tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9149446.post689810731415094331..comments2023-10-10T10:34:10.843-06:00Comments on The Nexus of Assholery: The Death of an ArgumentPatrick Rosshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04592482865332628189noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9149446.post-7243435951967546012009-04-30T01:07:00.000-06:002009-04-30T01:07:00.000-06:00Yes. And my point is that those individuals are on...Yes. And my point is that those individuals are only lying if they don't honestly believe they're being persecuted.<br /><br />I'm certain most of them don't really believe they're being persecuted. I don't condone their dishonesty. But I'm equally certain that many of them <I>do</I>, and as bemused as I personally am at this view, I won't condemn them for it.Patrick Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04592482865332628189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9149446.post-51779669100344305992009-04-29T20:00:00.000-06:002009-04-29T20:00:00.000-06:00My point wasn't the legitimacy of expressing views...My point wasn't the legitimacy of expressing views about same sex marriage (or any issue), or civil disobedience as a way of drawing attention to those views: I agree with you on that. <br /><br />My point was to draw attention to the hypocrisy of lying, by deliberately omitting key facts, in order to defend the position of a religion that explicitly condemns lying.Balbulicanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03909755014063452689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9149446.post-55674160997613379552009-04-29T12:51:00.000-06:002009-04-29T12:51:00.000-06:00Well, even though this does take us off topic a bi...Well, even though this <I>does</I> take us off topic a bit...<br /><br />First off, I disagree with the views of those particular Christians.<br /><br />But beyond that, I'd remind you that civil disobedience has been used to protest numerous issues that people <I>believed</I> to be unjust. The anti-Vietnam war movement used civil disobedience, as did the civil rights movement.<br /><br />I'd be more inclined to agree that the Vietnam war and the denial of civil rights to blacks were unjust. The latter case I'd posit is much more factual than simply a matter of opinion.<br /><br />The point of civil disobedience has always been to make the authorities appear and feel heavy-handed in arresting peaceful protesters. It has often worked.<br /><br />Few people would agree that it's just to arrest a Christian activist on the grounds that they're protesting same-sex marriage. Although I personally support same-sex marriage fully, I don't hold it as an issue that is in any way above reproach. I disagree with the people who oppose it, but I respect their right to oppose it. I certainly expect that they'll do so peacefully.<br /><br />If organizers or police have these protesters arrested they have to understand that they run the risk of appearing heavy-handed and oppresive. Naturally, that perception will resonate best with individuals wbo are themselves Christians who oppose same-sex marriage.<br /><br />Some of those people honestly do believe that their religion <I>is</I> being persecuted by the very act of legalizing same-sex marriage. I disagree with their hysterics, but just because they're being hysterical doesn't necessarily mean they don't believe it's true.<br /><br />The act of praying in protest at a gay pride day celebration basically comes down to the simple right that Christians have the right to pray, and they have the right to do so in any public place.<br /><br />The organizers of that gay pride celebration have the option of continuing to conduct their celebration, simply ignoring the protesters. On an increasing business, just ignoring folks such as these has proven to be fairly effective. The Westboro Baptist Church has decreased the number of pickets they actually show up to conduct because people have started to simply ignore them. It's probably lot easier to do so now than it was four years ago.<br /><br />That being said, if we agree that the individuals in the case you've raised are being dishonest, and don't honestly believe that the individuals in question are being persecuted -- and we don't agree on this -- that dishonesty wouldn't be excusable.<br /><br />But nor would the dishonesty of an individual who has transformed accusations of dishonesty into a core argument against his philosophical opponents.Patrick Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04592482865332628189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9149446.post-15421529606263216902009-04-29T06:33:00.000-06:002009-04-29T06:33:00.000-06:00More broadly, though, don't you find some validity...More broadly, though, don't you find some validity to an atheist's puzzlement over Christian zealots who do, in fact, lie for Jesus? <br /><br />I'm thinking of instances in which Christian bloggers publish accounts dripping with astonished indignation about the "persecution" of some poor Christians arrested "just because they were praying." In one example I'm thinking of, it turns out that the "poor Christians" were anti-same sex marriage demonstrators who chose to "pray" laying face down in the middle of a gay pride day celebration in a park, in front of the stage. They had been asked by the organizers AND by police not to disrupt the event. <br /><br />We could debate their tactics. But my point is, the omission of that information from the reports signficantly changed the nature of a reader's response to the event. <br /><br />So how does one justify such dishonesty - either by omission or commission - in defense of a faith whose basic tenets include an injunction not to lie?Balbulicanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03909755014063452689noreply@blogger.com