kurt vonnegut said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

My example at the ski resort - I am in no way more entitled to shredding that powder more than you. That's not even the point. I'm happy to share a chair lift with you or whatever. The point and question at hand is why it needs to be broadcast out which impacts basically everyone there at that point. I'm not saying that it needs to be some kind of secret, but why the advertisements and dedicated weekend? Go ski with your gay buddies anytime for all I care.

---

Would you have been equally upset to arrive at a ski resort and find that a certain number of people had gathered to have a Diwali celebration? Would you be cursing Hindus and telling them to just keep it to themselves?

And for the real test, what if it was a Christian gathering? You know . . . Gays aren't the only ones that get together in public to celebrate an idea? What am I supposed to tell my kids when they see Christians loud and proud and worshipping God? They are only children for crying out loud!!! How can I, as a responsible parent, expose children to the idea that not everyone thinks exactly like 'us'?

Read that last paragraph as tongue in cheek, but the point it makes is very real.

So - is it okay for all groups of people, like Christians, to gather and celebrate something? Or should all groups of people be pressured against public self expression? Or are there different rules for different people?

---

No, there is nothing sexually offensive about a Diwali celebration versus drag performances and celebrations of gender reassignment.

As far as Christian gatherings in public - I am not really sure I know of any specific examples to be honest. I know there might be some outreach with folks trying to share Christ or something, but that's more of a one on one conversation. There usually aren't Christians blocking freeways demanding that everyone repent. I also may not be the most supportive of some of the mainstream "christian" worship type things also. But thats for another day.

Beer Baron said:

---

Quote:

---

So - is it okay for all groups of people, like Christians, to gather and celebrate something? Or should all groups of people be pressured against public self expression? Or are there different rules for different people?

---

This is what I don't get. If I showed up somewhere and there were ads for worship services everywhere and concerts where everyone was holding up the Jesus spirit fingers and closing their eyes while singing religious-sounding songs, I'd just think "ok, that's clearly not for me" and go about my vacation. I may send some snarky texts or make some comments to my friends, but I'd just go about my vacation and do the things I do like doing. I definitely wouldn't cut my trip short and be upset it was happening.

---

Well, the obvious is that Vail Resorts would NEVER EVER host a corporate sponsored Christian event. But they are hosting and funding an event for drag shows. Now, I don't want Vail Resorts to mess with any Christian event, because they'll likely just botch the thing anyways.

So the point is that sure, a group can organize and have an event. The issue is that these corporations or now our own government is hosting or propping up one specific group over another.

Quote:

---

I think there is a big difference between going about your business because of a religious service versus me needing to be aware of when a drag show may be happening at a bar after we have dinner in town. One of those things is for adults only. Big difference between drag and church.

---

Sure, but again, why can't they have a drag event there if the owner wants to host it and people want to come see it? And it was at a bar right? I guess I just don't get why it upset you other than you wanted to go there and someone else was using it for something you didn't want to do.

Quote:

---

And even though there hasn't been specific mention of drag included in this thread (I think) it has been adopted into the alphabet soup that we have today. 30 years ago, the message was to let the homosexual community have its rights and freedoms and live in peace. Now its obviously evolved into something much different. 30 years from today I would not be surprised at all if we were trying to support pedophilia in the guise of minor attracted persons. It was and still is quite a slippery slope.

---

Damn. You were being such a great ambassador for your faith and then you went "you're going to be championing pedophilia next" route. That's honestly pretty disappointing because I thought we were having a pretty respectful back and forth.

Anyway, drag isn't exactly new. It's been around a long time and no one cared about it until very recently. It's not for you, which is fine, so don't go to a drag show. And again, I don't know why you feel entitled to go to a particular business and not be exposed to something you don't like. Karaoke and trivia nights in bars annoy me, so if one is hosting one of those, I find a different place that isn't.

