₦airaland Forum

budaatum:
My UK perspective of race might jaundice my sight of course, but over here only losers buy the narrative of race holding them down. You can't do poorly at school and easily get away with "my teacher failed me because I'm black" or not get a job and shout "racist" unless you have evidence for your claim.

Your parents would take koboko to your backside if you tried the first - mine would have, and the school board would investigate; and no one would employ those who believed the second. We can after all identify it at the interview. Those who shift responsibility from themselves.

No, your perspective of taking the most blame for your fate is not jaundiced -it's right and normal.

I think you overgeneralise. We black Brit Nigerians would tell you our race, our blackness, is a superior advantage wherever we go, which is why we walk with our heads tall, and I know other blacks the world over who feel the same and no one who thinks as you claim CRT says.

I already stated Black Americans are guilty of this. Black Britons (which is odd as Britons aren't as race-obsessed as the Black Americans are so do not always use racial prefixes).

That CRT postulation is why Meghan Markle (a Black American) who has all her life been fighting her family and has been accused as a social climber with attitudinal issues (including co-actors) and has many failed relationships where she was the toxic one would easily blame her travails with the Royal Family or the British press on them being racist. She refused to take any blame for the fallout even though she has mountains of issues herself.
Guess those who still support her and call her "Queen" who is standing up to toxic whiteness? Yes, you guessed right - Black American and Leftist white saviours, of course.

Black Brits are more likely to fault her stance.

She has backing - Critical Race Theory dictates everything from her courtship to marriage was racially motivated against her.

patrickmuf:
This Madrid fans are really funny, you hardly ever find them contributing on their thread, 24/7 they're camped here yet they think Ronaldo lives in the head of Barca fans, isn't it funny?

Abeg make una try talk about una team for una thread small else it's no more trolling but an obsession...Do you guys find Barcelona fans on your thread every now and then? You only troll when there's a reason to lest it becomes boring as it is now...

It alright that they keep the thread alive. Madrid - Barca debate would always be on - they are arch rivals.
The debate which doesn't make sense, however, and is redundant is still arguing Messi's football immortality status with them. If you keep replying everytime they compare Leo with the Portuguese guy, it means you still think there's any comparison at all.
What's a LIONel to a hyena?

The periods nobody debates Messi with them, you'd notice they retreat to the shadows.

Obrigrado/EnlightenedUFO, are you taking note of how Budaatum is arguing his points on CRT and the debates have been going on, focusing on the many issues or perspectives stemming from CRT without insults?

He didn't need to steal other people's articles from the internet or spend 4 hours compiling stolen work like you were doing yesterday. He's debating his points rationally.
No coon, cultist or neo-confederate slur.
Yet, like you, he's Left-leaning.

This is how to debate.

It's something you lack - decorum. And pseudo-intelligence is your stock-in-trade.

It's why you'd always be tagged a mental midget, along with Baba60+ who has sired illegitimate children all over the place.

Learn from your mental superiors, child!

budaatum:
Diss, CRT also has to consider a 'gender perspective' in its own right, and an education perspective, and a finance perspective, and incarceration perspective, family perspective, all in their own right and without racial input or prejudice. It must be done for comparative studies, and to have evidence of your racial claim and for respect by your peers for not doing shoddy research. Or can you not hear those on your side accusing those you claim "Insist that everything the black person faces, or deals with or has to do has to be viewed through a racial in decking", of being ignorant and institutionally racists themselves?

If CRT insists on what you say it does no one would give it the light of day because we are far too advanced and smart for "I'm broke because I'm black", and no one is really selling "you are broke because you are black", despite your rhetoric that they are, and even if they are selling it, then I'm sorry to say that the fool who buys it deserves it. Jussie Smollett has come to my mind, but he is rare.

See? Actually, many people buy it. There is still racism just like there's always be tribalism but to what degree?

Sadly, most black people buy that narrative that they are held down by racism. I was debating an issue on The Economist's Facebook page the other day where one white woman was comparing her facial similarities to a sculpture she came across in Egypt.

The number of black Americans who attacked her for being supposedly racist was amusing while Africans including myself noted the similarities and agreed with her. The victimhood is shameful and has been indoctrinated into the very core of the average black American.
They think themselves gatekeepers of everything black even though Black Americans are the most xenophobic people on Earth to Africans on the continent.

