Blameblakeart’s comment to my post about the school district that condemned a student’s high school newspaper anti-gay adoption column, part of a “pro vs. con” feature approved by the editors and faculty advisor, illustrates a point that was the subtext of my post but never explicitly stated. It should have been, but blameblakeart shows how it’s done. The productive, educational, fair and persuasive way to rebut any argument is by using facts and logic, not to just condemn it as “offensive” or “bullying,” or to discourage future expressions of unpopular points of view. That is true in school and out of it.
Here is his Comment of the Day on the post, “Let’s Have An Open Debate on Both Sides of This Controversial Issue. Wait…Your Side Offends Me. Shut Up. You’re A Bully.” I’ll have a comment at the end:
“I am not gay and I am a recovering Catholic. I am all for free and open debate. But the Anti-Gay adoption opinion has to get his “facts” straight. To the best of my knowledge, there is nowhere in the New Testament where “Jesus states in the Bible that homosexuality is (a) detestable act and sin..” Where are these so-called “Christians” getting their info?
“All throughout the gospel of John, We find all of the references to “the disciple whom Jesus loved” in the book of John (John 13:23, John 19:26, John 20:2 and John 21:7, John 21:20). While the Gospel of John does not specifically identify its author, and “the disciple whom Jesus loved” is nowhere explicitly named in Scripture. But who is to say that this particular disciple didn’t have a romantic relationship with Jesus? It can’t be proven either way by modern means – unless there are new or suppressed scriptures that come into the debate that prove otherwise.
“What I have come to learn in my short life here is that “History is shaped by those who control the debate, who frame the argument and who beat their drum the loudest. This poor kid has been for lack of a better word “brainwashed” by those that want to use homosexuality as a wedge issue, nothing more. Those that protest too much about being gay usually have those feelings themselves. Any loving environment does a fantastic job of raising what we would deem a “normal” upbringing, period, with certain variables of exceptions.
“I also agree that the school board is 100% wrong for coming down on this kid, as completely clueless as he is.”
I’m back, with two notes:
- While my post quoted a part of the student’s column in which he, apparently erroneously, references Jesus, the moral objection to homosexuality has its origins in the Old Testament, and Brandon’s anti-homosexuality quotes from that book of the Bible are accurate.
- I wouldn’t be so certain that Brandon holds the views the he argues for in his column. Pro vs. Con features often involve two writers being asked to research an advocacy position and present it in opposition to the adverse argument. In debate competitions the debaters the position assigned to them; lawyers in trial similarly argue for positions they may not personally believe. He may not be clueless. Maybe he just drew the short straw.
Ethics Alarms 
Good point about his not necessarily believing what he wrote. Back in the days I used to teach speech classes, I would assign students to deliver two speeches on the same topic, arguing opposite positions. The whole idea was to examine the use of rhetoric, of evidence, of argumentation. I should have remembered that before commenting on the original post.
That reminds me; I once volunteered to represent John McCain’s environmental platform at a high school assembly about the 2008 election, not because I was conservative by any means, but simply because nobody else bothered to step up, and I was already somewhat familiar with it.
Well, I forgot about it too—oddly, it was the graphic of the male and female student fencing that got my attention. I bet these same too have done this with other topics. I agree that this topic was a bad choice for a high school paper. On the other hand, when I was editorial editor of my high school paper, it is exactly the kind of issue I would have visited, because I liked shaking things up and starting arguments. Yes, even then.
I wonder why this line of argument applies only to homosexuality.
Are those who strongly oppose Catholics have secret Catholic feelings?
Does the MADD leadership have secret feelings in favor of drunk driving?
Is the Southern Poverty law Center led by people with secret racist feelings?
Was Code Pink led by people with secret pro-war feelings?
I responded to this same comment on the original post. This comment is misrepresenting the different situations.
On the homosexuality side, the argument is that “This thing that hurts nobody is Sinful!!! Nobody can be allowed to do it!” I don’t see the parallel argument about drunk driving, racism, anti-war, or anti-religion sentiment (inter-religion attacks also are a whole different category).
Ryan White was killed by sodomite blood.
And before you argue that homosexuality does not always cause AIDS, note that drunk driving does not always cause injuries or death.
Poe’s law strikes again, so I have to respond to this.
Both gay sex and straight sex can transmit HIV, and this is just about completely eradicated by condoms. Also, non-fluid transfer acts are considered especially wicked if they’re homosexual in nature.