Quote:

---

It is quite the challenge to have a high functioning society when lots of different people groups are following different moral codes -and not just slight differences but significant differences.

---

Sure, but unless you rigidly force everyone to follow the same one (we've been there and done that, and it typically doesn't go well for the ones being forced), we kind of have to figure out how to live with and around each other.

Quote:

---

Well, the obvious is that Vail Resorts would NEVER EVER host a corporate sponsored Christian event. But they are hosting and funding an event for drag shows. Now, I don't want Vail Resorts to mess with any Christian event, because they'll likely just botch the thing anyways.

---

I would imagine a lot of the incentive for hosting such an event is alcohol sales, so that's probably right. But I'm sure they host other events attended by mostly straight party-goers that you'd find much less offensive.

Quote:

---

So the point is that sure, a group can organize and have an event. The issue is that these corporations or now our own government is hosting or propping up one specific group over another.

---

Really you should just end this paragraph after that first sentence. This is just the free market at work. Other entities can and do gladly suck up the Christians' money for their own events, it just might not be a Vail Resorts event sponsored by Coors Light.

I guess, what is your solution here? You say the group/resort has a right to have these events, but you also seem to really not want them to.

Don't put words into my mouth. I am just trying to read the writing on the wall and try to forecast what has happened in the past and how it may impact the future. Don't be naive about pedophilia and how it may very well be disguised as minor attracted persons. From your perspective I would not want anything to do with it (already sounds like you don't), but it seems like letters continue to get added to the LGBTQ+ agenda. Perhaps I shouldn't have opened that box, so I apologize from distracting from the main point. However, my intent was to reflect on what the issues were 30 years ago and what the issues are today and what's next in the pipeline. The goal posts continue to move.

Quote:

---

Don't put words into my mouth.

---

I'm not sure how what I wrote wasn't exactly what you said, and what you say again below:

Quote:

---

I am just trying to read the writing on the wall and try to forecast what has happened in the past and how it may impact the future.

---

The thing with this is that both pedophiles and all those other letters in the acronym have all been around for ages, and despite decades of pushing for rights for gay and trans/non-binary, etc. people, pedophiles haven't had a seat at the table, despite the right's consistent push to link the two.

Quote:

---

Don't be naive about pedophilia and how it may very well be disguised as minor attracted persons.

---

Someone claiming that they are "minor attracted" and entitled to pursue that, and other people giving the idea the time of day and making it mainstream are very different things. There are some people out there who make what I think you and I could agree are some pretty outlandish claims about what God wants them to do, and it would be disingenuous of me to say that Christians as a group are likely to take up those ideas and run with them. As I've said in other posts, I think this is an area where it's good to remember memes and internet culture and random headlines from sources who make money off angering people aren't real life.

Quote:

---

From your perspective I would not want anything to do with it (already sounds like you don't), but it seems like letters continue to get added to the LGBTQ+ agenda.

---

You seem like a truly nice and decent person, and I really think a lot of your ideas and attitudes toward gay people come from a place of unfamiliarity, so I know no insult here was intended by this. That said, you clearly seem either surprised or unsure of whether I or people like me are ok with pedophiles. Surely you can see how this can come off to someone, right? "It sounds like I don't support them?" - What, other than my being gay and your previous assumptions about gay people, would indicate that this was ever in question? I would like to think that one thing we could all agree on here is that "anti-pedophile" should be a poster's default stance unless proven otherwise.

Just something to think about, because it seems like as a gay person I had the burden of proving I don't support adults having sex with children. For the record, I oppose that, even when people claim their religion compels them to marry underage girls, by the way.

Quote:

---

Perhaps I shouldn't have opened that box, so I apologize from distracting from the main point. However, my intent was to reflect on what the issues were 30 years ago and what the issues are today and what's next in the pipeline. The goal posts continue to move.

---

Again, trans people and non-binary people were always there, they're just kind of a minority within a minority. The goal posts didn't really move to include them, more people just became aware of them.

