I appreciate the comments about things that were unclear–I could use an editor for sure! Just to clarify I was not trying to equate any group of atheists with Beck or Ted Haggard. I was just trying to say that by picking those two examples he painted a really incomplete picture.

I am writing tonight to let you all know that my response is a guest column in the Sunday edition (3-14) of the Gazette. I hope that it begins a civil, deep, important conversation in the Springs, which I’ve only lived in for about 7 months (and like!). It is a place that has quite a divide around lots of social, religious and political issues–and is in need of some unity and tolerance.

Well, all the best to you all, Roger

I don’t think Butts was actually likening the UTSA atheist group to Beck and Phelps, but only using Beck and Phelps as extreme examples of “fringe-Christianity” that he knew Laugesen must decry as non-representational of his own faith as a whole, solely for the purpose of demonstrating how inappropriate it is to equate an entire movement with the actions of just a few members. I don’t think he was actually suggesting that the UTSA group is AS BAD as Phelps & Co.

I’m becoming less of a fan of the interfaith approach that Butts suggests — the kind that sees value in all religions — but in this case, the reverend makes many terrific points.

There is very little in this world which is completely devoid of value; even excrement is useful as fertilizer. A given religion may be a net negative (most are), but it still probably has some elements that are worth looking at.

ecorona: Why shouldn’t Christianity be judged by the likes of Beck, Haggard, Palin, the Pope, the maiming and murder of children in Nigeria, the violence against and disregard for LGBT rights, women’s rights, etc etc etc.

It shouldn’t be judged by Beck, …, the Pope since every movement has its nuts. It should be judged by its actions. However, if you look solely at the murders and rights violations, you’ll get one picture, and if you look solely at, say, the humanitarian work you’ll get another. As with most aspects of life, the authoritarian/hierarchical strain of Christianity is what’s causing the problems.

The original article in question, re: smut for smut, was comparing apples and oranges to begin with, and the only thing the author has managed to in writing it was to demonstrate the dullness of his own wit.

Scratch that. The original article in question, re: smut for smut being the decline of the atheist movement, was a piece written out of stupidity. We know that.

All in all, I like the essence of what Butts says, that to oversimplify one’s opinions (and the implications thereof) into a single word, and judge the entire book by that word, is ridiculous. Not that I agree with every point… but at least he’s being helpful…

why does the picture of him on the Gazette’s website make it seem like he has horns growing out of the side of his head?

I don’t think its horns. It’s hair.

Although I liked the rebuttal, I also saw the irony of him painting the UTSA similarly with a broad stroke.

Seriously? You’re going to give a round of applause to someone who compares the UTSA atheists to Glenn Beck and Fred Phelps?

Of course it would wrong and stupid to compare the students to those people. I don’t think this “pastor” does that, he’s using two unrelated examples.

The original article in question, re: smut for smut, was comparing apples and oranges to begin with, and the only thing the author has managed to in writing it was to demonstrate the dullness of his own wit.