The Girl On The Plane

I hate flying.

It’s not the airports, the traffic, the bag-checking, or even the shoe removal and full-body X-ray. That stuff is no fun, but I can tolerate it. I hate actually being in the air. Even though I’ve heard the statistic (“It’s safer than driving a car!”) a million times, what I call my “primitive monkey brain” kicks in as soon as I look at the plane. A tiny, primeval voice in my head says, “That is a building with wings, and buildings can’t fly.”

No matter how many times people try to explain it to me, using words like “propulsion” and “thrust” and “imbecile,” I still can’t wrap my brain around it. I feel certain that the plane I am about to board will be one of the rare ones that drops out of the sky like a stone.

I was sitting at DFW airport, after the car I was riding in had a flat and I had to be handed off to another family member in the pouring rain by the side of the freeway like a parcel of contraband. I bolted from the car at the terminal ten minutes before my flight was to depart, sprinted through security like a maniac, and screeched to a halt at the gate to find that my flight had been delayed an hour… then another hour… and then another.

About twenty minutes before I actually boarded the plane, a young woman sitting nearby, pretty and in her mid-20s, hung up her cell phone. I knew she had been talking to a boyfriend or husband because I heard her say, exasperated,  “I can tell you’re playing video games.” Now, tired and impatient like the rest of us, she looked at me and said, “What’s your story?”

I was taken aback, not because of her unorthodox greeting, but because this was my favorite way of starting conversations with strangers. I was used to being on the giving and not the receiving end of this bold opener. I told her I was on my way to see my boyfriend, she said she was on her way to see a friend, and we exchanged travel horror stories for a few minutes before we started telling each other more about ourselves.

I’ll call her Janet. She was from Chicago, 26 years old, a psychologist, married for three years to a newly graduated attorney, living in New York for five years. She was curious and direct. She asked me about my politics, and seemed a little surprised when I told her I owned a gun, and my boyfriend owned several. She said she wasn’t used to being around that. After hearing about my politics and expressing a little of hers, I became aware of what I had already guessed: we were on opposite ends of the political spectrum.  She then asked if she could take a picture with me in which the large black Texas tattoo on my forearm was showing. “My husband will love this,” she said. I said sure, we snapped the photo, and then it was time to board the plane.

As we queued with other disgruntled passengers to board — by this time it was nearly midnight and our flight had been scheduled to leave at 8:15 — Janet, having ascertained that I was interested in politics and wrote about the subject often, asked me what my “pet” subject was, the one to which I gave most of my attention. I took a deep breath and said, “Definitely pro-life.”

“Really?” said Janet. “That’s funny because mine is pro-choice.”

“Really?” I said. I continued talking politely, answering her questions. She was candid and inquisitive about my positions, and I found her charming and genuine. But inside I was in a state of turmoil.

Three days earlier I had attended a meeting hosted by Planned Parenthood of North Texas in which the Center for Reproductive Rights, a New York-based pro-abortion group, discussed their lawsuit against the state of Texas and the partial injunction they had won against the so-called Sonogram Law. I had been asked to go by the president of a pro-life organization who was interested in CRR’s legal strategy, and I had attended incognito, not divulging myself as a pro-lifer, seemingly just another “abortion rights” advocate interested in the lawsuit. I wrote about the meeting for Live Action, and explained a little of how traumatized I was by the event. It had filled me with fear and loathing, an awful sense of dread.

I felt a huge gulf between the way I saw the world, and the way the “concerned” women sitting around me in the “church” saw it. It startled and confused me, how self-righteous these people were about the perceived suffering of women, while making no mention whatsoever – none! – of the fate of their slaughtered children. I felt like I was in the presence of evil, a type that was particularly dangerous not only because it thought itself good, but because it seemed so banal. These women wore sensible sandals, not horns and hooves. They genuinely thought they were helping, and it scared the living hell out of me.

So as Janet and I boarded the plane I felt a little twinge of that feeling I had had only three nights before. It still hadn’t left me completely, as a matter of fact. And now here I was, face to face with a person who seemed perfectly nice, but advocated for the right of a woman to have an abortion.