I am curious what your solution would be to the ski resort issue though. It really does seem like you're at an impasse between "they can do it," and "I don't like it."

I am genuinely enjoying our back and forth by the way.

Quote:

---

So - is it okay for all groups of people, like Christians, to gather and celebrate something? Or should all groups of people be pressured against public self expression? Or are there different rules for different people?

---

Not different rules for different people, but there are different rules for different topics.

Society has limits of what is acceptable for public display. Society decides collectively what those limits are. There is no objectively wrong or right here, from a cultural or societal perspective.

Quote:

---

Society has limits of what is acceptable for public display. Society decides collectively what those limits are. There is no objectively wrong or right here, from a cultural or societal perspective.

---

Great, so gay ski weekend this weekend, and Christian ski weekend next. And the primary lesson here is check the website's "events" section before booking.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I think there is a big difference between going about your business because of a religious service versus me needing to be aware of when a drag show may be happening at a bar after we have dinner in town. One of those things is for adults only. Big difference between drag and church.

---

Have you ever been to a drag brunch or drag show? I have concerns over how 'adult' you think these events are versus reality. I've been to a drag brunch in the burbs and they are not remotely sexual and they are relatively benign. Still a difference from church, no doubt. But, its not even remotely close to the pornographic orgy of sexual perversion that some people simply assume they are.

Now. . . . I did go see a drag show in a seedy dive bar in Seattle about 10 or so years ago. Thats a different story, but that isn't really what we're talking about.

I think there really is a big misconception about them. Most of the time, I actually find them pretty boring.

Last summer we went to one in San Angelo of all places. We didn't really want to, but some of my husband's (straight, standard West Texas Christian married couples) wanted to go and treated it like they were doing something "naughty." They actually all seemed pretty disappointed at how lame the whole thing was since it was just lip syncing. Some of the more comedy based ones are more entertaining, but it's mostly a lot of sex puns and I've only seen those in actual gay bars.

Even a lot of the ones I've seen in gay bars are mostly just bad lip syncing and I honestly don't see either the appeal or the reason for outrage. I just kind of treat them like I treat Marvel movies - not for me, so I do other things instead.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

No, there is nothing sexually offensive about a Diwali celebration versus drag performances and celebrations of gender reassignment.

As far as Christian gatherings in public - I am not really sure I know of any specific examples to be honest. I know there might be some outreach with folks trying to share Christ or something, but that's more of a one on one conversation. There usually aren't Christians blocking freeways demanding that everyone repent. I also may not be the most supportive of some of the mainstream "christian" worship type things also. But thats for another day.

---

Is sexual offense the only type of offense that matters?

On this ski trip, was this gathering full of naked individuals? public fornication? If that is the case, then I agree that it is a problem. . . . but, I'm guessing that wasn't the case.

The way I read this first sentence is that the sin of homosexual conduct is offensive. And the sin of worshipping false gods is not. Time and time again, I've accused Christians on this board of holding a special and extreme prejudicial dislike of homosexuality as compared to other sins. And each time, I am told that all sins are bad and that Christians dislike all sins equally. So, which sins are offensive and ought to be done in private and which ones are we allowed to do publicly? What I am hearing is 'waiving a rainbow flag' - disgusting and offensive. But, 'Praying to false gods', yeah, no problems.

Christian displays in public happen all the time. There have been tons of church sponsored rallies and protests against abortion or birth control coverage and other issues. I've walked into coffee shops and restaurants plenty of times and seen a Bible study happening. Prayers happen all the time at schools after hours or before hours. The idea that Christianity is some timid hardly noticeable, keep to yourself, thing in this country is crazy. The difference is that it doesn't make the news when a church sponsors a Christian singles outing at a restaurant. And no one gives a damn when a few people gather at Starbucks to study the Bible. You don't hear about the Christian gatherings in public, because we don't care. And good for them. If you have a deeply held belief, who am I to tell you that you are not permitted to express it publicly?

