Another thought on the mischaracterization of Christian thinking is reflected in George F. Will's brilliant essay in this morning's Washington Post. He cites Martin Luther King,

In his “Letter From Birmingham Jail,” King wrote, “You speak of our activity in Birmingham as extreme. . . . But though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label. Was not Jesus an extremist for love. . . . Was not Amos an extremist for justice. . . . Was not Paul an extremist for the Christian gospel. . . . Perhaps the South, the nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists.”

When people advocate the repression or abrogation of another person's natural rights they are acting counter to the teaching of Jesus and the long history of Judeo Christian tradition.

Jesus would not stand with those who advocate the kind of exclusion promoted by Tim Thomas and others. Jesus would choose to comfort the sick, the meek and those among us that the Pharasees had decided were not worthy of the fullness of the law. Love for the least among us is a constant principle of Christian faith.

Thank you for saving me a little time with having to respond to that. People place too much weight on their own beliefs. If any of your beliefs involves the denial of someones rights, than I take a diarrhea dump on those beliefs, and rightfully so. Seriously, how arrogant are people to think their beliefs are more important than equality... It's ridiculous.

Blah blah blah blah but it's his beliefs... (frank) off, you arrogant twats.
- laughs2907

Are you putting the Gay communities beliefs above those of other groups????

BTW, what "rights" are being denied the gay community??? Because if their "rights" are being violated then they have a case they can take to the SCOTHUS and most likely win handily.

Are you putting the Gay communities beliefs above those of other groups????

BTW, what "rights" are being denied the gay community??? Because if their "rights" are being violated then they have a case they can take to the SCOTHUS and most likely win handily.
- Doppleganger

Spoken like a Pharisee.

Are you putting the Gay communities beliefs above those of other groups????

BTW, what "rights" are being denied the gay community??? Because if their "rights" are being violated then they have a case they can take to the SCOTHUS and most likely win handily.
- Doppleganger

Beliefs that encourage inclusion and equality always come above those that focus on exclusion and hate.


WHY ARE YOU ALWAYS ON THE SIDE OF STUPIDITY?

Beliefs that encourage inclusion and equality always come above those that focus on exclusion and hate.


WHY ARE YOU ALWAYS ON THE SIDE OF STUPIDITY?
- Feeling Glucky?

So Dan Cathy's Church focuses on "Hate" and "exclusion".

And IF that were true, would practising that religion be protected until the Constitution of the USA?


The truth is, any organization that is supportive of Christian values is going to be called anti-gay or haters (by the gay community and the progressive left) when in actuality they are only people of faith that want affirm their convictions of scripture. There are radicals who will say they are haters because they follow scripture.

It's a reversal of values.

So you claim to be Atheist and support the Gay communities causes...........therefore using the tactic of "reversal of values" that you've used in this thread, I can conclude you must be Heterophobic and are anti Christian.

So Dan Cathy's Church focuses on "Hate" and "exclusion".

And IF that were true, would practising that religion be protected until the Constitution of the USA?


The truth is, any organization that is supportive of Christian values is going to be called anti-gay or haters (by the gay community and the progressive left) when in actuality they are only people of faith that want affirm their convictions of scripture. There are radicals who will say they are haters because they follow scripture.

It's a reversal of values.

So you claim to be Atheist and support the Gay communities causes...........therefore using the tactic of "reversal of values" that you've used in this thread, I can conclude you must be Heterophobic and are anti Christian.
- Doppleganger

False. Those who pick and choose pieces of their faith, ignoring things that are very clearly outlined in the bible(no pork, accept everybody, etc), and instead spouting off on something that is barely mentioned(Not a single line anywhere about banning gay marriage)... those are people that are hiding behind religion in order to bash a community they don't like. Those are the people I have a problem with.

So Dan Cathy's Church focuses on "Hate" and "exclusion".

And IF that were true, would practising that religion be protected until the Constitution of the USA?


The truth is, any organization that is supportive of Christian values is going to be called anti-gay or haters (by the gay community and the progressive left) when in actuality they are only people of faith that want affirm their convictions of scripture. There are radicals who will say they are haters because they follow scripture.

It's a reversal of values.