I was seated a few seats back from Janet, and she asked if I wanted to move up and sit across from her. I told her I would if no one sat there, and as we waited for takeoff we used our iPhones to friend each other on Facebook. I also prayed. I prayed that someone would sit in that seat so I would not have to talk to her, and I prayed that if I did have to talk to her, I would be suddenly blessed with the gift of eloquence. I have never liked arguing, although I usually do okay with it. I prefer to write out my arguments, and have time to consider them thoughtfully. Added to my anxiety about spending the next hour and a half debating abortion with a stranger was my fear of flying, which began to really kick in as we waited for takeoff.

My fate was sealed soon after: the flight attendant came by and said, “You can move up and sit by your friend if you’d like. ” Sigh. Thanks, lady. I moved up, feeling bad for feeling bad. After all, Janet seemed like a kind, funny, intelligent, authentic person. I had immediately liked her.

Needless to say, Janet launched into politics, religion, and abortion right away, and the next hour and a half are a blur to me. We covered everything from Darwin to Sarah Palin to marriage to Judaism, and we disagreed on almost every single subject. We connected on one topic though: both of us were strongly pro-Israel. Janet was Jewish, and had visited there, and encouraged me to do so.

“We finally found something we agreed on!” I said.

“I bet we agree on more than you think,” said Janet, which shut me up for a moment.

Although my answers seemed to shock her occasionally, Janet never acted as if I were insane, stupid, or evil, and I hope I never acted that way towards her. In fact, her beliefs, though diverging from mine, and in my opinion often ill-considered, did not make her seem less human to me. She impressed me as an honest, bright, and compassionate young woman, though one I felt was very much, unfortunately, a child of her age.

As we landed, I felt a great deal of relief. Janet was a seasoned and relaxed flyer, and I asked her if she had used her skills as a psychologist to distract me from my fear of flying. She said she had, and I smiled. I wondered then — and still wonder — if she was not so much interested in talking to me, but just doing a good deed by occupying the mind of a nervous flyer.

We disembarked. Janet was tired and in a hurry to get to her friend. We said our goodbyes, and I smiled as I spotted my boyfriend in the terminal. “Is that him?” she asked, because we had made time in between discussions of the Gaza strip and partial-birth abortion to talk about our significant others. “That’s him,” I said. As she walked ahead of me and past him, I heard Janet say to him, “She’s a great girl.”

Aside from a brief Facebook comment, I haven’t spoken to Janet since the flight. “Single serving friends,” as Tyler Durden said in Fight Club. To me, though, she was much more. I think of her often. I feel like we met for a reason. I don’t know what, if anything, I meant to Janet, but to me she was a very necessary reminder, after the contempt and dread I felt during the Planned Parenthood meeting, not to demonize the other side. It is neither honest nor constructive to pretend that her opinion on abortion is acceptable to me, but neither is it honest or constructive to pretend that she is the devil. She is not. She is a kind, intelligent young woman, and there are many like her. And that gives me hope. We can be of no use to humanity, born or unborn, if we can’t see the humanity in each other.

On the flight back from Mississippi, I sat in almost the exact same seat I had sat in during my earlier trip, and sitting where Janet had been was a woman about six months pregnant. I didn’t have Janet to comfort me with distracting debate, but occasionally in my anxiety I would turn and see the woman sitting there dozing, and think of the sleeping child in her womb, and feel at peace.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Kristen is Vice President of New Wave Feminists and blogs at Eve’s Ransom and Right Wing News. She also tweets as @walkertxkristen and can be found on Facebook if you know where to look.

  • Anonymous

    ‘Janet’
    is exactly what you already said, ‘a child of her age’, as are nearly all young
    people (western) these days. Male and female. You gave her exactly what she needed, and I
    have little doubt exactly what she is secretly looking for.

