Thread by @jholbo1

theamericanconservative.com/dreher/trump-t… One of the problems with the 'live not by lies' frame is that Dreher uses 'lie' for any case in which there is a policy or norm he feels is not deferential to his religious outlook. 1/

So 'live not by lies' translates as: don't settle for less than spiritual hegemony. But seriously, let's start with the case and what ought to be the norm here. How do we generally address people? Other things being equal, we address them in the manner they wish to be. 2/

We call them by the name they prefer. We don't presume to name them ourselves. We call them by the titles they assume - like Mr. or Mrs. or Ms. Sometimes they have professional titles like 'Dr.' or 'Major' or 'Senator' or 'Director'. 3/

Even when we are not ourselves affiliated with whatever group we tend to go along with others' customary usages. This includes religious titles. I would tend to address a religious leader by their preferred title, though I am not a member of the church in question. 4/

There are limits to this. If I think you are the head of some nutty cult, I may refrain from addressing you as 'his loftiness, the glorious ruler of the known universe' or whatever bullshit it is you think you are. 5/

Ergo, if we refuse to name someone in the manner to which they are accustomed to being addressed, and believe they are entitled to be, we are calling bullshit, socially - in at least a small way. We are insulting them, challenging them. Calling them out as liars. 6/

If I met the Pope and refused to address him as 'Your Holiness' [is that the accepted formula? I would check before meeting him], or if I insisted on calling him 'Jorge' - his given name - or even 'George', on the grounds that English is better - that would be insulting. 7/

I could say that I was only doing it out of commitment to what is 'true, beautiful and good'. Catholicism is a dirty, foul lie and everyone ought to speak proper English anyway, so calling him 'George' is my way of encouraging him to improve himself - out of love! 8/

It might be my view! You gotta do what you gotta do! There are plenty of people who wouldn't be willing to call the Pope 'Your Holiness' - that would stick in their craw - but those people also shouldn't be surprised if they don't get repeat invites back to the Vatican. 9/

Now, back to this transgender student. She wants to be addressed as 'she' and this is normal these days. Doing the normal thing, social etiquette-wise, is low-commitment, soul-wise. I may call a priest 'Father' without professing he is really my father or spiritual superior. 10/

No one assumes me calling a priest 'Father' means I am converting, on the spot, to his sect. No one thinks I am doing anything more than letting the status quo ride, 'I'm ok, you're ok.' I am sending a weak signal that I regard him and his group as tolerably respectable. 11/

Or at least respectably tolerable. Now, back to our teacher who doesn't want to call the student 'she'. In an environment in which it is normal to address transgender individuals by their preferred pronouns, a refusal to extend that minimal courtesy is a calculated insult. 12/

The teacher is sending the message: you are worthless. Your existence is a lie. Now, this may be a message of love, in a sense. The bad news: you are worthless! The good news: by abandoning this false identity and taking the identity I would chose for you, you attain worth! 13/

But obviously the school may make a policy against teachers imposing so insistently. Suppose the teacher, before getting on to math or whatever, spends the first minute insulting students' religions as false and abominable and insisting they should convert to his. 14/

I expect that would be a firing offense. Certainly it would earn a 'never do that again' warning at best. The teacher might protest that it is an unbearable imposition on him, that he be asked to tolerate these heathens. His conscience requires him to unburden himself. 15/

But this isn't reasonable. We take it to be the case that, in a school environment, you can set aside that sort of thing. The classroom isn't the place. Likewise, this teacher can address the transgender student in a normal way without making a big deal of it. 16/

He is perfectly welcome to his private reservations. But keep them to himself on the job. Or get a new job. Now of course at this point the objection will be made that transgenderism shouldn't be socially normalized. Again, you are entitled to your opinion. 17/

But nobody died and made you dictator of what is socially normal. In a society in which it becomes normal to address transgender individuals by their chosen pronouns, doing so is normal. By following that norm, you are not committing to anything deep. It's just etiquette. 18/

You are free to think it's all a corrosive error. But if you go around all day shouting 'live not by lies!' to the students, don't be surprised if you are out of a job for shouting 'live not by lies!' to students once too often. 19/

The school is asking little of the teacher. The teacher is asking a lot, demanding the right to serially insult students. But there's more. What is most bothering the teacher & Dreher seems to be this very sense that others would regard them as wanting to give insult. 20/

They are wounded by others' sense that they would be acting from bigotry, in insulting the student - rather than trying to spread a message of truth and love. Where's the tolerance for their point of view? But this just misunderstands the social situation. 21/

Suppose, again, you are that guy who wants to call the Pope 'George' - because Catholicism is dirty and bad, and everyone should speak English. You lose your nice job at the Vatican after you address Pope Francis with a smirking 'Hi, George' one too many times. 22/

It would be very weird if you denounced your firing as anti-anti-Catholic bigotry. Why isn't the church more tolerant and open to the views of those who regard it all as an intolerable, filthy lie? The contradiction here is performative. 23/

If you believe people have some duty to be tolerant of others, then why are you getting in everyone's face? If, on the other hand, you think what is important is for people to have the right to be intolerant, on conscience grounds, what are you complaining about? 24/

Dreher and the teacher want the right to be intolerant and insulting - for a higher reason. But they do not think it is acceptable for the other side to judge this is bigotry - because that would be intolerant and insulting, which is clearly never acceptable! 25/