Letter of the Day: Response to “Brokeback Mountain” Review

Today I received this letter in response to my Brokeback Mountain review. Its typical of other responses I’ve received, but this one was such a convenient distillation of the various contradictions and claims that I was grateful for the chance to address so many common attacks on Christian faith in one fell swoop.

When someone starts out by telling you to put down your Christian persepctive and see things the way they are, well, you know you’re in for a grand time. I’m not the most eloquent defender, I know that very well. But, inspired by G.K. Chesterton and so many others, I went ahead and made a quick run at it….

Dear Jeffrey Overstreet:

Can you only see the world through Christian filters? You are obviously far more intelligent than that. Brokeback Mountain also beautifully documents the suffering of all of its characters caused by the homophobia preached and practiced by intolerant Christians who foolishly believe in biblical literalism and inerrancy. If these Christians think it is wrong to practice homosexuality, then they shouldn’t do so, but why try to impose their religious beliefs and mythologies on others? This is a secular civil society wisely based on the Constitutional separation of church and state. Sexual behavior that harms no one between consenting adults in private is simply not an ethical issue, though it may be a religious one. Christ was a rebellious rabbi who opposed blind obedience to the established religious authority of his day. His primary message was compassion, not unquestioning obedience to scripture. He, himself, did not condemn same-sex love. Why do you? Compassion is far greater and wiser than fear-based childish obedience, don’t you think?

Nature celebrates diversity, not one size fits all, or only One Way. Ask your gay friends what religious condemnation of what is central and sacred to them–their ability to love–does to them. See Brokeback from this viewpoint and you will understand. Empathy is the basis of true compassion. Compassion is what our humanity is all about. It is the destination and the path. As you well know, Christianity has the bloodiest history of any major religion. Does this not cause you to reflect and question? Every religion believes theirs is the true one, but as a lifelong student of comparative religions, it seems obvious that humans have invented their gods and religions and then they pretend that they did not. My faith is in alternatives and diversity, not closed-minded dogma masquerading as faith. I suspect you, being intelligent, know well what I mean.

[name of writer removed by Jeffrey], Ph.D.
Clinical Psychologist

I’ll address this point by point:

Can you only see the world through Christian filters?

Hmmm. Good question. Can you only see the world through Clinical Psychologist filters?

Forgive me if that sounds flippant. My point is this: We all see through filters. Filters are good. If we don’t have filters, we can’t separate what is healthy from what is corrupting. We can’t block damaging ultraviolet rays in order to protect our eyes, so we can see and not go blind.

Perhaps lenses are a better metaphor. Lenses can either distort reality or help us see it clearly. Through Christ, I believe that I see things more clearly than through anything else. Putting down our lenses does not enable us to see some kind of basic truth. If you believe that I have to put down my Christian perspective in order to see clearly, then you’re using lenses of your own… lenses that lead you to believe Christianity is misleading.

You are obviously far more intelligent than that.

Well, I can entertain other perspectives, but I’ll only accept them if they ring truer than the perspective that I’ve grown to embrace. To borrow a word from G.K. Chesterton, “Merely having an open mind is nothing; the object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.”

Brokeback Mountain also beautifully documents the suffering of all of its characters caused by the homophobia preached and practiced by intolerant Christians who foolishly believe in biblical literalism and inerrancy.

Do you really think “intolerant Christians” are to blame for everything that goes wrong in the film?

Is it the homophobic Christians’ fault that both Ennis and Jack blatantly lie to their wives, pledging fidelity and true love, while secretly clinging to another love? It’s homophobic Christians’ fault that Jack goes to Mexico to sleep with male prostitutes? You give homophobic Christians too much credit.

Incidentally, you mention “intolerant Christians.” Does that mean you believe that there is such a thing as a “tolerant Christian”? How would you define that? If being “tolerant” means being compassionate and understanding, then yes, Christians should be tolerant. If it means abandoning our convictions that some choices are better and healthier than others, then you’re not talking about tolerance, you’re talking about shaping our opinions based on what other people want rather than what we believe God says.

Jesus offended people all the time. Anyone who refuses to adhere to an aspect of Christianity just because it offends people, well, they’re not much of a Christian.

As for “biblical literalism,” that is a subject of much debate amongst Christians. But just because I don’t take everything in the Bible *literally* (Jesus was a big fan of metaphor) doesn’t mean I can just cross out the parts I don’t like.

