Following on from a post I wrote last week about an ad that was deemed offensive, I’m interested to know what you make of the ad below which was recently run as a mobile billboard in South London by a Christian pressure group that calls itself The Christian Congress for Traditional Values (CCTV).
The ad shows a picture of family consisting of a man, a woman and a young son and daughter next to the statement “GAY AIM: ABOLISH THE FAMILY.” The CCTVs website address is printed beneath the body copy and a banner across the picture of the family identified CCTV and showed the pressure groups logo.
Perhaps unsurprisingly the ad came to the attention of the Advertising Standards Agency which was categorized last week by a Ryanair spokesman as being a “bunch of unelected, self-appointed dimwits [who] are clearly incapable of fairly and impartially ruling on advertising.”
The Agency deemed the CCTV billboard to be an inaccurate representation of the views of gay people and that the ad was likely to cause serious or widespread offence or condone anti-social behaviour. It has since told the CCTV to ensure future campaigns were not presented in a similar way.
As you might expect the CCTV, which is run by a Bishop Michael Reid, felt the ad was entirely reasonable and the potential for the ad to cause offence was “minimal” because the aim to redefine the concept of the family was “so widely and openly acknowledged” by the homosexual community. Citing a 1971 Gay Liberation Front manifesto as an example supporting its position the organisation claimed the campaigners who “sought same-sex marriage did not do so simply to achieve the same domestic situation that was available to heterosexuals, but also because they aimed to redefine and abolish the traditional family.”
BISHOP OF WHAT?
After watching the organisations leader and spokesman, Bishop Michael Reid, on a couple of videos posted on the CCTV website, I became curious as to what denomination had ordained him and made him a Bishop. After spending a few fruitless minutes trying to find this information I decided instead to simply call the Bishops office and ask a member of his staff.
However, despite being placed on hold several times while various staffers were asked the question, nobody at Bishop Michael Reid Ministries was able to tell me by whom he had been ordained. In the end I was asked why I wanted the information and eventually told instead to refer to him as Doctor Michael Reid as he has a doctorate from Oral Roberts University in Oklahoma, USA.
In the case of the Ryanair ad controversy I could have believed the airline was behind the brouhaha that surrounded the newspaper ad. Could it possible that as a Christian pressure group the CCTV might have used similar cunning? Somehow I doubt it. But as one Christian group rallies hatred toward the gay community another will march in the forthcoming Mardi Gras parade in Sydney Australia to apologise for the church’s hostility toward gay and lesbian people. Jerry Falwell would be turning in his grave!
—
The Christian Congress for Traditional Values
Bishop Michael Reid Ministries
Bishop Michael Reid’s church
‘Family values’ poster ruled offensive
ASA rule against anti-gay ad
Midlands Bible College blog post about Bishop Ried
Something’s not quite right in Brentwood
The oracle of Essex
[Video] BBC TV News report
Wrote the following comment on Feb 6, 2008 at 9:17 pm
This is just really unkind. I find putting an ad like this out disgusting. I understand the need for freedom of speech but this seems to be more along the lines of defamation. A church that does this i would guess has problems with legalism and a lot can be said about that breaking up homes as well.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 6, 2008 at 8:01 pm
damn right they have banned that CCTV ad. self righteous bigots.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 6, 2008 at 9:22 pm
As a nation why do we allow newspapers and magazines to produce highly sexual images that will be seen by children, but not advertisers? I don’t condone the ad but the double standard undermines the ASA’s argument.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 6, 2008 at 10:09 pm
And all this time I thought CCTV was closed circuit television. Guess that makes him the bishop of tiny TV cameras in public places.
(Comments above courtesy of my trained monkey.)