I think as a Christian there is an important distinction between what offends people and what clearly offends God based on Scripture.

And I understand I see things through a different lens than an atheist/agnostic.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Well, the obvious is that Vail Resorts would NEVER EVER host a corporate sponsored Christian event. But they are hosting and funding an event for drag shows. Now, I don't want Vail Resorts to mess with any Christian event, because they'll likely just botch the thing anyways.

So the point is that sure, a group can organize and have an event. The issue is that these corporations or now our own government is hosting or propping up one specific group over another.

---

What is the problem with corporations doing what they want. Is it the government's job to step in and tell private companies what they can and cannot do?

Government and public institutions is where we are going to be far closer to finding common ground. I generally think that the government should be limited in what ideologies it supports. However, if we allow for some endorsement, we simply have to be even handed.

For example, every year there is some new situation where a state has allowed a Christian statue at a court building or is trying to put the 10 Commandments displayed in public schools, like in Texas recently. And inevitably, the Atheists and Satanists come in and say 'fine, but you can't pick favorites, so here - have this giant statue of a demonic goat to go next to your 10 Commandments. And then everyone backs off and we move along. The point is simply that I think its important that if are going to permit government to make space for expressions of specific ideologies, then you have to open it to everyone.

Have lines been crossed where a public institution went too far in supporting LGBTQ ideology? Sure. The same can be said for lines being crossed for Christianity.

Beer Baron said:

---

I am curious what your solution would be to the ski resort issue though. It really does seem like you're at an impasse between "they can do it," and "I don't like it."

I am genuinely enjoying our back and forth by the way.

---

Yeah, I am not sure I have a solution to be honest. Goes back to my moral code being significantly different and all of these competing moral codes and how to live peaceably amongst it all. I would think government and places like a ski resort or amusement park for example should aim to protect citizen or guest safety respectively. One of the ways I would flesh that out is to make it very hard for children to be exposed to things involving human sexuality. For me, it just doesn't belong and seems to almost be extremely awkward to push a certain agenda of that nature. Obviously others who fly by a completely different set of ethics would have zero issue with kids being faced with a drag performance or encountering something of sexual nature.

I don't think the government should be playing in this sphere to begin with. Obviously we have lawmakers and judges that make new law and enforce it (in theory), but I'm not sure why it should go further to the point the white house is lit up in rainbows or whatnot, just like it doesn't have a nativity scene during Christmas. It just is outside their scope, in my opinion anyway.

For a publicly traded corporation like Vail Resorts or maybe Disney, seems like hosting highly politicized and polarizing events actually goes against their fiduciary duties in a way. A privately owned company I think has more freedom to pursue whatever they want. Just my take shooting from the hip. You have paying guests from all walks of life - why not just focus on putting out a great product, turning a profit for your shareholders, and be apolitical. Of course one big reason for this is the push from the top - all the focus on the DEI and ESG scores now from an investment perspective.

So I am not sure what the solution is. I think a reasonable expectation is for at the very least nobody (in general) to be harmed by certain public events. Nobody is harmed by a country music festival or a jazz music festival. Nobody is harmed by passing by a Bar Mitzvah or other religious gathering (I think, tell me if I am wrong). But having a drag parade is kind of a different animal in that it can be generally unsettling due to the sexual nature and content. I mean there is obviously a line in the sand at some point where there is common ground - you can't walk around naked legally - I guess most agree on that? But I would rather heir on the side of caution as a general rule.

Again, I do appreciate your perspective.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

No, there is nothing sexually offensive about a Diwali celebration versus drag performances and celebrations of gender reassignment.

As far as Christian gatherings in public - I am not really sure I know of any specific examples to be honest. I know there might be some outreach with folks trying to share Christ or something, but that's more of a one on one conversation. There usually aren't Christians blocking freeways demanding that everyone repent. I also may not be the most supportive of some of the mainstream "christian" worship type things also. But thats for another day.

