That’s a little hyperbolic, don’t you think? Yes, the author used violent imagery, but that battlefield imagery was designed to complement the the idea of a culture war.
Stripping away his use of battlefield imagery, what are the core ideas that the author expresses? As far as I can tell…
*]Individuals in favour of same-sex marriage have attempted to force those who disagree with same-sex marriage into compliance
*]Christianity identifies same-sex relationships as sinful
*]Christians are obliged to obey moral laws and to disobey immoral laws
*]Since Christians view same-sex marriage as immoral, and since there are many proposed laws which seek to force individuals to support same-sex relationships, and since Christians must disobey laws which enforce immorality, then Christians will inevitably be targeted by these laws
I actually think that almost everyone on both sides of this issue would agree with points 1,2 & 3 and I believe that 4 logically follows from the following point. I can’t imagine how the substance of this letter constitutes a crime unless it has become a crime to tell the truth.
Now, perhaps you believe that it isn’t the substance of the message that’s the problem but the form. Perhaps you feel that the language is needlessly vitriolic. Even then, I wonder if you’re holding a double standard. I’ve read enough of the Huffington post to see that there is plenty of spite and vitrile flowing from from the left to the right. The difference is that while the targets of those articles may get upset, they don’t seem to feel the need to get the police to shut-up their opposition.