an open carry scenario

[paul]

comment removed by me, this conversation is going nowhere- Paul

[headcase]

Well-reasoned, as usual.

My point is that some conduct, while perfectly acceptable in many situations is unacceptable as a matter of courtesy due to the weight of public opinion and common custom in others. Open carry is, indisputably, not common practice in church, or we wouldn't even be having this discussion. I'm willing to give it the nod in most situations, with a quiet smile and an understanding that whatever gets some folks through the night differs from my own way of thinking.

The inherent fallacy underlying the insistence of people to push the limits of what they can do and where they can do it is that those limits should be pushed the first place. Or that leaving well enough alone isn't good enough.

And simply because something does not overtly interfere with worship doesn't make it appropriate. It may form the basis for allowing a particular behavior, but it doesn't form the predicate for the argument that it necessarily should be allowed.

For example:

Would it be appropriate for someone to come to church in a a full gimp style vinyl suit, complete with ball-gag, dog collar, and leash?

Would it be appropriate for someone to dress up in full drag-queen regalia?

Either of those may be analogized to OC.
"I'm just trying to bring awareness to the lifestyle."
"I'm not doing anything illegal."
"If you don't like it, don't look."
"I'm not making noise, or disturbing anyone."
"Why won't you accept me as I am? I'm perfectly normal, and within my rights."

Yeah, you are. But you're also making a spectacle, right or wrong, by deviating from the norm and engaging in unusual behaviors in a traditional forum. If the goal is normalizing a behavior, you're admitting up front that it isn't normal to begin with, and church isn't the place to break ground like that. The message may be valid, but you're targeting the recipient in the wrong forum.

I completely understand your point. I am willing to play Devil's advocate though. I would venture that a person's own curiosity trumping their stated devotion, is that persons' character flaw. If the vinyl wearing freak show is going to engage in disruptive behavior, I am all for the lynch squad. But, again, if they are just minding their own business, someone else's uncontrollable need to investigate, stare, or otherwise break from their stated purpose is to blame for the disruption, not the vinyl wearing freak show. A person, or group of people, not liking some legal behavior enough to actually get themselves angry over it, is more inappropriate than the behaviors mentioned so far, IMO. Especially in a church, which is supposed to be a forgiving, tolerant, universal love type of atmosphere. And that supposed atmosphere, is exactly the place, I would imagine, to break ground like that....

ETA~ I also don't think it even needs to be making a statement, it could just be that is how they go about their life, Vinyl or OC

[Pa. Patriot]

Rule, if you want to take the path of least resistance, as you call it - have at it. That's your prerogative.
The attention whore comment (broad brush/generalization again) was really not applicable to why most others may not choose that path. Some? maybe. Not all and probably very few of the bunch.

[Rule10b5]

Rule, if you want to take the path of least resistance, as you call it - have at it. That's your prerogative.
The attention whore comment (broad brush/generalization again) was really not applicable to why most others may not choose that path. Some? maybe. Not all and probably very few of the bunch.

No offense, but "least resistance" isn't my point at all -- it is that individuals should engage in context appropriate behavior and recognize that not all conduct is appropriate in all contexts. When you engage in behavior that is outside the norm in a very structured and traditional context you're being discourteous.

Violating social norms in a place that exists to revere tradition doesn't make one an ambassador for a lifestyle -- it makes him boorish. The more I hear people militantly advancing OC, quite frankly, the less inclined I am to respond positively towards it. Given that I'm already in the overwhelming minority that endorses OC as generally a positive thing, that should speak volumes regarding how your average non-gunnie will respond.

If you'd like to respond to the several and detailed posts I made setting forth my arguments in support of my point, I'm happy to respond.

[Pa. Patriot]

If you'd like to respond to the several and detailed posts I made setting forth my arguments in support of my point, I'm happy to respond.

I've read them, and agree with a lot of your points in part or in whole.

However, I see none of those comments giving legitimacy your attention whore generalization. Sorry. My main point was that I was surprised to see you post such a response.

As far as the comments on there own, again, I agree with much of them. I also have no problem with people thinking one "behavior" is not acceptable. Understand that some people will disagree with that opinion. People have said that OC into any retail store was unacceptable too. My opinion is completely counter to that. Based largely on the lack of concern from the people there when I do do it.

[paul]

It would be unchristian to to welcome anyone for any reason, whether ball gagged or open carrying or any other scenario you can come up with. Propriety isn't a tenet of christianity, acceptance is. Wasn't one of the reasons Jesus was targeted by the pharisees was that he hung out with unsavory characters? Whores and tax collectors, hell, Jesus was a rebel, kicking money lenders out of the temple and collecting grain on the sabbath. You think he would have stopped one of his sermons because someone was open carrying a sword in the crowd?

This whole debate reminds me of a conversation I heard in church as a kid. My friend Chris was sitting with his mom next to me and all of a sudden she starts hissing under her breath, "Chris I can't believe you wore those sandals to church, how will this look?"

He just looked back at her sweetly and said "So Jesus never wore sandals to church?"

[Emptymag]

...

This whole debate reminds me of a conversation I heard in church as a kid. My friend Chris was sitting with his mom next to me and all of a sudden she starts hissing under her breath, "Chris I can't believe you wore those sandals to church, how will this look?"

He just looked back at her sweetly and said "So Jesus never wore sandals to church?"

Our priest wore sandals during our wedding ceremony.

I'm not sure if he wore any fetish gear under his robe, and while I don't care if he did, I would not have been too happy about him performing the ceremony without the robe, and with a... (shudder) nevermind, gotta get rid of that mental image.