You know I am saying that attacks on Christian Fundamentalism tied to "Moral Equivalency" comparisons are attacks on Western Civ.
No wonder you support fundamentalism. You are an absolutist at heart, even if not a Christian. "It's the truth because it's the truth. No, I don't need to back it up. Rationales and explanations are for lefties and the French, after all. What I believe to be so is so. Amen."
What a distortion. And part of your normal argument pattern.
OK, I apologize. I was chiding you about your authoritarian response, not arguing.
Don't bother to try to extend this discussion with me.
You added a twist to the statement you were refuting. You added in "tied to 'Moral Equivalency' comparisons." I already agreed that may sometimes be the case. I cited Rosie.
In adding that twist, though, you did not respond to my point, which was that attacks on fundamentalism (plain vanilla fundamentalism) are not necessarily attacks on Christianity or Western Civilization. I, for one, cast a disapproving eye on fundamentalism. I did so in the first paragraph of this response. I do not consider fundamentalism to be constructive in today's society. But that's no attack on Christianity, about which I am ambivalent, or Western Civilization, which I adore. |
