Dan Savage talks about the bible and Christian students flee

by Terry 319 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  panhandlegirl

  In all fairness (is there such a thing?) the only people actually committed to keeping the LAW (and all those wacky details of OCD observance) were

  Jews who had presumably embraced a covenant. Nobody else was required to do anything except what was right in their own eyes.

  It isn't so much THE BIBLE that tells us (who is "us"?) we have to do this or that nutty thing. It is the history of a particular time and place and people

  serving as a puppet show being held up as an example. The BIBLE merely reports it.

  Christians claim to be free of the Law while insisting the 10 commandments be posted publicly and revered! How confused can they be?

  I finally got through all the posts. There were some good poinst made by both sides of the argument. I had never heard of this man Dan until I heard his name on Fox which is what prompted me to click on this thread. I agree with what Terry said above. Why worry about a Law that had been done away with and only applied to the Jews? Although some of those things stated by Dan Savage are restated in the NT.

  Tal, people who have previously been homophobic can change their viewpionts. Not everyone of them (us) has a closed mind. I believe everyone has a right to live as they wish and not have to fear being killed or harassed to the point of suicide or harassed at all. I saw the video and was not offended by it or the use of the word bull s..t. I Hear worse from young people all the time, but it would have been better had he not used the word. I think a good convincing argument with a good vocabulary works better.Once you attack people's beliefs, most stop listening. Their departure may have been staged because they did leave very early into the discussion. Anyway, it was a long and interesting discussion.
• 

  NewChapter

  Once you attack people's beliefs, most stop listening.

  This is probably true, which means they will never listen. Some beliefs deserving attacking. There is absolutely no way to take on this issue without attacking beliefs. The fight for human dignity is always fiery. Slavery, civil rights, women's sufferage---it's never pleasant. But the only ones that are expected to act politely all the time are the ones being abused by the powerful! It's true. Others will quickly dismiss the issue by blaming the representative, but I think many of them have already dismissed it and are simply looking for excuses. The walk out was staged, and the walkers got a little gift in the word bullshit. Had he not used the word, they would have found something else to cry over. Dan Savage was not going to touch those walkers in any way. They had already decided.

  If he had simply said the bible was wrong about slavery and is wrong about homosexuality, they still would have found something to fret about. That's what is so frustrating here. People are buying their stories. We all know those kids had no intention of listening with an open mind, and we all know they were going to find fault with the message, and we know that starts with finding fault with the messenger.

  I mean, the funny part is that anyone would think that the delivery turned away people who would have otherwise been convinced. No. Of course it didn't. Those that were likely to be convinced stuck around.

  I'm absolutely not buying it. Just like in politics, it is only the independant vote that can usually be swayed. I don't care that those kids walked out---because they were not going to be convinced of anything anyway. No sense catering to them--they have decided. Tailor the message to those who will actually listen---and most did listen. Why roll around and grovel before those that will always hate homosexuals and find fault with the message? Pointless. Call bullshit, bullshit. It will reach the important ones.

  Dan Savage is not an educator. His is not known for worrying about offending people that support the book that supported slavery. He did nothing shocking. Why would everyone suddenly require that he change is whole character? He is fighting for LIVES, not some silly superstition. He stakes are GREATER. The balance of power is not on his side. Pandering to bigots should be the least of his concerns.

  NC
• 

  Berengaria

  Maybe all the little darlings that felt the need to walk out would prefer this guy

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTiBv99MYDk
• 

  NewChapter

  Yeah Beks, I saw that. But it would be terribly wrong to use strong language to fight against this. Personally, I think a young person who got squashed like a cockroach by parents and society probably finds a bit of comfort in hearing someone declare that it's all bullshit. They have a hero.
• 

  Berengaria

  Exactly
• 

  talesin

  Wow, I didn't realize that was BB in the pic, my mistake!

  t
• 

  NewChapter

  "Give him a good punch!" and the audience laughs. Girls have to be beautiful and attractive? Shall I assume that ugly or plain girls are automatically sinners? Also, I didn't know that digging ditches was what little boys do. I've never actually seen a little boy dig a ditch. Had I known how central this was to their development, I would have punched them

  NC
• 

  tec

  Were the people at his talk not there because they do support homose x ual rights? What did they need to be convinced of, if so?
• 

  james_woods

  tal, I think letting a cat drive a car is bullshit not something we should take literally.

  Am I getting the hang of this?

  It is Wibble - and you are getting the hang of it. It is almost as Wibble as the TV commercial of the cop dog chasing the criminal cat through city streets in 1970s cars.

  Romans is a real piece of OCD eruption. I put it up there with the Unibomber Manifesto for brilliant weirdness empty of rational sense.

  Two points here: I have always had the private opinion that Paul was gay, and in love with Timothy. Many gay bashers are covering up gay tendencies. Second point: I have a copy of the Unibomber Manifesto and have read it. It may be the most carefully written and "logical" piece of sheer madness that I have ever read. It was apparantly such a signature piece of Kozynscki's writing that it got him caught.
• 

  saywhat29

  Um I hope folks that are opposed to Dan Savage's speech know that the Walk out was more than likely planned/staged? I hope they realized that the date of the talk fell on the Family Research Council's inspired Day of Dialogue or whatever where christian parents pulled their kids out of school to protest the Day of Silence?

  I hope they also realize that as soon as the students walked out, the Family Research Council and other pro-family groups were already in the area and had the accounts and comments of all the students that walked out. And since the event happened, no other news outlet has even bothered to get the students comments either (wonder why they are so quiet... maybe because they aren't allowed t talk to anyone else).

  However, all the folks on Dan Savage's side need to realize that Savge is a reactionist; he doesn't always think before he speaks and it leads to say horrible shit. I've followed Dan's work and he's made lots of folks in the LGBT community highly pissed off for the things he's said (because they weren't factual based and were bred out of ignorance or his feelings at the moment, as if he's not a seasoned public figure who should know better.)

  Reading this thread, Botch has a problem with trying to draw a connection or equivalent between someone who is 'pro gay' (or anti-christianity' or whatever)and someone who is not. Trying to equate Dan Savage to Westboro or Rick Santorum is weak and I'm surprised he'd do that. Its a problem some people (no shade, usually men, not surprisingly white men do it a lot) have when they see folks express anger or an opinion about the majority, non-oppressed groups actions. A member of different, less priveleged group expresses themselves, whether they are right and wrong, and somehow their feelings are branded just as hateful and damaging to others as much as the damage or discrimination that has been done to their community. Its the same kind of response have when women express anger to discrimination, then they are feminazis or manhaters.

  Rick Santorum worked effortlessly to deny the LGBT community rights and when Lawrence v. Texas ended sodomy laws, he wrote an op-ed piece comparing the relationships of LGB people to that of man on animal relations and condemn the overturning of the laws. He's supported bills to deny people rights, even admitted that he'd make sure gay people couldn't even adopt children in any circumstance... and Dan Savage is the equivalent of that. Westboro has terrorized gay people for decades now and they've only gained the attention they've garnered these days when they started protesting dead soldier's funerals. But before that, when they were protesting gay funerals no one gave a goddamn. However, you Botch equate the two effortlessly as if somehow on some scale they are comparable.

  Even after all of this, what Christian is suffering from his words? Could they have been better chosen? Hell yes. Were they the worse thing ever said to a bunch of high schoolers? I'm pretty sure those kids left that auditorium and SAID way worse things ;-P

  Oh. And hey everyone!