So you claim to be Atheist and support the Gay communities causes...........therefore using the tactic of "reversal of values" that you've used in this thread, I can conclude you must be Heterophobic and are anti Christian.
- Doppleganger

When you drive past a lot of churches these days, you'll see a little rainbow flag in the top corner of their signs. Not all churches, but a lot are perfectly accepting of gay people and treat them no differently. This isn't an issue of anyone attacking the religious institution, this is an issue of people decrying that man's beliefs. He shares them with some of his parishioners, but an admonishment of Dan Cathy is not an admonishment of Christianity at large.

Are you putting the Gay communities beliefs above those of other groups????

BTW, what "rights" are being denied the gay community??? Because if their "rights" are being violated then they have a case they can take to the SCOTHUS and most likely win handily.
- Doppleganger

I regard more highly the belief that gay people should be allowed to marry than the belief that they shouldn't. Again, both parties have the right to say whatever they like.

Are you proposing though that we ought never to put the beliefs of one group over another?? We do that all the time. As a society we push white supremicists, conspiracy theorists, satanists, all sorts of people with wacky beliefs to the fringes. We try our best not to listen to them, and we regard most every other belief and value above them. There's absolutely nothing wrong with 'putting the beliefs' of one party above anothers

The Dali Lama said something remarkable. He explained that Christianity was the most "beautiful religion" known to man. But, he explained, the problem with Christianity is Christians. So many Christians have turned a religion of love and inclusion into a code of judgement and exclusion.

Jesus ministered to the poor, the sick, the lame and the broken. He stood with those who had been excluded and marginalized. Do you really believe that Jesus would scorn a gay couple who loved and cared for one another?
- spatso

Exactly!

I regard more highly the belief that gay people should be allowed to marry than the belief that they shouldn't. Again, both parties have the right to say whatever they like.

Are you proposing though that we ought never to put the beliefs of one group over another?? We do that all the time. As a society we push white supremicists, conspiracy theorists, satanists, all sorts of people with wacky beliefs to the fringes. We try our best not to listen to them, and we regard most every other belief and value above them. There's absolutely nothing wrong with 'putting the beliefs' of one party above anothers
- Morris

Those of you who read the statements of Dan Cathy when he said how he lives his life according to his religious beliefs cannot point to one sentence that he directly "bashed" the gay community.

He believes in his religions biblical interpretation of marriage, and promotes that interpretation. He feels that traditional marriage as he sees it, as being under attack and has also voiced his fears on that issue.

None of what he said was anything that could be considered hate speech, and he did not blame anyone group for what he sees as an attack on his religious beliefs.


He has every right to say what he did, and to practise his religion.

He is not saying everyone else should believe as he does, and nor should he.

I'm not saying I agree with his religious views on marriage, but am simply pointing out he has the right to free speech, and the right to practise his religion.


Those of you who disagree with his views are allowed to, and if his views are outdated and in the future become the minority, then he'll be a minor footnote in American history.

There is not need to lash out and Bash him, insult him and his religion, claiming that they are bigoted and hate those who don't agree with them.

There is no need to twist his words into meaning something he did not say, and did not intend, just to fit your agenda of social change. All it does is make your argument weaker and less likely to appeal to a wider base of people.

There is no need to twist his words into meaning something he did not say, and did not intend, just to fit your agenda of social change. All it does is make your argument weaker and less likely to appeal to a wider base of people.
- Doppleganger

“I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we would have the audacity to try to redefine what marriage is all about.”

Redefining marriage... What do you think he was referring to?

“I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we would have the audacity to try to redefine what marriage is all about.”

Redefining marriage... What do you think he was referring to?
- laughs2907

I wonder if he feels that Christians are a prideful, arrogant group, for trying to redefine marriage hundreds of years ago. Are they all going to hell for that? I'm sure Dan Cathy is. Straight to hell. I've never seen someone so prideful and arrogant.

I wonder if he feels that Christians are a prideful, arrogant group, for trying to redefine marriage hundreds of years ago. Are they all going to hell for that? I'm sure Dan Cathy is. Straight to hell. I've never seen someone so prideful and arrogant.
- prock

It really is quite funny... Dan Cathy is the definition of arrogant.

It really is quite funny... Dan Cathy is the definition of arrogant.
- laughs2907

It’s interesting, based on Dan Cathy’s philosophy, all Christians for the last 1500 years are all in hell. And he, along with all of his Christian friends, will be joining them.