Since when do gays all have the same “aim”? Are they an organized secret society with an evil hidden agenda? While Dr. Reid may think so, I would beg to differ. The gay people I know have other concerns on their mind, like living their lives.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 6, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Ye gods! I’ve just spent a bemused few minutes looking at the website of this CCTV shower! Oh, and they don’t like this global warning malarkey either. Apparently it’s a conspiracy.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 6, 2008 at 10:06 pm
This puzzled me until I realized this is from the UK. Because here in the States I think it’s all good as long as advertisers don’t show any naughty bits.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 7, 2008 at 4:49 pm
Jeffrey, it is a conspiracy! Al Gore’s trying to force us to order his light bulbs using his internet to line his pockets! Meanwhile, he’s using his ever increasing wealth to go jetting around the country spewing hateful messages of gay tolerance, freedom of sexual choice, and family destruction.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 6, 2008 at 10:46 pm
Wikipedia suggests that he was made bishop by that ancient church council (est 1982!) the International Communion of Charismatic Churches.
Reid’s defence of traditional values does not – if the 1999 report from the Independent is to be believed – include church sponsored financial gain on what at least borders on usury. Traditionally a lot more has been said by the church against this than the gay corruption of “family values”, after all, it kick started a reformation!
Wrote the following comment on Feb 6, 2008 at 11:19 pm
I have alot of gay friends. I have never felt like they were ruining my fam. Plus gay weddings are much more fun lol!
Dont people have anything else to fix/do?
Wrote the following comment on Feb 6, 2008 at 11:33 pm
om goodness.. i dont really agree with posting up an add like that .. and im christian.. it doesnt mean that im perfect but working towards being more christ like and not “waddling” around in my sin. it means i have christ and a sort of lawyer on my behalf in gods court room. his blood covers my smoked dung ( sin)
if someone is going to put up an add .. it needs to be something that displays the love of christ.. everyone already knows that there really is a hell. how many really know the love of god…. i dont believe in encouraging people to be gay, because really does call it sin. but there should be no bashing of any kind done to any type of people
Wrote the following comment on Feb 7, 2008 at 12:12 am
suggesting that all gay people have an aim just goes to show how completely out of touch these people are. i’ve come across only a handful of religious people who seem normal, the vast majority of christians just seem odd to me. they often picket outside my work and they’re a funny looking bunch of people. one got beat up outside a few months ago so we brought her in from the rain to fix her up and wait for an ambulance and the police with her. she never once said thank you, instead she just talked strange gibberish with her eyes closed almost the entire time! the man who was with her also refused to talk to us and he just prayed out loud the whole time too, it was really strange. they mostly seem a bit funny in the head if you ask me.
good to see your still writing simon :)
Wrote the following comment on Feb 7, 2008 at 8:04 am
Hey, good blog this Simon. I’ve added you as a bookmark, so maybe if I ever clean up my bookmarks I’ll find this site again!
From his church’s wikipedia entry:
The church’s founder, Michael Reid, is a former Metropolitan police officer and insurance salesman, and was made a bishop by the International Communion of Charismatic Churches in Benin City, Nigeria in 1995.[4]
I’m not a religious man myself, and I’m not saying that a man who has named his church after himself, and who appears to be something of a television evangelist of the type not usually seen in the UK (I think?), is necessarily a small minded charlatan. Quite possibly he is a genuine and sincere man, who really was told by God to go to Nigeria to get his “Bishopric”, to attempt to infiltrate the local Conservative party until being exposed by Martin Bell, and to run a series of ads which are offensive and untrue. God moves in mysterious ways, after all, and subverting the Essex Tories might be a way to please Jesus for all I know. All I am saying is that I would be wary if he sent you an email suggesting that he needed your help in moving 50 million dollars.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 7, 2008 at 11:54 pm
The gays are out to destroy our families whilst the muslims are moving to our countries are part of a world wide conspiracy to over through the west. The Archbish of Canterbury made an interesting point in his recent speech https://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/1561 (though many people didn’t like his conclusions it is, as usual, a very intelligent piece). Hateful speech from a majority to a minority (e.g. straights to gays or westerners to muslims living in western countries) is pretty obviously wrong. People try to justify by inventing global conspiracys trying to convince people that the minorities are really well organised and will take over if we’re not careful – therefore their hateful speech is necessary. (That’s a summary of I thought the ABC was saying).