Also, homosexuality causes aids??? I guess heterosexuality causes herpes.
I write this in response to what someone wrote at the beginning of this blog. He wrote:
-“All throughout the gospel of John, We find all of the references to “the disciple whom Jesus loved” in the book of John (John 13:23, John 19:26, John 20:2 and John 21:7, John 21:20). While the Gospel of John does not specifically identify its author, and “the disciple whom Jesus loved” is nowhere explicitly named in Scripture. But who is to say that this particular disciple didn’t have a romantic relationship with Jesus? It can’t be proven either way by modern means – unless there are new or suppressed scriptures that come into the debate that prove otherwise.”-
Christ commanded us to Love our neighbor as ourselves. Mathew 22:37. He commanded us to love our enemies as ourselves. Matthew 5:44. We must love all those who we come in contact with. That is the command of Christ Jesus our LORD. Those people are our neighbors. It is a logical thing, (and if you disagree with me, you are a fool) that man does not have a romantic relationship with every person he meets, and the same for a woman. And yet Christ Jesus commanded us to Love them. What does that mean? “Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade it self, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. love never fails.” 1 Corinthians 13:4-8a. This is true love. It is a self sacrifice and to love another above ourselves. Christ showed us the extant of His love when He laid down His life on the cross. He was blameless and has never and will never sin. If Christ had “romantic relations” with the disciple He loved then He would not have been able to die on the cross and experience complete forsakeness by God His Father. He was a perfect man, and to hint otherwise is blaspheme. How dare you even hint that Christ might have had gay relations with a man? He was clean according to the Old Testament. He fulfilled the Old Testament, and never broke the command that we find in Leviticus 20:13. And woe to him to dares think otherwise. God’s Word is true, and Christ was true man and true God. He kept the complete perfectness that was required. And He forbids any unchaste acts such as homosexual. It is detestable in his eyes. I hope you will learn from this, and repent of the things you said. For to hear the Name of my God so profaned makes me tremble with fear. May God show you the way you must walk, and repent from your evil talk.
Take it away, TGT!!!!!
Can I just say this is one big honking mass of circular reasoning? Throw in some appeals to authority and a poisoning the well, and that hits the high points.
I’m also entertained that someone would tremble in fear because someone else on the internet blasphemed. Can anyone help me comprehend how that makes sense? Is God going to smite Roelf because blameblakeart did something bad? What kind of God would do that? I mean, Jesus Christ, wasn’t he all about the love? Not if he’s smiting Roelf here.
Does Roelf tremble because he thinks that anyone who disagrees with his own perfect interpretation of God is liable to kill him in his sleep?
Maybe it’s just that thinking of alternate interpretations cause Roelf to doubt his own interpretation. That’ll puts the “fear of God” into a moron. Literally!
I would like to apologize and replace that “a moron” with “the close minded”. My bad. I let me emotion get the better of me.
As an addendum, while that last suggestion does occur, it tends to be incoherent, at least with christianity. It doesn’t matter if you’ve been wrong. Once you figure out what’s right, you can just honestly repent for your prior mistaken beliefs and be okay.
ILet me write this.
If someone in medieval Europe had suggested that Jesus Christ was in a homosexual relationship, he would have been burned at the stake for heresy.
So, you’re saying that religion has led people to do horrible things without any sane reason? I agree!!!
Defaming Jesus Christ is a perfectly good reason.
Thanks for making my point for me.
I fear and tremble because the Name of God is being blasphemed. Not because I am afraid but out of reverence for God. Yes, you can say I tremble because I am angry. What loving person would not be angry if the name of the one he/she loves the most is blasphemed? God is my Father through Christ, and He has paid for my sin. For we must all love the LORD our God above all. That is why I tremble, I tremble because the name of God is being blasphemed and that makes me angry. I also tremble with fear because I know what God has laid in store for those who blaspheme His name. I am not guiltless from this, but I know that I have been forgiven because God has chosen me to be His son. But those who do not seek forgiveness and repent from their evil way will be cast in to the burning lake of fire, that God has prepared for the Devil and his followers. I tremble because God is great! But woe to those who turn to God to save themselves, for those who seek life will lose it, but those who lose their life for God’s sake shall find it. Matthew 10:39.
I also tremble with fear because I know what God has laid in store for those who blaspheme His name.
Why does this cause YOU to fear. You aren’t the blasphemer.
I tremble because God is great!
And Newt cheats on his wife because he’s so patriotic.