If these Christians think it is wrong to practice homosexuality, then they shouldn’t do so, but why try to impose their religious beliefs and mythologies on others?

Some Christians do try to impose their beliefs on others. Some homosexuals do too. So do some clinical psychologists. (Are you imposing your way of seeing the world on me by asking me to set aside my ‘Christian filters’? I’m not sure.)

I voiced my opinion in a film review. I haven’t gone out and forced anybody to do anything. Since Americans are free to voice their opinions, and free to follow the religion of their choice, Christians have just as much right to express what they believe as anyone.

You seem to believe in a “mythology” in which Christians are fascist monsters who go around forcing things on people. There are a few freaky Christian blowhards out there, and thanks to the media, they’re often in the spotlight because they’re freaky. And, at times, Christians have, as a majority, been swayed toward false perspectives. But I encourage you to stop by my church sometime. You might go away disappointed, because nobody’s going to force anything on you. It’s difficult to find a good representation of Christians in the media… the freaks are much more interesting.

This is a secular civil society wisely based on the Constitutional separation of church and state. Sexual behavior that harms no one between consenting adults in private is simply not an ethical issue, though it may be a religious one.

Ah, but there’s the rub. Some of us believe that certain kinds of sexual behavior do harm people, even if others disagree.

Again, I’m not sure where this is coming from. Did I say that homosexual activity was illegal? No. Did I say that I think it is a sin? Yes. So, yes, it’s a religious issue. To me, a religious conviction is not just a cultural detail that I can set aside. It is a core belief, something that stems from my faith, not an accessory I attach to it.

Christ was a rebellious rabbi who opposed blind obedience to the established religious authority of his day. His primary message was compassion, not unquestioning obedience to scripture.

When Christ showed compassion to the adulteress, he condemned the Pharisees for judging her, yes. But he also told the adulteress “Go and sin no more.” He didn’t just say “Go.” (I’m quoting someone from a recent blog there, but at the moment, the source escapes me. Sorry, Source!)

Christ wasn’t just about compassion. If you think so, I encourage you to read the Gospels again.

He was also a hardliner on the issue of sin.

And he constantly reinforced the idea that righteousness is not defined by what feels good, or what we want.

I take it on more than just faith, for the reasons spelled out in my review, that homosexual behavior (not homosexuality or homosexual impulses) is a sin, just as drug abuse (not drug addiction or desire for drugs) is a sin.

Impulses are one thing. Choosing to indulge those that are not what is best for us, that is another.

We all have appetites. And all of those appetites have the capacity to veer off the best course. This world is so messed up, sometimes we’re born hungering for the very things that are bad for us. The compassionate thing to do for the child born with destructive tendencies is to help him learn the difference between what he wants and what he needs. Compassionately, of course.

He, himself, did not condemn same-sex love.

There are many things Christ didn’t specifically address. Pornography, for example. And yet, he encouraged us not to lust. Gambling, for example, and yet he encouraged us away from recklessness and greed.

He did, however, instruct us to respect God’s law and, moreoever, to go above and beyond the law to understand the spirit that created the law.

I understand that love is not about what I want sexually. (For a good definition of the fundamentals of love, see First Corinthians 13.) If a man and a woman decide to show love to each other by beating each other, that’s not really love, even if they enjoy it. That’s a distortion and a peversion, something that should be dissuaded even if it “isn’t hurting anybody else.” Love is about more than finding somebody with the same appetite. It’s about developing a discernment about God’s design for human life, and he created man and woman to serve each other, a plan that is uniquely blessed by the possibility of children.

Compassion is far greater and wiser than fear-based childish obedience, don’t you think?

I do not obey out of fear. There are, however, certain children who don’t respect what they’re told, and the only way they learn is through harsh discipline because of their rebellious natures.

I’m all for grounding rebellious teens if they hang out with the wrong crowd, because the fear of grounding will save their lives. Note that the scriptures say that “The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.” Fear is a good place to start, but you mature past the fear to realize that the rules were established for good reason. If you just ignore the fear, you may end up regretting it. Have you seen Grizzly Man?

Having said that, I obey because I learn, more and more each day, that greater fulfillment and joy comes from living within the guidelines God has designed for our benefit. It’s not fear anymore. It’s joy, and gratitude for the things I can enjoy because, to some extent, I have learned to control my appetites.

Just as Timothy “Grizzly Man” Treadwell learned by overstepping certain lines and deciding that, ‘Hey, who has the right to tell me I shouldn’t live with grizzly bears?’… so many will learn the hard way that the boundaries God has set for us are there for a reason.

