I offered a sympathetic (and gentle) affirmation of Truth and for my efforts received the obligatory, unthinking, and knee-jerk accusation of bigotry.
What, exactly, puts a literally-deviant (and immoral) act beyond reproach? How does a lust constitute a moral good?
Here's my reply to someone who prefers demonizing over debate:
How is recognizing that I'm no better than anyone else a "mask"? And how does argumentum ad hominem prove the rectitude of your position?Update: samollie followed up with:
As for "prejudice"? That's not only absurd, it's intellectual suicide:
-Every act is subject to moral judgment; in fact, you just made one. Doesn't that make you "prejudiced"?But an absolute, objective morality exists. Christ endorsed one man and one woman for life.
-Why is it that you can make moral judgments and I can't? Doesn't that make you a hypocrite?
-Is there any act or "relationship" of which you would not approve? If so, then why would you deny anyone their happiness? Doesn't that make you a bigot?
-What makes your "truth" more valid than mine? If there exists no absolute, objective standard of right and wrong, then you are completely unable to condemn anyone else's perspective, because what's true for them is just as "true" as what's true for you.
Our sinfulness does not negate that.
I never judged you. I stated a fact, not anyone's version of truth. I respect the fact that you believe nobody believes to be mistreated, yet you are still judging another because of your faith. That is prejudice, automatically handing down judgment no matter what. We'll leave it at that and agree to disagree.To which I replied:
You did judge me; "prejudice" is a moral evaluation.
(And since you don't know me, that would make you ... prejudiced.)
The word means "judging before knowing"; since I'm judging no one but merely affirming an objective moral truth regarding a behavior, your use of "prejudice" is inapt (at best; at worst it's a craven attempt to demonize me and quash criticism of something you consider sacrosanct).
Rather than engage in ad hominem attacks, why don't you prove the rectitude of your position?