briar patch

[JohnH]

I find it ironic that you simultaneously complain about being silenced and advocate silencing others. I seem to remember scriptures where Jesus instructs, "Do to others as you would have them do to you."

I certainly am not interested in silencing others. I think sunlight is the best disinfectant, but sometimes it does need to be clarified what other people rather believe. Anti-biblical, anti-Christian ideologies need to be put out in the open instead of staying hidden, with those holding to them pretending they are still part of some kind of actual Christianity.

We agree about that and thank you for clarifying that you weren't calling for violence against liberals. I also don't believe that people should be murdered for their political beliefs and I also believe that Christians can say "no" to ideologies in a non-violent, Christlike manner.

However, I believe that calling your ideological opponents the "enemy of God" who should be "given no quarter" is neither non-violent nor Christlike. While Christ spoke prophetically, he also exhibited humility, mercy, truthfulness, care for the marginalized and love of enemies.

The ideology and the movement is the enemy, not the people.

By saying that liberals should be "given no quarter," you are literally arguing against mercy for your political opponents, even if you're not arguing for physical violence. Using God to fight culture wars of grievance is not Christlike.

I also reject your framing that conservatives are uniquely persecuted in the United States.

When I say "give no quarter", I am saying that anti-Christ views should not be promoted and endorsed inside Christian circles. We "wrestle not with flesh and blood", but against "principalities and powers in high places" and the "rulers of darkness".

Charlie Kirk wasn't the only political assassination last year. Former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband were also murdered in their home by Vance Boelter, a far-right Christian extremist who was assassinating Democrats.

This is a false narrative. He wasn't a "far-right Christian extremist" killing because of ideology; his ideology was all over the place (it could be argued he was leftist, at least in some areas, like on the topic of immigration) and he appeared to just be very mentally ill. (There also isn't any such thing as a "Christian" ideology that calls for assassinating political opponents, so by definition he was not a "Christian extremist". He was something else.)

If all "the Left" is responsible for Kirk's death, is all "the Right" responsible for Hortman's? If the nasty comments celebrating Kirk's assassination convict all liberals, do the nasty comments by Trump and others after Rob Reiner's murder convict all conservatives?

No, because the right didn't cheer him on.

I don't think you're being silenced. According to forum statistics, you are one of the most prolific posters. At almost 9500 posts, you have authored 3% of total posts, or about 12 posts a day. That's a loud silence.

I am not silenced (yet), but it's not like there haven't been plenty of attempts to do so. This has been going on for years. The fact folks like you haven't (yet) been successful doesn't mean you aren't trying, and doesn't make it any less wrong.

[GaryK]

I find it ironic that you simultaneously complain about being silenced and advocate silencing others. I seem to remember scriptures where Jesus instructs, "Do to others as you would have them do to you."

I am not silenced (yet), but it's not like there haven't been plenty of attempts to do so. This has been going on for years. The fact folks like you haven't (yet) been successful doesn't mean you aren't trying, and doesn't make it any less wrong.

I assume then that you believe that the things you have said about many people and groups of people over the years have been attempts to silence and is therefore wrong as well. Consistency would ask that of you.

[Wesleyb]

(There also isn't any such thing as a "Christian" ideology that calls for assassinating political opponents, so by definition he was not a "Christian extremist". He was something else.)

No true Scotsman?

When a few people celebrated CK's death you assigned that attitude to "half the country." When a person claiming Christianity does a despicable thing you can conveniently deny any connection to Christianity.

[JohnH]

When a few people celebrated CK's death you assigned that attitude to "half the country." When a person claiming Christianity does a despicable thing you can conveniently deny any connection to Christianity.

Christianity, as an ideology, does not call for assassinating its opponents. (There are some fringe groups that do.)

Leftism, as an ideology, does. Centrists do not, which is why I said "leftists". Centrism also seems to be going extinct in America.

I was quite surprised to hear the reaction to the assassination of that health-care CEO in broad daylight in NYC. A significant portion of the country supported it. That is simply where we are now.

