3 ms·

"Rules"? LOL! The interpretation of the rules vary so much that there are Christians who think Catholicism (and Unitarianism!) are not Christian faiths. The re

"Rules"? LOL! The interpretation of the rules vary so much that there are Christians who think Catholicism (and Unitarianism!) are not Christian faiths. The repeal of Prohibition was not anti-Muslim, despite it re-legalizing alcohol. Laws regulating the production of pork for human consumption are not anti-Muslim either. The repeal of adultery laws was not anti-Christian, despite the Bible firmly prohibiting adultery. The repeal of Sunday closing laws was not anti-Christian, despite another Biblical prohibition of working on the Sabbath. (And it isn't like Christians are 100% in agreement about when the Sabbath actually is.) Laws allowing divorce are not anti-Christian, despite how some people interpret Jesus's statement in Matthew "what God has joined together, let no one separate" as meaning that a Christian marriage does not allow divorce. Just like none of those are anti-Christian, a low allowing homosexual marriage is also not anti-Christian. Millions of Christians find no disagreement between the rules of Christianity and the legalization of homosexual marriage just like millions of divorced Christians find no disagreement between the rules of Christianity and their divorce. If you think homosexual marriage is against God's will, don't marry someone of your sex. If you think it's against God's will to work on Sunday, don't do it. If you think it's against God's will to commit adultery, don't do it. If you think it's against God's will to wear clothing woven from two different kinds of thread, as stated in Leviticus, don't do it.

jpcfl 3y ago
I’m not here to debate theology. I’m here to point out that using epithets like homophobe to attack someone for his religious beliefs is inappropriate.
- eesmith 3y ago
  You said it was specifically anti-Christian, not this broader claim of "religious belief". Allowing secular homosexual marriage is no more anti-Christian than allowing secular divorce. We do not give carte blanche to religious viewpoints. People can hold religious beliefs which are sexist, racist, or homophobic, as you surely must know. Others are free to call them out for their sexism, racism, and homophobia. Are you going to attack a Christian whose religious belief is that his faith supports homosexual marriage? Are you going to deny that Christian his liberty to tell a homophobic Christian that those homophobic views are not Christ-like? If I have the strongly held religious belief that I must proselytize my faith, even at work during break time, and a co-worker objects and does not want to listen to my proselytizing, then under US Title VII Civil rights law my employer must stop me, even if I think it's an attack against my Christian faith, because in our secular system the religious rights of one do not override the religious rights of another. Since millions of Christians support homosexual marriage, it makes no sense to say that support for secular homosexual marriage, and opposition to those against it, is anti-Christian. The United Church of Canada, which is the largest Protestant denomination in Canada, is not anti-Christian. The Episcopal Church is not anti-Christian. The Church of Denmark, which is Denmark's state religion, is not anti-Christian. All of them support homosexual marriage not just in the secular sense but sanctified within church practices. You are free to say they don't actually follow God's Word, as clearly expressed in the Bible, but then it's more like yet another doctrinal disagreement between the Dutch Reformed Churches, which you've mistaken as a mass anti-Christian attack.
  - jpcfl 3y ago
    > Allowing secular homosexual marriage is no more anti-Christian than allowing secular divorce. I said using the epithet “homophobe” to attack a Christian for a his beliefs is wrong. You’re arguing with a strawman.
    - eesmith 3y ago
      And I say that using Christianity as a get-out-of-jail-free card for any bigoted belief is wrong. I never used the epithet "homophobe". I said "Using Brave helps put money into the clown's pocket. Money that could be used to, for example, to fund homophobic initiatives." If that's anti-Christian, then you think Episcopals and millions of others are anti-Christian, which places you in the category of street preachers who insist their view of Christianity are the only true ones. Is it only "homophobe" you are concerned about? Are there epithets you think we can use to attack a specific Christian for a specific belief? Can we agree that it's okay to use the epithet "racist" about a Christian holding the religious belief that Blacks have the Curse of Cain on them, and that this curse justified their enslavement? Plenty of Christian Americans used to believe this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_and_mark_of_Cain#Baptist_segregation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_and_mark_of_Cain#Baptist... Christians disagree with each other about their beliefs all the freaking time, even to using epithets like "heretic", "blasphemer", "idol worshiper" and "antichrist" against other Christians. Since you don't have answers to any of these issues, I don't think you've thought about the logic behind the argument you are trying to make.
      - jpcfl 3y ago
        I didn’t accuse you of using the term homophobe (though, now you’re calling him a bigot in the same vain). I was speaking about the how author of this article is using rhetoric is divisive and rude, and how “homophobe” in this context is an anti-Christian slur (Eich is Roman Catholic). That is the argument I’m trying to make. I have not argued the merits of his beliefs.