Even the African Americans are very xenophobic and they'd be more likely to be prejudiced against you an African living in African than a Black Briton or Black European. It even happens on this thread.

Blacks believe the doctrinaire postulations of CRT and it's a good thing actions are being taken to curb its teaching.

benalvino3:
Even that maths debate we had was looking at the performance of minority groups from race base. If they fail it is because of racism and white supremacy.

Even when student refused to study its not their fault but racism and white supremacy

Oddly, they got Affirmative Action in return. Even though Affirmative Action cheats Asians who perform best at STEM than any other racial group.
It's alright when it favours blacks only.

budaatum:
"A critical stance" can and usually is one stance in many stances like, financial stance, motivational stance, opportunity stance, gender, sex, capability etc,

Exactly! CRT examines all these stances - gender, education, finance, incarceration, family... - but from a racial perspective or racial prism.

For example, it postulates that the reason blacks are poorer is connected to institutional racism, or the institutional racism is responsible for black men getting incarcerated hence kids growing up without fathers.

It blames racism for it all.

It refuses to hold the black community responsible for its predisposition to gang violence or black-on-black crime or substance abuse or why black women lead the charts for abortion because it is overly subsidized for them. Need I go on?

CRT examines all issues but from a racial perspective.

TheDarkGamer , you mailed me. What's it about?

budaatum:
"Stop with the semantics", or stop using my brain?

The definition above does not "Insist that everything the black person faces, or deals with or has to do has to be viewed through a racial in decking".

For the purpose of clarity, do explain this:

"Roy L. Brooks defined critical race theory in 1994 as "a collection of critical stances against the existing legal order from a race-based point of view".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory (Check the "Definition" subheading.)

Not from any other point of view from a race-based point of view. It's the definitive prism CRT is viewed from - race.

budaatum:
What you posted does not mean "Insist that everything the black person faces, or deals with or has to do has to be viewed through a racial in decking".

Budaatum, stop with the semantics. You should know better than that. The definition of CRT as stated and accepted by all means examining issues which concern the black person from a racial perspective. I even posted the screenshot.

I didn't define it - CRT proponents did.

You are Left-leaning doesn't mean you have to agree with everything they postulate - you have a right to think for yourself. That means you aren't lost like the Leftists on this thread.

I lean to the Right but I don't agree with the floating of platforms like Parler. I don't like echo boxes. Dissenting opinions are good and constructive debates help us become better humans so I'd stick with platforms like Twitter and Facebook (even though the moderation is biased mostly in favour of Leftist ideas).

pu7pl3:
Please elaborate on the bolded

None seems ever likely to enter the great player or football icon debate like Zidane. The World Cup didn't do anything to make them legends. In fact, Neymar has more chances at being legendary than everyone in that french team.

I'm deliberately not even mentioning CR level. Messi is out of the question, god that he is.

Point is, winning the World Cup is a cherry on the top, an icing on the cake.

Cruyff didn't win any of Euros or the World Cup but he's a greater player than that friench team put together.

World Cup: Icing on the cake, not the cake itself.

Kilishihunter:
E go hard gan, the WC is still the Pinnacle as usual but since he's reached the final before and won the golden ball, alongside achieving at every age grade, There's certainly not much left to prove again

Actually nothing left to prove. No single player from the French 2018 WC-winnng team can ever be said to be legend. Not one. Even with the World Cup. Mario Götze should have been given the Balon d'Or for scoring the 2014 winning goal then.


Nothing to prove. A cake is still a cake without the icing. The icing only makes it tastier and more appealing but it doesn't make it more of a cake than it already is.

The Copa America and World Cup are just icing to Messi' cake. With or without both or either, he's the greatest player to ever walk this earth.

raumdeuter:
You can only comment on American politics if you live in America
Or you support the Democratic party

Otherwise you are suffering, a coon, on 30K salary with no electricity but when you support the Democrats all these dont apply to you

Or a cultist. Or a flag-waving neo-Confederate.
----------

I self-identity as Hunter Biden and AOC on this thread from now on. Both seem to always get a pass for everything from the Left.

Can I comment on US issues now, Gangster of Chicago, gatekeeper of U.S. socio-politics?

ScumOfLincoln.

budaatum:
CRT does not "Insist that everything the black person faces, or deals with or has to do has to be viewed through a racial in decking", and anyone who thinks it does is just being silly.

