Or, perhaps, how does "whiteness" actually "reconcile" with "blackness" (to use the new hotness) without destroying the limitations specified for the categories in question?

Bueller?

RT @ChoosingHats@twitter.com

Also, as a perennial question - how does a nebulous social construct (guilty of sin systemically, not individually) "reconcile" with another nebulous social construct?

How does one argue from general to specific, or specific to general without trashing the initial stipulations?

🐦🔗: twitter.com/ChoosingHats/statu

While engaged in a decades long campaign to erase black mothers from existence - one generation at a time.

Unbelievable.

RT @PPFA@twitter.com

We’re proud to support @BlkMamasMatter@twitter.com in their 2nd national Black Maternal Health Week to promote maternal health, rights, and justice for Black mamas.

🐦🔗: twitter.com/PPFA/status/111602

RT @XianMind@twitter.com

For me, one emphatic takeaway from J. V. Fesko's Reforming Apologetics is the crucial necessity of reading primary sources and doing so as carefully and fairly as possible.

🐦🔗: twitter.com/XianMind/status/11

RT @JoshDaws@twitter.com

Excusing prejudice against a group because of their perceived cultural power is how anti-semitism has been justified throughout history.

🐦🔗: twitter.com/JoshDaws/status/11

RT @ChoosingHats@twitter.com

Also, as a perennial question - how does a nebulous social construct (guilty of sin systemically, not individually) "reconcile" with another nebulous social construct?

How does one argue from general to specific, or specific to general without trashing the initial stipulations?

🐦🔗: twitter.com/ChoosingHats/statu

That'll probably apply to like, 5 of you, but still.

Incidentally, Fesko makes nearly the same assertion about Kant and VT that I see all over here about CRT and SJ proponents. Take that for what it's worth.

Oh, so a few *hundred* thousand little women dying in abortions is okay, instead. Got it. You're a

RT @DrLeanaWen@twitter.com

We in medicine and public health know the consequence of these extreme abortion bans, because we have been there before.

Before Roe v. Wade, thousands of women died every year, and because of these ongoing attacks, this could happen again right here in America.

🐦🔗: twitter.com/DrLeanaWen/status/

Also, as a perennial question - how does a nebulous social construct (guilty of sin systemically, not individually) "reconcile" with another nebulous social construct?

How does one argue from general to specific, or specific to general without trashing the initial stipulations?

Supplemental note: Not everyone who disagrees with SJ issues is a racist, and not everyone who champions SJ issues is a Marxist.

Except you, you horrible person. You know who I mean.

Addendum: The last (deleted) tweet had the worst typo ever. That was your fault, too.

Some adopt positions uncritically, but without knowledge of the origin of the ideas the position relies on. That doesn't mean they adopted the origin position, or that they don't. That's another discussion altogether.

I love pushing the antithesis - but reductionism ain't it.

Only peripherally related to the quoted tweet, really - but used it to make that particular point. There is a tendency to argue fallaciously, here, from both sides - specifically, with the genetic fallacy. Going too broad to include assumptions of motive is problematic as well.

It's great to adopt that idea - but not if we do so because CRT proposed it. If we do believe that race is an unreality, we should adopt that position because we went ad fontes and found that the concept of "race" is foreign to Scripture.

RT @AlsoACarpenter@twitter.com

Following their (il)logic, I suppose I could argue that most ant-"social justice" warrior evangelicals are Critical Race Theorists (& therefore "Marxists," hahaha), because they have adopted a central plank of CRT, viz., that "race" is a social construct and a biological fiction.

🐦🔗: twitter.com/AlsoACarpenter/sta

When marriage is a picture of Christ and the Church, you can't believe anything else. Add in Paul's comments about sexual sins being intensely personal re: the imago dei, and it's inescapable.

twitter.com/BrandonAmbro/statu

RT @BrandonAmbro@twitter.com

Because he doesn’t follow Jesus’ famous teaching from the Sermon on the Mount about not allowing women to have abortions? It’s beyond insane that the religious right sees sexuality as a “Gospel issue.” twitter.com/noltenc/status/111

🐦🔗: twitter.com/BrandonAmbro/statu

Those pesky Constitutional Republics and their representatively democratic political systems.

RT @PPact@twitter.com

Six-week abortion bans are dangerous, extreme, and blatantly unconstitutional. Don't let your lawmaker decide for you → ppact.io/2WGjStJ

🐦🔗: twitter.com/PPact/status/11142

More business for their genealogy enterprises, I guess.

RT @NPR@twitter.com

JUST IN: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints says it has reversed its 2015 policy that excluded children of LGBT couples from being baptized. It also will no longer refer to LGBT couples as apostates.

🐦🔗: twitter.com/NPR/status/1113851

Apologetic methodology is important, true. It should flow from our systematic theology in an organic fashion. Systematic, however, holds primacy - and our unity is found in our shared commitment there, not in apologetic method.

Show more
Mastodon

terrafirma.space Is this thing on? Hello?