The sad thing is that our hearts are messed up, and they guide us to desire things beyond those boundaries. And when we are ruled by our own hearts and natures, rather than a higher authority, we inevitably overstep those bounds and pay the price.

Nature celebrates diversity, not one size fits all, or only One Way.

Nature is flawed. I don’t assume that nature has all the answers. Hey, praying mantises do bloody awful things to each other. Should I imitate that? Each thing in creation follows after the design God charted for it, and imperfectly, because sin has messed everything up.

We can learn from nature, but we should also be discerning about where the things that penguins are supposed to do are different from the things that we’re supposed to do. (Nod to Steven Greydanus’s review of March of the Penguins at DecentFilms.com.)

Ask your gay friends what religious condemnation of what is central and sacred to them–their ability to love–does to them.

If “their ability to love” means having gay sex, and if that is what is “central and sacred” to them, then they are basing their convictions on their sexual preference. They are building their worldview on their appetites. Back to your idea of filters, they’ve just established filters that will reject anything that gets in the way of them fulfilling their appetites.

Let me repeat your words back to you with a twist: “Ask your obese friends what nutritonists’ objections to what is central and sacred to them–their ability to eat fast food–does to them. ” Do you see what I’m saying? Just because the truth hurts doesn’t mean it isn’t the truth. Now, Christians are responsible to represent the truth, but they’re supposed to represent it with grace and love. As a teacher of mine used to say, “You can be right, but you can also be damned right.”

See Brokeback from this viewpoint and you will understand. Empathy is the basis of true compassion.

In its proper place, empathy is a good thing.

But say, for example, I start empathizing with the KKK and stop trying to change their minds. Will that make everything better? I’m not saying gay people and the KKK are equal, please don’t get me wrong. But I am challenging your point that I should abandon my objections and just empathize.

Compassion is what our humanity is all about.

And again, I can have compassion on someone without affirming all of their choices. I have compassion for my friend who is addicted to heroin. And that compassion leads me to want to coax him in a better direction.
I would hope, as a clinical psychologist, you’d understand that idea.
It’s interesting to me that so many who wish Christians would be more compassionate are so quick to slap labels and generalizations on Christians as “right-wing extremist homophobes.” If I object to the choices of a heroin-use, am I a heroin-o-phobe?
It is the destination and the path.

Compassion is a characteristic, a virtue, not a destination. If you see someone choosing something that isn’t healthy, what is the compassionate response? To affirm their choice? Or to kindly ask them to consider otherwise? Ack, I’m becoming redundant.

As you well know, Christianity has the bloodiest history of any major religion.

In any religion, there are those who twist the fundamentals and wield them for ther own greedy ends. You’re not talking about Christ anymore, or true Christianity. You’re talking about people who proclaim the name of Christ in the process of deceiving others, so this is irrelevant.

I’d encourage you to show me a religion that has done more to prevent bloodshed, and to encourage healing in the world, and to give to the poor, and to bring medicine to the sick…Does this not cause you to reflect and question?

It’s always a good idea to be reminded to be compassionate. But since Christ is indeed the epitome of compassion, no, it doesn’t cause me to question him. In fact, it was compassion that motivated him to draw us nearer to God, to God’s law, and to God’s intentions for us.

That tells me that I shouldn’t bend the truth to meet my own selfish ends, but adhere to what God wants instead.Every religion believes theirs is the true one, but as a lifelong student of comparative religions, it seems obvious that humans have invented their gods and religions and then they pretend that they did not.

So, because they all say their religion is true, it thus follows that none of them are true?

All of the virus-protection programs at Best Buy are trying to persuade me that they’re the best. But I don’t believe they’re all equal and disregard all of them. I need virus-protection for my computer. I’m going to test them all and see what holds up.
In my life, my departures from Christ have been the cause of my failures and grief. When I try to follow him, I find healing, revelation, and joy. Those are strong selling points.My faith is in alternatives and diversity

Please say more. I don’t know how to have “faith” in “alternatives.” Faith is “the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.” What does it mean to have “faith” in alternatives? Or diversity?

Can “alternatives and diversity” answer your prayers? Can “alternatives and diversity” forgive sins? When your grandmother is dying and she is afraid of what lies beyond, do “alternatives and diversity” give her substantive comfort?
…not closed-minded dogma masquerading as faith.You’ve just told me that you think it’s obvious that all gods have been invented by humans. Who’s closed-minded?