    I speak with
    a good many young men, as I am 50 (male), and have a great interest in what’s
    going on in the minds of young people and how they see the world and see
    themselves within it. What is almost universal is that they don’t consider the
    origins of their opinions and their beliefs. In fact they actually think that
    they came up with their ‘philosophy’ or outlook on life on their own, in a
    vacuum. As if the morals and corresponding ethics (or the lack thereof) they
    hold are of their personal generation and had little to do with the culture
    around them (aka- their own generation). They rarely consider the influence
    their generation and that of former generations have had in the formation of
    their own thought process and what that thought process produces in themselves.
    The first thing that becomes clear is that their thought process is ambiguous
    and without any clear structure or Universal guiding principles. In fact it
    becomes clear enough from the beginning of a conversation in which they
    contradict themselves at every turn that they have been conditioned to think
    of, and use ‘self’ as a ‘Principle’. In fact they use themselves as THE
    Principle and the Criterion for the Establishment of Truth. This is the current
    condition of the modern age and the generation living it have little or no hope
    of escaping this ‘reverb loop’ they are caught in. They hear their peers and
    they take that in and propagate the same ‘noise’ and it becomes louder and more
    distorted until nothing else has much hope of getting in. It’s like putting an
    electric guitar right up next to the amplifier turned way up high and slapping
    the strings. The sound waves from the amp become the generation of more and
    more vibration on the strings themselves with increasing distortion until the
    amp blows up: Small chance of hearing or making any actual music. This current
    generation coming out of adolescence and into adulthood are destroying
    themselves in the same way, as they are in a deadly reverb loop so filled with
    distortion and noise that they have little hope of pulling away before the
    ‘amp’ blows up. It’s ironic to say the least that they have been conditioned to
    believe that they are ‘free thinkers’ and that they have the ‘right’ to think
    for themselves, yet they don’t comprehend that they can’t even begin to think
    for themselves and truly think freely unless they understand what the
    influences are that formed their thinking process in the first place. They also
    seem oblivious to the responsibility inherent to Free Thought so seem to make
    ‘free thought’ and ‘undisciplined thought’ synonymous. They are ‘children of
    their age’, and they are so conditioned and so thoroughly formed in the modern
    template that the very last thing they could possibly do is actually think
    freely. They have become so imbued in the modern spirit of chaos that they
    think that spirit is ‘freedom’ simply because it insists that ‘I can do
    whatever I please’, not considering the consequences of such a radical
    rebellion against Order and the Universal Principles, to glorify the ‘specific
    individual’. This is the ultimate form of slavery, where the slave actually
    thinks himself ‘free’ and thinks his master is in fact himself. No slave would
    even have the impulse to ‘escape’, nor the concept of a tyrannical ‘master’ when
    that master is himself. The light at the end of the tunnel here is that this
    generation is extremely dissatisfied and they have not lost the Natural desire
    to find something bigger than themselves, as they can’t ignore the empty hunger
    that necessarily comes with being ‘God unto self’. This is a double-edged sword
    however, as the unrest this empty hunger causes can just as easily become
    destructive, even suicidal. This generation of self-made gods will move in one
    of two directions, as they cannot and will not remain ‘at rest’ in their
    current condition. They will be lead out of this darkness and into a
    relationship with Universal Principle as greater than ‘self’, or they will
    become destructive in their pain and confusion that ends in civil death. They
    will either be healed or die. As it is they are in the ‘death throes’, thrashing
    and destroying themselves and each other. The cure is simple really. They need
    only hear something outside the reverb loop. They need to hear something quiet
    and Eternal. They need to experience the peace and Eternal Hope of Universal
    Truth, and they will only ‘hear’It through the ‘window’ of Reason. But that
    window is usually closed tight and has the shade drawn, covered over with a
    posters and beyond that hasn’t seen soap and water in decades. We have to help
    them find the window and help them clean it, open it up and leave the noise of
    the reverb loop and stentch of decay behind before it’s too late for all of us.
    The current generation is the future of civilization, and as it stands now Socrates
    is being poured a tall glass of hemlock……again.