Those of you who read the statements of Dan Cathy when he said how he lives his life according to his religious beliefs cannot point to one sentence that he directly "bashed" the gay community.

He believes in his religions biblical interpretation of marriage, and promotes that interpretation. He feels that traditional marriage as he sees it, as being under attack and has also voiced his fears on that issue.

None of what he said was anything that could be considered hate speech, and he did not blame anyone group for what he sees as an attack on his religious beliefs.


He has every right to say what he did, and to practise his religion.

He is not saying everyone else should believe as he does, and nor should he.

I'm not saying I agree with his religious views on marriage, but am simply pointing out he has the right to free speech, and the right to practise his religion.


Those of you who disagree with his views are allowed to, and if his views are outdated and in the future become the minority, then he'll be a minor footnote in American history.

There is not need to lash out and Bash him, insult him and his religion, claiming that they are bigoted and hate those who don't agree with them.

There is no need to twist his words into meaning something he did not say, and did not intend, just to fit your agenda of social change. All it does is make your argument weaker and less likely to appeal to a wider base of people.
- Doppleganger

I believe that that particular biblical interpretation of marriage ought to be utterly abandoned. So I've said as much.

I'm saying no one else should believe as he does. I don't think it's a helpful belief to hold for the advancement of society. But that's simply a belief one can hold about Cathy's beliefs. So I've said as much.

He has every right to say what he did. I have every right to say that I think it's wrong and harmful. So I've said as much.

I'm saying I disagree with that particular instance of religious interpretation. I have no qualms with religion or the religious. He has every right to practice his religion and say what he'd like. And I reserve my rights to have public or private opinions about it.

I would never lash out and bash him or insult his religion. I do think in principle it's a hateful thing to purposely deny someone rights, so I've said as much.

Having the right to freedom of speech does not mean that nothing you say will have consequences. What you say will change how people feel about you.

“I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we would have the audacity to try to redefine what marriage is all about.”

Redefining marriage... What do you think he was referring to?
- laughs2907

We've been over this, he's not bashing gay people. He's bashing gay people and any other people in society for specifically and exclusively for their positive opinion of gay people. Don't you know for it to be an anti-gay sentiment, literally every single person the sentence could possibly apply has to be gay?

We've been over this, he's not bashing gay people. He's bashing gay people and any other people in society for specifically and exclusively for their positive opinion of gay people. Don't you know for it to be an anti-gay sentiment, literally every single person the sentence could possibly apply has to be gay?
- Morris

Of course he was referring to gay people, and those who support the gay community.

Of course he was referring to gay people, and those who support the gay community.
- laughs2907

Nope. The sentence can be construed to mean that at least one person he's talking about isn't gay, so it's not anti-gay.

Like if I said "I hate all people who come from France, and also a guy named Jerry who isn't from France", I wouldn't be targeting french people. Understand now?

Nope. The sentence can be construed to mean that at least one person he's talking about isn't gay, so it's not anti-gay.

Like if I said "I hate all people who come from France, and also a guy named Jerry who isn't from France", I wouldn't be targeting french people. Understand now?
- Morris

I just wonder if he knows he’s going to hell.

Nope. The sentence can be construed to mean that at least one person he's talking about isn't gay, so it's not anti-gay.

Like if I said "I hate all people who come from France, and also a guy named Jerry who isn't from France", I wouldn't be targeting french people. Understand now?
- Morris

Right... You'd be targeting all people from France AND the guy named Jerry (Who isn't from France)

I'm not saying his comment was focused only on gays... I'm saying his comment was aimed towards gays AND those who support them. It's an attack on equality.

Right... You'd be targeting all people from France AND the guy named Jerry (Who isn't from France)

I'm not saying his comment was focused only on gays... I'm saying his comment was aimed towards gays AND those who support them. It's an attack on equality.
- laughs2907

I'm making fun of Dopple here.

Of course it's attack on gay rights.

I'm making for of Dopple here.

Of course it's attack on gay rights.
- Morris

I haven't urinated today.

I haven't urinated today.
- laughs2907

It's tough out there.

“I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we would have the audacity to try to redefine what marriage is all about.”

Redefining marriage... What do you think he was referring to?
- laughs2907

I'm not saying I agree with his religious views on marriage, but am simply pointing out he has the right to free speech, and the right to practise his religion.