There’s now, apparently, an epidemic of Christians who get on planes and begin preaching when they know they finally have a captive audience. Evangelist Whitney Lynn, one of the more notorious culprits of this, even said as much in a recent TikTok post: “I just love a captive audience.”
The fact that the sermons are unwanted doesn’t bother the evangelists at all because, for once, they have an audience that can’t walk away. And the hope that strangers might convert outweighs any concern that they’ll conclude Christians are lunatics.
There’s unfortunately very little airline staff can do to stop this. While there are rules regarding passengers who are disobedient or belligerent, preaching doesn’t necessarily cross a line. Flight attendants can politely ask them to stop, but I have yet to see any examples of plane preachers getting kicked off flights because they wouldn’t shut up.
Which means we’re just stuck with the possibility Christians may hijack a flight with their voices.
How is this not being belligerent? What if this was a MAGAt doing this (probably already is)?
If anything, this seems like a quick way for a fellow passenger to get annoyed and punch out the disruptive preacher. If this happened on a plane I was on, I’d clap for the person who decked the preacher. It really says something about how this “religion” is dying off if thos is a tactic they’re resorting to.
*Edit: if I were the flight crew, I’d start by asking the passenger to sit down. If they didn’t I’d warn the passenger with something like:
Ma’am, you are continuing to be being a disruption despite being told you knock it off. You can either sit down and be quiet, or you will be sat down and quieted. Please take your seat.
Then if they still insited, I’d either have an air marshall “take care of them” them, or I would.
I don’t disagree with your point, i am saying my belief is that they others are free to believe but not free to do whatever they want. There are laws for the things we can do and not do. We have the right (in the free world) to think what we want, in parts of the free world we are free to love who we want. Believe is something internal, like a thought or an opinion. I am not saying you should not use your freedom to persuade these people into having better beliefs, please go for it. But imo restricting what people are allowed to believe is as wrong as restricting someone from having certain opinions. But them having the freedom to have these believes does not mean we should just do nothing and sit idle. Please note that i am making a clear distinction between the freedom inside oneself (opinions, thoughts, beliefs) and acting on them. You are not and should not be allowed to do or say anything based on those internal things. If i believe my neighbour is an asshole, i am not and should not suddenly allowed to insult him.
Unfortunately, yes. I agree on the problem.
I don’t see the difference. They believe they are obligated to do those things, so they do those things.
Nobody can stop anybody from thinking their thoughts. My point is we should oppose false beliefs before they turn into harmful actions.
What is the difference? They believe that’s how they should act, so that’s how they act.
Constructive criticism can change behaviors for the better, if everyone is listening to reason. Your neighbor shouldn’t be an asshole, that hurts everybody.
Thank you. It is why I am a “militant” antitheist. I think that compromising with delusion gets innocent people killed needlessly.
Hence my comment. I dont think you want to see the difference. As long you act through legal action, I encourage you to follow your antitheist goals. Giving constructive criticism instead of insult to an asshole neighbour for example. The good people should, imo, take the high road as much as possible.