HGTV was planning to air a new show about fixing up houses for families in need, Flip It Forward. It was being hosted by twin brothers, David and Jason Benham, who have made a career of flipping houses. But the network decided to cancel the show after Right Wing Watch reported that the Benham twins do not agree with homosexuality, and have even led protests outside of abortion clinics. Initially HGTV said they were “currently in the process of reviewing all information about the Benhams,” and then they issued a tweet declaring that they would not move forward with the series.
While Right Wing did not call on HGTV to cancel the show, it appears that HGTV caved to the small amount of public pressure they received based on Right Wing Watch’s report. Shame on HGTV for not having the internal fortitude to stand up to the public pressure and say, “We understand that a large number of people do not agree with the personal views of David and Jason Benham, and we respect that. However, Flip It Forward is not a show about the Benham brothers’ personal views. It’s a show about helping financially-challenged families get their dream home. The Benham brothers’ experience in flipping houses makes them well-qualified to host this show, so we will continue to air the show with them as hosts. HGTV’s employment of the Benham brothers is not an endorsement of their views, but we believe people have a right to their own moral opinions, and that those of us who disagree have a responsibility to extend tolerance to those we disagree with. We believe a civilized, tolerant society must give space for people to believe and act according to their convictions, and do not agree with those who think anyone who doesn’t agree with them is not deserving of gainful employment. We can do better that as a society, and at HGTV, we are doing better than that. For those who find the Benham’s views distasteful, we would ask that you extend the same tolerance to them that you want extended to those who share your point of view. We ask that you set aside your personal differences with the Benham’s personal views, and allow yourself to enjoy and celebrate their work to help our mutual neighbors.” That’s the press release you’ll never see, but one that would be cheered by the vast majority of citizens, and I would suspect, the vast number of HGTV viewership.
The Benham brothers have responded graciously (see here and here).
Remember when they asked us, “How is same-sex marriage going to affect you?” This is how.
Thinking to Believe 
May 12, 2014 at 10:39 am
Remember when they asked us, “How is same-sex marriage going to affect you?” This is how.
No, not exactly. BUT, this is how homophobicsexuality perception is allowing self righteous indignation to affect personal prejudicial opinions. It is not enough for others to say all god’s creatures are made in god’s image when that image is like ours but when we start to discriminate against other aspects of humanity that are opposed to the beliefs, religious and cultural biases from the era of stoneagism, the reins must be pulled in to expose the egos of dogmatic assertions from an ancient people who sacrificed their children to the gods for a bumper harvest; who had no idea about meteorology; who only by sheer chance discovered the benefits of a wheel; who carried around fire coals in an Ark with the priests stoking the embers so the fire would not go out by day or by night because it was the very spirit of God that allowed a society to claim dominion over others because they were the Chosen People.
Uh uh…We have entered the enlightened age and there is no going back to ancient folklore when it was the acceptable practice to go to the church to have your disabled children exorcised from the epilepsy demons possessing them into frenzied fits of seizure, when they called ordinary bandages to keep a wound clean, “a miracle cloth”.
No matter how much I disagree with body piercings and tattoos I would never disclaim to the general public viewers of my television series to stop watching my show because they are not welcome. You can niggle about the worms all day long but you can’t squirm out of your homophobic bigotry, I don’t care how high you stack the Christian Bibles on top of Qurans, on top of the Hebrew Bibles, the Talmuds, the Analects, Tao-te-ching, Upanishads, Veda or Guru Granth Sahib.
Gays are a fact of life and a fact of humanity in every nation, every tongue, every mammal on earth; (with the possible exception of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Iran)lol.
Once you accept all humanity, warts and all you will continue to civilize into a just society with “all of us for one and one of us for all”. That is the New World Order and the Dream of every man, woman and child since time immemorial and the final vision as revealed in Revelation and all the holy books searching for the perfect heaven in which the only queer will be you and your homophobia.
Did the Samaritan ask the man needing help what religion he belonged to or if he was gay? Or if he believed in the God of the Desert? I don’t think so!
If you don’t make the most of life; life will make the least of you.
LikeLike
May 13, 2014 at 5:12 am
SonofMan, I think you miss the point.
