"It's okay for Christians throughout centuries to exterminate races and for their priests to rape little kids throughout decades, but trying to give the people the power to think and be individual, that's evil?"

Glenn Danzig presents a scathing critique of religious hypocrisy and questions prevailing moral judgments within Christianity. He draws attention to grave historical abuses, genocide perpetrated against entire groups in the name of religion and the long-term sexual abuse of children by priests, which was often concealed by church authorities. These acts, according to Danzig, have frequently been excused or minimized across centuries, revealing a troubling double standard within religious institutions and among their defenders.

Simultaneously, Danzig condemns how these same religious authorities have demonized or outright opposed efforts to empower individuals, particularly through critical thinking and personal autonomy. Promoting individuality and independent thought has historically been branded as a threat to church authority or dismissed as dangerous, sometimes even equated with evil or heresy. For Danzig, this inversion of values exposes a deeper moral inconsistency: institutionalized violence and abuse are tolerated or overlooked, but autonomy and reason are condemned.

The quotation also echoes a broader societal frustration with entrenched power structures that enforce conformity and suppress dissent. By juxtaposing horrendous acts with the demonization of self-empowerment, Danzig implies that the true threat to these institutions is not immorality, but rather the prospect of losing control over individuals’ minds and lives. Encouraging people to question, to seek knowledge, and to define their own morality undermines religious authority and the power dynamics it maintains.

Danzig’s words reflect anger at centuries of institutional impunity and point toward the importance of skepticism and autonomy as moral goods. They serve as a call to question which behaviors society labels as evil or acceptable, and who gets to decide. Ultimately, he highlights the contradiction between the professed moral values of Christian tradition and the historical reality of its actions, urging a reevaluation of moral priorities and the courage to think independently.