Hacker News Reader

The point I'm making is I'm not sure they're viewing it through that lens, but rather GP is dismissing the article because the author is Christian and _some_ of them are known to be against meditation. It does not segue that all Christians are against it. GP seems to be the biased one here with a preconceived opinion.

View on HN

My interpretation is that the author is Christian (he says this) and he is against meditation for reasons commonly given by many Christians to discourage people from meditating

> he is against meditation for reasons

Again, this is _your_ interpretation. They only said they're Christian, and you've decided this must be the reason they're against, and their opinion is worthless. You're just colouring their opinion with YOUR preconceptions.

Their opinion matches my experience, and other commenters, and I'm not Christian at all. Why are you taking it so personally? It's an intellectually stimulating topic, you're free to disagree without dismissing the person based on their religion.

I'm not unsympathetic with that stance, as every Christian I've ever met is fast to claim "there are also tolerant ones" - the majority are simply not. That's what a reputation does: It informs someone about what to expect. In this case it colours what is also said, both parties need to acknowledge this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com