Whether you agree with the brothers’ views or not is irrelevant. The show had nothing to do with homosexuality, and their so called “bigotry” views would probably not have been aired. The fact remains that the bigotry displayed here is by “Right Wing Watch” in that they are being intolerant of people who don’t think homosexuality is “normal”. Irony I feel is lost on these people.
LikeLike
May 13, 2014 at 8:39 am
scottspeig, I think you miss the point:
Homosexuality is “normal”.
LikeLike
May 14, 2014 at 12:14 am
Here in Canada same-sex marriage is the law of the land. I thought accepting same-sex marriage and being a good loser would be the end of it. Apparently, I also have to approve of it or at least don’t say anything against it. I guess there was a slippery slope surprise surprise. Can I say anybody shouldn’t be able to get married now? How did the Benham brothers’ even make the Right Wing Watch list? Isn’t there people actually calling for homosexuals to be killed and countries where homosexuals are being killed? We’re any of these people or countries on their list?
LikeLike
May 14, 2014 at 1:24 pm
The more special rights we keep granting to all groups the further apart we become. Why isn’t the KKk forced to sell their business for their views? Because the 1st amendment covers them but not everyday people.
LikeLike
May 15, 2014 at 9:37 am
Concerned 1st:
(1) “HGTV’s employment of the Benham brothers is not an endorsement of their views, but we believe people have a right to their own moral opinions…….”
Anyone who gets their morals from a Book of Ancient Culture may as well get their personality from a microship.
(2) “We believe a civilized, tolerant society must give space for people to believe and act according to their conviction…..”
Statement 2 applies to HGTV also, does it not?
(Not all Christians are lamenting HGTV’s cancelation of ‘Flip it Forward.’ Rev. Susan Russell, a pastor at All Saints Church in Pasadena, California, told The Huffington Post:)
[ “The First Amendment absolutely protects the right of the Benham brothers to preach, practice and believe whatever they choose – whether that choice is anti-gay or anti-gluten. That’s part of the beauty of this country. Another part of the beauty of this country is that free enterprise allows networks – like HGTV – the freedom to decide what kind of values they want represented by the talent they hire. And this week HGTV made the decision that it does not want to give air time to two brothers who, when they are not flipping houses for profit, are proclaiming that equal protection LGBT families is “demonic” and protesting a woman’s right to reproductive freedom.”]
As a Christian priest and pastor, my response is a big fat “Amen.”
source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/09/christian-activists-benham-brothers-hgtv_n_5289625.html
LikeLike
May 15, 2014 at 9:43 am
I have no problem with HGTV refusing to air the brothers TV show since they have the right to air what they want regardless of their reason why.
In the same token then, I would expect society to accept that certain churches will NOT marry gay couples based on the same principle.
The knife has to cut both ways……
Naz
LikeLike
May 15, 2014 at 10:22 am
Trending today: Religious Hatred against another Religion
A Sudanese judge on Thursday sentenced a Christian woman to hang for apostasy, in a ruling which activists described as “abhorrent”.
Born to a Muslim father, the woman was convicted under the Islamic sharia law that has been in force in Sudan since 1983 and outlaws conversions on pain of death.
Meriam Yahia Ibrahim Ishag, 27, is married to a Christian and eight months pregnant, human rights activists say.
“We gave you three days to recant but you insist on not returning to Islam. I sentence you to be hanged,” Judge Abbas Mohammed Al-Khalifa told the woman, addressing her by her father’s Muslim name, Adraf Al-Hadi Mohammed Abdullah.
Khalifa also sentenced Ishag to 100 lashes for “adultery”. Under Sudan’s interpretation of sharia, a Muslim woman cannot marry a non-Muslim man and any such relationship is regarded as adulterous.
