There's one major difference though. I don't favor hate crime laws or thought police to enforce what people should and shouldn't say. I'm not demanding an apology or punishment.
I'm simply saying that, from a practical standpoint, a Christian should know what parts of the Christian belief system are unpalatable to non-believers and to be careful when such subjects are discussed.
I don't like watching some Christians who tell others they are "going to Hell" for some activity they engage in. Even if true, such words only bring resentment and hatred not the self-reflection and repentance the Christian might seek. I don't like it when Christians use Scripture on non-believers like a sledgehammer instead of a lamp. The self-important will spout Scripture at non-believers and think they are doing good works when, in reality, they are alienating everyone around them who disagrees which will make it more difficult to reach them with the Truth when they are in need of salvation. The goal should be to win souls not to impress others on how well you can condemn others scripturally.
“some Christians who tell others they are “going to Hell” for some activity they engage in”
Truly, one must keep the dialectic of Law and gospel firmly before themselves. While the Law accuses and condemns, the application of the Gospel balm is what turns evil convictions such that the Spirit may work.
“The goal should be to win souls not to impress others on how well you can condemn others scripturally.”
While I would argue that we do not win but it is the Spirit who “wins souls” beyond anything we may say or do, we can rightly apply the full force of the Law (present judgement) such that the pagan may come to the realization that they have sinned and are in need of a messiah.
To be sure, we must know which battle needs to escalate and which can be won by by the application of the feather.