Tip #34 No, Really, You Already Warned Us
Sep. 13th, 2015 11:40 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wingedbeastThis is a somewhat belated response to the movie "Audacity" by Ray Comfort.
The movie is all about Ray Comfort making the case that (his version of) Christians aren't really hateful when they preach against homosexuality, but merely warning people. There are elements of this that I've already touched upon. Show versus Tell is certainly a matter.
Additionally, Ray's metaphor extends beyond merely "warning" to the matter of pulling someone out of a path... a metaphor I hardly believe Ray would take well to applying to someone who thinks it's immoral for him to be allowed to do any heavy labor on a Saturday.
But, let's take the movie as Ray Comfort wants us to take it, as him stating how he's warning (people with a sexuality, a religion, or certain political views that disagree with Ray's views). This is a claim I've seen made multiple times. "If you were in a plane that was going to crash, I would warn you." "If your house was on fire, I would warn you." "If your house was in the path of a tornado, you'd want me to warn you."
The big problem remains, and it's one that goes back to the very first tip. We've all been warned on these things before. Homosexual people have been "warned" before. Trans people have been "warned" before. Allies of both have been "warned" before. Atheists have been "warned" before.
We've all heard these warnings over and over and over and over and over again. Another repetition isn't going to do anything at this point for one clear reason.
We do not find the warning to be credible.
The metaphors commonly used nearly always refer to a blatant threat, one that is easily seen, such as an oncoming train. However obvious that threat may seem to you it is not so to us. It is one of many threats that we do not find credible.
Your task isn't just to deliver the threat, but to actually present evidence that said threat is credible. If you have none to deliver, then the only thing you can do has already been done.
The movie is all about Ray Comfort making the case that (his version of) Christians aren't really hateful when they preach against homosexuality, but merely warning people. There are elements of this that I've already touched upon. Show versus Tell is certainly a matter.
Additionally, Ray's metaphor extends beyond merely "warning" to the matter of pulling someone out of a path... a metaphor I hardly believe Ray would take well to applying to someone who thinks it's immoral for him to be allowed to do any heavy labor on a Saturday.
But, let's take the movie as Ray Comfort wants us to take it, as him stating how he's warning (people with a sexuality, a religion, or certain political views that disagree with Ray's views). This is a claim I've seen made multiple times. "If you were in a plane that was going to crash, I would warn you." "If your house was on fire, I would warn you." "If your house was in the path of a tornado, you'd want me to warn you."
The big problem remains, and it's one that goes back to the very first tip. We've all been warned on these things before. Homosexual people have been "warned" before. Trans people have been "warned" before. Allies of both have been "warned" before. Atheists have been "warned" before.
We've all heard these warnings over and over and over and over and over again. Another repetition isn't going to do anything at this point for one clear reason.
We do not find the warning to be credible.
The metaphors commonly used nearly always refer to a blatant threat, one that is easily seen, such as an oncoming train. However obvious that threat may seem to you it is not so to us. It is one of many threats that we do not find credible.
Your task isn't just to deliver the threat, but to actually present evidence that said threat is credible. If you have none to deliver, then the only thing you can do has already been done.
