As for the OP, I think you're seeing through biased lenses.
Well, it has been a while since my last eye test.
Its ok for me to say "I like people who are religious but I hate their religion?".
Actually, this is what I wrote in my first post:
Isn't it funny how if a religious person says 'hate the sin, not the sinner' in reference to homosexuality, some non-religious people view those comments as bad and homophobic; yet if a non-religious person says 'I like religious people, I just don't like their way of life', it's okay.
Not 'hate', which is a much stronger word.
Since when is that? I'd get cussed at if I said that most places.
The use of conditional tense indicates you may not have actually tried saying that in public.
In fact, religion is one of the few things left in society that is "holy" and beyond criticism. Merely by making a criticism of a religion you are often told you are launching personal insults at people.
And the same happens vis a vis homosexuality. Which is why I like to let God make such judgments. Us mere mortals aren't often in an effective position to sufficiently separate people from actions, unless those actions are extreme (murder, rape, theft etc) - even then, we don't really separate the actors from their acts.
In some places they may even kill you for speaking such criticism.
Okay, fair enough. I've never heard of a place that would kill you for criticising homosexuality.
Although some of the Village People do look pretty scary.
Declaring something a "religious view" is one of the few ways we've got left to make the otherwise deplorable sound acceptable and tolerable. Be that discriminating against homosexuals/women/infidels/whatever, mutilating a child's genitals, or denying one's child a blood transfusion and killing them in the process. Try to point out the obvious imorality and you'll be told you need to "respect their religion". I'm sick of that.
If 'love the religous person, dislike the religion' is valid, 'dislike the sin, not the sinner' must also be valid. That's all I'm saying.
Personally, I would really, really appreciate it if everyone left all this kind of judgement to God or karma or whatever, but hey, that's life.
Azy said:
On that basis Muslims don't have to respect people who are homosexual or people who think homosexuality is acceptable.
Um, no. In this context, Muslims do indeed have to respect people they disagree with. Thus 'hate the sin, not the sinner'. If some dude is openly camp, that absolutely does not give any Muslim the right to start stoning him. However, if that dude is witnessed sodomising someone... that would be the sin, see? Similarly, a woman mustn't be punished for looking a bit... butch. However, if she's caught in the act so to speak, that's where she's committing a sin under Islamic law.
Note: I don't want this to become a discussion of Islamic law, I'm just clarifying. There are plenty of other threads covering that particular topic.
I don't have to respect Muslims on the basis that they don't think homosexuality is acceptable, but I can still get along with them and do so on a daily basis.
Don't confuse 'respect' with 'agreement'. The two are not mutually exclusive.
It amuses me to no end that you brought up the KKK, though. Still, beats invoking Godwin's law.
The KKK hate people for who and what they are, not what they do. Religious people in general are not supposed to hate people for who and what they are, they're supposed to hate their wrongdoing. If religious people do hate people for who and what they are, they become sinners themselves.
"He's a Muslim - but he's still a nice guy" is valid in this context.
Valid, but still ignorant and bigoted-sounding. Just like 'He's gay - but he's still a good guy' or 'She's a woman - but she's still pretty clever' would be ignorant and bigoted-sounding.
