Read on Twitter
This is an interesting discussion, and it prompted me to want to clarify something -- https://twitter.com/nberlat/status/1391626919557410817">https://twitter.com/nberlat/s...
First, the concept of "sin" -- a vague & slippery concept which has no meaning outside of a religious context.
Because "sin" is more or less *defined* as an offense against God, while "abuse" is an offense against other people, "crime" is an offense against law, etc.
Because "sin" is more or less *defined* as an offense against God, while "abuse" is an offense against other people, "crime" is an offense against law, etc.
I think Christians -- especially conservative, purity-culture Christians -- often deliberately use "sin" interchangeably with other descriptions of "bad behavior" & it& #39;s done for a deceptive, evil purpose --
One, is to take things like abuse and crime and make them *merely* sins, to excuse them when they& #39;re being perpetrated by people the church wants to defend, like Josh Duggar or Donald Trump.
Because, ultimately, a "sin" is an offense against God.
Maybe you think there& #39;s no HIGHER crime, but that& #39;s really on you. I probably don& #39;t believe in your God, so I don& #39;t care, and supposedly we live in a country with freedom of religion, so I don& #39;t HAVE to care.
Maybe you think there& #39;s no HIGHER crime, but that& #39;s really on you. I probably don& #39;t believe in your God, so I don& #39;t care, and supposedly we live in a country with freedom of religion, so I don& #39;t HAVE to care.
The second evil purpose of this type of sin-conflating rhetoric is to take something that is ONLY a sin (as in, it is not an offense against other people, or necessarily against other people& #39;s gods) and make it sound like something inherently bad.
Like, if somebody who is Catholic says, "I think some kinds of sexual activity are a SIN" the correct response is "I& #39;m not Catholic, and we don& #39;t live in a Catholic dictatorship, so who cares?"
But tradcath religious fanatics on the SCOTUS & elsewhere apparently believe that we DO live in a Catholic dictatorship, or at least that we OUGHT to.
That& #39;s the idea simmering just under the surface of the opinions of everyone from Elizabeth Bruenig to William Barr to the late unlamented Antonin Scalia -- that Catholic opinions *ought* to be the basis for secular law & shared culture, that they SHOULD matter to non-Catholics.
Which means sometimes we get sucked into the wrong argument, like, trying to convince the Pope to bless same-sex unions, when really we should be talking about "why do we care what the Pope thinks anyway?"
Sometimes it& #39;s like Catholics are stuck in the middle ages & deep down they assume the Pope is actually still the true & rightful boss of everybody.
Oh, for @paulcarp13 & #39;s benefit, <the end>