I'm sure there are some on the right wing who are also moving in this direction, which is not a positive development either.

This data was assembled from multiple sources:

U.S. adults:
27% expressed sympathy (moderate or significant) for Luigi Mangione.
12% expressed support for the decision to murder UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.
17% to 23% (different polls) viewed Mangione favorably overall in national public opinion polls.

U.S. votesrs:
68% of overall voters considered the killing unacceptable.
32% unacceptable.

It's worse amongst young people:

Age 18-29: 41% said acceptable; 28% or 39% said directly sympathetic
College students: 50% viewed Mangione "favorable".
Age 50+: 5% or 10% approved or supported.

And...

Support amongst those who identifying as "liberal" was 28% versus of those identifying as "conservative" was 5%.

To be clear, amongst conservatives, that's 5% more than it should be.

[Szdfan]

I find it ironic that you simultaneously complain about being silenced and advocate silencing others. I seem to remember scriptures where Jesus instructs, "Do to others as you would have them do to you."

I certainly am not interested in silencing others. I think sunlight is the best disinfectant, but sometimes it does need to be clarified what other people rather believe. Anti-biblical, anti-Christian ideologies need to be put out in the open instead of staying hidden, with those holding to them pretending they are still part of some kind of actual Christianity.

I think we have some agreement here. One of the reasons why I engage with you is that I also want sunlight and exposure on what I believe are un-Christian and un-Biblical beliefs. There are arguments you make that I don't want to see take root or normalized among Christians.

Even though I believe you are profoundly wrong, I still see you as a Christian, which is one of the reasons why I think I engage you.

We agree about that and thank you for clarifying that you weren't calling for violence against liberals. I also don't believe that people should be murdered for their political beliefs and I also believe that Christians can say "no" to ideologies in a non-violent, Christlike manner.
However, I believe that calling your ideological opponents the "enemy of God" who should be "given no quarter" is neither non-violent nor Christlike. While Christ spoke prophetically, he also exhibited humility, mercy, truthfulness, care for the marginalized and love of enemies.

The ideology and the movement is the enemy, not the people.

By saying that liberals should be "given no quarter," you are literally arguing against mercy for your political opponents, even if you're not arguing for physical violence. Using God to fight culture wars of grievance is not Christlike.
I also reject your framing that conservatives are uniquely persecuted in the United States.

When I say "give no quarter", I am saying that anti-Christ views should not be promoted and endorsed inside Christian circles. We "wrestle not with flesh and blood", but against "principalities and powers in high places" and the "rulers of darkness".

I understand your point, but I think there are better, less violent metaphors you could use than one associated with military language about killing enemy soldiers instead of imprisoning them.

And while I appreciate that you distinguish between the person and ideology, I think the problem is that you are still dealing with people. People aren't just ideas and I think that what comes often across are swipes against people, not ideas.

Charlie Kirk wasn't the only political assassination last year. Former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband were also murdered in their home by Vance Boelter, a far-right Christian extremist who was assassinating Democrats.

This is a false narrative. He wasn't a "far-right Christian extremist" killing because of ideology; his ideology was all over the place (it could be argued he was leftist, at least in some areas, like on the topic of immigration) and he appeared to just be very mentally ill. (There also isn't any such thing as a "Christian" ideology that calls for assassinating political opponents, so by definition he was not a "Christian extremist". He was something else.)

Boelter's religious views are documented:
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2025/06/1 ... nservative

Friends and former colleagues interviewed by AP described Boelter as a devout Christian who attended an evangelical church and went to campaign rallies for President Donald Trump. Records show Boelter registered to vote as a Republican while living in Oklahoma in 2004 before moving to Minnesota where voters don’t list party affiliation.

Boelter, who worked as a security contractor, gave a glimpse of his beliefs on abortion during a trip to the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2023. While there, Boelter served as an evangelical pastor, telling people he had first found Jesus as a teenager.

“The churches are so messed up, they don’t know abortion is wrong in many churches,” he said, according to an online recording of one sermon from February 2023. Still, in three lengthy sermons reviewed by the AP, he only mentioned abortion once, focusing more on his love of God and what he saw as the moral decay in his native country.

