He didn't attack the beliefs of all Christians. He attacked the beliefs of some Christians and there's nothing wrong with that. You attack the beliefs that make bullies bully. I doubt you would have a problem with him attack white supremacist beliefs or beliefs that being small in stature is a sign weakness that should be exploited. This is the same thing except that some people think that irrational beliefs held by Christians should be immune.
I didn't assume anything. I took the "gay community" quote from the tweet Josie posted. Take this up with the person who made the tweet.You're assuming that there is some monolithic "gay community." There is not.
Gay Conservatives Demand Dan Savage Apologize for Anti-Christian Tirade - Dan Savage - Fox Nation
First, there's a time and a place for a riff that turns into a meltdown rant, and a lecture to high school students attending a journalism conference wasn't that time or place. Of course, you can't always predict when you're going to crack up and lose your good sense and judgment, LOL.
Second, there are gay conservatives who are also people of faith, and Savage isn't helping them one darned bit by Bible-bashing and all his crap about how the Bible gets the "easiest moral question that man has ever faced wrong" and got human sexuality all wrong too. He's exacerbating the conflict that many gay Christians experience, and I resent it.
It is EXACTLY what he said, you just refuse to hear it.Its not what he said...it was the way he said it and the insults included...
He didn't attack the beliefs of all Christians. He attacked the beliefs of some Christians and there's nothing wrong with that. You attack the beliefs that make bullies bully. I doubt you would have a problem with him attack white supremacist beliefs or beliefs that being small in stature is a sign weakness that should be exploited. This is the same thing except that some people think that irrational beliefs held by Christians should be immune.
Again, you keep missing it, the attack is upon the message first and foremost. Second, the attack on the person comes when they refuse to see the irrationality of holding to their view.
Those kids are old enough to be challenged on their views since they are capable of acting out with those views.
Great post, Gina. You and I have talked about this, before. No matter what you believe, attacking people and putting them on the defensive only makes them dig in more. Many of the attitudes that have changed in me have done so because people like you, and others, were willing to hear me out first.
I agree that the way he said it was not at all conducive to discussion. I've said many times to atheists on this board that when they say things like "imaginary friend" and such, they get negative reactions because of how, not what, they said. However, in this case, we're talking about bigotry that stems from inconsistent and in turn, irrational, beliefs - the belief that what the Bible says about homosexuality is correct, but that we can just ignore what it says about slavery and other things.Its not what he said...it was the way he said it and the insults included...
He didn't seem to be applying it to all Christians. It looked like he was applying it to Christians who do what he mentioned in the video.Yea attacking the beliefs of some Christians, especially when those beliefs are bigoted is fine.
But he applied it broadly to all Christians, then he called those who left, pansies.
Sorry but his speech was **** and didn't do anything to advance his cause.
What's the point of speaking to people that already agree with you?
Great post, Gina. You and I have talked about this, before. No matter what you believe, attacking people and putting them on the defensive only makes them dig in more. Many of the attitudes that have changed in me have done so because people like you, and others, were willing to hear me out first.
First off, they know who Dan Savage is. You apparently don't. The suicides of gay teens is a topic among HS journalist students. The cause, the motivation, of the bullying was the the point. Context just seems to be an issue, but then I didn't expect much.How many of those kids act out on their views?
How do we even know what their views are?
This anti bully speech was dumb in the first place.
I'm guessing the vast majority of the people present, don't bully in the first place.
To review, Dan Savage was invited to the JEA/NSPA high school journalists' convention. Here is what the promo said:
"Dan Savage was already a popular syndicated columnist when he created the “It Gets Better” video project. He’ll speak at 1 p.m. on Friday, April 13, about alternative media, social media and creating a movement against bullying."
JEA/NSPA Seattle 2012
The "B.S. in the Bible" rant doesn't appear to be relevant to the topic, and the offensive language wasn't appropriate for this audience. Savage went off his chain.
Again, you keep missing it, the attack is upon the message first and foremost. Second, the attack on the person comes when they refuse to see the irrationality of holding to their view.
Those kids are old enough to be challenged on their views since they are capable of acting out with those views.
I think that's probably what happened too. The school didn't know he was going to start Bible-bashing.
Moderator's Warning: |
I see, when giving a speech about the root causes of the bullying, you should avoid talking about the root causes.No, you keep missing it. Savage was invited to keynote on anti-bullying efforts and the use of alternative social media to help, not to launch an anti-Bible screed. And as good old Aristotle pointed out, if you abuse your audience, you lose them.
A lot of people were clapping though.No, you keep missing it. Savage was invited to keynote on anti-bullying efforts and the use of alternative social media to help, not to launch an anti-Bible screed. And as good old Aristotle pointed out, if you abuse your audience, you lose them.
He didn't seem to be applying it to all Christians. It looked like he was applying it to Christians who do what he mentioned in the video.
I agree that calling people "pansies" wasn't the best idea, but again, if he were talking about other types of bigotry like racism and he called racists who walked out "pansies", I doubt people would have a problem with it. It's the sacred nature of Christianity that gets people frustrated about things like this.
People make speeches to people who agree with them all the time. Those kinds of speeches can have many purposes.
First off, they know who Dan Savage is. You apparently don't. The suicides of gay teens is a topic among HS journalist students. The cause, the motivation, of the bullying was the the point. Context just seems to be an issue, but then I didn't expect much.
No, it wasn't. In fact it was to journalist HS students, those who write for HS papers, who have an influence on their audience.He didn't really differentiate.
Yes, but in this case, this is speech to a general audience of high school students.
Rather than beat up one group of people, he should of been more generic in his criticism.
Instead he went full retard on Christians.
Just dumb.
Yep. A lot of people who teach their children that homosexuality is a sin and bad and that gay people can't get married are teaching their children to think of others as less than them. If you teach a lot of kids something like that, then they'll go straight to bullying gay kids. A lot of Christians who think homosexuality is a sin don't want to admit that because then they would have to share some of the blame for anti-gay bullying and its consequences.I see, when giving a speech about the root causes of the bullying, you should avoid talking about the root causes.
Brilliant!
You learn to hate, the hate comes from teaching. The primary source of hatred towards homosexuality in the US is the Bible.Religious people aren't the only ones who bully gays.
More often than not, people hide behind religion to justify bullying gays, when the truth is closer to them being general douche bags.
Going after the religion is dumb, when the individuals motivations are not really religious in nature.
No, it wasn't. In fact it was to journalist HS students, those who write for HS papers, who have an influence on their audience.
I heard it much differently than you then.He didn't really differentiate.
Not dumb. Most anti-gay bigotry in this country is rooted in Christian opinions on homosexuality. If this was a speech about attacking the root causes of bullying and specifically gay bullying, it would be dumb to leave out one of the main root causes. He could have been more classy about it, but then again, nobody would care about his presentation if it hadn't been about Christianity.Yes, but in this case, this is speech to a general audience of high school students.
Rather than beat up one group of people, he should of been more generic in his criticism.
Instead he went full retard on Christians.
Just dumb.
Yep. A lot of people who teach their children that homosexuality is a sin and bad and that gay people can't get married are teaching their children to think of others as less than them. If you teach a lot of kids something like that, then they'll go straight to bullying gay kids. A lot of Christians who think homosexuality is a sin don't want to admit that because then they would have to share some of the blame for anti-gay bullying and its consequences.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?