---

If you have a deeply held belief, who am I to tell you that you are not permitted to express it publicly?

---

Meeting in Starbucks with others to study the Bible is hardly a public expression of faith. That also involves you assuming they are Christian and not atheists prepping for a debate.

If I walk into a Starbucks with my 9yo and see some drag queens strutting around, that seems like a different ballgame than a group of people quietly talking about the Bible in the corner.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I think there is a big difference between going about your business because of a religious service versus me needing to be aware of when a drag show may be happening at a bar after we have dinner in town. One of those things is for adults only. Big difference between drag and church.

---

Have you ever been to a drag brunch or drag show? I have concerns over how 'adult' you think these events are versus reality. I've been to a drag brunch in the burbs and they are not remotely sexual and they are relatively benign. Still a difference from church, no doubt. But, its not even remotely close to the pornographic orgy of sexual perversion that some people simply assume they are.

Now. . . . I did go see a drag show in a seedy dive bar in Seattle about 10 or so years ago. Thats a different story, but that isn't really what we're talking about.

---

That is your opinion, and maybe for adults it is benign. What about a 9yo?

Quote:

---

So I am not sure what the solution is. I think a reasonable expectation is for at the very least nobody (in general) to be harmed by certain public events. Nobody is harmed by a country music festival or a jazz music festival. Nobody is harmed by passing by a Bar Mitzvah or other religious gathering (I think, tell me if I am wrong). But having a drag parade is kind of a different animal in that it can be generally unsettling due to the sexual nature and content. I mean there is obviously a line in the sand at some point where there is common ground - you can't walk around naked legally - I guess most agree on that? But I would rather heir on the side of caution as a general rule.

---

Can I ask what, specifically the drag queens and attendees at the events were actually doing? Were they just there and visible, or were they doing something explicitly sexual? Did you actually see anything explicit or were you just worried you would based on what you've read on the internet? You mentioned common ground of not walking around naked - sure, I'm on board with that. Was that going on here?

Also, any country music festival I've been to has had plenty of drunken behavior, up to and including scantily clad people, drunken make-out sessions, LOTS of beer drinking and plenty of weed smoking, etc. You're kind of just waiving all that away just because it's something you're more comfortable and familiar with in general, which is understandable.

dermdoc said:

---

I think as a Christian there is an important distinction between what offends people and what clearly offends God based on Scripture.

And I understand I see things through a different lens than an atheist/agnostic.

---

Do people have a right to not be offended?

Some people are offended when pro-lifers camp out with posters of aborted fetuses. And some people are offended when a contingency of LGBTQ persons get together to have an event. As far as I'm concerned, both are acting within their rights.

-------

One other thought. There is soooooooooooooooooooooo much heterosexual sexual 'sinful' content (not talking about pornography) within television. Think of every sitcom you've watched for the last 40 years and how often was there sex outside of marriage on Friends, Seinfeld, Scrubs, How I Met Your Mother, New Girl, The Simpsons, Family Guy, Parks and Rec., Brooklynn 99, The Office, and on and on. If you took the sum total of all of the heterosexual sexual sins on television and put it into a pile next to the sum total of all homosexual sexual sins on television and put it into an adjacent pile - by the time you zoomed out to see the whole of the heterosexual sins pile, you wouldn't be able to see the homosexual sins. Where are the Christians complaining about rampant pre/extra marital heterosexual tones and images in our culture. It is freaking everywhere and there are exactly zero threads on this board complaining about it. Why?

10andBOUNCE said:

---

That is your opinion, and maybe for adults it is benign. What about a 9yo?

---

My opinion is that its mostly benign for a 9 year old also. A 9 year old attending with parents that can explain whats going on . . I see no problem.