Wrote the following comment on Feb 8, 2008 at 1:17 am
Stuff like that makes me physically ill. :-P
Wrote the following comment on Feb 8, 2008 at 3:44 am
Some great comments here. Thanks everyone!
Okay, so I noticed that one of the co-founders of the CCTV was a guy called Colin Dye who is the senior pastor at London’s Kensington Temple. That church is highly regarded so I was stunned to see it connected with the CCTV in any way. To that end I decided to write to Colin Dye and about the association with CCTV.
I called KT and they refused to give me a direct email address for Mr Dye, but did give me his secretary’s email, so I wrote to her and asked her to forward it to Mr Dye.
This is the email I wrote to him…
In my experience preachers seriously disliked being questioned. With that in mind I have to say I doubt he will take any time to respond.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 8, 2008 at 8:47 pm
Sad, sad, sad. What were they thinking to put up an ad of this nature? This isn’t loving at all!
Wrote the following comment on Feb 11, 2008 at 2:25 pm
I was just about to mention the Colin Dye connection, since KT and its leader are (presumably still) big in Elim.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 13, 2008 at 10:57 pm
It is the homosextual community goal to break down the family and the values that make up the family in which God himself put in place. It is not natural for a man to desire a man nor a women to desire a women. Reading the bible you can clearly see that God intended marriage to be between a man and a women so that we can procreate.
Why would a billboard like this offend someone unless they themselves have sinned? May be different in the UK but in the US I would fine this billboard very acceptable and proper. Children should see the family unit as God had intended.
The homosextual community should not feel accepted by society as a norm but also should not be treated badly. They should just not be out there about being gay. Like it use to be before all this “proud to be gay” movement came about.
God Bless,
A Conservative Christian in the US
Wrote the following comment on Feb 14, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Conservative Christian,
I’d like to start by answering addressing your first question. You asked why someone would be offended by this unless they had sinned. That to me is far too broadly stated as you and I both know, we all have sinned…
Now to your thoughts on this billboard being acceptable… i would like to first ask how exactly all homosexuals are aiming to destroy the family unit? The way i see it, if your argument is that homosexuals are all aiming to break up the family through adoption you have two problems. First, far from all homosexuals are even trying to adopt. Second, children who dont have a home are already in a broken family unit- cause they have none! Are you seriously telling me that you think its better for a child to grow up with no parents at all then two with the same gender? I would love an explanation on that.
I would also like bring up that I’ve been involved in a group before who would say something similar to the billboard above… who were ultra conservative and would agree with your comment. What i found though, was an inconsistency in judgment as the focus was often on homosexuals and not the problems festering in church pews- christian adultery, divorce etc… IF gays really were the destroyers of families because they are not creating families according to God’s design, what about the adulters? the sexual immoral? single parents? Do these people get a billboard too or is it just homosexuals? Seems to me that someone who puts out a billboard like this, focusing in on someone else’s sin, has bigger issues to deal with- taking the place of God and judging.
I am a Christian, and do not agree with the homosexual lifestyle, but the way i see it homosexuals are no different from all the other people i know who dont know Christ. In an ideal and happy world, it would be great for kids to be raised in a home with a father and a mother… but we dont live in that world.
Finally, as someone who used to be involved with a lot of judgment, may i encourage you to look to your own family before so quickly endorsing another’s accusation at a broken family. I find that with judgemental attitudes often comes depression, hatred, unforgiveness and bitterness. In my opinion, this is something to be really concerned about rather than a gay aim.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 14, 2008 at 8:40 pm
In response to ‘Conservative Christian’ I would just say that the billboard showed a lack of understanding and tact. Christians are so often seen as nut-jobs and stunts like that do nothing to improve their image.
The family is broken generally and I do not believe that any one group could or should be singled out to be blamed for this. Divorce plays a far more significant role in this, and there are other factors too. The fact is though, we like to try and find a group other than ourselves to blame.
