Followup

     I had a very heated exchange of comments with two persons on a page in another closed FB group late last evening. The origin of the contention was their response to my post of 20 hours ago re: Syrian immigrants specifically and Muslims generally. One actually praised the Crusades and called for another. They also attacked the Pope, apparently as an added bonus, as a pedophile (??)

     Throughout, the two kept using what under any definition would qualify as hate speech, directed first at Muslims, and then expanding to include the President and then me. The conversation deteriorated as I pointed out to them that while both of them, in print and on their own FB pages, lay very loud and visible claim to being "patriots" and even more strenuously, Christians. their actions and attitudes say diametrically otherwise. 

     Things really deteriorated when I posed to them the simple proposition with which I closed yesterday's post, and I'll paraphrase, here: If you lay claim to being a practicing Christian, there are really only two rules you absolutely must follow: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." All else being "window dressing" and man made dogma.

     My contention is that if you genuinely consider yourself a practicing Christian and not simply a wannabee poseur, how can you discriminate against a group based on the actions of a small fanatical portion of that group? By extension, how can you discriminate against other persons who, while perhaps different then you, are still your neighbor? The two persons in questions had no answer, rather just revved up the name calling. They do, however have several traits in common. They apparently believe all Muslims are the evil, they are gun crazy, and they both falsely claim to be Christians.

     At some point, hopefully in a debate format on air, this question needs to be put to the Jindal/Huckabee/Walker/Santorum group who continually spew their "Attack on Christianity" nonsense, while acting in such a manner as to indicate their own propensity for actions and attitudes diametrically opposed to the mandates of their "faith". As an external observer, I would opine that if you believe Kim Davis is righteous and the Pope isn't, you are about as screwed up as a soup sandwich.