Skip to main content

A classic case of projection by Christian conservatives

I often times regret studying psychology in college, because it's led to me having a tendency to over-analyze everything, and not only that, but ten years after I graduated, I've yet to utilize the degrees I earned a great deal. However, once in a while, what I learned through the course of college, especially in the field of psychology, pays its dividends, where I'll have an "ah-ha!" moment and think to myself, "Now, if I hadn't have studied psychology, I probably wouldn't have thought of that." Such was the case when recently thinking about the Indiana RFRA law (Religious Freedom Restoration Act) and how many Christians positively reacted to it. 

It really befuddled me to hear Christians say such things as the following in response to the passage of the bill and the backlash it received: 

- "We're not discriminating against anyone! Liberals are discriminating against us for our beliefs!"

- "What these liberals want is homosexual supremacy!"

- "No matter how much we give the LGBT community, they're going to continue coming back and wanting more! They'll never be satisfied!"

These are classic cases of projection. What exactly is projection? Here's how psychology expert Kendra Cherry explains it: 

"Projection is a defense mechanism that involves taking our own unacceptable qualities or feelings and ascribing them to other people. For example, if you have a strong dislike for someone, you might instead believe that he or she does not like you. Projection works by allowing the expression of the desire or impulse, but in a way that the ego cannot recognize, therefore reducing anxiety."

In other words, these "Christian" conservatives are simply attempting to deny themselves feelings of guilt due to discrimination by projecting that onto another group, in this case, liberals. They also want to hide their desire for supremacy by claiming that's what homosexuals seek. Lastly, they want to deny their quantity of rights as never being good enough by suggesting that's how the LGBT community feels.

These projections (and others) clearly show that Christian conservatives in this country want to feel special. They may have a difficult time truly believing their words and actions are discriminatory, because they have trouble seeing things from an equality perspective. When it comes to gay marriage rights, instead of saying to themselves, "Well, they just want equal rights as everyone else," they're saying, "Well, if they get equal rights as us, then we'll no longer be seen as more special than them, and we don't want that! We want to be special!" This may be why so many die-hard Christians firmly believe they're being discriminated against and having their rights stripped from them. The fact of the matter is, they're not losing their long-held rights, others are simply being granted those very same rights, which makes them feel less special, and therefore, discriminated against. 

Homosexuals aren't looking for supremacy or more rights than everyone else; they're simply looking for equal rights. If there's anyone out there that appears to want supremacy and more rights than the rest, it's these very Christian conservatives projecting otherwise. Christians, like anyone else in this country, have the right to believe as they so choose, however, that doesn't grant them the right to discriminate against other groups of people in order to prevent them from attaining equal rights. If they must resort to this, they should ask themselves, "What would Jesus do?" Not that...

http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/ss/defensemech_7.htm

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"