InterstateQ blogger Matt has a post advertising the Can you be gay and Christian forum hosted by Michael Brown and the Coalition of Conscience. I'm looking forward to reading Matt's thoughts on the forum, as he went to it. In the meantime, I'd like to draw attention to the conversation between Dr. Brown and myself in the comments regarding slippery slope arguments. I'd also like to expand on my thoughts further.
I have a big issue with the use of slippery slope arguments to justify discrimination of any sort. (Actually, I have a big issue with the use of slippery slope arguments to justify just about anything.) As I mentioned in the comments, I find myself wondering how one ultimately draws the line in determining whether a slippery slope is legitimate in a particular situation. Again, can my own argument about the correlation between a belief in absolute truth and a tendency to persecute those who don't subscribe to that truth be used to outlaw the belief in absolute truth? After all, by closing the door to a belief in absolute truth, we keep the door to persecution based on that belief closed as well. Similarly, can we shut the door to all automobile future crashes by outlawing the use of automobiles? After all, if one supports Dr. Brown's slippery slope argument, what unique argument can they provide against supporting either of my slippery slope argument? Indeed, the fact that the slippery slope argument can be used against itself is possibly one of the best reasons to discount it.
But let me suggest a hypothesis here. The fact that someone would even bring up a slippery slope argument may well suggest that the reason to argue against something is poor indeed. After all, a slippery slope argument relies on what might happen (often suggesting it's too inevitable to chance) rather than considering the original proposition on its own faults and merits. It's a red flag that tells those listening, "We can't come up with a better reason why we oppose this, so we're going to rely on everyone's fear of something else that may come up as a result to make our case." And one must wonder, if no case against the original proposition can be made on said propositions own faults, should any case be made at all?
And does reacting to something based solely -- or even primarily -- on a fear of what may be make any sense? To put an even finer point, is such a rationale appropriate for adherents of a religion that has a rather negative opinion of fear? Indeed, one must wonder why Christians who have been given a spirit of love and power as well as a sound mind would be so strongly motivated by the fear of what may be? And one wonders why Christian leaders would encourage such motivation through slippery slope arguments.
Comments (3)
Hi Jarred, I found you because, ah, well, you found me!
I didn't read the article you referenced, but I want to answer the question it raises.
Yes, someone who is homosexual can be Christian.
I prefer not to get drawn into the debate about whether or not it's a sin because I can't answer that question. But I will say this ... even if it is(and I'm not convinced that it is), we're all sinners at some level and cannot single out one sin as being "worse" and outside of the sacrificial atonement made by Jesus. In any case, it's not up to me to decide what is sin in someone else's life ... that's ... uhhh ... between you and God. I've got a plank in my own eye, brother. You may deal with the dust mote in yours.
The slippery slope arguments drive me INSANE. They are illogical and designed to inspire fear. If we lived our lives by them we'd never leave our houses and couldn't breath the air ... It's all a slippery slope to one degree or another.
I'm so sorry you had to leave the church in order to be whole. That is a sad commentary on where the church is these days. But believe me when I say that I understand.
Posted by sonja | September 25, 2007 1:41 PM
Posted on September 25, 2007 13:41
Welcome to my neck of the blogosphere, Sonja. And thanks for stopping in.
I appreciate your honest and compassionate examination of the topic at hand. And I agree with you, though I would point out that even if one accepts homosexuality as a sin, that's probably the least of my concerns, as I'm not even Christian.
Of course, that's something I've found odd. I've run into a handful of Christians who seem to struggle more with the fact that I'm gay than they do with the fact that I'm a goddess-worshipping witch. After all, even if I wasn't gay, wouldn't my religious outlook be an issue?
Thanks again for stopping by.
Posted by Jarred![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://musings.northerngrove.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
September 25, 2007 1:56 PM
Posted on September 25, 2007 13:56
Well ... I **was** responding to the post at hand.
OTOH ... here's something weird about me. I believe (and many of my brothers and sisters would call me a heretic and a syncretist) that God has revealed herself to all men and women throughout time and space through a variety of means. S/He did NOT limit herself to the Hebrew scriptures. So ... who's to say you're not worshipping the same God-figure that I am? I'd rather spend time finding the commonalities in our worship, than have debates over who is more right than the other. Because in the end, it's all really about faith ... which is being sure of what we "hope for" (regardless of our religion). It's not empirical knowledge that can be statistically studied. So arguing about it is silly.
So ... yesterday I spent quite a while reading your story about coming out and becoming who you are now. I haven't had a chance (yet) to engage with the rest of your blog. As a homeschooling mom (don't make too many pre-conceptions about why I'm doing that) and the manager of my daughter's ice hockey team ... I'd put as much time into it as I could yesterday.
You're a good writer and tell a compelling story. I'm curious, though, where in PA did you grow up? I went to college on the NY/PA border in Elmira, so I recognized a lot of the place names you were speaking of. And you got your cat in the county that Elmira is a part of. It just brought back some memories for me ...
Oh ... you might not want to answer that question here. But I wanted to mention the connection ... tenuous though it is.
Posted by sonja | September 26, 2007 9:38 AM
Posted on September 26, 2007 09:38