Consider Others In Non-Essentials

With issues of conscience, it's the party who feels free - who thinks it's okay to do something - not the party who thinks something is wrong - who has to do most of the bending.

Someone who thinks something is okay to do, can always refrain from doing it for another's sake, and still maintain a clear conscience; 

whereas the person who thinks it's wrong can't do it to please the other person, or else he violates his own conscience.

And not only that, but the person who thinks it's wrong can't help but feel grieved that the other person is doing it; 

he feels duty-bound to pray for and rebuke and try to save the person who he perceives as doing something wrong; 

he's always wishful, watching whether the person has had a change of mind yet;

and in addition, he also feels obligated to spare others from being influenced by the person who's doing wrong;

meanwhile that person loses whatever status he had as an inspiration, example, and leader of the values he aspires to.

Consequently he tends to withdraw and separate himself from whatever level of involvement he once had with him.

Unlike the person who think it's okay - he or she isn't bothered at all if someone else isn't doing the thing which he allows. 

So if a person who thinks something is okay truly understands and cares about the impact their action will inevitably have on others who think it's wrong, they ought to choose rather to refrain. 

If he doesn't refrain, he's either ignorant of or doesn't care how his action is affecting those who think the thing is wrong.  

But after explaining this burden which those with a more tender conscience (or weaker, depending on what the thing is) some can only think of it as being judgmental. 

It would be judgmental only if they weren't trying to save the person.

It would be tantamount to being complicit in someone else's destruction, if they didn't try to spare others from the person's influence. 

To insist on a non-essential freedom, that's going to put someone else's conscience in that position, and then only to accuse the person who has to try to save him and others of being judgmental, is either ignorant or careless. 

Instead, we should consider one another (one another's consciences, not just our own rights) to provoke unto love and good works (rather than provoke dilemmas of conscience). 

And as I said, it's mainly the person who thinks something is okay who can do this.