Uh, another "do as I say, not as I do" moment.
End Times Harvest Mission for Christ?

Oh, yeah, balanced people.
But people like this have it all worked out. You see, all they have to do is say "sorry" and their god forgives them. We may think they are homicidal fools, but their religion says that's hardly relevant.
I'm in no way defending what this guy did, but I'd like to know the details of this "violent confrontation", and whether or not the shooting was in some sort of attempt at self defense.
Are you hinting at a cryptic meaning of the Proverbial "spare the rod, spoil the child" or just translating the Hebrew differently for King Dan's Version of the Old Testament?
@6 I was thinking the same thing, what was the confrontation about?
We don't know that Caldwell murdered his son, or even that he acted out of malice.

We don't know, but Dan Savage does ... though the source of his knowledge in these matters is often occult.

Dan, what are you impying by posting this story?

His narrow world view.
If you dislike Dan so much, why do you spend so much time on his blog?
Some christians sure know how to celebrate!!
The well-regulated militia doesn't even take Christmas Day off!
@10 That being devout is not a guarantee against destructive behavior, and as such, claims by the faithful that their religion gives them a moral advantage over others are false.

Unfortunately, the linked story doesn't give all the details. What was the disagreement over? Was the shooting an accident? Was it self-defense? Inquiring minds want to know.
@ 8

All the article linked said was that it was a violent confrontation between the son and a woman. The circumstances deserve to be questioned, at least.
@ 12 I figured it be appropriate to ask the meaning behind your statement. However, it must be noted that my attempt at understanding your statement leads me to conclude the unfortunate limited scope of your intelligence. To imply that african-americans aren't apart of the "true" christian world is asinine, disturbing and disgusting. I find you to be the one who is pathetic sir/ma'am. Your idiotic comment is indeed why I fully support the criminalization of bigotry and idiocy. I pray for you and those who respect you as a human being for they have blessed you with a dignity in which you are unworthy. I regret Dan and I and other human beings must include you among the likes of us for you are truly a subspecies deserving to be relegated to the special pit of hell waiting just for you!
Dan, what is your basis for stating that the man "murdered" his son?
What journalist standards are you employing here?
Even in an opinion piece it is libel to assert as a fact something which is not true.
What do you base your assertion of "murder" on?
What few facts seem to be available at this time suggest the man killed his son to protect a woman. Most people will find that tragic but commendable. Dan will find in the tragedy an opportunity to display his hatred of religion and anyone associated with religion. Hatred is blind to fact or reason. It cripples those it infects. Dan needs your sympathy.

Sounds like a Marvin Gaye copy cat crime.

It's understandable why Dan likes to bash Christians, because so many Christians bash gays.

However, when you're angry -- and rightfully so -- at being put down by the majority in a group, it's easy to overlook the fact that not everyone in that group agrees with the majority. There are Christians who don't take the Bible literally; there are Christians who actually act in a Christ-like manner; there are Christians who feel there's nothing "wrong" that needs fixing with gays and lesbians; there are Christians who support same-sex marriage.

As New York Times columnist Charles Blow pointed out in his blog (see the "Vote by Religion" table), 35% of Protestants and 35% of Catholics voted AGAINST California's Proposition 8. Now granted, 90% of "Nones" (people who said they were not religious at all) voted against Prop 8 but, still, one third of Protestants and Catholics voted against it, and that's a pretty sizeable minority.…

Apparently, the usual disclaimer (the first two paragraphs) is going to need to be displayed every time Dan posts one of these. Or not, if people just are doomed to not get it.

So, Allegedly, how does the race of the family discern whether or not it represents the true Christian world? Can only certain races (e.g. not African Americans) be true Christians? Please elaborate.

RonK and Allegedly, the term fatally shot does seem to put this in the realm of murder, even if it is somehow justified. The only way it would not count as murder is if the weapon was accidentally discharged, in case it's a case of poor firearm discipline that some of us may regard as worse than murder (i.e. murder by stupidity).

But what one has to ask is why does a pastor in Darby, Pennsylvania who allegedly believes Retaliation is never the answer own a handgun in the first place? It seems the man forgot about both, turning the other cheek, and seeking first the Kingdom of God. And it cost him a son, potentially the rest of his life.

