radical and partisan invective
If (a) an unsympathetic non-Christian describes the activities of a Christian campaign group as "radical and partisan invective," and if (b) you feel slightly inclined to agree with that description, and yet if (c) the invectivous Christians are in general standing up for what's right, then, I think I just made up a word there, but how do you rationalise your contact with said campaign group?
The options which I can see are: either you side with them under the same "Christian" umbrella in the interests of avoiding divisiveness and increasing the strength of numbers, hoping that their good points will outweigh their bad points; or alternatively, you take a separatist line, disown all association, and try and put your points across, to the shared opposition, from an aloof-but-invective-free position. How bad does someone's reputation have to be, before you decide they're more bother than they're worth?
The options which I can see are: either you side with them under the same "Christian" umbrella in the interests of avoiding divisiveness and increasing the strength of numbers, hoping that their good points will outweigh their bad points; or alternatively, you take a separatist line, disown all association, and try and put your points across, to the shared opposition, from an aloof-but-invective-free position. How bad does someone's reputation have to be, before you decide they're more bother than they're worth?
posted by cath at
4:42 pm
3 Comments:
Are you having problems with such a group? or is this an excuse that someone has made for not supporting a 'Christian Group?'
By
Anonymous, at 9:31 am
Well, this is my dilemma, just put much more succinctly :-)
I can't really remember, but i think you and me have already talked about said group? (unmentionable group, maybe).
Myabe a better way of putting it is, when someone agrees with you that X is a Bad Thing, and yet chooses to communicate that conviction in ways which make you disinclined to associate yourself with them. - Is it divisive to disassociate yourself, or do you just compromise your own position by being connected with people who have a bad reputation?
By
cath, at 9:58 pm
Speaking to different folks and mulliing it over, I've come down on the side of, "you just compromise your own position by being connected to people who have a bad reputation."
It's difficult enough to get dialogue going from a Christian perspective (on a whole variety of moral and social issues) without things getting muddied up by organisations who use the name of christianity but aren't bothered about keeping it a *good* name. Once you're identified with that kind of organisation, people can dismiss you out of hand as extremist nutters, which avoids them the bother of taking your arguments seriously.
Or so it seems to me right now. Feel free to disagree!
By
cath, at 11:08 pm
Post a Comment
<< Home