Blaming “the gays” doesn’t do anything constructive and for that religious pressure group to engage in such an act was pure folly. It reflected extremely poorly on them. It was a tactless puerile thing to do that showed a disappointing lack of wisdom.
Be conservative by all means, but also be mindful of the fact that your neighbor might not share you view and that the book by which you have chosen to live your life commands that you love thy neighbor too.
Thanks for dropping by my blog Christine, feel free to come back anytime.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Thank you both for your comments on my post. Let me clarify my comment a bit more. When it comes to the blame I don’t necessarily think that homosextuals sit together in a room and choose to attack the family values. I believe that in their desire to be accepted that they push to much on the issue and bring it out in front in a place it need not be in our society.
Such as marriage equality, medical benefit equality as a couple, and the acceptance of them bringing up a child in a home that the two parents are not in clearly defined gender roles. This issues should not be issues of concern being that the role of a mother and father are clearly defined in the Bible. If they choose to live their lives otherwise they should do so in private.
Just because I believe this doesn’t mean that I treat others with disrespect in any way. It is very much different for me because I treat people as people. I will not treat that person as if they are not human because they certainly are. I have worked with and been friends with homosextuals and have always had a great relationship with them. They respected my views because I have respected theirs.
Like they say, “let us agree to disagree” on this topic. “smile”
Thank you for the kind welcome to your blog I enjoy reading it.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2008 at 7:29 pm
You know Christine, if you’ll excuse my continuation of the discussion I’d like to mention just one thing.
When I read lines like “they push to much on the issue and bring it out in front in a place it need not be in our society” and “If they choose to live their lives otherwise they should do so in private.” I can’t help but think such a sentiment echoes a little of those voiced by people in history who have struggled with issues relating to color.
I believe that a persons sexuality should be of absolutely no consequence to anyone else but themselves and those who they choose to include.
A persons sexuality does not define them, however if someone was to impose a definition on someone based upon their sexuality then I do have a problem with that. That stretches right from those who openly confess to hating “fags” to people who will define a friend with a sexuality title like “my gay friend Rob.” (I wrote about this ten years ago.)
I wonder how many gay people make a decision to be gay? I understand that sexuality can and is strongly driven by childhood experiences, but your assertion that it is a choice is one that I question. After all, I never sat down one day and decided that I’d prefer to be straight… I just am.
In the end though I think my concern is that by creating this ad which you have said you have no problem with, the Christian community (of which you are a part) is represented in an extremely poor light. To claim you have no problem with that ad, or ads similar to this, would seem to be very much at odds with your ‘lets agree to disagree’ stance.
Do you not think that an ad that is as openly inflammatory as this does more harm than good when you consider it in respect of how it portrays Christians? To my mind it only further goes to present Christians as narrow minded judgmental bigots.
While I appreciate that there are plenty of narrow minded judgmental Christians out there, I think I’ll suggest that that “in their desire to be accepted that they push to much”, and that if they choose to live like that “they should do so in private.”
Wrote the following comment on Feb 24, 2008 at 9:07 am
You know Simon I think you are being far to gracious in your email to Pastor Colin Dye when you say that there seemed to be few controversies surrounding him.
Colin Dye has long been a controversial character. He’s been accused on numerous occasions of false teachings and false prophecy, most notably a rather horrid false prophesy about God’s anger and judgment upon London that he made back in 1998. These are all traits that are sadly not uncommon in the Elim denomination.
He also believes strongly in ‘positive confession’ (sometimes known as ‘name in a claim it’) which is widely regarded as suspect to say the least.
I applaud your effort to hold Colin Dye accountable for his associations, however you are unlikely to receive a reply from such a challenging email.
If he does reply though, please be sure and publish his response because I would be very interested in seeing how he deals with those excellently direct questions.