source: http://news.msn.com/world/sudan-judge-sentences-christian-woman-to-death-for-apostasy
LikeLike
May 15, 2014 at 4:41 pm
Is opposition to same-sex marriage hate? It could be, but in my case and many others I believe it is not. I’m commanded to love my neighbor as myself and I try to do that. I had two main concerns: 1. slippery slope and 2. problem could have been solved by civil union legislation. Same-sex marriage is now the law of the land, our side lost and their side one and I accept that. I first got upset because civil servants who had a conscientious objection to issuing a marriage license to a same-sex couple were required to do so. This was not part of their job description when hired and I believe some reasonable consideration should have been made for them. Then private citizens were getting into trouble because they refused to provide services to same-sex couples because of a conscientious objection. Again, even if you agree you have to provide a service if requested, when these people started their business they probably never thought of this scenario so consideration should also have been given them for protection from legal action. There are several issues now that if you disagree your not just wrong you are evil, in this case a homophobe. Am I hateful now if I disagree with the following people getting married even though perfectly legal in some cases: divorced people, different religions, multiple people of same or different sexes, to young, to old, to big of a age difference, not financially able, I don’t think their compatible, etc… that’s not hateful it’s just my opinion.
LikeLike
May 15, 2014 at 8:55 pm
Paul:
“problem could have been solved by civil union legislation.”
No it could not, because there were Federal benefits denied to civil unions, especially in the USA.
In fact even though Alberta changed its Civil Union Status to do away with the Common Law Marriage Union: ADULT INTERDEPENDENT RELATIONSHIPS ACT, this is still not recognized by Federal Jurisdiction as far as Revenue Canada is concerned and still operates under the Marriage or Common Law Marriage.
What’s in a Number? (Lambda Legal)
In 1997, the General Accounting Office of the Federal Government compiled a list of 1,049 rights and benefits which were related to civil marriage. In 2004 they did an update covering changes that had been made between 1996 and 2003 and found there are a total of 1,138 federal rights, benefits and privileges connected to marital status. The list includes thirteen categories of rights and benefits, including:
Social Security and Related Programs, Housing, and Food Stamps
Veterans’ Benefits
Taxation
Federal Civilian and Military Service Benefits
Employment Benefits and Related Laws
Immigration, Naturalization, and Aliens
Trade, Commerce, and Intellectual Property
Financial Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
NOTE: The 1,138 federal rights noted here are the rights that are granted to American couples who are united in civil marriage. These rights are not given to people who are not married/cannot marry, to people who are united in Civil Unions, or to people who are in Registered Domestic Partnerships. This page refers to the federal rights that were unavailable to legally married same-gender couples prior to the Supreme Court of the United States ruling on 26 June 2013 in the DOMA case, United States v. Windsor. These federal rights are still unavailable to the majority of same-gender couples in the 33 states where marriage equality does not exist – unless those couples travel to another state that recognizes marriage equality in order to marry.
source: http://www.marriageequality.org/1-138-federal-rights
So you see it was not something that could be settled by Civil Unions.
And while it may not be hate to deny rights to same apparent sex marriages, it is the Law and the Law that is followed (not by haters necessarily but certainly by enough bigots who point the law out time and time again, pointing that is to the letter of the law but not to the spirit of the law.
And after all, one might ask; what’s more important? the marriage that people commit to; or, the people that commit to marriage? Remember the analogy about the Sabbath? Jesus said of the Sabbath that it was made for man and not man for the Sabbath, therefore Man is master of the Sabbath. The identical analogy can describe Marriage or any cultural, religious or environmental ritual which can change several times over a period of time. Galileo’s Book was banned as heresy for two hundred years before it was lifted and that was wrong on so many levels.
The type of love Plato seems to have admired most was that in which one man loved another because of his intelligence or virtue, rather than because of his physical attractions — a love of the idea of beauty more than the physical appearance, and a love of a person is a lesser love to that of absolute beauty, the ideal form.
Platonic love in the modern world can also refer to love between gay men.
