Hi, Daniel--a couple of responses below--
>> "There's a long tradition on Poetryetc of respecting each other's views in
>> the sense of _accepting_ them and exercising a basic courtesy and
>> sensitivity toward them regardless of our own beliefs (religious or
>> political, e.g.). Your remarks about veganism, anarchism, and Christianity
>> have all crossed that traditional line,"
>
> How will I ever learn to "accept" a belief if I don't ask for the reasons
> of undertaking such a belief?
There's no need for you to accept the belief, but only to accept it as
_John's_ belief--and to respect it as such. He doesn't owe you any
explanation or justification for it, any more than you owe him one for your
Christian beliefs--on which he has not "challenged" _you_, in that very
spirit of mutual acceptance and respect.
If you're genuinely interested in understanding those beliefs, you could
read John's work, for starters, then politely seek such "dialogue" with him
back-channel and offer him those "interesting criticisms" of yours, which he
would of course be free to decline. Insisting on and persisting with it
front-channel is effectively to challenge the beliefs themselves and, in
your case, on the grounds of a different system (religion) entirely.
_That's_ what crossed the acceptance/respect line--the persistent
displacement of the grounds for John's statement with your own.
> (traditional line?--i recall LINGUISTIC DISOBEDIENCE)
I don't recall using that term myself.
Cheers,
Candice
|