Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Christian anti-SSM jeweler threatened after making rings for lesbian couple
Collapse
X
-
What?"Kahahaha! Let's get lunatic!"-Add LP
"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin is pride that apes humility"-Samuel Taylor Coleridge
Oh ye of little fiber. Do you not know what I've done for you? You will obey. ~Cerealman for Prez.
-
-
Originally posted by Spartacus View Posthttp://www.theamericanconservative.c...ails-they-lose
Via Rod Dreher"I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostThe comments section of a Dreher piece is always a good bit of agreeable reasoning, both supporting and dissenting commenters. In this case, I agree with some of the comments: yeah, the couple was wrong to expect their deposit back once they learned of the business owner's views; yeah, that's what you invite as a business owner when you publicly advertise those views in your shop; yeah, this isn't a big deal — customers, in general, are jerks and any public figure, even those people forced into that role by some news hound, are going to experience a lot of online criticism.
Dreher has gotten way too paranoid in the last six months to a year as he realized that this battle was well and truly lost.Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Spartacus View Posthttp://www.theamericanconservative.c...ails-they-lose
Via Rod DreherMicah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Spartacus View PostTo be fair, when anyone who so much as voices opposition to same-sex marriage can expect all sorts of nasty and anonymous threats, a little paranoia might be understandable.
Not that nasty threats, anonymous or otherwise, are in any way acceptable. But they are a staple of the Internet: you can't criticize gamers these days without getting nasty anonymous threats. A Dreher-level of paranoia there probably isn't all that rational."I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostI'm old enough to remember certain places (that you had to spend at least four years walkin' around) where voicing support for same-sex marriage got you a good deal of nasty comments and some whisper campaigns. I think if we tally up the oppression and abuse of the homosexual community vs. the oppression and abuse of the same-sex opponents, Dreher et al. have nothing to really worry about.
Not that nasty threats, anonymous or otherwise, are in any way acceptable. But they are a staple of the Internet: you can't criticize gamers these days without getting nasty anonymous threats. A Dreher-level of paranoia there probably isn't all that rational.
Any time people use politics as an excuse to dehumanize the opposition, when it becomes obvious that they're looking for excuses to hate, I tend to get just a little annoyed. There is absolutely nothing potentially ironic about that statement.Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Spartacus View Posthttp://www.theamericanconservative.c...ails-they-lose
Via Rod Dreher
Comment
-
Originally posted by Spartacus View PostTo be fair, when anyone who so much as voices opposition to same-sex marriage can expect all sorts of nasty and anonymous threats, a little paranoia might be understandable.
I'm curious however... let's say that someone expressed their sincerely held belief that two people of the Jewish faith ought not to be able to marry one another. This person feels that belonging to the Jewish faith is inherently wrong, and campaigns for the government to prohibit two Jews from marrying. What do you think is a justifiable level of response by the general public towards the person campaigning for that viewpoint to become law? How persecuted would Jewish people be justified in feeling if such views were widespread and if they were widely prohibited from marrying one another?
I encourage you to think over this analogy because I honestly think that people who are against same-sex marriage simply don't realize how inherently hurtful such a position is towards gay people. It's hard to find a more personal and hurtful place to threaten people and be nasty to them than in their relationships - people's marriages are really really important to them and to try and take away someone's marriage is about as personal and as hurtful as it gets. So when you say "when anyone who so much as voices opposition to same-sex marriage can expect all sorts of nasty and anonymous threats" I'm not really sure what to make of that sentence, because I'm not sure I'd agree that any level of nasty and anonymous threats can ever reach the level of hurtfulness that trying to take away people's marriages and their right to marry does - that's simply a whole other level of hurtful attack on their closest personal relationship and a fundamental diminishment of their status as humans that operates on a plane far above anything that can be achieved with simple verbal nastiness."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostI don't at all agree with or endorse nasty anonymous threats. But sadly it seems that's what the internet produces regularly these days in any situation on any issue.
I'm curious however... let's say that someone expressed their sincerely held belief that two people of the Jewish faith ought not to be able to marry one another. This person feels that belonging to the Jewish faith is inherently wrong, and campaigns for the government to prohibit two Jews from marrying. What do you think is a justifiable level of response by the general public towards the person campaigning for that viewpoint to become law? How persecuted would Jewish people be justified in feeling if such views were widespread and if they were widely prohibited from marrying one another?
Let's clarify this, ok? Are they also lobbying for the two Jews not to even be able to be together, or is it simply to deny them a piece of Government paper?That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostI don't at all agree with or endorse nasty anonymous threats. But sadly it seems that's what the internet produces regularly these days in any situation on any issue.
I'm curious however... let's say that someone expressed their sincerely held belief that two people of the Jewish faith ought not to be able to marry one another. This person feels that belonging to the Jewish faith is inherently wrong, and campaigns for the government to prohibit two Jews from marrying. What do you think is a justifiable level of response by the general public towards the person campaigning for that viewpoint to become law? How persecuted would Jewish people be justified in feeling if such views were widespread and if they were widely prohibited from marrying one another?
I encourage you to think over this analogy because I honestly think that people who are against same-sex marriage simply don't realize how inherently hurtful such a position is towards gay people. It's hard to find a more personal and hurtful place to threaten people and be nasty to them than in their relationships - people's marriages are really really important to them and to try and take away someone's marriage is about as personal and as hurtful as it gets. So when you say "when anyone who so much as voices opposition to same-sex marriage can expect all sorts of nasty and anonymous threats" I'm not really sure what to make of that sentence, because I'm not sure I'd agree that any level of nasty and anonymous threats can ever reach the level of hurtfulness that trying to take away people's marriages and their right to marry does - that's simply a whole other level of hurtful attack on their closest personal relationship and a fundamental diminishment of their status as humans that operates on a plane far above anything that can be achieved with simple verbal nastiness.
The sort of language you employ is going to be used again-- is already being used-- with reference to incest and polygamy, and when those campaigns gain more steam, what will your counterargument be? How could you possibly stand against the weight of your own words about how there is nothing more hurtful, nothing that effects a more fundamental diminishment of their status as humans than denying them marriage?
But let's set that aside for a moment and think about how the rhetoric you use also gives a warrant to the people who issue these threats, anonymous and otherwise. If there's nothing more hurtful than denying someone the right to marry, then effectively denying someone the right to participate in the economic or social life of their country, telling them that they don't belong in civilized society-- that becomes somehow acceptable despite the fact that denying someone their right to participate at all in the public square is, in fact, far more dehumanizing than denying them tax benefits.Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Juvenal, Today, 02:50 PM
|
0 responses
9 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Juvenal
Today, 02:50 PM
|
||
Started by RumTumTugger, Today, 02:30 PM
|
0 responses
14 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Today, 03:44 PM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, Today, 12:07 PM
|
2 responses
26 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Today, 12:57 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 03:46 PM
|
19 responses
233 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
Today, 12:33 PM
|
||
Started by Ronson, Yesterday, 01:52 PM
|
3 responses
44 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Today, 03:12 PM
|
Comment