    I speak with
    a good many young men, as I am 50 (male), and have a great interest in what’s
    going on in the minds of young people and how they see the world and see
    themselves within it. What is almost universal is that they don’t consider the
    origins of their opinions and their beliefs. In fact they actually think that
    they came up with their ‘philosophy’ or outlook on life on their own, in a
    vacuum. As if the morals and corresponding ethics (or the lack thereof) they
    hold are of their personal generation and had little to do with the culture
    around them (aka- their own generation). They rarely consider the influence
    their generation and that of former generations have had in the formation of
    their own thought process and what that thought process produces in themselves.
    The first thing that becomes clear is that their thought process is ambiguous
    and without any clear structure or Universal guiding principles. In fact it
    becomes clear enough from the beginning of a conversation in which they
    contradict themselves at every turn that they have been conditioned to think
    of, and use ‘self’ as a ‘Principle’. In fact they use themselves as THE
    Principle and the Criterion for the Establishment of Truth. This is the current
    condition of the modern age and the generation living it have little or no hope
    of escaping this ‘reverb loop’ they are caught in. They hear their peers and
    they take that in and propagate the same ‘noise’ and it becomes louder and more
    distorted until nothing else has much hope of getting in. It’s like putting an
    electric guitar right up next to the amplifier turned way up high and slapping
    the strings. The sound waves from the amp become the generation of more and
    more vibration on the strings themselves with increasing distortion until the
    amp blows up: Small chance of hearing or making any actual music. This current
    generation coming out of adolescence and into adulthood are destroying
    themselves in the same way, as they are in a deadly reverb loop so filled with
    distortion and noise that they have little hope of pulling away before the
    ‘amp’ blows up. It’s ironic to say the least that they have been conditioned to
    believe that they are ‘free thinkers’ and that they have the ‘right’ to think
    for themselves, yet they don’t comprehend that they can’t even begin to think
    for themselves and truly think freely unless they understand what the
    influences are that formed their thinking process in the first place. They also
    seem oblivious to the responsibility inherent to Free Thought so seem to make
    ‘free thought’ and ‘undisciplined thought’ synonymous. They are ‘children of
    their age’, and they are so conditioned and so thoroughly formed in the modern
    template that the very last thing they could possibly do is actually think
    freely. They have become so imbued in the modern spirit of chaos that they
    think that spirit is ‘freedom’ simply because it insists that ‘I can do
    whatever I please’, not considering the consequences of such a radical
    rebellion against Order and the Universal Principles, to glorify the ‘specific
    individual’. This is the ultimate form of slavery, where the slave actually
    thinks himself ‘free’ and thinks his master is in fact himself. No slave would
    even have the impulse to ‘escape’, nor the concept of a tyrannical ‘master’ when
    that master is himself. The light at the end of the tunnel here is that this
    generation is extremely dissatisfied and they have not lost the Natural desire
    to find something bigger than themselves, as they can’t ignore the empty hunger
    that necessarily comes with being ‘God unto self’. This is a double-edged sword
    however, as the unrest this empty hunger causes can just as easily become
    destructive, even suicidal. This generation of self-made gods will move in one
    of two directions, as they cannot and will not remain ‘at rest’ in their
    current condition. They will be lead out of this darkness and into a
    relationship with Universal Principle as greater than ‘self’, or they will
    become destructive in their pain and confusion that ends in civil death. They
    will either be healed or die. As it is they are in the ‘death throes’, thrashing
    and destroying themselves and each other. The cure is simple really. They need
    only hear something outside the reverb loop. They need to hear something quiet
    and Eternal. They need to experience the peace and Eternal Hope of Universal
    Truth, and they will only ‘hear’It through the ‘window’ of Reason. But that
    window is usually closed tight and has the shade drawn, covered over with a
    posters and beyond that hasn’t seen soap and water in decades. We have to help
    them find the window and help them clean it, open it up and leave the noise of
    the reverb loop and stentch of decay behind before it’s too late for all of us.
    The current generation is the future of civilization, and as it stands now Socrates
    is being poured a tall glass of hemlock……again.

    • Gene

      Ummmm.  I don’t want to assume anything, but as you said, Ms. Walker clearly did give Janet (and receive from her) exactly what was needed.  She had a real, human interaction with her.  Again, I don’t want to assume anything, and I could well be projecting, because I could so type out a long analysis, like you did, but I just wonder if you are having a human encounter with these young men you talk to.  I know for myself, I sometimes habitually look for attitudes and similarities in people to fit into my own “grand theory” of humanity. As often as I do that, I end up meeting my theory, and not meeting the person at all.  (I hope I’m not just doing the same thing to you;-) )  Although I have an altogether rosier view than you appear to, with respect to the younger generation, I often think of what was handed down explicitly and implicitly, and whether we or the younger generation are aware of it.  In the end, though, awareness doesn’t seem to change very much, because we still must decide on which internal or external standard we will live by.  I beleive the author of the article is one of the younger generation, and I beleive that she found the one standard which surpasses the others: she saw the other as human, like herself, and even appreciated the kindness shown. (as in, “Do unto others as you would have them do to you.”) Universal Principle and Truth are great, but we know them through our humanity, otherwise they are only exterior, and will likely be experienced and proclaimed as oppresive. 
      I have no doomsday prediction for the younger generation, and I do not pretend to know where we are really at in history.  I have no desire to burden the young with solving the mistakes my generation or the previous one made.  In fact, I really find it touching when one of them even bothers to speak with me.  As individual persons, they may live with the consequences, but they will adjust themselves and find joy and peace in life.  If they have for one another (and hopefully for us!) as much humanity as the author and her interlocutor seem to have, then the world will be better off for their generosity and openness.  The real problem is ours and that of the Baby Boomer Generation.  Hopefully we can learn from the young author and from “Janet” to be honest, open, kind, and humble. 
       
