> People who have little opportunity for advancement being white and Christian does not mean that whites or Christianity is under threat.

As a resident HN Christian, I don't concur.

We've seen a number of Christian individuals & businesses recently taken to court/UCMJ action for refusing to do things that are contrary to their religious (Christian) beliefs, or for openly stating their beliefs [1] , [2] , [3] , [4]

The same protections afforded to observant jews and practicing muslims should also be afforded to Christians.

It is in the Constitution after all.

[1] https://thepoliticalinsider.com/colorado-baker-sued-again-th...

[2] https://reason.com/volokh/2021/10/16/justice-thomass-opinion...

[3] https://www.christianpost.com/news/obamacare-and-the-catholi...

[4] https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/air-force-cracking-down-on-c...

If a Muslim or Jewish person refused to sell you pork, you’d say they shouldn’t work at a deli. Your religion is not under fire. Its adherents sometimes have a persecution complex.

This is why there are Halal Butchers, and Kosher Butchers, as well as Halal Delis and Kosher Delis.

It is ok to operate a business with respect for religious preferences.

That does not mean they are marginalized. For every communities, you will find neighbors quarrels, and the examples you show are mainly that (for the ones I was able to access): someone wants X, someone wants Y, hence quarrels.

It would have been more relevant to show examples where the "attacker" did not had any stakes or if it would have been proven that the "attacker" has reacted this way because the person is christian, but would not have reacted if the person was muslim, or atheist, or ... but defended the same actions. For each of your examples, I really doubt there would not have been exactly the same conflict if the person was atheists but had the same strong views.

At the end, it may even feel like Christians are slowly discovering that they are people like others and that there is no reason the society should always settle to their advantage. In a way, it feels like the "threat" in question is "stopping being privileged".

You're changing the goalposts.

I never said anything about marginalized.

That's the problem with thread discussion. The comment you are answering to is answering to a comment that says that they are marginalized. If you are now reacting to this comment by changing the context, you are the one moving the goalposts.

But in fact, it does not really change my argument: the examples that you are providing does not show anything bad against Christians. What you provide is just examples of neighbors quarrel where one party happens to be Christian. If you think it means Christians are under threat or unfairly treated, it makes me feel that you are thinking that the normal situation is when society always side with Christians all the time, which would be a pretty strong privilege for Christians, and very unfair for non-Christians.