Skip to main content

View Diary: "No True Scotsman" and Jesus: UPDATE (89 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I like your understanding of Christianity (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Loge, Catte Nappe, Wee Mama

    but not your interpretations of semantics and semiotics.

    If a Christian says something like:

    No true Christian would oppose marriage equality!
    it could easily be read more as a statement about Christianity than about the speaker. And if the Christian says something like:
    No true Christian would oppose marriage equality! Jesus himself  [did something something something...]
    It could much more easily be read as a statement about Christianity than about the speaker. Only when the Christian says something like:
    No true Christian would oppose marriage equality! Why, just the other day I was saying to my dear gay friends...
    does it seem fair to interpret it as a statement about the speaker.

    If you don't give people that kind of leeway, then what is to stop you from saying that every statement is about the person making it? This diary is about you. This comment is about me. Etc.

    (Maybe those latter statements are true, but I prefer to think otherwise. (Oops.))

    Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

    by Nowhere Man on Tue Apr 10, 2012 at 11:13:03 AM PDT

    •  As I said, I think those (0+ / 0-)

      remarks are ways of derailing the issue-- dealing with the wrong done to GLBT people in this case --by making it a discussion about what Christians really believe rather than fighting the institutions promoting this inequality.  It's like the guy who shouts at the feminists saying "not all men are like that!"  True, but the issue was fighting the oppression of women.

      •  In most cases, (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Loge, Catte Nappe, HeyMikey

        all you need to do is to acknowledge the point, and get on with the discussion. That's all the other person is asking. If you make the discussion about the other person making the discussion about herself, then that's your issue.

        It's one thing to interject a temporary digression ("not all Christians are like that"); it's another thing to take that digression and make it your focus.

        Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

        by Nowhere Man on Tue Apr 10, 2012 at 11:30:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You keep doing this (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Wee Mama, Nowhere Man

        Proposing this as an either/or
        "a discussion about what Christians really believe rather than fighting the institutions promoting this inequality"
        When for just about everybody on this site it (including some who aren't Christian) it's a both/and
        "a discussion about what Christians really believe [as well as]fighting the institutions promoting this inequality"

        from a bright young conservative: “I’m watching my first GOP debate…and WE SOUND LIKE CRAZY PEOPLE!!!!”

        by Catte Nappe on Tue Apr 10, 2012 at 12:30:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think you understand that (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Nowhere Man

        repeating your thesis is not a valid response to specific criticism of your thesis.

        The study of law was certainly a strange discipline. -- Yukio Mishima

        by Loge on Tue Apr 10, 2012 at 12:45:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site