Like you said, that is my opinion. I anticipate you would have a different opinion. However, I stand by my statement that whatever you think these drag brunch shows are. . . . it is likely radically different in reality from what it looks like in your head. As Beer said, they are kinda boring.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

No, there is nothing sexually offensive about a Diwali celebration versus drag performances and celebrations of gender reassignment.

As far as Christian gatherings in public - I am not really sure I know of any specific examples to be honest. I know there might be some outreach with folks trying to share Christ or something, but that's more of a one on one conversation. There usually aren't Christians blocking freeways demanding that everyone repent. I also may not be the most supportive of some of the mainstream "christian" worship type things also. But thats for another day.

---

If you have a deeply held belief, who am I to tell you that you are not permitted to express it publicly?

---

Meeting in Starbucks with others to study the Bible is hardly a public expression of faith. That also involves you assuming they are Christian and not atheists prepping for a debate.

If I walk into a Starbucks with my 9yo and see some drag queens strutting around, that seems like a different ballgame than a group of people quietly talking about the Bible in the corner.

---

Ah. . .. a bit cynical. I like it.

I recognize a difference between a bible study and a drag show. I wasn't equating the two directly, just giving examples of Christian gatherings in public.

Would you take offense to a gay couple kissing in public? Nothing handsy or overly sexual.

Quote:

---

If I walk into a Starbucks with my 9yo and see some drag queens strutting around, that seems like a different ballgame than a group of people quietly talking about the Bible in the corner.

---

If they're just sitting there chatting and drinking their terrible, overpriced coffee, I really don't see the issue. One time I was in Baton Rouge for a wedding and forgot a belt, so I popped into a Ross Dress for Less. In front of me in line were three of the HUGEST, LSU football player-looking drag queens I have ever seen in my entire life, all purchasing suitcases. Other than being something you don't see every day and a funny story to tell, it wasn't very exciting. They were just looking at their phones and talking in line, made their purchases, and sashayed out to their car, and I don't think anyone else felt any kind of sexual energy from that.

I don't think a 9-year old would even notice other than them being really tall. My 30-year old friend literally said "wow, those gals are huge" and we had to explain to him why that was.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

No, there is nothing sexually offensive about a Diwali celebration versus drag performances and celebrations of gender reassignment.

As far as Christian gatherings in public - I am not really sure I know of any specific examples to be honest. I know there might be some outreach with folks trying to share Christ or something, but that's more of a one on one conversation. There usually aren't Christians blocking freeways demanding that everyone repent. I also may not be the most supportive of some of the mainstream "christian" worship type things also. But thats for another day.

---

If you have a deeply held belief, who am I to tell you that you are not permitted to express it publicly?

---

Meeting in Starbucks with others to study the Bible is hardly a public expression of faith. That also involves you assuming they are Christian and not atheists prepping for a debate.

If I walk into a Starbucks with my 9yo and see some drag queens strutting around, that seems like a different ballgame than a group of people quietly talking about the Bible in the corner.

---

Would you take offense to a gay couple kissing in public? Nothing handsy or overly sexual.

---

Ha, no. That is their personal freedom to do so. It is my freedom to look away and mind my own business (which I would with a hetero couple as well).

kurt vonnegut said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

I think as a Christian there is an important distinction between what offends people and what clearly offends God based on Scripture.

And I understand I see things through a different lens than an atheist/agnostic.

---

Do people have a right to not be offended?

Some people are offended when pro-lifers camp out with posters of aborted fetuses. And some people are offended when a contingency of LGBTQ persons get together to have an event. As far as I'm concerned, both are acting within their rights.

