| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In another thread we were discussing Islamic doctrines. In order to make my point I cited some passages from the Quran. One of the other people active in the thread replied that they were afraid of me, apparently because I had quoted the Quran and had therefore been "radicalized" somehow and was some sort of "threat" to the LGBTQ community.
Really? And they honestly expected to be taken seriously?? One wonders how they can get through the day without piddling themselves constantly. Somebody needs to lay off the Kool Aid and get a life. It should also be pointed out that attempting to play the "victim" card in a situation where no one has been victimized makes one's position even more farcical than it would be otherwise.
The first thing to point out is that while lawyers can drone on for hours about the laws that relate to the use of force by civilians, the actual principles involved are quite simple. Ultimately they are derived from Biblical law which is why I, as a conservative Christian, am bound to obey them. In a nutshell I can only use physical force to defend myself from an actual attack by somebody else, or in order to aid a relatively defenseless person who is being attacked. That’s it. It doesn’t matter how much I dislike somebody or disagree with what they’re saying. If they’re not actually attacking somebody I don’t get to use physical force against them. So, if you don’t want to be afraid of me, then don’t go around assaulting people. You won’t have anything to worry about.
It should also be pointed out that I have made abundantly clear in my postings on the subject that LGBTQs have the same rights that everybody else does. That necessarily includes the right to life. This means that neither I nor anybody else has the legitimate authority to hunt down LGBTQs in order to harm/maim/injure/kill them “just because”.
However, it should also be pointed out that as a conservative Christian I am called to stand for God’s moral law. In standing for God’s moral law I can only use persuasion and argumentation. I do not have the legitimate authority to attempt to force anybody to do anything (except to stop physically attacking other people). Thus after having made my point by saying that people should not engage in homosexual acts because such behavior is sinful, then there really isn’t too much more I can do. Trying to convert hard core (dis)believers on the other side is usually an exercise in futility. I am also not a fan of beating dead horses any more than actually necessary. However, if for whatever reason somebody finds that simple moral argument more than they can bear, I have two alternative suggestions for them. The first is that they change their behavior as necessary such that they can live their lives with a relatively clear conscience. The second alternative is that they figure out how to grow a spine. While in context I would prefer that people chose the first alternative, either one would be a substantial improvement.
I should also comment that trying to draw some sort of “moral equivalence” between conservative Christians who are attempting to use persuasion and argument in order to support God’s moral law and what the Islamic fundamentalists are doing by executing homosexuals in job lots only serves to show that the person making that argument doesn’t know what “moral equivalence” is. There are incredibly significant differences between simply stating a position that some people find disagreeable and slaughtering people.
Last but not least attempting to control a debate by shutting down the other side, using the mechanism of falsely accusing them of inciting people to violence, only serves to indicate that the person making that argument is even more biased/prejudiced than the person they are trying to shut down. In spite of my various disagreements with LGBTQs, I have never argued that they should be silenced.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