I think it's possible for people to do things that seriously contradict their beliefs without automatically erasing how they identify themselves. Otherwise you end up in a circular argument that no Christians can commit murder, because murder proves they weren't Christian.

If all "the Left" is responsible for Kirk's death, is all "the Right" responsible for Hortman's? If the nasty comments celebrating Kirk's assassination convict all liberals, do the nasty comments by Trump and others after Rob Reiner's murder convict all conservatives?

No, because the right didn't cheer him on.

And neither did the majority of the Left. Do the actions of a few condemn everyone? "The Left" is a very broad, diverse group of people.

I don't think you're being silenced. According to forum statistics, you are one of the most prolific posters. At almost 9500 posts, you have authored 3% of total posts, or about 12 posts a day. That's a loud silence.

I am not silenced (yet), but it's not like there haven't been plenty of attempts to do so. This has been going on for years. The fact folks like you haven't (yet) been successful doesn't mean you aren't trying, and doesn't make it any less wrong.

You're right that if I was trying to silence you, I must be doing a very poor job of it since we've been fighting for at least a decade. I think I know my motivations better than you do and last time I checked with myself, I wasn't trying to silence you.

One of my objections is that I feel like you demand precision and generosity about your beliefs, while you treat your opponents with the same hostility and sweeping generalizations that you complain about when directed at yourself.

[JohnH]

I understand your point, but I think there are better, less violent metaphors you could use than one associated with military language about killing enemy soldiers instead of imprisoning them.

I'm not ex-military. The term "give no quarter" is one that is part of standard English. I don't think tone-policing language like this is necessary.

Even though I believe you are profoundly wrong, I still see you as a Christian, which is one of the reasons why I think I engage you.

This could be a difference between us. I think that you think you're "a Christian", but overall I don't think that everyone thinks they are a Christian actually is once they abandon enough of core Christian beliefs. (Boelter probably wasn't either, although I'm not sure if he wasn't just having a serious mental health episode, or if he had embraced some kind of coherent non-Christian belief system.)

Alternatively, we could just agree the term "Christian" is meaningless and is open to anyone who wants to either self-identify as one, or else use it as an epithet to accuse someone else of being one in order to associate being Christian with being bad, such as the attempt above to do so with Boelter.

[Szdfan]

Christianity, as an ideology, does not call for assassinating its opponents. (There are some fringe groups that do.)

Leftism, as an ideology, does. Centrists do not, which is why I said "leftists". Centrism also seems to be going extinct in America.

I seem to have forgotten my revolutionary literature at home, comrade. What’s the foundational left-wing doctrine calling for political assassination? Where did it come from?

[JohnH]

Christianity, as an ideology, does not call for assassinating its opponents. (There are some fringe groups that do.)

Leftism, as an ideology, does. Centrists do not, which is why I said "leftists". Centrism also seems to be going extinct in America.

I seem to have forgotten my revolutionary literature at home, comrade. What’s the foundational left-wing doctrine calling for political assassination? Where did it come from?

Probably many things. I simply look at what people actually say and what they actually do.

[GaryK]

When a few people celebrated CK's death you assigned that attitude to "half the country." When a person claiming Christianity does a despicable thing you can conveniently deny any connection to Christianity.

Christianity, as an ideology, does not call for assassinating its opponents. (There are some fringe groups that do.)

I would suggest that Christianity, as an ideology, also does not call for executing criminals. I would also suggest that Christianity, as an ideology, is neither right, left or center, politically speaking.

[Szdfan]

Christianity, as an ideology, does not call for assassinating its opponents. (There are some fringe groups that do.)

Leftism, as an ideology, does. Centrists do not, which is why I said "leftists". Centrism also seems to be going extinct in America.

I seem to have forgotten my revolutionary literature at home, comrade. What’s the foundational left-wing doctrine calling for political assassination? Where did it come from?

Probably many things. I simply look at what people actually say and what they actually do.

As do I.