He used the word WE rather than I, with the implication that he was speaking
for all of us there. That is the kind of presumption that others find off-putting.
I can understand your preferring that the speaker not use such language. But for myself, I can just let it wash over me. What I find just as objectionable, of not more so, are speakers who speak with an even higher degree of pomposity, "I am right"ness, exclusion, etc. on philosophical or political grounds. Heard a graduation speaker a few years ago who was a rabid environmentalist/vegetarian, and his condemnation of and open scorn for those who were meat eaters, fur wearers, SUV drivers, etc. was far beyond anything I have heard any religious person say. In fact, for him it was a religion, and just as objectionable to me as if he had been a Southern Baptist preacher doing a hellfire and brimstone sermon.
I am mystified as to why when a belief is said to stem from nature it's not objectionable, but when it is said to stem from God, it is, when the passion, condemnation of non-believers, etc. are of the same virulence in both cases. |
