You are taking his quote out of context and we are not talking about what could have been said. He also compared himself to a murderer, a homosexual, a liar, a cheater, everyone is a sinner. His statement was not homophobic, it was not hateful. My own husband does not think I will be in Heaven with him because I don't believe in his church's beliefs. That doesn't mean he hates me. He wishes, just like this man posted, that I would accept his God and those beliefs.
Moo
I've read this whole thread and your posts have been so thoughtful, Yoda. There is one thing, though, about this last post I need to point out. I'm seeing it in most, if not all of the posts written in support of the teacher's freedom to give testimony; DENIAL of the experience of the homosexuals and sympathizers.
It is surprisingly arrogant for anyone to tell another person "Your experience is not legitimate."
This teacher's testimony was not abusive or painful or degrading to you. But it was especially so to others. Unless you (the generic you) were present and practically reading the mind of the teacher at the time he wrote the post, your interpretation of his words is as good, or not, as Nova's (for instance).
I sense a lack of basic empathy from the social conservatives toward less conservative points of view, as if social conservatives believe they are THAT different, fundamentally, than those who look askance at their agenda. Or, those who "defy" their agenda. Where did all this arrogant ownership of the human experience come from??? I know it is a common assumption of the majority class, that is explicit throughout history, but are American religious conservatives really a majority class? So entitled to "share" their beliefs that the confusion, pain or outrage against it will be dismissed by simply saying "His words are not hateful."
Experiences that contradict yours (the generic yours) are not illegitimate, or necessarily skewed or based upon the wrong information. I have yet to encounter a social conservative who approaches opposition with an attitude of openness, concern and curiosity. I'm seeing a lot of dismissal on this thread of for the experience of those who do not share in the religious/conservative agenda.
I am curious about YOU (the generic, again lol), and especially so when the debate concerns facts and other verifiable data. This is the one ground we can speak the same language; because faith and belief are not mutually shared, we have to find a common ground elsewhere.