jpcfl 3y ago

I’m not here to debate theology. I’m here to point out that using epithets like homophobe to attack someone for his religious beliefs is inappropriate.

eesmith 3y ago
You said it was specifically anti-Christian, not this broader claim of "religious belief". Allowing secular homosexual marriage is no more anti-Christian than allowing secular divorce. We do not give carte blanche to religious viewpoints. People can hold religious beliefs which are sexist, racist, or homophobic, as you surely must know. Others are free to call them out for their sexism, racism, and homophobia. Are you going to attack a Christian whose religious belief is that his faith supports homosexual marriage? Are you going to deny that Christian his liberty to tell a homophobic Christian that those homophobic views are not Christ-like? If I have the strongly held religious belief that I must proselytize my faith, even at work during break time, and a co-worker objects and does not want to listen to my proselytizing, then under US Title VII Civil rights law my employer must stop me, even if I think it's an attack against my Christian faith, because in our secular system the religious rights of one do not override the religious rights of another. Since millions of Christians support homosexual marriage, it makes no sense to say that support for secular homosexual marriage, and opposition to those against it, is anti-Christian. The United Church of Canada, which is the largest Protestant denomination in Canada, is not anti-Christian. The Episcopal Church is not anti-Christian. The Church of Denmark, which is Denmark's state religion, is not anti-Christian. All of them support homosexual marriage not just in the secular sense but sanctified within church practices. You are free to say they don't actually follow God's Word, as clearly expressed in the Bible, but then it's more like yet another doctrinal disagreement between the Dutch Reformed Churches, which you've mistaken as a mass anti-Christian attack.
- jpcfl 3y ago
  > Allowing secular homosexual marriage is no more anti-Christian than allowing secular divorce. I said using the epithet “homophobe” to attack a Christian for a his beliefs is wrong. You’re arguing with a strawman.
  - eesmith 3y ago
    And I say that using Christianity as a get-out-of-jail-free card for any bigoted belief is wrong. I never used the epithet "homophobe". I said "Using Brave helps put money into the clown's pocket. Money that could be used to, for example, to fund homophobic initiatives." If that's anti-Christian, then you think Episcopals and millions of others are anti-Christian, which places you in the category of street preachers who insist their view of Christianity are the only true ones. Is it only "homophobe" you are concerned about? Are there epithets you think we can use to attack a specific Christian for a specific belief? Can we agree that it's okay to use the epithet "racist" about a Christian holding the religious belief that Blacks have the Curse of Cain on them, and that this curse justified their enslavement? Plenty of Christian Americans used to believe this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_and_mark_of_Cain#Baptist_segregation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_and_mark_of_Cain#Baptist... Christians disagree with each other about their beliefs all the freaking time, even to using epithets like "heretic", "blasphemer", "idol worshiper" and "antichrist" against other Christians. Since you don't have answers to any of these issues, I don't think you've thought about the logic behind the argument you are trying to make.
    - jpcfl 3y ago
      I didn’t accuse you of using the term homophobe (though, now you’re calling him a bigot in the same vain). I was speaking about the how author of this article is using rhetoric is divisive and rude, and how “homophobe” in this context is an anti-Christian slur (Eich is Roman Catholic). That is the argument I’m trying to make. I have not argued the merits of his beliefs.