The Washington Post is in a bit of trouble for disparaging Lynchburg, although really it’s for disparaging religions conservatism. A freelancer promoting Lynchburg wrote of her low expectations, writing that “its reputation as home of conservative Christian-oriented Liberty University and the late Jerry Falwell hardly bodes well for style, culture and night life.” The ombudsman thought this was unfair.
But, on a few minutes’ reflection, I think that the original statement may have been correct. Religious conservatives of all religions oppose the sorts of things traditionally associated with the sort of fun sought by the reviewer: dancing, alcohol, dating (even the mixing of sexes at all), art, ostentation in all of its forms, etc. Whether I’m thinking about conservative Christianity (whether Falwell or Amish), conservatism Islam (whether Taliban or good ol’-fashioned conservative Muslims), or conservative Judiasm (I’m thinking orthodox), all of the Abrahamic faiths are certainly known for being dour on the conservative end of their spectrums. (I don’t know enough about Hinduism or Buddhism to consider those.) Ignoring the specification of Lynchburg, it seems to me that, as a rule, religiously conservative regions aren’t liable to have much in the way of style, culture (in the arts sense), or night life.
I write about this here because I’m curious whether anybody can correct me. Are there any exceptions to this presumed rule?