This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
What slippery slope exists between abortion and interracial marriage?
If your model of pro-lifers is "conservatives who want to turn the clock back to the social mores of 1950", the answer becomes obvious. It's a slope of "concessions to that agenda".
First they go for the least popular and legally flimsiest 2020s social more (abortion). When they succeed at that one, it's easier to knock down the next domino, both because the conservatives are energised by the proof that liberal progress can be reversed, and because their opponents have to concede "OK when the conservatives won last time the country didn't immediately get consumed by hellfire". Slip!
But that model is wrong, and contra-indicated by every piece of evidence available.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
What slippery slope exists between abortion, contraception, porn and homosexuality?
All these things are seen as sins, regardless whether they increase or decrease killing unborn babies, and opponents of abortion hate them all.
Interracial marriage and race mixing in general was traditionally considered as extremely serious sin in American Christianity, for far longer you would imagine.
If proponents of war on sin get their way on all of the things above, it is not impausible that they will bring back this issue too. Slippery slope all the way up, all the way to heaven!
The irony was, the reason God told the Jews not to marry outside the nation of Israel was to avoid idolatry and dissolution of their faith, not their blood.
Paul, in his second letter to the Corinthians, revisits the command explicitly on the grounds of faith alone, not blood: “Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?”
Racists who never read Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians decided God's command to Israel, along with the genesis of nations following the Flood and the Tower of Babel, was Biblical justification for their very human isolation of races.
Yet we Christians believe we have two natures (births), a human birth into the species of Adam and a spiritual birth with God as our Father. The second birth, a birth chosen by us, regathers us whose families were scattered by the Curse of Babel and joins us with Jesus, the second Adam, in a new nation, the Kingdom of God. Among Christians who take the whole Bible as holy and sacred, there are no races among us.
More options
Context Copy link
You are making the unwarranted assumption that racism is something the pro-life movement is generally in support of, as opposed to something they grudgingly tolerate from their political allies. And, historically, the pro-life movement has been extremely honest in describing their unpopular policies, and so it should take some pretty strong countervailing evidence that it’s secretly in opposition to race mixing.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link