There are, indeed, closed-minded dogmatists masquerading as people of faith. But there are also people of faith. Your own statement strongly implies this. Just because there are some violent homophobic bigots out there doesn’t mean that people of strong Christian conviction are automatically homophobic or bigots.
Again, see the Chesterton quote above… If you don’t select a car, you won’t get out on the freeway and go anywhere. Use discernment, be cautious, but man… make the best choice you can.I suspect you, being intelligent, know well what I mean.

Well, I have faith that I am somewhat intelligent. But I’m afraid I don’t see what you mean due to the contradictions and “filters” you’re using.

I welcome a follow-up message.

 

  • Facebook
  • Anonymous

    Yeah, the pro-Bush bias on Today show is hilariously bad. Maybe they’ll be more objective once she’s gone, but I doubt it.

  • Nicholas

    The linked story also says that The Shield won its first Peabody. It’s about frickin time it got some recognition. Kudos to them for the Battlestar Galactica respect, as well.
    Now if only the Emmy’s could get half a clue (though awarding Lost “Best Drama” was definately a step in the right direction).

  • Daniel Crandall

    I would agree with others here that you gave a good response to what I read as a rather intolerant clinical psychologist.

    A couple of things that could have made your argument stronger.

    1. Christ did not come to change one jot or tittle of the law, i.e., the Torah, where homosexual behavior is condemned in no uncertain terms. Christ Himself says he came not to change the law. Arguments that Christ was all about compassion and “speaking truth to power” are baseless Leftist interpretations of Scripture.

    2. Christianity’s violent history pales in comparison to the violent history of Islam. Islam was spread by the sword and jihad. It is sad that many throughout history who claimed to be Christian did so just to promote their violent, sinful desires. In Islam, however, being violent is itself a cause for celebration from that religions inception to this very day.

  • Tom

    Jeffrey,

    Well-thought out, articulate, even-tempered, grounded in Scripture, and totally accurate. Huzzahs all around!

    Tom

  • CM

    They should have used this blog entry on CT’s Leadership Journal blog as an example of how a Christian should approach the homosexuality issue rather than McLaren’s “Sitting on the fence” answer.

    Nice job, Jeffrey.

  • Ellen Collison

    Yikes!

    I meant “the late 18th century” (above).

  • A. Campbell

    Nice comments.

    My Christian-informed, non-Christian accessible summary on Brokeback Mountain here

  • Levi

    Excellent Jeffery. Once again, reason slays the wisdom of the age. God bless.

  • Gaffney

    Oops – clarification: “I consider opposite-sex sex OUTSIDE OF WEDLOCK a sin,”. Glad to correct this before my wife saw it…

    -Sean

  • Ellen Collison

    Re. abolition, I think Wasp Jerky’s got a great point. And it’s not as if supposedly Christian countries have been quick to abolish slavery! Here’s an example: in Brazil, slavery was not abolished until 1888.

    In the US, we were pushed into it. The odd thing is that some states (including Virginia) were on the verge of doing so in the late 17th century, but didn’t.

    It’s a complex issue, and not one that’s confined to any single culture or religion. (Many Muslims are against the “owning” of other human beings on religious grounds.) Though it is clear that abolitionism gained ground in England (and other countries) partly because of the actions of committed Christians.

  • Gene Branaman

    “But we shouldn’t forget that Christianity was also used to justify that slavery in those countries to begin with, at least in the States.”

    And some so-called “queer apologists” currently use Scripture to justify the practice of same-sex sex. Just becasue some Christians (& non-Christians) have misused Scripture in the past has no bearing on the Truth of Christianity.

    Just as Dan Brown’s misuse of history, for example, has no power to change actual documented fact.

    “Truth has nothing to do with the number of people it convinces.” – Paul Claudel

  • Ellen Collison

    I think the point about sexual attraction per se not being a sin is well-taken – we all face it, whether it’s opposite-sex or same-sex (or both, in many cases, like those of the lead characters in this movie).

    It’s what we do with it – in our heads and in our actions – that’s the rub. (And a very big one, according to Biblical standards!)

    I also agree with those who’ve noted the way people in the US single out certain sins as being more grievous and destructive than others. To me, at least, that seems to contrary to what’s said in Scripture. To take that argument one step further (as some do) – don’t we all hold responsibility for racism and – in the case of indigeouns peoples here – some pretty clear-cut acts of genocide? And we’re certainly a lot easier-going on sexual sin so long as it’s opposite-sex.

