I just found this iReport video of some Kristian Krusaders harassing attendees of a gay marriage ceremony. Listen to the confused words coming out of the guy's mouth with the Jesus shirt on.
He seems harmless enough now, but how much would more it take to get to the point where Kristian Krusaders like these end up having their own anti-gay kristallnacht event?
The Kristian declares at one point that this gay marriage ceremony, where he himself is not getting married, somehow persecutes his faith! Fine. Two can play at that game. Let's assume that this guy's religion is being persecuted by two non-Kristians who are having a gay wedding. Using that logic, it can be demanded in return that all Kristians stop wearing clothes and stop reproducing because doing so likewise persecutes my faith.
If only the government didn't stick its nose into marriage either way, then everyone would be free to recognize or not recognize whatever marriages they want.
4 comments:
Wow, that dumwit looks like if all the logic in the world could be packed in a single pill, and he would swallow it, he still would go on a rampage to defend talking snakes and rascist st00pid liars.
Good thing the court seems to be stepping to modern age.
Someone unfamiliar with the psychological palsy that is Christianity, might wonder what this guy was trying to could accomplish by making such an ass of himself. At least in the montage, he didn't seem at all able or prepared to explain how the couples lining up for their ceremonies were "persecuting" him. Many Christians have a tendency to mistake being offended for being persecuted. Psychologically, Christians are eager to be persecuted, because if they aren't, then their salvation doubts can easily be brought to the surface and tumultuously aggravated. If the world is not persecuting them, then they aren’t reflecting the righteousness they claim for their god. But in a culture where Christianity is the norm, whence cometh persecution? The believer who is eager to quell his salvation doubts has few alternatives here, and an obvious one is to drum it up deliberately, to actively provoke unmistakable targets, hoping that at least some of them lash back at him so that he can both justify his resentment of them and also settle in his own mind that finally he is in fact being persecuted. In the end, however, it turns out that he merely broadcasts to the world that he's simply an immature brat making an utter ass of himself. He certainly wins no converts, and he goes home completely unsatisfied by the experience, because didn't get what he came for, which is validation. And as we already know, nothing in reality will authentically validate the Christian's whim-worship; he’s stuck in an out-of-control spiral as he tries to outrun the fact that he’s been had big time.
I’m sure glad these aren’t my problems.
Regards,
Dawson
Aren't we forgetting something here? Like the fact that both the ceremony, and the state of being married, has its origin in religion?
If we are going to allow men (or women) to marry each other, then where do we draw the line? Will we then have people wanting to 'marry' their dog or cat? Or their budgie?
Some third-party Marrying their cat wouldn't persecute Christians any more than their marrying someone of the same sex.
But since cats, dogs and budgies aren't persons under the law, you are aware you can't marry them any more than you can marry your coffee table, right?
Your arguments is irrational hyperbole.
Post a Comment