Really? But the textbook, singular definition of Critical Race Theory which is accepted by all states that everything must be viewed through a racial prism.

In your own words, Roy L. Brooks is very silly.

Thank you.

Capaldi:
You have still not provided any proof on how you came to the conclusion that Eve was not talking to a literal serpent. That's what am waiting for

Sorry, it's almost impossible to make a dyslexic person write. I can't perform miracles. You can go ahead with your whataboutism and strawman poking arguments while I engage those who either truly want to learn or can discern.

Every person (including Jodera) gets the point except you. Every package in a sinking ship can't be salvaged.


Say hi to your Daddy-in-the-Lord, Prophet (Dr.) (Evang.) Pastor Whatever-His-Name-His.

EnlightenedUFO:
Shut your trap. Chicken out of what? your fake outrage questions that i have already treated? Didn't i lecture you on the past racism in America, or what else do you want me to do for you? wear you your diapers?

You dimwitted offspring of a mutated newt!

Accursed mental dwarf who spent 4 hours copying and pasting other people's articles on this thread yet trying to pass them off as yours. You couldn't debate the point(s).

You resorted to inundating this thread with articles you stole from the internet and assert you are schooling? Debate the points or scurry back to the digital rabbit hole from whence you emerged.


See how quickly it has been for you to quote with insults for more than an hour after posting but you needed to post other people's articles as retorts to you debating CRT?

You are supposedly too busy to debate but you dedicated 4 hours of your life to searching the internet for articles.You are too busy but not too busy to reply with insults.

May an unidentified flying object smash your cranium to a sidewálk. (Yes, I deliberately gave you a reason to summon the moderators. It would further prove my point about your cowardice and mental dwarfism.)

Capaldi:
There is nothing scientifically or physically involved in Yom. The Wikipedia page you brought had 7 meanings? Why did you pick the one out of the seven and bring reasons with proof why?



I didn't ask for your logic or thinking. Bring out proofs from the bible that Eve was not talking to an actual serpent like you claimed or rest?


If you cannot back your own understanding of the scripture with reasonable proofs then it's also meaningless like those pastor's own .

What is wrong with you? Your Bible is flawed! Mostly flawed!

Serpent in Hebrew mythology and even most cultures mean sinful desires. Eve was listening to her own sinful desires hence the talking to the serpent.

Note also, that while serpent means snake, it also means dangerous and treacherous. That's why if someone says you are s. snake, he doesn't mean you are a literal snake but serpentine.

Imagine if that was being transliterated?

In fact, the Bible needs a keynote booklet like the ones we used in school to point out the many passages that are pitfalls.

The literal translation of the earth being at the centre of the world by the modern Bible like KJV has been proven wrong.

The literal translation that Adam was the first man (so Cain and Abel the first children) had been proven wrong because it contradicts itself when a mark was put on Cain so he won't be harmed.
Harmed by who? His only brother was dead and his family was supposedly the only one on earth.
Adam was the anointed man, not the first man.

That's why even your Bible said, "If anyone comes to Christ or God and surrenders his life, he become a NEW creature". New creature like new man, like Adam was, like spotless. Adam was the spotless man without sin until he did. See? I just quoted the Bible for you there.


I'm taking time to break this down mostly for the reading public.

The things of God can be explained logically too. After all, didn't the Bible say,"I am [God is] not an author of confusion"?

You see why many Christians are scared to debate people like we even though we are also Christians?

benalvino3:
That old man has been saying coon and cultist for months on end.

I don't blame them. He posted lengthy stuff. I was waiting for him to discuss any of the tenets and I waited for nothing because how confident he sounded when he was going to embarrass me on the topic

If he had anything, he'd have done so long ago instead of avoiding the topic. When did he become so gracious?

He has the mentality of a toxic girlfriend or wife. When you catch them doing wrong, they either gaslight or muddy the waters with counter accusations instead of addressing the issue, then make it seem like it's all your fault.

I deliberately insisted I would debate him and refuse to respond to his insults until he dug himself further into the hole.

IgnorantUFO can never debate any topic logically on his own. He relies on support where he can throw around tags like "cultists", "coons" and bitterly swallow "poor" when Baba60+ says everyone who lives in Nigeria is a pauper.

