Baking Cakes is Bigoted But Slaughtering Gays Isn’t? Explained

On Twitter Katie Pavlich (and almost every other conservative) voiced what she thought was an apparent lack of logic in the left’s reactions to homophobia.

Apparently, if it’s a Christian refusing to bake a gay wedding cake, it’s homophobia. But if it’s a Muslim shooting gays, it’s about gun control, not Islamic homophobia.

Now, this might sound logical. Christian “bigotry” isn’t violent, it’s a statement of belief. Muslims killing gays isn’t on the same level as Christians refusing to bake cakes. Although one is far worse than the other, the left will still label the first, bigotry, and the second, a gun control issue.

It sounds logical, but it’s really not.

It’s surface level logic, devoid of any relevant context.

So, here’s some context for you.

The Context Surrounding Christian “Bigotry”

This goes back to all I’ve said about culture wars and Christianity.

Christians not only react to social change, they react to in some of the worst ways possible. They react with fear, hate, and disgust.

So after all the bad reactions, Christians then have the nerve to say they should have the legal right to discriminate against gays. This being after they fought for restricting gay marriage.

Would you protect someone’s right to discriminate against you after they tried to deny you rights in the first place?

Most people won’t, and that’s why Christians are viewed as bigots. They fought against allowing a group equality under the law, then they want to legally discriminate against said group? Yeah, good luck.

The main opponent of gay rights in America has always been Christians, not Muslims.

Why Muslims Shooting Gays Is A Gun Control Issue

The Orlando gay club shooting was contextualized as a gun crisis.

See, the talking points were already defined before political twitter could rally itself.

The left will use this to rail against lax gun laws, and call for strict gun control. And the right will use this to point a finger at Islam and how dangerous Muslims are, while calling for gun ownership.

The soundbites were predetermined.

The fact that guns were involved determined why this became such a big gun control issue. This happens every time a mass shooting comes along. This shouldn’t have been a surprise.

If the Muslim knifed a bunch of people then I’m sure the window of debate would’ve been different (and perhaps more focused on Islamic homophobia).

Surface Level Platitudes Get Old, Stop Using Them

Katie Plavich’s tweet was a shallow analyzation of the issues.

Christians have been the main opponents of homosexuality in America. They fought this cultural shift like a bigot. They provided no viable alternative, nor did they seek middle ground.

Muslims haven’t been a big part of this nation’s history. And the focus has been on the radical ones, the terrorists.

The Orlando mass shooting was an inherent gun issue, with some terrorism mixed in. Mass shootings have been on the minds of Americans for a while now. It shouldn’t be a surprise anymore.

This is why shallow analyzations are so ineffective. It boils issues down to a he said, she said debate. It cries “this isn’t fair” while claiming they know better.

Most importantly, it’s preaching to the choir. No one outside your ideological tribe will read it and agree, much less think unbiasedly about it.

So, before you go tweeting broad generalizations and comparisons of issues that are miles apart think before you tweet.

Will this add to the conversation, or will it push others away killing the conversation altogether?

Did you like this article? If so please take a moment to support future work of mine on Patreon!
About John-Pierre Maeli

Keeping it simple and crystal clear, because anything else is useless. I'm here to not only inform you, but to also connect with you. That's what The Political Informer is all about. Feel free to follow me on either Twitter or Google+ Let's talk!

Learn How to...

Just enter your email to get started (plus free goodies afterward)