Comments on: More from Laurie Higgins on why She Supports a Culture of Disapproval and Condemnation

By: Bill S

Bill S — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:46:13 +0000

Wrapping verbal abuse in Biblespeak doesn’t make it any less hurtful and mean-spirited and obnoxious.

By: William

William — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 18:44:29 +0000

I agree with Priya Lynn. Laurie Higgins’s organization isn’t – unfortunately – some obscure, far out group, comparable to a flat earth society or an anti-Copernican society, which no-one but a tiny number of nutcases would dream of taking seriously. It’s an organization with a grandiose title, the Illinois Family Institute, whose declared object is “Upholding marriage & family, life & liberty in the land of Lincoln”; it’s presumably well funded and it asks people to pledge a monthly gift of $25 or more to support its new “New Division of School Advocacy”. N.B. Donations are tax-deductible.

People who see the IFI website need to be made aware of what it is they will really be supporting if they contribute.

Priya said: “I was wondering myself what Higgins feels distinguishes righteous ‘condemnation and disapproval’ from bullying.”

The “Christian” kids, with the encouragement of bodies like IFI, can express the righteous condemnation and disapproval, making it clear that they’re not thereby trying to incite bullying; they can then safely leave it to others to do the explicit bullying. Now what was the name of that famous bloke nearly 2,000 years ago who adopted a somewhat similar ploy? Ah yes, Pontius Pilate.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:47:56 +0000

Yes Christopher, I was wondering myself what Higgins feels distinguishes rightieous “condemnation and disapproval” from bullying.

By: Christopher Waldrop

Christopher Waldrop — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:45:46 +0000

To back up what Priya Lynn said, I think there’s a lot more to stating a case than just “winning the argument”. Higgins approves of bullying. She says Christian kids must engage in “condemnation and strong disapproval”, and she even goes so far as to say that publicly-funded schools should provide “a counterbalancing message of Christian conservatism” in any discussion of homosexuality. It’s not the role of schools to push a religious message.

To get back to bullying, though, Higgins is in favor of it. She even encourages it. Is she saying teachers should stand off to the side when kids are bullied, or that they should take the side of the bullies if they’re doing it for the “right” reasons? I think it would be fruitful to get her exact definition of “bullying”. Does she think it should stop at verbal abuse, or would she encourage it to become physical? If Higgins approves of violence, let her come out and say so.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:13:25 +0000

I have confirmation that Teri is not a pseudonym for Laurie Higgins.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:47:49 +0000

I disagree with Ephilei and Pomo. The point of these essays is not to change immovable minds like Higgins its to influence the reachable moderates who she is also attempting to influence. Higgins specious tracts left alone have the ability to convert. If we cede the stage to people like her they’ll be the only ones telling impressionable people what to think and we’ll lose the battle for public opinion.

By: Ephilei

Ephilei — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:01:37 +0000

I’m inclined to agree with Pomo. Let’s not worry about winning the argument. Unless Laurie has something new to say, let’s ignore her.

By: Bruce Garrett

Bruce Garrett — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:53:43 +0000

“You see, as long as he hates himself they have a chance to save his soul.”

I don’t think that’s what’s going on here. What’s going on here is he has to hate himself as much as they hate him. Then they can feel justified. If, on the other hand, he feels good about himself, if he lives proudly, decently, honorably, then there is always going to be that little mustard seed of doubt deep down inside, asking, “What are you doing to these people…?”

It’s not his soul they want to save. It’s their own. From having to live with the knowledge that they put a knife into the hearts of so many innocent kids.

By: me again

me again — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 04:21:52 +0000

Hmm, I read this:

“She argued that Christian kids should not “do to others what you would have them do to you””

And then I read this:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Where_is_the_Golden_Rule_in_the_Bible

By: Ben in Oakland

Ben in Oakland — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 03:56:40 +0000

Actually, RU486, you mean stay IN thge kitchen… where any good Christian woman will be.