Comments
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.
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
While you guys are going all apeshit, you're missing the big news:
http://spifflines.blogspot.com/2010/05/j…
James Franco explores the "Forbidden Zone"
http://spifflines.blogspot.com/2010/05/j…
AFAIC, he's still a coward. Now, if he truly believes that God is LOVE, then demonstrate it by asking forgiveness of the people whom he so recently* condemned. The Lord's Prayer is pretty specific on this point: Forgive our trespasses _as we forgive_ those who trespass against us. If you're not forgiving those you hate, then God cannot forgive you.
*15 years is big to the 20-something crowd, but it's bupkiss once you're in your 40's.
I mean, come on- next thing you know he'll be licking bathroom doorknobs.....
Wasn't that doorknob thing 10 years ago?
How young were you 10 years ago Dan, 42 or something?...
"—what can I say? I was young and foolish—"
"Stupid and immature I'll give him—but young?"
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
PS- Writing e.e. cummings on a post to slog made me giggle.
You do realize that was a hoax, right?
There *is* some capitalization in it though:
Joe Jervis
I
YouTube
I
What that means I don't know.
We all know my opinion isn't worth a damn, and everyone is entitled to their own. I still think it's comparing apples to oranges. The "young and foolish" of licking doorknobs isn't even in the ball park of encouraging ones flock to act violently towards gays and lesbians.
And, I hope that Dr. Owens has really changed from preaching violence and that he will respond to the letter.
People can be "young" at any age. Someone can say stupid and immature and ignorant things well into their seventies, and if they somehow grow up and get perspective in their eighties, well, they still can say they were "young." Yes, yes, if you take the literal meaning of the world you can take a cheap shot and play semantics.
But this guy is 1) acknowledging that he said terrible and stupid things, 2) repudiating those hateful things, and 3) apologizing in a seemingly genuine way. Do we really need to haggle about what "young" means and whether he should have come to his senses four or twenty-four years earlier?
I hope he grants your interview, and I hope you can focus on what made him change from wholly evil to merely judgmental. Please don't get wrapped up in whether "young" ends at 20 or 30 or 40. That's the kind of label-based argument that nobody will ever win, and to the extent that some genuine knowledge and benefit could come from an interview, it won't be in that area.
I need to get some sleep.
But I do hope he agrees to it!
But I do hope he agrees to it!
Seriously, people, get over yourselves.
Au contraire, mon frère
That is the real Dan-
the whole "journalist/editor" thing,
now that is a hoax.....
What does "... they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them." fit under the definition of?
Clearly, Dan was typing with one hand. Simple as that. :-)
When you publicly call for the murder of certain individuals of our society, and that God will bless those who do the killin', then you should be held to a higher standard for forgiveness than if you had called somebody "fuckin' gay." There's no statute of limitations on shit like that. So what if it's better than a lame-ass excuse? That's still not enough.
That fucker has blood on his hands, and it may surprise you to learn that there have actually been more than one homosexual who has been murdered by people who felt they were doing 'The Lord's' work. Saying "God has forgiven me" doesn't wash any of that away.
But capitalization aside, if my son was an epic fuck-up and the shame of my community I would probably bend over backwards apologizing or do whatever it takes to mollify bloggers and reporters to make them go away and stop snooping around my family.
Also, the Old Testament prescribes death for those who "lie with mankind, as with womenkind". Gay men lie with mankind as with mankind; they're by definition not attracted to women. The real criminals under this archaic law would be straight guys who are lonely enough to bugger each other.
There's a clip of Dan on YouTube making fun of a student who used poor grammar in a sex question submitted to him while he was speaking at a college. So he clearly cares about grammar. Maybe he's sloppy and dismissive in this email because he doesn't really care if he interviews him or not. What a waste of time.
The key phrase is "I am not a believer in the gay life-style..."
Here's what you need to get, Irreverend Owens: being gay is not an article of faith, and it's not a "lifestyle." It's the way many of us were made, and our existence does not threaten your right to not suck cock. So don't threaten our lives OR try to deny our personhood.
