your second paragraph contradicts the first. if there is nothing wrong in voicing beliefs openly why you deny that right to Savage?
again, Savage (as far as I can tell from the linked article) did not address these particular 10 students, did not fault them individually for Christian bullying nor he accused them in being bullies themselves. These students CHOSE to hear his speech as insult against them. Now, you mix together "insulting them and their faith". Their faith does not need defense in the form of getting offended on its behalf. By getting insulted they behaved as that вор на котором шапка горит. By getting up and leaving they pointed his accusing finger on themselves. The joke is really on them.
It's either or: either he insulted them personally or he insulted their faith (but not them). These students should have known that the facts he is talking about exist - that Christians (among them students-Christians) attack, make fun of and bully gays (among them student-gays) - and this behavior is stems from (among other reasons) tenets of Christian faith. This is a cold fact, with numerous examples.
As to your jewish example let me ask you: is it OK to attack random atheist because some commie murderers happened to be ones? "They are all atheists, what's the difference?" - that's exactly what i experience when I am among people of faith. But I take it lightly - until they become intolerably mean. When, in all truth, it is me who should laugh at them - after all, adults believing in fairy tales and seriously defending improbables with a serious, sometimes fanatical look in their eyes are rather hilarious.
no subject
again, Savage (as far as I can tell from the linked article) did not address these particular 10 students, did not fault them individually for Christian bullying nor he accused them in being bullies themselves. These students CHOSE to hear his speech as insult against them. Now, you mix together "insulting them and their faith". Their faith does not need defense in the form of getting offended on its behalf. By getting insulted they behaved as that вор на котором шапка горит. By getting up and leaving they pointed his accusing finger on themselves. The joke is really on them.
It's either or: either he insulted them personally or he insulted their faith (but not them). These students should have known that the facts he is talking about exist - that Christians (among them students-Christians) attack, make fun of and bully gays (among them student-gays) - and this behavior is stems from (among other reasons) tenets of Christian faith. This is a cold fact, with numerous examples.
As to your jewish example let me ask you: is it OK to attack random atheist because some commie murderers happened to be ones? "They are all atheists, what's the difference?" - that's exactly what i experience when I am among people of faith. But I take it lightly - until they become intolerably mean. When, in all truth, it is me who should laugh at them - after all, adults believing in fairy tales and seriously defending improbables with a serious, sometimes fanatical look in their eyes are rather hilarious.