Monday, November 4, 2019

Michael Brown claims that he is a scapegoat

via YouTube
Dr. Michael Brown asks rhetorically: Who's Keeping the LGBTQ Agenda in the Headlines? “I'll take crazy Christian crackpots for $100!”

Writing of himself in the third person like a voice from the gods:
Dr. Michael Brown is the author of the piece in question. Why does he insist on referring to himself in the third person?
Popular and widely read columnist, author and national radio host Dr. Michael Brown says he has been a scapegoat for keeping LGBTQ issues in the news, as he addresses them often in his writings.

But don't blame Brown, he says: Blame the Democratic presidential candidates who are pushing this agenda—and quite aggressively, at that.
Brown continues to refer to himself. The purpose of Monday's tirade is actually to promote a book (I am certain that it is a compelling page-turner). Skipping the self-serving advertisement:
"Democrats are the ones talking about what the Bible allegedly says and does not say about homosexuality," Brown says. "They're the ones threatening our religious liberties, indoctrinating our children, telling Christians they don't have the right to biblically based beliefs, pushing a radical, revisionist agenda and demanding that explicit teachings of Scripture must be ignored and that the church and synagogue have been wrong on these issues for 2,000 years. All we're doing is responding.
Abstract arguments are meaningless. Brown does not indicate who is saying what and in what context. Vagueness is a necessity when you are writing stuff simply to sell other stuff. Most importantly, Brown is promoting the utterly false notion that there is only one set of valid beliefs.

In point of fact, for example, many Christian denominations and most Jewish congregations are LGBTQ-affirming. Most people do not believe that nondiscrimination laws are a threat to religious liberty. Most people (which means the majority of Christians) do not subscribe to the notion that teaching kids that LGBTQ people exist and deserve to be treated fairly is a form of indoctrination. No one is telling Christians that “they don't have the right to biblically based beliefs.”

“All we are doing is responding?” Bullshit! They are not responding. They are creating the dialogue by promoting abject bigotry, ignorance and untruths.
  • Brown has claimed that a man seeking to have a court find him 20 years younger than he is sustains the argument that transgender people do not really exist. To whom was he responding?
  • Brown has claimed that gender dysphoria is “unnatural” and, thus illegitimate. To whom was he responding?
  • Brown has indulged in lengthy diatribes to assert that his god does not like gay sex. To whom was he responding?
  • Brown has claimed that LGBTQ people will self-destruct if Christians would stop talking about them. He might follow his own advice.
  • Brown has written treatises about the effectiveness of gay conversion therapy. To whom was he responding?
  • Michael Brown has written numerous scare-mongering pieces about pediatric gender dysphoria (which he clearly knows nothing about). To whom was he responding?
Those are just the first few, of many, examples of Blowhard Brown independently creating the dialogue that he claims he is only writing in response to Democratic politicians. Dr. Michael Brown is full of crap.

Later on, Brown tries a form of inoculation:
"We dare not offend the activists!" Brown continued. "We dare not be viewed as haters and bigots. 'There are more important battles to fight,' these leaders reasoned, 'so we'll practice appeasement and live to fight another day.' But this strategy never works, because the more ground we surrender, the more ground we have to yield. The goalposts keep moving. When it comes to the present state of LGBT activism, it is a presidential issue, front and center."
Dr. Michael Brown does a pretty good job of offending me, of appearing to be a hater and demonstrating his bigotry. Eventually Brown cites some examples of commentary that he feels are worthy of his reaction. For example:
Mayor Pete Buttigieg stated that, when it comes to opposing LGBT rights, despite the importance of religious liberty, "It's also the case that any freedom that we honor in this country has limits when it comes to harming other people."
It is actually a very lengthy quote from Mayor Buttigieg but the part that Brown is referring to, in context is this:
Religious liberty is an important principle in this country, and we honor that. It's also the case that any freedom that we honor in this country has limits when it comes to harming other people.

We say that the right to free speech does not include the right to yell fire in a crowded theater. A famous justice once said my right to swing my fists ends where somebody else's nose begins, and the right to religious freedom ends where religion is being used as an excuse to harm other people.
Do you see the difference? Brown attempts to obscure the equal footing that Buttigieg provides for religious liberty and the rights of others. He is clear that religion is not a valid “excuse” to harm others. Does Michael Brown believe otherwise? Apparently he does.

Again, quoting himself:
“We're supposed to ignore another candidate who suggests that our religious liberties do not include the right to 'harm' LGBT individuals with our beliefs? … ”
Is the above not confirmation that Brown believes that religious liberty includes a right to harm others? That is called Christian Privilege.

Brown concludes by speaking authoritatively:
"Don't deceive yourself with thinking that any other ending is in sight," Brown added. "It's a matter of rewriting the Bible and rewriting reality or a matter of taking a firm Scriptural stand, speaking the truth in love. What will it be? To be a sideline spectator is to be part of the problem. Neutrality is not an option. Jezebel would like nothing more."
Were Brown capable of appreciating the difference between beliefs and conduct he might resolve his confusion and concerns. He is free to believe anything that he likes. It might shock Brown to know that no one cares what he believes.

When Mr. Brown turns those beliefs into conduct that harms others or promotes such conduct or even excuses such conduct then he is harming others — essentially for having different religious beliefs than he holds.

I have some Muslim friends. They have different beliefs about Israel than I hold and we discuss those differences. Not so much to convince each other that our position is the right position but to offer an understanding about why we feel the way that we do. I am always willing (if I am being truthful) to provide others with the empathy cushion of saying: “I appreciate why you feel that way.” That does not mean that I agree with them, only that I understand their feelings.

Dr. Michael Brown is incapable — unwilling — to empathize with LGBTQ people. He is too busy trying to moronically prove (contrary to the overwhelming consensus of science) that gender identity and sexual orientation are choices. If he wants reciprocal empathy then he is morally obliged to acknowledge (not to accept) certain evidence-based facts. Brown has put himself in a position where he is arguing with himself with the support of a very small constituency.

No one is interested in forcing Mr. Brown to approve of gay sex or transgender kids. He would benefit greatly with the reduction in arrogance that results from understanding that we do not seek his approval. We certainly do not require his approval.

Related content:



No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.