Read his "apology" carefully again. He does not apologize to gay people. It's all about what he NOW thinks God thinks he should think.
I believe in forgiveness, but when it's coming from judgey, hateful Christians, I'm just far too skeptical.
wy do wee get so hungupp on rools peepel shud just rite howevir they whant
All I could come up with was "Jeff Bridges."
I quit.
It's easy to preach hatred when you feel that your religion demands it and when gay people are an abstraction. It's harder when it's someone you know and love. It certainly caused a crisis of faith for me (one that eventually led to atheism). The same thing might very well have happened to this pastor.
I do hope he does the interview and explains himself. I would like to see why he changed his mind.
Soul Winning Made Simple. There is nothing else like is on the market. Its sale is not all about money but the souls of men being saved. Originally priced at $29.95, but it's now 83% off at the low low price of just $5.00. You might as well pick up Teaching On Character while you're at it. Make sure you read the "character" content for each disk.
HURRY! With all of this free press they're getting this offer won't last.
http://www.owenspublications.com/store/i…
I love you, but I hate those other people. No, I hate you and those other people. Those other people, well, I loved them before, but now I hate them--- and I love you. I hate everyone and will shove flaming swords up their nether orifices... but I might love you. Maybe.
And so on.
However, does he still believe that God will send anyone who doesn't love him (or anyone who is the wrong religion, gay, or eats shrimp) to hell? The only difference is swift murder against eternal torture. Guys like this have been saying that my eternal burning and suffering of intestinal parasites is right, and true, and just. Then they can hold their hands up and disavow any responsibility for their moral beliefs.
So, he may not advocate the breaking of "Man's Law," but he's still responsible for his moral beliefs. If he thinks I deserve torture, I don't need to change my mind about him, and neither should anyone else.
Maybe he just has wised up.
Maybe he realizes that violence is not the way to destroy the wicked homosexuals.
Maybe he realizes that people like Dan and Steven Paul Boone are much more lethal to homosexuals than fundamentalists could ever be.
Maybe he realizes that the "Free Sex! Safe Sex!" crowd following Dan's advice give themselves AIDS 38X as much as normal Americans.
Maybe he realizes that the lifestyle choices of the "Safe Sex" crowd make another Gay Plague a certainty and guarantee that it will be much more lethal than AIDS.
Maybe he realizes 5 homosexuals killed each year from homophobic violence is NOTHING compared to the 15,000 deaths a year of homosexuals who gave each other AIDS.
Maybe he figures the wicked will destroy the wicked and he won't have to lift a finger.
Maybe he realizes Dan is the most potent weapon in the aresenal of anyone who wishes harm on homosexuals.
Maybe.
You do realize, of course, that heterosexuals also die from complications from AIDS? In fact, last time I checked, everybody dies from something. Unlike you I wouldn't wish the slow, agonizing death that AIDS can cause on anyone, but mortality is a fact of life.
However there are also homosexuals being born all the time, so your idea that "the wicked will destroy the wicked" doesn't actually work.
Nice try, though.
Too early...
Recognizing the lethal consequences of behavior choices is not wishing for them.
How has sticking your head in the sand been working?
But don't get too smug, the next round in the Epidemiological of Depravity Wars may be a doozy....
Just so we're clear about "[r]ecognizing the lethal consequences of behavior choices", though, are you happy when smokers die of lung cancer? That's not a fair comparison to AIDS, of course, since smoking has been directly linked to lung cancer, whereas AIDS is not a direct result of sex.
However I'm not the one who's sticking my head in the sand. As I said, you're the one who seems to thrive on misinformation. Can you cite a reliable source for those AIDS statistics you previously quoted? I'll warn you in advance that your own imagination is not a reliable source.
You seem to think that misinformation regarding sexual behavior will make the world a better place. I hate to break this to you but it's been tried. It didn't work.
From the CDC:
"Consider these facts:
>AIDS has been diagnosed for more than half a million MSM. Over 300,000 MSM with AIDS have died since the beginning of the epidemic.
>MSM make up more than two thirds (68%) of all men living with HIV, even though only about 4% of men in the United States reported having sex with other men."