Wrote the following comment on Mar 19, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Just an update. Colin Dye has not responded to that email. I sent it to him again on the 11th just to make sure he got it. On that occasion I CC’d it to His assistant Michelle Bennett as well as info@kt.org, smo@kt.org and clp@kt.org. ms Bennett confirmed that the email had been passed to Mr Dye but it would seem either he hasn’t had time to respond as yet, or he is simply avoiding the difficult questions.
I followed it up this evening with an email circumventing his assistant and going right to an address that appears to be his personal email address. I hope Mr Dye responds, but in truth I think he’s probably going to take the easy option and avoid the email. Shame. I’d hoped he was better than that.
Wrote the following comment on Mar 21, 2008 at 9:54 pm
A further update. Colin Dye has now responded. This is what he had to say…
Wrote the following comment on Apr 3, 2008 at 6:57 pm
My response to Colin’s email…
Wrote the following comment on Apr 8, 2008 at 3:09 pm
You know Bishop Michael Reid, the founder of CCTV, has resigned now because of adultery? The hypocrisy makes me sick.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 9, 2008 at 8:37 pm
In a telephone conversation with Colin Dye on April 9th the Pastor made a number of comments surrounding Bishop Read and the recent revelations that the Bishop had been involved in an adulterous affair with a church official for the last 8 years.
“I’d not heard or participated in the CCTV for quite some time, knew nothing about this poster, and the point is that he [Michael Reid] wouldn’t necessarily go and involve people in the committee meeting and say this is what we want to do and have you got any ideas. He would just sort of act independently on that.” Claimed Pastor Dye.
“I haven’t had a conversation with him in ages, and I had no idea he was putting posters out in the name of CCTV.” He continued.
Asked why he didn’t step in and suggest the Bishop step aside and let a more moderate person take press interviews and be the public face of the CCTV, Dye responded, “I’d never seen it. I never seen it in this recent thing. I mean I thought to myself, he really has changed, because he was presenting himself very sensibly.”
However when asked about the process of accountability within the Bishops own church Colin Dye conceded there were probably serious failings.
“There wasn’t anybody there [at the Peniel Church] that knew about this, or should have known, and if they did know they didn’t do anything about it, and certainly on the surface of it, it would seem the accountability structures weren’t effective.”
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 9:37 am
I am *very* surprised at the tone taken by Rev Dye’s original email. I have never known him to be so graceless in communication, and am surprised that he took a tone that was so defensive and even hostile. Certainly your original email was strong, but there was nothing belligerent about it.
If Dye genuinely wants to disassociate himself from Reid’s kind of anti-gay rhetoric, I am glad, but I am baffled how this kind of thing can go on in Dye’s name without his knowledge.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Elim has many leadership accountability issues itself. Its very difficult to ask difficult theological questions in an Elim church unless the answers you receive cause you to tow the party line within three or four months. If you don’t agree you tend to be seen as a trouble maker. Leaders cannot be criticised because God has spoken to them and God can not be wrong.
That was my experience, for what its worth.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Well I am glad to see I have to eat my words. Colin Dye replied, but what a reply. If that wasn’t a smack-down then I don’t know what was. Was he more gracious on the telephone?
Wrote the following comment on Apr 13, 2008 at 5:15 pm
I have a rainbow-coloured pin in the shape of a cross. Most of the time, I am too embarrassed to wear it. Funny thing is, I’m more embarrassed about being Christian than I am about being gay.
Until I met my partner, I was stubborn and righteous. Ever hear someone say, “hate the sin and love the sinner?” That was me. But since then,(many of) the layers of blind faith have been peeled from my eyes, and not without considerable discomfort. I now hesitate to use the word “Christian,” not because I lost my faith, but because I lost my faith in what that word represents.
How can the Church speak about human dignity, love, and healing—the evangelical “good news” when it is not good news for everyone? There are no seats in the pews for me, my beautiful partner, or others like us. Not as we are. We are crowding around the church’s emergency room and pounding of the doors entrance, while Christian muzak plays in the background, cheery and distant.