    Lots of food for thought here!

  • Wasp Jerky

    I think I pretty much agree with the Christianity being the basis for compassion line of reasoning, and that Christian countries abolished slavery first. But we shouldn’t forget that Christianity was also used to justify that slavery in those countries to begin with, at least in the States.

  • Martin

    >I’d also like to point out that
    >slavery was abolished in Christian >countries before it was abolished
    >anywhere else. Buddhist Thailand
    >didn’t abolish slavery until late in
    >the 19th Century.

    Heck, it’s still practiced in Niger, which is mostly Muslim.

    The racism/slavery/civil rights card is often played in such discussions, with convenient ignorance of the fact that major figures in the Abolitionist and civil rights movements, from William Wilberforce to Martin Luther King, were guided by Christian convictions.

    Word verification string for this comment: kkimwno (Keep kvetching, it’ll make weightier noisome objections!)

  • Mike Harris-Stone

    Dear Jeff,

    I thought your review was fabulous. I really appreciate the way you were honest and avoided the swirling politics of left and right to make your own statement. Would that there were more Christian responses like yours. I also have gay friends and have a similar feeling of ambivalence about their lifestyle. But as you point out, I have problems with my OWN lifestyle as well.

    As to compassion and Christianity, I’d argue the Christianity is the ONLY major religion that provides a basis for real compassion. What other religion teaches that even the most evil person could, potentially, find forgiveness and redemption? I think of Paul, who was famous for killing Christians before his conversion. Would any other religon have accepted such a man as a leader? As to the assertion of your correspondent that Christianity has “the bloodiest history of any major religion,” I’d like to point out that all of human history is bloody — why blame a religion. I’d also like to point out that slavery was abolished in Christian countries before it was abolished anywhere else. Buddhist Thailand didn’t abolish slavery until late in the 19th Century.

    Long live “Looking Closer!”

    I’m still not sure if I’ll see the film are not…I have trouble seeing all of the films I want to see, so those that are on the border tend to fall out unfortunately.

  • Evan

    Great post and well-argued defense.

    I’ve not seen Brokeback Mountain yet, I’m sure I will eventually so I’m not left out of the cultural loop.

    When I first saw all the reviews for the film I started to get the feeling that the film’s supporters had a built in defense mechanism against criticism of the movie. If you don’t like it you’re automatically homophobic and a bigot (see attack on Rex Reed). I’ve no pre-conceived notions about Brokeback but attitudes like that (not the content of the film) make me want to see it less and less.

  • Thom

    “I consider opposite-sex sex a sin,”

    Even between married couples? :)

  • A. M. Hildebrandt

    Steve,

    With the recent election in Canada, we have just elected a Prime Minister who wants to re-open the issue of same-sex marriage, and put it to a more public vote. Many Canadians don’t like the idea of the Supreme Court passing it with out our consideration.

    Loving a member of the same sex is not a sin, it’s called in Greek Philia, Brotherly Love, it is natural and promoted by God. It is often mistaken and turned into lust, which turns into sexual immorality. It happens to members of the opposite sex as well. I have many friendships with people of the opposite sex, but for me to go beyond “Philia” with anyone but my wife I would be sinning.

  • Chris Hansen

    Oh — and P.S. — I’d like to echo what Sean said. Christians don’t (or shouldn’t) see homosexuality (or same-sex sex) as some kind of ‘special’ sin. We are all sinners — and thank you, Sean, for your excellent examples of other kinds of sin that we all commit.

    Unfortunately, those Christians who represent us as ‘our leaders,’ in the media, have more often than not singled out homosexuality and abortion as special sins, the kind that, if you commit them, make you an evil person on a whole different level.

    These words aren’t spoken plainly, of course, but the contempt in which many Christians seem to hold anyone who commits these sins makes the reality pretty clear.

    So I agree with you, Sean. But I also see why non-Christians don’t really believe that — there are too many ‘loud’ Christian voices condemning them every day.

  • Chris Hansen

    You guys all impress me with your restraint and well thought-out comments. Honestly, as a Christian, I’ve often been frustrated by ‘our’ response to these issues. At least in the media, and in many local churches, the responses offered by those who (for better or worse) represent Christians to the rest of the world are unfortunate at best and downright hateful at worst.

    Jeffrey, I read your blog because you articulate your beliefs in such a clear and HUMANE way — it’s really an example.

  • Gaffney

    Nicely done, Jeff.