Capaldi:
According to Wikipedia you posted Yom also means literally day among the meanings. Who told you the definition of Yom to pick in relation to the creation? Can you bring out the proof of it too

Simple: Scientifically and physically, 7 literal days do not explain. the world. 7 yoms (7 long periods of extended time would come close).

It would account for the Ice Age, and other periods.

Also, even your Bible says "a day before you is like a thousand years to man". Understand or you still want to argue for the sake of it?

Capaldi:
You have been beating around the Bush.

You said Eve didn't talk to an actual serpent so prove it with fact. I am waiting

There's nothing to prove about this other than logic - snakes don't talk.
The onus is on you to prove other examples of snakes or animals talking (asides parrots, that is).

Don't give me that miracle ish. Who performed it? Snakes don't talk. If you think they do, tell me how snakes can.

Biologically, snakes don't even have the capacity to talk. The absence of larynx and all but I guess that's where education comes in. You have to be truly educated to understand the scriptures.

Maybe that's why Paul and Luke understood the Bible best - they were very educated.

benalvino3:
I don't know why he is posting that. I hope for him to act like Livelystone01 and add substance to crt debate.

I already explained what he's doing - he's muddying the waters. He claimed he had points to prove the CRT is real, only to spend 4 hours posting articles of others and not even one sentence is his own opinion. Not even one.

The CRT is clear-cut. It is clearly defined and there's no mistaking what it's premised on. Even the most seasoned liberal commentator have struggled to defend it in debates.

I wasn't asking for articles. I was asking that he debates the theory he so believes in.

It's like doctrinal Christians who quote Bible portions while trying to convince atheist. Keep your Bible aside and debate logically.

He can't. I knew he can't. I knew there's a reason they skip the CRT anytime you raise it or would curse out at you instead of addressing the point. I've been pointing out for a month now that they deliberately avoid the CRT debate. would engage on any other topic like the Arizona audit.

It's like a Physics student defining all physical laws but can't explain or debate the concepts. Garbage in, garbage out.

He's not smart. His buddy instead began some nonsense about coons and cultists.

I know a mental midget when I engage one so I take time to expose them when they bask in their ignorance.

Jodera , Capaldi, I was mentioning why the bible is transliterated and why the 7-day creation theory is wrong becuase it isn't translated.

The Hebrew word for day is 'Yom'.

Yom in Hebrew means the following;

1. Period of light (as contrasted with the period of darkness),
2. General term for time
3. Point of time
4. [b]Sunrise to sunset
5. Sunset to next sunset
6. A year (in the plural; I Sam 27:7; Ex 13:10, etc.)
7. Time period of unspecified length.
8. A long, but finite span of time - age - epoch - season.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom

God created the world in 7 'yom' but not in 7 literal days. Created in 7 seasons of long periods which in Hebrew could even be 7 1000-year periods or even 7 100,000-year seasons.

Don't make God look stupid. Research.

limcar:
So which animal did god cursed?

Really did God curse the snake Eve didn't even speak to in the first place?

Did God also curse the mosquito to suck blood? Or was it part of our punishment? Humour with your reply.

EnlightenedUFO:
Seriously, get lost, i mean go deep down into the sahara desert and get lost.

Of course, he resorts to insults after spending 4 hours researching a topic and posting other people's articles. Garbage in, garbage out. I wanted to humour you.

And he chickens out, people.

Mental mdiget.

EnlightenedUFO:
@benalvino.2, disstro.y., basi.lico, lets continue..

Though this is you muddying the waters by recounting history, the concerns are noted still. Be done pasting the news articles then the points stated would be debated on. I'm particularly interested in this topic of CRT. Notify me when you are done and I'm game.

benalvino3:
Its funny how they complained that Italian team that won the euro 2020 was too white. Nobody is complaining that Nigerian team is too black

They just look for a problem all the time and most time it is about race.

Or the French team is too black. They said the french team was an African team and France couldn't have done it without Africans. Italy listened and played with an all-white team yet they yelled.

Miss USA and Miss England can be black but the times when Miss South Africa was white, all hell was let lose.

It's alright for black comedians to make fun of white skin colour or them being hippies and trailer-dwelling trash but if a white person dares, he's canceled.

Do they want me to show them video and stand-up comedy clips of black comedians calling Obama a 'mixed race fool' when he declared he wanted to be POTUS but when he won he was black?