LikeLike
May 16, 2014 at 3:11 pm
Son of Man,
Agreed, civil union does not equal marriage in all ways — Is that discrimination though? My interpretation of the situation is we have competing “rights” and now those who accept the law but disagree with same-sex marriage are the wronged party. If a Justice of the Peace was hired before the same-sex marriage law and performing same-sex marriages was not a condition of his/hers employment should they have to now perform a same-sex marriage if they oppose for religious reasons? I think they should be able to refuse. However, if today a Justice of the peace is being hired, a condition of his/hers employment would be to perform same-sex marriages. Again, if say a same-sex couple go to their Priest/Minister/Rabbi/Imam/etc.. and want to get a religious marriage the Priest/Minister/Rabbi/Imam/etc… should be able to say no, shouldn’t they? Now regarding goods and services for a same-sex couple or any other identifiable individual group or individual — any governmental agent or agency can not discriminate and I agree with that. However, if a private citizen owns a business they should be able to have the right to refuse service, shouldn’t they? Why they would is beyond me but if they feel it would be wrong they should be able. To clarify, I’m not talking life and death here, hopefully the Good Samaritan would present. I’m talking about baking a cake, being a DJ, photographer, florist, etc… for a same-sex marriage. Regarding government, I could be wrong but in Canada older married couples can use income splitting on their income tax and my wife and I can’t. If the government lowers the age though then we and every other married couple (including same-sex) can use income splitting. Whether I’m right or wrong, my point is the government should be able to give different benefits to different people, IMO that is not discrimination. For me discrimination would be if a same-sex couple had a child either by a previous relationship or surrogate or adoption and couldn’t get a benefit or tax deduction for their child a opposite-sex couple would be eligible for.
LikeLike
May 17, 2014 at 4:41 pm
Business Licenses are given to applicants under the consideration that they will serve the public, not the public that is black or white only, heterosexual, able bodied, without informaties; nevertheless, how many years did it take for the Government to even build ramps for the disabked to enter government buildings or how long did it take for the buses to have sming ramps so wheelchair disable could become mobile? Sure you can be ugly to people and claim you hate their a-affliction but should you in good conscience go into a public bar for example where a blind person sits at a table and end up taking his empty chairs away from his table to add one more party to your own table so that eventually the blind man sits alone in the only chair left at the table where he sits, alone, friendless, ostracized, rejected and dejected by the treatment of others? AND YOU AND YOUR FRIENDS HOWLING AWAY in glee and rejoicing you good fortune? Justices of the Peace are expected to carry out their duties like the rain that falls on the good and evil alike; like the sun, that shines on the good the bad and the ugly.
And without a doubt this scripture needs to be put into practice not just lip service:
Matt 5: 43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.
Never walk away from someone who deserves help;
your hand is God’s hand for that person.
Don’t tell your neighbor “Maybe some other time”
or “Try me tomorrow” Wait until they change the Law!
when the money’s right there in your pocket.
Don’t figure ways of taking advantage of your neighbor
when he’s sitting there trusting and unsuspecting.
In other words THOU shalt not discriminate:
Proverbs 3: 7 Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due,
When it is in the power of your hand to do so.
28 Do not say to your neighbor,
“Go, and come back,
And tomorrow I will give it,”
When you have it with you.
Oath of office
3. Every justice of the peace, before beginning the duties of office, shall make the following oath or affirmation:
I, ……………., solemnly swear (affirm) that I will faithfully and to the best of my skill and knowledge, execute the duties of a justice of the peace, and I will do so without fear or favour, affection or ill will. So help me God. (Omit last sentence in an affirmation.)
Christians know every twist and turn of reason to squirm out of doing what is right when it suits their prejudicial mindset. Sure you own the business so if you want, don’t allow blacks in your restaurant, keep them at the back of the bus; what? an atheist, get the hell out of here…… No you can’t even run for public office in 8 States in the USA if you’re an atheist ……and imagine; that, when every person ever born on this earth was born without a belief in Zeus, God, Allah or any of their wannabe messengers.
You see we were all children and we are still, all children of the Universe no matter who created it or if it always existed…nobody knows except the religionists of Absolute Certainty and the Drug of Absolute Certainty is the Devil’s drug (metaphorically speaking) that makes them think their ego is the biggest and best and brightest in the light socket of life……..
LikeLike
May 17, 2014 at 4:51 pm
And Paul:
One more thing:
It will always be impossible for any government to avoid being seen as the hypocrite when it justifies its own executions by blaming the party it kills. Is the King more equal than the Subject? Prove it. Follow the words you speak and watch righteousness glow brigher in society.
