{"id":13251,"date":"2012-08-01T12:00:15","date_gmt":"2012-08-01T19:00:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/?p=13251"},"modified":"2015-03-19T15:39:06","modified_gmt":"2015-03-19T22:39:06","slug":"distinctions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/2012\/08\/01\/distinctions\/","title":{"rendered":"Distinctions"},"content":{"rendered":"

I saw this on Brandon Vogts<\/a>‘ Facebook page this morning about the Chick-fil-A\u00a0kerfuffle<\/a>. I felt it needed to be shared…<\/p>\n

With the recent\u00a0Chick-fil-A\u00a0controversy, I now realize modern man is almost incapable of distinguishing between these four things:<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

1. The difference between “Approval” and “Implicit Condemnation”.<\/strong> <\/span><\/em>
\n Just because you support one thing doesn’t mean you’re viciously antagonist toward another (i.e. “anti-” the opposite.) If Dan Cathy supports traditional marriage between one man and one woman, that doesn’t mean he ipso facto “hates gay people” or is “anti-gay.”<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

2. The difference between “Disagreeing” and “Hating”<\/span><\/strong><\/em>
\n I disagree with ideas all the time. This does not necessitate hating the person who proposed them. Your beliefs are not your identity.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

3. The difference between “Beliefs” and “People”<\/strong>
\nThis is somewhat similar to #2. Rejecting a belief does not equal rejecting a person. You can reject the validity of same-sex marriage on philosophical and social grounds while still profoundly loving people with same-sex attraction. I reject at least some opinions or actions from each of my friends (such as “double-rainbows are boring” or “playing the lottery is wise.”) They in turn reject plenty of my own. But we don’t hate each other. In fact, just the opposite is true. Our relationship is grounded on a communion of persons, not a symmetry of beliefs.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

4. The difference between “Bigotry” and “Disagreement”<\/strong>
\nThe definition of bigot is “one unwilling to tolerate opinions different than his own”–not “someone who disagrees with me.” Toleration doesn’t require agreement, merely recognition and respect. (Ironically, those quickest to accuse people of bigotry are often bigoted about their flawed definition of “bigot.”)<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

The solution to these failures is not more dialogue. It’s better philosophy, logic, and reason. Unfortunately, until two people are capable of making these distinctions, healthy, productive dialogue about same-sex marriage is almost impossible.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

UPDATE: Brandon has now got around to posting this on his blog<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

So there you are. And now for something a little lighter…<\/p>\n