    Adding to the last response, Steve said, “the fact remains that you consider their relationship ‘sinful’ suggests that you are not prepared to accept them as equal citizens.”

    I can’t speak for Jeff, Steve, but for myself I can say that your argument is way off. I consider gossip to be a sin, but I do not consider gossipers to be second class citizens. I consider opposite-sex sex a sin, but I do not consider, oh gee, a majority of my friends to be second class citizens. I consider breaking the civil law of speeding to be a sin, yet I allow myself to vote every November.

    To assume that since, as most true Christians believe, “all have sinned,” no Christian is ready to treat anyone on the planet (including themselves) as an equal citizen is a tad silly.

    Just my thoughts.

    -Sean

  • Cynthia Duck

    Nicely done, Jeffery! I’d like to offer some additional comments, mainly to your responders.

    As a Christian, I don’t believe same-sex love is sin, but same-sex sex is sin.

    The tolerance argument based on gender and race don’t wash with me. Unless I arrange for surgical intervention, I remain a woman 24 hours a day. Any sexual act is a behavior. Gender and race are not. While a person might feel he was born with specific sexual attractions, sex is still a behavior.

    Steve – check out the status of women in the Bible again. Jesus was very inclusive of women in the midst of a society which treated women like second class citizens. You’ll have a better understanding of the Biblical view of women if you read in context.

    I hope the standard for the United States is not to be more like Canada or Europe. Recent elections in Germany and Canada could indicate that many people in Canada and Europe want to be more like us.

  • Ellen Collison

    Good response on the whole, Jeffrey – it’s tough to respond to letters like this without wanting to hit back. (We’re all human…)

    Sorry to sound like a broken record, but one of the main characters in Annie Proulx’s story has been abused by his dad – and, of course, both Jack and Ennis are committing adultery, lying (to themselves and others), etc. As far as i know, those items are part of the screenplay – so I find it hard to understand why someone who is endorsing compassion would not show compassion on the family members who’ve been hurt by this behavior.

    At any rate, I don’t think the story itself is any mroe cut and dried than the writer assumes your response to be. Adultery, lying, stealing and cheating on taxes can feel pretty good too, along with a multitude of other sins.

    I hope this letter might just initiate a dialogue, though I’m not confident that it will…

  • Steve

    To be honest, I’m leaning toward agreeing with several of the points in the original letter. What I find rather depressing is that there are still intelligent people who consider same-sex love to be a “sin”. I keep being reminded that back in the 40s and 50s and most of the 60s, there were equally intelligent people of different religions who considered that negro people were sub-human and second-class citizens. And going back, there were equally intelligent people who considered women to be second-class citizens unworthy of the vote or even full human rights. (And there are still many parts of the world where this holds true today).

    Jeffrey, while I don’t believe that you’re practising discrimination against gay people and I’m prepared to believe that you practice more tolerance toward them than most Christians, the fact remains that you consider their relationship ‘sinful’ suggests that you are not prepared to accept them as equal citizens. Your religion will clearly lead you to reject assigning them equal social rights such as civil partnerships or benefits – things that women and negroes had to fight for – solely because you’ve dug into your Bible and picked a literal transcript that states that to be worthy of a Christian, you are required to do so. I can’t imagine you doing the same for women despite the fact that there are plenty of literal transcripts in the Bible stating that women are second-class citizens.

    I live in hope that as the years pass, considering gay love as a “sin” in the USA will gradually become outmoded and even socially unacceptable. Most of Europe and even Canada have, mercifully, taken a more enlightened stance. Is the USA to be bastion of intolerance here? I hope not.

  • Martin

    The “Go and sin no more” vs “Go” comment is from Sean Gaffney’s blog entry on The Book of Daniel…

    I love the way this guy dangled his “clinical psychologist” credentials over you at the end of his letter. Yeah, facile dismissals, rampant stereotyping and outrageous lies about Christianity mean so much more when they come from a shrink. I hope he doesn’t try to bill you for his time.

    Word verification string for this comment: kdagkq (King David: “Ask Goliath – keep quiet!”

  • Jeffrey Overstreet

    Heh. Yeah, that was out of line. Even before you posted this, I’d posted a revision of my replies. My snarkiness was uncalled for. I just get a little testy after a couple of weeks of being labeled all kinds of things.

  • Anna

    “I’ll be interested to see how that works for you on your deathbed.”

    You only got snarky there, Jeffrey. :o)


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X