Anti-Bullying Speaker Curses Christian Teens

[gnomon]

I doubt that many people in his audience that day fit these descriptions at all.

The bone of contention lies not so much in what he said but where he said it and who he said it to. OH, and HOW he said it. "Panty *****?"

Of course his audience wasn't a group of Biblical literalists.

I don't know why that would even be brought up.

 

[ForeverFaithful]

That's not his problem, my problem or your problem.

Tell this to the preachers who tell their flock that homosexuality is nothing but a sinful lifestyle. Tell that to the preachers who petition their flock to go out and vote for marriage amendments. Tell that to the parents who belittle homosexuals in front of their children, teach their kids that homosexuals are deviants and stand by while children are beaten, threatened or even killed because they are different.

Tell it to those who do use the Bible to do harm. There's obviously many of them out there using the scriptures in exactly the way the man described in that video.

Don't tell us. I already know what moderates, non-literalists and many others think about those passages and that they don't adhere to them or justify them to abuse others. And for the most part I don't care about those passages at all.

Tell those who do take the Bible literally and use those passages to justify harming others.

The Bible literally says lover the sinner not the sin (Mark 12:31) the problem is not the Bible as he claims, but those who pervert it

 

[Me Myself]

The bible doesn't support forcing people to kill themselves because of shame or feeling hated by a few idiots at school.

20:13 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

No, that tactic is merely what leviticus fearing "Christians" are reduced to resort to when enforcing the specific texts which Savage was denouncing.

**** happens. That's why I was so adamant with my CHRISTIAN kids that I would NOT tolerate bullying of any kind toward any person - ever. Jesus told us to love our neighbors as we love ourselves.

And THAT is a holy, respectabel quote, you see? the difference is easy!

It´s fair to not pretend that Leviticus 20: 30 is in anyways similar to that. Itis also fair to say Leviticus 20:30 is not only ***** but is also dangerous ****** if anyone actually believes God subscribes to it.

The fact that people would be offended simply because of saying that quote is wrong is INSANE :areyoucra

 

[Kathryn]

Of course his audience wasn't a group of Biblical literalists.

I don't know why that would even be brought up.

I don't know either! :sarcastic

 

[Kathryn]

20:13 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

No, that tactic is merely what leviticus fearing "Christians" are reduced to resort to when enforcing the specific texts which Savage was denouncing.



And THAT is a holy, respectabel quote, you see? the difference is easy!

It´s fair to not pretend that Leviticus 20: 30 is in anyways similar to that. Itis also fair to say Leviticus 20:30 is not only ***** but is also dangerous ****** if anyone actually believes God subscribes to it.

The OT was written to the Jewish people. Jews don't even follow most of the Laws in Leviticus anymore, for heaven's sake, and they have their own doctrinal reasons that are well substantiated for their reasons to forsake some of the Old Testament laws.

Most Christians believe that the OT law was replaced by grace upon Jesus' death and resurrection. That's one reason why we don't take our rebellious teenagers outside the city gates and stone them, or why we can eat shrimp, or pork, or why we don't support capital punishment for adultery or gays.

I'm not going to get into a whole doctrinal thesis on this topic but my point is this - Savage probably KNOWS what I just said is true for most Christians. He may even know WHY most Christians and most Jews don't follow the OT law anymore. But he chose to disregard that truth because of his personal agenda. He misrepresented what most Christians believe, whether he is fully aware of that fact or not.

 

[gnomon]

I don't know either! :sarcastic

There ya go mocking again.

edit: thhhbbppptttt!

 

[Kathryn]

There ya go mocking again.

Not.:slap:

Nice segue though.

 

[gnomon]

Not.:slap:

Dang it. I knew you'd respond before I got my edit in.

 

[Me Myself]

I'm not going to get into a whole doctrinal thesis on this topic but my point is this - Savage probably KNOWS what I just said is true for most Christians. He may even know WHY most Christians and most Jews don't follow the OT law anymore. But he chose to disregard that truth because of his personal agenda. He misrepresented what most Christians believe, whether he is fully aware of that fact or not.

Where on his speech did he say "all christians believe in this"? Where in his speech did he say anything keen to that?

He merely said those texts were wrong. He merely and rightfully said that the texts from where people from christianity extract the "gays are bad" are the same texts that say that slavery is good. He cited both OT and NT letters from Paul to that.