Capaldi:
Like i asked before what's the difference between you and those pastors who interpret the bible to suit their own understanding? What makes you right and them wrong? The truth you digged up can you backed them up with facts too?

Can you prove Eve didn't talk to an actual serpent with facts? What makes your interpretation right and others wrong?

Dude, I argue these things on the wider social media with my full names and in person.

Most Christians are stuck and too scared to question what they have been taught and I even engage clergyman in this. Most would slam you with the heretic or some other dysphemistic expression to get you to cower.

Interestingly, the clergyperson who really listened to and even debated with me on these things was a Catholic priest. He seemed too liberal to be a priest but a priest all the same.

What the hell? You believe Eve talked to a snake and donkeys talk?

Notice how I have been discussing theological and life issues without quoting countless Bible passages?
That's the only way you can truly debate an atheist.

Jodera:
Hmmmm...
in any of your spare time can you please explain those bolded for me? I would want to learn, even if it's a dead thread so as not to derail here

I will really appreciate that

I already addressed most of them almost an hour ago. Do check my post history on this thread.

budaatum:
No it is not based on the premises nor postulate what you claim! And its rather absurd to be claimimg CRT proponents will agree that one is an addict or a thief because of discrimination one experienced due to race. Unless race is the reason one is an addict or a thief of course.

No, it's not about the CRT proponents but the theory itself.

Insisting that everything the black person faces, or deals with or has to do has to be viewed through a racial in decking the black person in an apparel of victimhood.

Damn it! There were those who paint a racial colouration with Ghana losing the 2010 WC Quarter-Final to Uruguay.

CRT is very divisive. Yes, racism would always exist just like all forms of prejudice would never truly end, but everything doesn't have to be racially motivated.

Neobulletzz:
Baba abeg some of us no know the Wetin all these things mean literally, so what exactly do they mean by all these since you said they are transliterated??

Just check my post history on this thread.

You can still research about these things. Just don't limit yourself to what your pastor tells you. He might just be as theologically ignorant as the people he's heading and herding.

There are some pastors I've listened to who at least try to explain these things but I don't want to start a denominational tussle. I don't believe in denominational segregation in Christendom anyway.

Capaldi:
Can you prove all these? The answer is No. What's the difference between you and those pastors translating the bible to their own understanding? Can you prove the serpent didn't talk? Etc

I just explained some passages to you. Just because your theological knowledge is limited by the tutelage of your "Daddy-in-the-Lord" who selectively reads out transliterated Bible passages from the KJV Bible to you doesn't mean others do not go beyond that.

You can dig up original text, some which have been translated by scholars of ancient Aramaic and Hebrew directly into English, not the commissioned 66 books made to fit with the propaganda of some pagan emperor.

I even went the extra mile to explain using a major Nigerian language how intended meanings get lost in translation-albeit-transliteration.

I did not write the scriptures - no one man did. I just study and go beyond "My Papa said". Screw it, I've not had any 'Papa-in-the-Lord' for years now, and it coincided with me digging up truth for myself.

This debate picked up when I asked if you can prove God's existence logically without quoting the scriptures. Most 'My dadd-in-the-Lord' said wouldn't even dare to but ask you to believe blindly.

Wait...Didn't your 66 books say something about the truth being hidden from men but they shall find it if they seek it? - if they consciously search?

Capaldi:
What makes your own translation of what you perceive happened to be accurate and not the opposite?

Facts, my friend; comparative analyses. Analyses of original text and their contextual meanings.

Sayings like, "If your eyes causes you to sin, cut it out". Those are sentences that should have been properly translated to the modern Bible from the original text, instead of transliterated.

That's why everyday, preachers have to keep explaining the CONTEXTUAL meanings of passages like that because people, by default, do not read between the line.

Jesus was called the "New Adam" because he was presumably without sin so spotless like God created man to be. Adam represented that spotless man until he sinned.

The supposed serpent Eve talked to was her own inner desires - cravings of the flesh which led her.

Again, you have to understand that the Hebrew are very mystical people and represent a lot of things in many ways. Just like a goat means a lot of things other than the literal goat to those into astrology.

budaatum:
One more thing. I have not yet come across anyone here complain that white people stopped them achieving what they have achieved; point it out to me when you do find, I would really love to read it.

Exactly! You are corroborating my assertion!