What is the good news for us? I have yet to hear a sensible, meaningful answer from the Church. Celibacy. The magic word. Because doing nothing at all is guaranteed against doing anything wrong. Right?
No wonder in the end we stop knocking on the door.
The Church is sitting on a Rosetta Stone of lepers, Gentiles, blacks, women, and queers, and still they are unable to decipher the message. I refuse to believe that the tearing of the HOLY curtain does not extend to us; that we, falling short of the heterosexual ideal, are the only ones who won’t see the liberation of that furious act of God.
My partner and I have enjoyed and endured the best and the worst of one of the most loving, ignorant, tolerant, and obstinate evangelical churches I have ever known. Perched between hope and disillusionment, we’ve had to ask ourselves: how hard will be fight to resurrect what is left of the good in church?
Wrote the following comment on Apr 14, 2008 at 11:30 pm
Among the many theological errors present in both classical and neo-Pentecostal circles is the belief that to challenge a pastor is to challenge God, since God has spoken to them. The fact that these so-called leaders contradict each others’ teachings/prophecies/leadings of the Spirit etc. ought to set alarm bells ringing loudly among the sheep, but most members of such congregations are too biblically illiterate or spineless to challenge such rubbish. That’s how lying charlatans like Michael Reid can get away with it for so long.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 15, 2008 at 6:23 am
malcolm I like your comment. This whole ordeal has got me thinking about ISrael’s desire for a king. How God put judges over Israel to speak directly for Him- people who were clearly had the word of God evidenced by miracles. THen the people got tired of being ruled this way and demanded a king. The king would make decisions at his whim or possibly consult a prophet for His opinion.
Samuel, the last judge was upset with the peoples request… and God told him not to be upset because it wasnt him, Samuel, they were rejecting- they were rejecting Him-God. God then said to let them have their king.
Its interesting to me cause it seems that the people of God, or humanity for that matter, havent changed. We are still trying to put a person in place of God instead of hearing His voice for ourselves- studying His word, waiting to hear what He says.
We are a microwave society. We want to know what God says, but we dont want to put the time and effort into searching out what that really is. Instead, we’d rather put ourselves under a pastor and let him do all the work; we’d rather pay someone to do for us the commitment and agreement we entered into when we said we would be disciples of Christ.
Then a man like Reid comes along who’s forceful, and probably attractively charismatic. He joins with a church of Christians who are used to being told what’s right and wrong, and not thinking on their own… and most probably putting man in the place of God for their decisions and you have a recipe for the disaster that’s just happened. His actions go unchecked and the people following him defend him even when he’s clearly been living a double life for 8 years.
I know this doesnt happen everywhere. I know Christians who think on their own and dont take in everything a man or woman says as gospel- but unfortunately the above is far more the case then it should be.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 15, 2008 at 3:22 pm
I am not sure if views are different in Europe versus other countries regarding the interpretation of the Bible so forgive me if I am not in sync with the rest of you.
The Bible at times can be interpreted by those who are more liberal in view the way that they believe it fits them best. As I am sure you know there are various different versions of the Bible with wording changes that can change the entire meaning of the scripture. Those who are truly practicing Christians know that the KJV is the more accurate next to the actually one. Translation can vary as many of you know due to language translations not being word for word for obvious reasons.
The fact that one of you has a cross with a rainbow and another believes that the “both classical and neo-Pentecostal circles” do not “belief that to challenge a pastor is to challenge God, since God has spoken to them” shows me how different it must be in your country.
I myself being a conservative Christian and not from Europe I can confidently say that we do not feel that we can not challenge our pastors. We do not challenge because they follow the scripture accurately. If they did not trust me we would not be shy to debate him on it. Catholics may view this differently but I am not Catholic so I can’t speak about that part. I just know that my denomination along with many other conservative ones not only challenge their pastors but most if not all are highly educated. We study the scripture in depth not just on the surface.
I am unfamiliar with this person for whom you are all very offended by but I think much may be due to the lack of communication from the community for which feel offended. Hopefully with Simon clearly communicating with him the clarity will soon be evident.