What he is doing is merely discrediting the hateful texts by comparison. He didn´t say "all the bible is wrong". He merely said "we ignore things from the bible already. There is no reason to not ignore this one too". AND that is a necessary thing to say for anyone justifying his nonsense with the texts.

Those who got out of the stage because of THAT parts that he said, nmerely did so because a: the language was too strong for them (sure, they don´t hear thaty often! , but I do say they didn´t have to hear it from school appointed personal, I am just saying this case is unlikely) or b: they didn´t know slavery was supported both in OT and in NT by their bible or c: they prefered to remain willfully ignorant, because truth was hurting their feelings.

When he started to resort to name calling, things got too ugly I admit. The cursing was over the top for STARTERS (mostlybecause of the audience and place), but THAT´S IT.

 

[Kathryn]

Dang it. I knew you'd respond before I got my edit in.

Only because RF is my life and I was poised like a pointer for your next comment.

 

[Straw Dog]

Here's a video of the speech:

[youtube]ao0k9qDsOvs[/youtube]
Dan Savage discusses bible at High School Journalism convention - YouTube

Walter: "Am I wrong?"
The Dude: "No, you're not wrong."
Walter: "Am I wrong??"
Dude: "You're not wrong, Walter. You're just an *******."

 

[MysticSang'ha]

That's not his problem, my problem or your problem.

Tell this to the preachers who tell their flock that homosexuality is nothing but a sinful lifestyle. Tell that to the preachers who petition their flock to go out and vote for marriage amendments. Tell that to the parents who belittle homosexuals in front of their children, teach their kids that homosexuals are deviants and stand by while children are beaten, threatened or even killed because they are different.

Tell it to those who do use the Bible to do harm. There's obviously many of them out there using the scriptures in exactly the way the man described in that video.

Don't tell us. I already know what moderates, non-literalists and many others think about those passages and that they don't adhere to them or justify them to abuse others. And for the most part I don't care about those passages at all.

Tell those who do take the Bible literally and use those passages to justify harming others.

I'd love to see parishioners walking out en masse at their churches if the preacher talks about homosexuality as an abomination. And that when a preacher talks about how obvious homosexuality is sinful, that it makes national news, and how people are offended by the notion to the point that Savage has offended so many here.

Has that happened?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Do you really not get this?

In addition to calling what many consider a holy text "bull ****," he then proceeded to lambast the students who walked out (peaceably, I might add).

I wanted to touch on the first part of what you said.

Personally, I would have no problem calling the advocacy of slavery "BS". I don't think it's a controversial position to take... in fact, I'd say that it would be very controversial for someone to say that it's a respectable view.

At the same time, I think it's almost trivially true that the Bible advocates slavery.

Besides the profanity (which I agree isn't appropriate for that audience), it seems to me that the controversy really only came in from Savage calling attention to these two things, neither of which is really controversial on their own, at the same time.

 

[HerDotness]

The Bible literally says lover the sinner not the sin (Mark 12:31) the problem is not the Bible as he claims, but those who pervert it

Oh, and this old saw, "Hate the sin, love the sinner," makes gay people feel EVER so much better.

"Now, now, dear...I don't hate YOU, not in the least.

I only hate the very essence of your sexuality, the fact that you're emotionally and physically attracted to your own gender. I don't want you to think I hate YOU at all. You see, your deepest expressions of sexual intimacy are so loathsome to God and to me that you must remain celibate for your whole life, because of course, you aren't allowed to express your orientation physically--that would be sinning. And naturally, you'll agree with me that that's what you want to do--be celibate to please God...oh, and me, too."

I can see how that is absolutely the most loving attitude to take toward gays and will make them feel so very cherished.

 

[Me Myself]

I'd love to see parishioners walking out en masse at their churches if the preacher talks about homosexuality as an abomination. And that when a preacher talks about how obvious homosexuality is sinful, that it makes national news, and how people are offended by the notion to the point that Savage has offended so many here.

Has that happened?

Sounds awesome

 

[HerDotness]

The OT was written to the Jewish people. Jews don't even follow most of the Laws in Leviticus anymore, for heaven's sake, and they have their own doctrinal reasons that are well substantiated for their reasons to forsake some of the Old Testament laws.

Most Christians believe that the OT law was replaced by grace upon Jesus' death and resurrection. That's one reason why we don't take our rebellious teenagers outside the city gates and stone them, or why we can eat shrimp, or pork, or why we don't support capital punishment for adultery or gays.

That must also be the reason why so many Christian women ignore passages such as:

…in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works (1 Timothy 2:9-10).

