Dan Savage talks about the bible and Christian students flee

by Terry 319 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  james_woods

  To james_woods, I never said anything of the sort about those who disagree being anti gay. My argument is that this event is being used by anti-gay forces to attack Dan and through Dan a lot of other things he's connected to.

  I did not mean YOU. The person who directly said it about me has apologized several pages back, and apology is accepted.

  But the indirect association is still alive:

  that is - (don't like Dan Savage? ==>> you are Anti-Gay.)

  There is also the lunatic notion that somehow Savage had a perfect constitutional right to say what he did, but the students who walked out had no right to protest it by walking out.
• 

  Diest

  Thanks to this thread I now have ammunition when Repubs talk about 'ugly liberal women.' Bizzy Bee you make us libs proud. Eat your heart out Colter, and Malkin.
• 

  NewChapter

  There is also the lunatic notion that somehow Savage had a perfect constitutional right to say what he did, but the students who walked out had no right to protest it by walking out.

  Hmmm---you'll have to show me that post. I don't recall anyone saying the bigots didn't have a constitional right to walk out. On the contrary, I even said i was glad they did, because it showed the other students what they were up against. It's always good to be able to identify the opposition. Especially when they hide behind a cloak of Christian love.
• 

  saywhat29

  Okay, I'm going to say that if they walked out, fine it was their right to. And Savage's right to call them out for walking out (word choice set aside). Using the word bullshit and pansy ass was poor word choice (I honestly don't care because we said way worse in high school because we were in high school...) AND I will add that Dan Savage doesn't usually silence or tone down his antics himself or change his wording. He is a columnist who became famous for his word choice, for his dismissive 'DTMFA' replies to lengthy columns of heartbreak and anguish, and for being 'down to earth' and a 'faggot'. If you have a problem with Savage your real problem is with the people who invited him because they knew what they were getting and they haven't denounced anything he's said since this stuff went viral.

  back to the students. So they have the lega right to walk out and protest and not stand for what Savage is saying and they exercised it. There are pros and cons to this method of protest, one con being that no one gets to hear what you want or your counter argument. In a large group (large enough for all of this to go viral.. however it went viral two weeks after it happened so it needed to be pumped up by the anti gay groups) it can be effective and it was effective enough to warrant Dan's response. I would say after all it was effective; people heard and saw what he had said.

  I have no problem with students walking out; that was never my concern. My concern was if they had staged the thing all along and their being used by other anti-gay groups.

  Another thing. I get what you mean by disagreeing automatically means anti gay. I get that and I get how its not fair. But also get it from the other side (speaking as a gay man and not an allyas I think you've been arguing with allies in this thread but I might be mistaken?) Like I mentioned above of how these anti gay groups are all linking together, organizing in an effort to counter all the work the LGBT communities have been doing over the years, when someone does run into your comments, it might be someone's response to put on the armor and prepare for that anti-gay response because that is what we are use to. I don't think that, however, 3 years ago I may have because I was younger and was dealing with a whole lot of homophobia because its all around us.
• 

  james_woods

  Excellent post, saywhat29.

  It would be by far the best thing if the LBGT community would police this kind of thing themselves.
• 

  Nickolas

  ZZZzzzzzzzzzz........ . . . . . .
• 

  NewChapter

  It would be by far the best thing if the LBGT community would police this kind of thing themselves.

  LOL---so what exactly to you expect of the 'LBGT' community? Should they silence Savage? Are you so sure that enough even disagree with him? Do you think they all know each other? This is the silliest thing yet. The LGBT community should "POLICE" free speech. Just silly.

  NC
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  Hey saywha!

  I hope things are going well for you. I tried to accomplish something on this thread. I've seen so much junk that the LGBT community still has to endure. One of my favorite professors had to move out-of-state so that she and her girlfriend could adopt. It's generally better for students here on campus. But the ones that have come from the sticks where the pastors advocate child abuse, it's just sad.

  Don't let Botch bother you, saywha. He's not an official representative of this forum. (Besides, he declared that he was leaving and this thread was dead... back on page 10. So surely he's gone by now.) He's entitled to his opinion, but I just want to make it clear to you that I do not agree, particularly with these statements of his:

  He is the gay version of Rick Santorum.

  Let's clear up the fact that Dan Savage has no desire to make heterosexual activity illegal or try to stop heterosexual couples from adopting children. He is not the gay version of Rick Santorum.

  My comments address the fact that Savage is every bit as much of a savage as the people who hate gays and bash them.

  If he was a Westboro Baptist type going off on how "God hates fags", the effect on homosexual students would have been the same.

  Savage is the homosexual liberal version of a Westboro congregation member. As I've said, he is a gay Rick Santorum.

  Such statements are clearly misleading to rally support for an agenda to hate Dan Savage. As bad as the WBC? Hardly. Just as one reminder of the depths of WBC, at the funeral of Matthew Shepherd, a gay student who was tortured and killed, WBC was there...
  From Wikipedia: Fred Phelps, leader of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas, took his church's "God Hates Fags" message to the funeral of Matthew Shepard, held in Casper, Wyoming, on Saturday, October 17, 1998. Two of his picket signs read: "No Tears for Queers" and "Fag Matt in Hell."

  For the record, I want to make it clear on this thread that I'm not anti-Bible and certainly not anti-Christianity. I still get into discussions where I defend Christian beliefs that I value. But it's getting late, and I'm tired, and I need to study for one more exam.

  I'll be back.
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  After giving this a bit more thought, I don't think I found Savage's words or argument particularly shocking because his underlying message is really quite old, at least for the part of the country that I live in and many of the people I know. His wording was harsh, but I've certainly heard Christians of different stripes using colorful language with each other on a variety of political and social issues... and often with children around.

  I certainly haven't read all of the students' comments, but I haven't seen the rebuttals to Savage's message that I expected. Sure, they have the right to walk out and use their free speech to say that they felt bullied. But they didn't actually address the substance of his statements. Even as a JW kid, I was trained how to handle the subject of slavery and Bible criticism.

  Although there were Christians that used the Bible to support the legality of slavery, abolitionists were also Christians and used the Bible to argue the ending of slavery(I live in a union state). When you read the history and examine the gravestones, you'll see that there was a lot of Christian blood spilled to end slavery. All Christians should be able to handle harsh comments about SOME of the Bibles commands, particularly on the subject of slavery. Why act surprised and offended? It's old news. Own the fact that plenty of Bible-thumpers fought to end slavery. And on the political side, Lincoln was a Republican.

  So, there's a short explanation I'd use as a Christian apologist, I guess.
• 

  talesin

  Billy,, you gave excellent debate arguments on this thread, and it's not wasted, because we don't know who is reading.

  Just keep in mind, that 'some' posters just enjoy arguing for their own entertainment (not singling anyone out, but you know who you are).

  Nice work!

  xo

  tal