuggling drugs into the US?
Are "the blacks" responsible for gang violence in LA?
There's also multiple denomination of Christianity who are completely separate from the Catholics and Protestants who were traditionally the sects at the helm during historical periods of Christian oppression, yet I can't help but notice that you never said, ". . . except for those Oriental Orthodoxy cats. They never burned anybody at the stake."
Therefore, if I said Asians are responsible for the holocaust because, historically, the Japanese govt was allied with the Third Reich, would that be pretty valid? I can't help but feel like it'd be as valid as your response.