Why is why Critical Race Theory is premised on absurd exaggerations. It blames racism (institutional mostly) as the culprit to be hanged for the failings of the black person.
CRT postulates that as a black person you'd be prejudiced at every turned based solely on your skin colour when the reality lays to waste the validity or truism of that assertion.

Jodera:
While I agree with you that some portions of the bible are transliterated, I don't believe that all are transliterated, else reading the bible will be so wrong (as a Christian) cos we won't be getting what the passages actually meant.

I understand your examples, (I clearly do), but one thing I do know from reading the bible (and through Bible studies) are, any transliterated verse is mostly explained in another book, chapter or verse of the bible. The example you gave about God creating the earth in days as being transliterated is a perfect example (which I know before now) cos even another passage of the bible clarified that.(which you correctly explained in your previous post).

Transliteration isn't always wrong. "I am a man" is literally "I am a man" in any language.

"Fruit of the womb" is where you have to be careful not to transliterate.

That's why they're 66 books in the bible, some with different versions almost saying same thing , (book of kings and chronicles, the different versions of the 1st four books in new testaments and so on).... Reading them, one can spot some transliterations. If all are transliterated, then it's almost useless reading and understanding the bible cos we'll be reading it wrongly.

If transliterations, figures of speeches and biblical analogies are that easy to spot by everyone, they should know the following:

1. 7 days of creation is not Monday to Sunday;

2. Eve did not talk to a literal serpent;

3. The Garden of Eden is a not a physical place but man's spiritual state with God;

4. The forbidden fruit is not a literal fruit.

And don't get me started on the 66 books. That's another topic.

The point is, most people take these things literally mostly because their equally innocent "Daddies-in-the-Lord" do not even know better.

They just 'kabash' and hope the 'grace' of God is sufficient to cover ignorance.

Jodera:
I don't really know where you get this from sha.

If really all the words are transliterated like you opined, then we really don't need to believe in the bible then cos what we'll be reading won't be the actual meaning of what it's being written.

Okay, I want to learn from you if you don't mind, what does the serpent represent? Also who does Adam and Eve represent too?

"Jesus moved to Bethlehem". If you transliterate this statement, it still means the same thing.
"He kicked the bucket." If you transliterate this statement, it means something else. If you translate it, it means "he died".

Transliteration is a literal meaning. Translation is context dependent.
The supposed translators of the Bible from Aramaic to Hebrew to Greek and Latin to German and/or English lost a lot of context.
In Hebrew, the word for day could also mean week or a long period of time.


I'm Ibibio. The Ibibio word for "market day' and "market" is "Udua". The Ibibio word for "week" is also "Udua".

If I say, I'd be back in one "udua", if you transliterate it, you'd tell someone, "Disstroy would be back in one day" while what I actually meant if you translate it is, 'I'd be back in one week".

That's the problem with the bible you read. Most pastors don't even know the difference.

The Hebrew word for "day" means many things. including "a long period of time".

benalvino3:
Its funny how they think critical race is about history some are linking it to slavery and other are linking it to the civil war but all the premise of CRT does not talk about slavery or the civil war instead its about Institutional racism, systemic structure put in place by the dominant group keeping other groups from reaching their full potential

Dude is mentioning issues like seizing lands from Native Americans. Critical Race Theory never mentioned that. It takes on supposed issues faced by blacks in RECENT TIMES.

Mentioning slavery is quoting history. Next he'd accuse you of denying slavery happened then tag you a cultist. He mentioned he has 7 more points to paste about CRT. He should then debate without insults.

Just don't follow up on the insults. He wants to debate it. There's no backing down now. I am game too. It's an issue which is clear cut and not about speculations.

Capaldi:
I have never seen any atheist bring up anything related to Islam to discuss here. It's always the peaceful religion Christianity they want to attack.

In recent years, the most visible critics of Christianity are Christians themselves. I'm a Christian but I criticize many Christian doctrines and beliefs. Like the talking snake and the existence of a physical Garden of Eden. The most vocal critics of the Church have always identified as Christians. It's always been so throughout history. Galileo, Martin Luther and the likes. Check social media.

The most vocal critic of church doctrines in Nigeria in recent years is Daddy Freeze and he identifies as Christian.

Atheists attack religious beliefs in general but focus on Christianity because most of them were from that background and those who engage atheists on negation of religious beliefs are mostly Christians.

Nobody is after you.