While I agree with you, Roma that pro-equality Christians are under-represented in our media, they are also ineffectual in their silence. Considering our recent loss in Maine, considering the Roman Catholic's continuing hissy-fit in DC, considering that no-one is shutting up Fox News, or the LDS pulpit, considering that the 100 IQ club still believes homosexuality equates to child predation, and that the gay panic defense is legit and appropriate, I think the gays have a legitimate gripe.

As an atheist with a well developed moral center, I think the message of these posts, namely that faith does not correspond to moral righteousness has merit and is worth repeating.
@12: It's obvious they were "negros"? WTF???

@6: Yes, I agree more details are needed. It's notable that the police have not yet charged the pastor with anything.

@22: You make a good point. It's regretable, however, that such a hateful minority is so incredibly vocal and influential.
You should acquaint yourself with the legal and moral concept of justifiable homicide. Murder doesn't mean what you think it does.
If the link to "the usual disclaimer" worked (darn the nets is a difficult place...) would it explain how good "journalists" (Editorial Director, even!!) leap to conclusions before the facts are known and call people MURDERERS?
Could you post a half dozen or so (working) links to educate Dan about the concept of Libel? justifiable homicide (and provide him with contact information for a good attorney specializing in media misadventures...)
Fact Check
It is the Obama Justice Department that "believes homosexuality equates to child predation".
Yea, Verily- you have put your finger on the real problem in America:

We don't allow
Open-Minded Tolerant Atheist Liberals
to SHUT UP all Media and Religions
that do not conform to the
Homosexual Agenda.

A thousand apologies...
That, and also, of course, that we do not have a Religious Test for the Right to Bear Arms...
Whine all you want, Christians, but the scripture and the religion--"christian family values" is what fosters this sort of thing.

You get false premises about the father being the king and sole violence provider, and role of mom, and the FACT that the bible teaches non-questioning of parents by their kids, as well as the DUTY of parents to have their children KILLED for not honoring them, you get this shit.

Let the whining commence.

PS: Deuteronomy 21. Deuteronomy is filthy with killing and eating children, and killing witches and people of the wrong religion.

And if Jesus ever once meant what he said (and you Christies don't seem to be able to agree on that, either), he came to fulfill and to hold up those laws. Even if he didn't. Because you can't agree on that, either.
Um...disingenuous much, Dan? Opening a blog post with alarmist introductions about "murdering children" before relating a dubious story about an ADULT MAN killing another ADULT MAN in circumstances that may actually have been justified due to the threat of violence against a woman?

Granted, I think anyone associated with a church that includes "End Times" in the name is probably nuts, but really.
If the pastor shot his son to prevent (potentially deadly) violence against the woman in question, then his actions would be commendable. Killing to save a life is an ethical act, and distinct from murder.

We don't know enough about the situation to determine the nature of the act.
OK, it's becoming clear that D Savage has two modes:

1) Advice/column mode. Here, he is very fair and rational, and does his homework.

2) Posting news articles mode. Here, he takes a mental vacation and is just trying to bait people to post angry and/or interesting responses.

He succeeds at his goals in both modes.
33 re: Editorial Director at The Stranger-

The Peter Principle is the principle that "In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence." It was formulated by Dr. Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull in their 1969 book The Peter Principle. It holds that in a hierarchy, members are promoted so long as they work competently. Sooner or later they are promoted to a position at which they are no longer competent (their "level of incompetence"), and there they remain, being unable to earn further promotions. This principle can be modeled and has theoretical validity. Peter's Corollary states that "in time, every post tends to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out his duties" and adds that "work is accomplished by those employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence".
32 is right... and if this is how it went down, then killing his son was not only commendable and ethical, but it's also surprisingly consistent with Christian mythology. Evangelical Christians believe that God sacrificed his own son's life for the salvation of humans.

In fact, I remember two stories (i.e. modern parables used in sermons or devotional writing) from my fundamentalist upbringing that were pro-filicide:

1. A railroad engineer has to choose between routing a train full of people onto a track where they will all be killed somehow versus a track where his son is playing. The proper decision was to kill his son, because one death is better than many deaths.

2. In a boating accident, a man has to choose between rescuing his Christian son or the son's non-Christian friend. Again, the proper decision was to sacrifice the son, because the son would go to heaven and the friend would live to have the chance to be "saved".

Funny how these things stick in the mind. Then of course there's the biblical story of Abraham being willing to kill his son Isaac for no purpose other than to obey God... that story was taught to me as a shining example of obedience to God, but now that I lean more towards Pastafarianism, it just creeps me out.