Do not let your adornment be that outward adorning of arranging the hair, of wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God (1 Peter 3:3-4).

Easy to see that today's Christian woman has "good doctrinal reasons" for paying a few hundred to get her hair colored and styled or a lot more for a weave. And those Louis Vuitton handbags attest to your following your New Testament, too, as do 2-3 carat diamond rings and wedding bands.

In short, when it suits you.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Watched the relevant opening moments. His speech wasn't hate speech, he was pointing out facts, and a soon as he mentioned the bible and it became clear he wasn't going to laud it, the first students got up. So, gee, more Fox spin. It wasn't over the top by any means. And as mentioned also, funny how the people who push, don't like being pushed back and cry as soon as it happens to them.

Karma.

 

[HerDotness]

Savage was supposed to be delivering a speech about anti-bullying at the National High School Journalism Conference sponsored by the Journalism Education Association and the National Scholastic Press Association. But it turned into an episode of Christian-bashing.

Rick Tuttle, the journalism advisor for Sutter Union High School in California, was among several thousand people in the audience. He said they thought the speech was one thing – but it turned into something else. [quote from the OP]

I'd like to see the blame placed strongly upon the two organizations and whoever from them was dumb enough to invite Savage.

Let's see...let me think back to my stint in high school journalism. I seem to recall something about the importance of discernment, critical thinking and using good judgment. One would certainly like to think that the adult staffers and advisors of the Journalism Education Association and the National Scholastic Press Association possess those qualities, but it seems somewhat unlikely that they do.

Inviting Dan Savage was certainly a wise decision to start with. Even if he had given a make-nice-nice speech, what does it say of their choice that the man writes a sex advice column that would make Dear Abby cringe and crawl under her desk? Have educators entirely abandoned the idea that what the person promotes makes him/her a good role model or doesn't? Did no one involved in the invitation have a clue the sorts of stuff Savage says regularly in "Savage Love"?

The only way I can refer to what Savage's typical subject matter is without violating several RF rules is to say that he writes in often scatalogical language about what most people regard as very kinky sex.

What in the vast universe was wrong with those people that he was ever invited in the first place?

 

[HerDotness]

I'd love to see parishioners walking out en masse at their churches if the preacher talks about homosexuality as an abomination. And that when a preacher talks about how obvious homosexuality is sinful, that it makes national news, and how people are offended by the notion to the point that Savage has offended so many here.

Has that happened?

I haven't done it because I have the good sense not to set foot in any church where that's likely to occur. Maybe I should gather some fellow-supporters and go to a few that do preach that kind of "loving" garbage so that we can make a point. Yanno...that might not be a bad idea if 20-30 people showed up determined to walk out together if necessary at churches that draw 100-200 per Sunday.

The last church I went to regularly, we celebrated the minister's recent marriage to her partner--a marriage that had to take place in Canada because there were so few U.S. states that sanctioned gay marriage then.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Oh, and this old saw, "Hate the sin, love the sinner," makes gay people feel EVER so much better.

"Now, now, dear...I don't hate YOU, not in the least.

I only hate the very essence of your sexuality, the fact that you're emotionally and physically attracted to your own gender. I don't want you to think I hate YOU at all. You see, your deepest expressions of sexual intimacy are so loathsome to God and to me that you must remain celibate for your whole life, because of course, you aren't allowed to express your orientation physically--that would be sinning. And naturally, you'll agree with me that that's what you want to do--be celibate to please God...oh, and me, too."

I can see how that is absolutely the most loving attitude to take toward gays and will make them feel so very cherished.

If that's what they feel, that's what they feel. And they can say and feel whatever and however they want.

Now, when it comes to policy based on that view, in particular public policy, I'm a gunna fight back, preach against it, protest policies in place based on that view, and scream bloody murder.

Private policy under that view, I'll say something about it, question it, and criticize it. Because the message is, "They can be homosexual, but not in MY house." ...and sure, homosexuals are free to change congregations and move out of the house, but it's next to impossible for an underage homosexual to leave that atmosphere.

Once again, I pose the challenge to parishioners who find Savage this offensive toward their beliefs, that if it's offensive to their beliefs as well to say that homosexuality is an abomination, that it creates the identical reaction as calling the Bible "bull ****".

Do parishioners in these churches consider how that sounds to these same teenage kids? Do we consider the same innocence and sensitivities of these kids when they're told their sinful just for loving someone of the same gender?