-------

One other thought. There is soooooooooooooooooooooo much heterosexual sexual 'sinful' content (not talking about pornography) within television. Think of every sitcom you've watched for the last 40 years and how often was there sex outside of marriage on Friends, Seinfeld, Scrubs, How I Met Your Mother, New Girl, The Simpsons, Family Guy, Parks and Rec., Brooklynn 99, The Office, and on and on. If you took the sum total of all of the heterosexual sexual sins on television and put it into a pile next to the sum total of all homosexual sexual sins on television and put it into an adjacent pile - by the time you zoomed out to see the whole of the heterosexual sins pile, you wouldn't be able to see the homosexual sins. Where are the Christians complaining about rampant pre/extra marital heterosexual tones and images in our culture. It is freaking everywhere and there are exactly zero threads on this board complaining about it. Why?

---

I've got no disagreements with that at all. As I said earlier, Christians can be pretty hypocritical.

Great post, though I expect you to catch substantial **** from some of your fellow Christians for it.

That's all fine and dandy, but it seems the event at the ski resort was well attended and businesses were willingly participating. Does that not show that the society there has found it to be acceptable? The poster in question is free to disagree with that and go home instead, which he did.

I think most people, Christian and non Christian, just want to be left alone. And allowed to live and let live.

That includes LGBT folks also

I do not enjoy Christians yelling at me or being overly aggressive. And that goes for any group including LGBT stuff, BLM, antifa, right wing fanatics, etc.

Just let me and my family live life and do not thrust your beliefs, lifestyles, or whatever on us.

It is a very small majority who try to be obnoxious and yet as usual they ruin it for everybody else.

Again...you seem to be missing the point.

Why is him objecting to the current societal boundary marker different than you objecting to it?

In other words, why is it wrong for him to not want that to be socially acceptable in public, but right for you to think it should be?

I think it's OK to disagree about these things, and openly disagree. And when our opinions about where those lines should be is at odds with society, going on with our lives.

What is not OK is the idea that we must agree.

Quote:

---

Again...you seem to be missing the point.

---

I guess I am. As usual, you and I seem to be talking past each other.

Quote:

---

Why is him objecting to the current societal boundary marker different than you objecting to it?

---

It's fine, I'm just trying to figure out what exactly he wanted. At first he seemed to indicate that the venue shouldn't have allowed such an event and then pulled back from that. That said, I'm still trying to figure out what exactly he was objecting to, since I'm not clear on what the people at the event were actually doing beyond assembling.

Quote:

---

In other words, why is it wrong for him to not want that to be socially acceptable in public, but right for you to think it should be?

---

It's not, but he has the freedom to decide to be there for it or not. He chose not to be. Chrisitans have all kinds of public meetings and assemblies and I have no problem not partaking in them personally.

Quote:

---

I think it's OK to disagree about these things, and openly disagree. And when our opinions about where those lines should be is at odds with society, going on with our lives.

---

Fine

Quote:

---

What is not OK is the idea that we must agree.

---

I've said multiple times on this thread that some things are for certain audiences and not others. I still don't see how "yall do your thing this week and we'll do ours next week" isn't in line with all of the above.

Quote:

---

I still don't see how "yall do your thing this week and we'll do ours next week" isn't in line with all of the above.

---

Because there are things in society that are not ok in public for any week. The line exists. Just brass tacks, for a long time same sex relationships were not ok in public for any week. Similarly for a long time openly being in a live-in relationship without being married was not ok in public. Or divorcing someone. These lines move with time.

Maybe he's not willing to say that he doesn't think that's something that should be ok in public any time, but I suspect that's what it is.

Quote:

---

Because there are things in society that are not ok in public for any week. The line exists. Just brass tacks, for a long time same sex relationships were not ok in public for any week. Similarly for a long time openly being in a live-in relationship without being married was not ok in public. Or divorcing someone. These lines move with time.

Maybe he's not willing to say that he doesn't think that's something that should be ok in public any time, but I suspect that's what it is.

---

Maybe so, but he didn't say that and in fact said the opposite a few times in relation to this specific event, so I'll take him at his word.

I agree the lines move, and in this case it seems to have moved past some of y'all, which is why we still have these threads.

Shrug, I didn't start it.