tl;dr: If it’s too long to read, why are you here? Otherwise, welcome and read on.
Twitter is an interesting place. You can say things in 140 characters that require a great deal of space to respond to, unless you’re going straight for a “fuck you.” I’m not going for that, but was kind of tempted (not for the reasons you may think).
Last night, Abbynormal0ne on YouTube put up the following video (included to provide context for anyone else seeing this page):
To which you responded with the following two tweets:
@lorrainrRo89 I think @abbynormal0ne blocked me. Every time I try to tweet her, it say’s bad request? I’m just pointing out you’re hypocrisy #chirstian ?
@lorrainrRo89 Ummm? Leviticus 18:-24. You’re Christian, Right? That’s what I’m talking about. Hypocrite.
I got into it a little bit on Twitter with you, and then got distracted and involved in something else when you didn’t reply for a long time. Very vanilla as far as Twitter arguments go, but I think why I reacted the way I did is complex enough that the 140 character limit is not something I want to work around.
It’s really simple: hypocrisy is contradicting one’s stated beliefs through word or deed. You called her a hypocrite solely on the basis of her being against the anti-gay bus ads because of a passage in Leviticus, basing this on the fact that she is a Christian, and identifies herself as such.
Only one problem with that: there are many, many different kinds of Christians. Even the Mormons are (sort of) Christian, even if they believe that Jesus was an alien who ascended to godhood via clean thoughts and pure living (to drastically oversimplify things). This means you’re calling her a hypocrite for not adhering to something that as far as you (and I) know, she never said, or even implied.
It’s like hating on a Republican who doesn’t like Ronald Reagan, and was born after Reagan died; the connection you want to make exists only in your own mind, and in the minds of those particular Christians (and Jews) who DO feel that Leviticus is wholly authoritative. Actually, they’d call her a heretic or some such, but I’m not clear on this whole set of terminology, which is why I usually don’t get involved in these conversations.
There was one reason I did get involved in this one (besides the fact that she’s a friend of mine): I suspect you’re an Atheist, which means we share a lack of belief (and that’s all that can be said, with the exception of things like we both understand written English and both use the Internet). There may be many dissimilarities between us, but one *possible* similarity is a respect for evidence and reason, which I’ll take the risk of appealing to now (even though there are a LOT of stupid and dogmatic Atheists out there, and I mock them as fiercely as I mock fundamentalists).
When you view one video, you are looking at a tiny slice of someone’s life presented as a mediated experience, and usually it’s been planned in advance (if only in regards to the subject of the video). Judging someone with a serious accusation like hypocrisy based on so little evidence is setting yourself up to look foolish (as in this case, because Abby is one of the most empathetic and accepting* people I know). You at least said you thought she blocked you rather than outright claiming she block you, which is a good start. Go with that, and hone it a bit; free advice, worth what you paid for it.
Other than that, have a good weekend.
* I hate the word “tolerant,” because in my mind it has the connotation of a not-so-happy-enduring of something or someone. For instance, I am tolerant of Gansta Rap if I’m in someone else’s house and that’s what they want to listen to, but I am accepting of the fact that they enjoy different things than I do.