Dan: "O they will know we are Christians by the children we murder on Christmas day..."

In this, Dan is indulging in the same kind of smear that an anti-gay Christian would do by taking an incident of a gay man molesting a boy and writing "O they will know we are homosexuals by the children we molest."


24/joybd: "@22: "You make a good point. It's regretable, however, that such a hateful minority is so incredibly vocal and influential."

I think you meant majority. A majority of Protestants and Catholics voted in favor of California's Prop 8 and there's no question that a majority of Protestants and Catholics think there's something "wrong" with gays and lesbians -- and they are hateful (or at least ignorant) and influential -- but the point is that there's a sizeable minority of Christians that are NOT that way. In California anyway. I'm sure in a state like Alabama or Kansas you wouldn't find one-third of Catholics and Protestants voting against a Prop 8 kind of measure.
There are translations of the sixth commandment that say "thou shalt not murder" instead of "thou shalt not kill." and whether you believe in a "God" or not, murder makes much more sense. There are plenty of scenarios -- such as self-defense or killing someone who has already killed a hostage is and is threatening to kill more -- where it may be ethical and moral to kill a person.

And Muslims believe in capital punishment since the Qur'an says, "...Take not life, which God has made sacred, except by way of justice and law." In their view, killing a murderer does not lower one to the same plane as the murderer, as opponents of capital punishment (both Christian and non-Christian) argue.

It's either "Upper Darby" or "Lower Darby", unless the two finally united sometime after I left the area in 1976.

mr pinky
People who believe in religion don't have to make sense. They live in faith, which by definition means things have to be irrational.

Don't ever expect anything form religion to make any sense whatsoever.
"O they will know we are homosexuals by the children we molest."

Have you ever seen that tactic employed?
Or is your comment but another in a series of straw men that infest slog...
Now that the topic has come up, does anyone actually know this guy was black? Kirk is a strongly white name to me. Scottish for Church, actually, which makes sense.
@23 because jesus was white! praise white jesus!! oh white jesus in heaven above, bestow your blessings upon the white race, who were fashioned in your likeness. we thank you white jesus for casserole, codpieces, windows 95, birkenstocks, white women, bulemia, anorexia, and superior intelligence! praise the lord.
You're right, Allegedly. I'm used to the '70s / '80s term justifiable murder, which may have since been clarified or otherwise removed from procedural parlance. If the term murder only applies when homicide is unlawful and premeditated, then this isn't necessarily murder, on the provision that the discharge of the firearm might have been accidental or in response to the use of force.

So yes, The term murder, depending on circumstances, may be an overstatement, but debatably a hyperbolic one. The term children might also, considering the victim was 21, and we're going for full disclosure. Not that you ever believed in full disclosure, Allegedly.

Is there any new information on this yet, Allegedly? Do you have any information indicating this was an accidental shooting, or a defense shooting, Allegedly? If he were not a pastor, but one of them homo ass-pirates, would you concern yourself with the possibility that he might have shot his kid in self defense, Allegedly? Or is this level of vigilance reserved for true Christians and real Americans (e.g. pastors and plumbers)?

Also, Allegedly, while you're checking facts, please provide a link (or search terms, since you won't register) to lead us to the offending quote, and whether the stated opinion was made by one of Obama's appointees, or a holdover from the Bush administration.

Not that any of us believe, anymore, that the equality movement has a friend in the White House. Not that the White House even pretends to be a friend of the equality sector. But you do like to bring up Dan's endorsement of the president. Does that make you feel all big inside, Allegedly, knowing the President lied as a candidate and that Dan believed him? Is the sweet, succulent schadenfreude that is the ichor of betrayal the very nectar on which you survive and thrive, Allegedly?
You read my posts often enough, Allegedly, that when I refer to shutting up [of] Fox News or the LDS pulpit you should know I'm not talking about silencing them by force. But it is true that others may not read and respond to me as often as you. Do you think we Open-Minded Tolerant Atheist Liberals want to silence those durned conservatives by force? Is that what you really think, Allegedly?

Oh, and I didn't say Caldwell should have been denied the right to own a gun, but that by his own principles he should have chosen to not own one, but you knew that already, didn't you, Allegedly?

