3 ms·

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.

by jpcfl 3y ago

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.

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.

by 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.