Peace be with you all. God Bless,
Christine
Wrote the following comment on Apr 15, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Christine. Thank you for visiting my blog, though your thinly veiled slap down has unfortunately made you look foolish if for no other reason than the fact that a “highly educated” person would surely know that Europe is not a country.
This blog sits on the worldwide web, so it should come as no surprise to you that you are not the first American to find it. Indeed of the 35 comments so far, only three of the people are from outside the United States, and one of those number is currently living in Texas!
Your lecturing the mirror Christine. And while you are standing up ready to speak on behalf of American Christians, bear in mind that that rainbow cross pin wearing guy is standing right there next to you with equal right to also speak on behalf of American Christians.
Truth is truth wherever it is in the world Christine, of that I am sure we can agree. People all over the world can be mislead by wicked men and suggesting that this is somehow something that only effects Europeans does rather lead me to conclude that you are exactly the kind of person who falls into the trap of coming to conclusions by proxy rather than experience or actual knowledge.
As for the man pictured in this post, who was behind the ‘Gay aim” billboard. He has since had to admit to having been involved in an adulterous affair for the last 8 years.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 15, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Hello Simon,
Thank you for your response. As I am sure you may have suspected I did mean “country” and “Europe” differently. My apologies for not being more articulate. Sometimes when I respond via blog or email I tend to not review what I wrote to be sure to catch things like that.
Be it as it may people like him clearly show exactly how “human” our pastors are and that we should not hold them to the level at which some possibly naive individuals may. He is one in a few and certainly should leave his post as pastor if he is indeed still practicing.
When it comes to the homosexual community they are of course entitled to live in freedom. I have never disagreed with that but to weave homosexuality with Christianity (the conservative and/or more traditional groups I should clarify) just seems strange to me. Obviously we have church groups in the states such as the UCC which embrace the homosexual lifestyle.
I just have an issue when the homosexual agenda is pushed on those who believe in the true scripture. I certainly do not feel they should be deprived of their spiritual need but they have denomination that are clearly welcoming to those who practice that type of lifestyle. They also have their own interpretation of the scripture so they would fit it wonderfully.
We must all find our place of happiness and there are many groups who embrace it. I don’t understand what this entire drawn out discussion is getting to in the end.
Finally, I am sorry to hear that the pastor had taking such a hypocritical position when he himself lived in sin. He should clearly spend some time repenting for those sins so that he can be forgiven for such terrible acts.
God Bless,
Christine
Wrote the following comment on Apr 16, 2008 at 2:48 am
Christine, I’m not sure you’re really communicating your point very well. First off you took a swipe and how different we “Europeans” are, then you learned the vast majority of people commenting here were your fellow Americans, so you switched gears a little but still didn’t come out and make a point.
Forgive me if I am being dim here, but what are you trying to say?
Clearly you feel that your church and your way is the only truth and the only way. So given your conservative “be gay, just not here” approach one could take it that you are in agreement with that poster. Is that what you are saying.
I only ask because you seem to be flapping around telling us all that you don’t like the gays and that if they want to go and do that nasty sin they should do it somewhere far away from you and they should not be gay anywhere near you either.
“I certainly do not feel they should be deprived of their spiritual need but they have denomination that are clearly welcoming to those who practice that type of lifestyle.” That works until you stop to consider that it wasn’t too long ago that folks in the south of the United States were saying pretty much the same in relation to “the negro.”
This post is about the utterly objectionable behaviour of the poster in question, as well as the attitude of groups like the CCTV. You can disagree with me all you like and I’d have more respect for it if you would just come out and tell us you don’t like gays. But dancing around that using politically correct language to disguise and somewhat muffle your real opinion seems pointless and almost cowardly to me.
It rather sounds to me like you need to either make your point using real langauge knowing you are free to be as un-pc as you wish, or perhaps you need to go away and do some thinking about this subject for yourself and find out what exactly it is that you are reacting to and why.
I wish you the best with that.