      Gene

  • Anonymous

    Gene, of course I’m having a ‘human encounter’ with these
    young men.  What you are implying (projecting)
    is that I am not having a human encounter. 
    Your response seems to imply that I am simple writing off the younger
    generation and don’t take the time or make the effort to have human encounters
    with them.  Nothing could be further from
    the truth.  Although it may be that you
    do not know where we are in history, awareness seems to have changed a good
    deal as it is only fairly recently that we don’t even consider this (where we are in history) as an
    essential component of our knowledge. Our internal and external standards we
    live by are a product of what’s been handed down and we were much more aware of
    this fact in former times.  Our ‘interior
    standards’ as you call them are not something we were born with like a computer
    program immune to the cultural economy/environment they are subjected
    to.  These ‘interior standards’ you refer
    to started as ‘exterior standards’ in the process of the individual’s psychological/intellectual
    formation.  They became ‘interior’ only
    after having been accepted and used in one’s life and encounter/integration
    with society.  These exterior standards
    are the ‘format’ with which the interior is impressed, particularly when the
    interior is young and easily takes that impression like warm wax takes the
    impression of the seal.   Furthermore, it
    IS our responsibility to know where we are in history and it is our
    responsibility to make up for the mistakes of former generations lest we
    compound these mistakes out of ignorance or indifference producing greater
    mistakes in the future.  If we don’t know
    where we are in history, that being a continuous progression of the past events
    shaping future events, we are lost and have no possibility of knowing where we
    are going (future events).  You seem to
    imply that we should live and manage society by osmosis as long as we are “honest,
    kind and humble”, as you say.  These are
    all good things; however, they will not deliberately and intentionally lead
    society onto a benevolent path.  Human
    beings can’t simply be nice to each other and expect a bright future as a
    result.  The path to a benevolent society
    is a very deliberate choice and will not and cannot be achieved through osmosis,
    as osmosis is the path of least resistance and plays to our animal nature.  The girl on the plane, ‘Janet’, was obviously
    kind, honest and humble enough but she still held the malevolent value that
    life isn’t worth much before birth, and that it was her right to murder the
    unborn.  The truth is that she is a
    product of her age, and that age makes the most important and essential part of
    civilization being nice to each other.  That’s
    a real ‘human encounter’ after all, as long as we’re all accepting and nice our
    values aren’t really that important. 
    Gene, the real human encounter starts with Universal Truth and the path
    to a benevolent civilization is Very deliberate.  Being honest, kind and humble are exterior,
    accidental (none essential) dispositions we have for our fellow man, and make
    communication easier and more fruitful, however, these things are not a substitute
    for the essential content of Real Communication.  Being nice to our younger members of
    civilization is fine and should be practiced in order to facilitate and
    cultivate good communication.  But it’s
    only the wrapping paper. If the ‘box’ is empty yet wrapped in pretty paper and
    bow, it’s still an empty box of no value.  We’ve been giving our young people empty boxes
    now for a long time, (perhaps the biggest mistake of our generation), it’s high
    time we started giving them more than pretty packages.  They deserve the Beautiful Gift of the Real
    Thing, not a kind, nice and humble illusion.  You say you have no desire to burden the young
    with solving the mistakes of our and previous generations.  I tell you that it is already their burden
    regardless of your personal desire. 
    The least we can do is help them bare this cumulative weight and correct
    those mistakes, not just smile and be nice while watching them drown in the chaos
    or our indifference with that cumulative boat anchor chained firmly to their
    collective necks.  If we really love
    them, we will roll up our sleeves and start working with them to promote the
    benevolent society worthy of humanity.

  • Anonymous

    don’t know what, if anything, I meant to Janet, but to me she was a
    very necessary reminder, after the contempt and dread I felt during the
    Planned Parenthood meeting, not to demonize the other side.

    So, the pro-choice woman who complimented your tattoo at the Planned Parenthood meeting was “evil,” but the pro-choice woman who complimented your tattoo and gave you free therapy was “kind.”  Nice to know that you have your priorities straight.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kenneth-James-Abbott/661683861 Kenneth James Abbott

      She didn’t call those women evil either.