I never did get a straight answer about what constitutes true Christians (Original post, removed.) Allegedly Are you sure you're not just a xenophobic recluse, using this as an outlet for your pent up bitterness? We all understand if this is the case, Allegedly, really. It's far better to get it out in the open.
I'm surprised this isn't also flagged "Every Child Deserves A Mother And A Father."
We are concerned that the principles of accurate, honest and fair journalism be applied to every story.

Obama didn't lie to Dan about his position on homosexual marriage. Dan is a victim of his own naivete and arrogance.

We tried to tell you girls Obama was too inexperienced to wield the levers of power effectively but no one listened. Enjoy the next three years of Carteresque Malaise...
45 perhaps you didn't get an answer because the author of the post had no idea who you were talking to. not all unregistered posts are by the same poster. there is no omnipotent unregistered boogeyman lurking under your bed...
"By force"?!
Where would you get such an idea?
Have you been sneaking out behind your mom's back and seeing R rated movies again? She told you they would give you nightmares...

No, Liberals lack the balls to enforce their cowardly anti-democratic dictates By Force.
Unless, of course, a howling mob of homosexuals find a California grandma alone at a rally....
But no, the Liberals seldom find a situation where the odds favor them enough for them to screw up their "courage"....

We expect more white powder mailed to enemies. Churches defaced in the night. Tax status challenged. Baseless harassment complaints filed with elections officials. People who dare disagree with homosexuals fired from their jobs. Or denied jobs. FCC regulations to silence opinions Liberals disagree with. Liberal Presidents using the office to bully news outlets that do not drink and regurgitate the koolaid. Petition signers harassed. "Hate speech" laws to intimidate those who believe some behaviors are immoral and or carry a high social cost into silence. School children indoctrinated and brainwashed.

Perhaps the Homosexual Thought Police could establish a "Proper Thoughts Bureau".
Media outlets and religions could be forced to submit their material for approval.
They could find out which thoughts are allowed.
And which are not.
It could avoid the awkwardness of "shutting up" those who don't fall in line.

A Liberal "Morning in Amerika"...
G. Orwell. That's just too cute. Loveschild much?
50 too cute is never cute enough
Allegedly, I hold you personally responsible for every anonymous comment on SLOG. It's the price you pay for your continued refuge behind a lack of identity. Didn't you get the memo?

Oh wait, Allegedly! Here, you're saying we are... and we tried.... So you did get the memo after all.

And oh, lookie, Allegedly, you're waxing pseudo-poetic again about how wussy liberals are, so what was this beef all about? It sounded like you expected us to grow a pair. Not that you'd do any less than parade naked in the streets if us liberals were disappeared by last administration, yes? Wouldn't you be cheering them on, Allegedly? Wouldn't you just love if they incarcerated all the gays, non-whites and non-Protestants, and then anyone who refused to inform on those still closeted? Is that not your dream for America, Allegedly

This, by the way, is why Obama, even if he did openly say he hated gays and wouldn't advance their rights agenda one jot (which he didn't) would still be better by far than Cap'n Torture and his sidekick Mrs. Rogue. So, Allegedly all your Cassandraesque heckling that Obama was a wimp (I'd hesitate to call them warnings - you've never been so kind) were moot. We couldn't expect those who are eager to strip rights from the mainstream to forward, or even leave be the rights of us on the fringes.

But you conservative types have never been big into human rights, have you Allegedly? You can't be bothered to care about even your own.

So, any word on whether this was accidental or a somehow justified homicide? Or does it still seem to be murder more likely than not? Links, Allegedly?
rhymeswithlibrarian, your hypothetical moral quandaries remind me of the paradox that accompanies pure deontological ethics (i.e. the mores of rule and duty).

A runaway streetcar is careening down the hill towards five bound victims along the tracks (placed there by a mad philosopher). You stand by a lever that will reroute the train along parallel tracks where only a single (unrelated) victim lies. Do you pull the lever?

A consequentialist might, but remember, if you do, the single victim dies at your hand. If you do not, the blood of the five victims lands squarely on the mad philosopher; you would escape involvement (and the wrath of the one victim's litigious family).

(There's no right or wrong answer to this one, nor any association with any revealed religion. Both absolutes of consequentialism and deontology have their own paradoxes.)
Can you allow me to advertise my online business in your blog? it will be a great help if say yes. thanks a lot!
You helping a lot of PPL thanks for your golden ideas about home based jobs.

I would like to share the secret of profit online
Learn How I Earn $50 to $250 Every Day!

home based work

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.