3 ms·

> Allowing secular homosexual marriage is no more anti-Christian than allowing secular divorce. I said using the epithet “homophobe” to attack a Christian for

by 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.

by jpcfl 3y ago

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.