      Next time you want to hunt through the article to try to find some statement you can dispute, take the time to actually read it.  That way, you might actually get the point of the column as well.

      • 12angrymen

        Actually, you should read the article again, as she did call them evil. 

    • Texas Pete

      She didn’t say the women at the PP meeting were evil. She said she felt the presence of evil–and so do I in similar situations. But the women themselves, she said, were all sincerely convinced they were doing good. So it’s a different point she was making, and not a contradiction at all. But you’re missing the larger point of this whole post, which is that this personal encounter with Janet has helped her look at pro-choice people much more sympathetically. Was her point that obscure? Perhaps she was too rash in judging them earlier; now after a personal connection with someone “kind and intelligent,” she’s more able to see things clearly.

      Thanks for a great post, Kristen.

  • Sarah M

    A great reminder to remember it is people at the other end of the fight. Thank you very much for sharing this story.

  • bubbalouwee

    Interesting article.  Love is who we are, but some souls have been so wounded by the experiences of life that the cuurrent condition of their love is seriously wounded.  People that are pro death are either seriously wounded or totally deceived.  Love and truth set them free.  Jesus Christ is the answer.  Perhaps Janet felt the love that Kristen reflected and got this messed up psychologist thinking, such as.’this pro lifer is a super nice person.  I wonder if it because of her convictions?’.  

  • Anonymous

    Kenneth and Pete:

    Sorry, kids, but she did call them evil.  Quoting from her previous column: Evil had a very impressive law degree and sensible brown shoes. Evil sat in pews around me with folded arms,feeling very concerned about the plight of poor women, wearing pants it bought at Macy’s. Evil looked like people you see at the grocery store.  And, most terrifying of all, evil thought it was doing good. 

    Was her point that obscure? Perhaps she was too rash in judging them earlier;
    Not obscure, but it’s pretty tough to believe that her point was made sincerely. Particularly given that, according to her own account, Ms. Walker wrote her ‘The Devil Wears Macy’s’  column several days after meeting Janet.

    • Texas Pete

      LY112: No, she didn’t. You apparently don’t know how to read writing that uses symbolism and poetic devices such as simile, allusion, synecdoche, etc. She was talking about the evil “in the air,” if you like–do you really think she was claiming to see evil sitting down and folding its arms? Really? Is that the only way you can think of interpreting that sentence? Think a little.

  • Maryam

    I can very much relate to the author’s sense of dread at the mundane and seemingly banal evil presence one can get a sense from in the abortion rights movement. I’ve felt this way many times for the same reason, that here were likable, intelligent, smartly dressed women who happened to support something so terrible and awful as abortion. It’s very disconcerting and, like the author, I’ve felt terrified by this. However, I agree demonizing the other side is not the way to bring people to understand the horrors of abortion. Thank you for sharing this article.

  • Anonymous

    As the saying goes, ‘Handsome is as handsome does’. Evil is
    as evil does. However, these people are named ‘evil’ equivocally, as the definition
    of ‘people’ differing from the name ‘evil’. Univocally named they would be
    ‘evil doers’. Only one being could be univocally named ‘evil’, and that being
    would be Satan (being the origin of all evil and therefore the name corresponds to
    the definition). Evil can be present in the people in question here only in the
    ‘accidental’ or ‘incidental’ sense, not the ‘necessary’ sense as Primary Substance/Subjects
    or individuals. Their actions however can and should be named evil univocally,
    as the definition corresponds to the name. These people are most properly named
    evil (simple) and evil doers (compound) ‘derivatively’ having derived their
    name from some other name. Evil is a genus with many species. The order of the category/genus
    Evil looks something like this: Evil: Murder: Abortion. Abortion being a
    species of Murder which is a species of the Evil.  So those who don’t believe these people are
    evil need to differentiate the sense in which they make their proposition.  They are not ‘necessarily’ evil, but they are
    ‘accidently’ evil and ‘incidentally’ evil. They are evil doers. But again I believe the real point the article
    makes is simple: Hate the sin, not the sinner

  • guest

    BORING…!

  • http://www.facebook.com/rhoslyn Rhoslyn Thomas

    Another amazing article! I am getting to be a bit of a fan of yours! I really really understand what you mean in this article….