Don’t Shut Up

You cannot argue with mindless hate, and hate seems all too popular in the recent storm of tweets seemingly attacking prayer. I thought this evening to work out a response to these detractions against prayer, these memes treating as cheap the most integral part of life. However, inspection revealed the argument was not against prayer.

The actual argument seems to be currently working for gun control, and it presupposes two things: prayer is meaningless showboating, and those who disagree upon a political issue are culpable for the problem. The argument goes something like: If you do not support the political agenda you allow this sort of horrendous atrocity; therefore your well-wishes and prayers are meaningless.

Assertions implying that dissenting opinions should be met with outrage and ridicule are insidious bigotry. Prayer seems to be an unfortunate casualty here, caught in the crossfire of a bankrupt ideology desperately lashing out. These attacks are a substitute for true debate, and poison the discussion.

So no, no one is obliged to agree with you because you think your policy could put an end to this cycle of barbarism, this sick vainglory sought by unscrupulous cowards. The logic of this argument falls apart; it can be turned against the very thing its users try to support. For example: When defenseless victims fall prey to a gunman, are the gun-control supporters—the ones keeping those victims from arms—accountable for the victims’ deaths?

Honest people can, will, and do disagree. Sometimes, after all the talk in the world, there is no room left for debate. But when one side continually volleys hateful rhetoric calculated to suffocate discourse, then all they do boils down to shouting, “Shut up.”