LikeLike
May 17, 2014 at 10:04 pm
Son of Man,
If I understand you correctly, you are saying to treat people differently is discrimination. If I open a private business to serve the public I have to do things I believe are morally wrong if they are legal, even if when I started my business those things were illegal? If my job description changes to where I now have to violate my religious beliefs I have to quit, even though when hired those things were illegal? It sounds to me like you are saying when two peoples rights are in direct opposition the government will decide who’s correct and the other person will have to capitulate. Obviously you and I have a totally different understanding on what is discrimination and how to live freely in a pluralistic society.
LikeLike
May 17, 2014 at 10:23 pm
Son of Man,
Just wanted to add the following. I wish we all lived by the golden rule (do unto others) but sadly we don’t. I believe in freedom of speech, thought and action to the utmost possible limits even though some people will abuse these rights in a free and democratic society. Sadly our freedoms are being eroded by the minute it seems and it won’t be long till “1984” is here.
LikeLike
May 18, 2014 at 7:45 am
Paul:
What you are doing is adding to the simplicity of the statement: “If I open a private business to serve the public…………” That’s where the stop is because the license is given to your private business to serve the public….. not some of the members of the public but not other members of the public. If you have a hamburger business and someone orders a hamburger it is none of your business what mouth eats the hamburger, your business is to serve the hamburger to the public. So if I order three hamburgers, one for my wife and I and one for our adult child who is “gay”, am I understanding you correctly that you should be able to change the order, only serve two hamburgers and refuse the gay person to eat?
LikeLike
May 18, 2014 at 7:49 am
Paul:
If you wish we all lived by the golden rule (do unto others) but sadly we don’t. THEN BE THE WISH YOU WISH FOR, never mind those who do not.
LikeLike
May 18, 2014 at 12:16 pm
Son of Man,
Are you reading me wrong? If I owned a hamburger stand I’d sell to anyone, I’d ask the gay guy if I could cater his same-sex wedding even. My job is to sell hamburgers. If two consenting adults want to do something that is legal even if I disagree with their choice that is not my business, but don’t ask me to approve of that choice, that’s my business. There are somethings I wouldn’t do though, couple quick examples: perform an abortion if I was an OBGYN, write a blasphemous message on a cake if a baker, let my unmarried niece sleep in the same bed with her boyfriend at my house. But we’re talking about someone else who took their own money and invested it and they should have the right to sell hamburgers to you but not me or who ever they like or not sell hamburgers to anybody and go broke. In our society the vast majority of business’ would sell the hamburger. Now I didn’t mention this before, but obviously if the guy doesn’t sell hamburgers to some one or an identifiable group, people can go to another place or protest him within the law. However this doesn’t matter because according to your post if I obtain a business license I forfeit my right to serve who I wish, I have to serve who ever walks in the door or I’ll be charged with a crime. Seems our government loves to stick their nose in our business, I guess we have way less freedom then I thought. Now after all that —- If I opened a bakery with my own money when same-sex marriage was illegal and I believe marriage should be between one man and one woman and I believe it would be morally wrong for me to participate in a same-sex ceremony by baking their cake why should I have to do something I think is wrong because the government now says same-sex marriage is legal? Shouldn’t I get a get out of jail free card because I was in business before the law? Wouldn’t the golden rule say —- if you think it’s wrong to bake the cake you don’t have to bake the cake? If I was the same-sex couple I’d just go to another bakery or buy a store bought cake and decorate it myself or make other arrangements. Seems to me this is all about forcing acceptance of same-sex marriage on the general public. I’m very worried about the full force of the government coming down on a baker just because he refused to bake a same-sex wedding cake. Democracy can be a very messy business, there are many things I find distasteful but I put up with them because I want as much freedom as possible. Sadly where I live, the truth isn’t a defense for some crimes.
LikeLike
May 18, 2014 at 2:54 pm
Paul:
I could not approve of same apparent sex marriage choice for me but for others, none of my business.
They do not have the right to sell hamburgers or any product to some people and not to others, that’s the law.
Laws change all the tiime; when police enforce a Law one day and the next day the law changes they cannot still enforce the Law of yesterday; their job is to enforce the Laws that are Laws not the Laws that are gone by the wayside.
When the High-rise building code calls for a maximum of 6 stories in height and the investor puts his own money into a new building should he have the right to sue the city two years later when the building code changes to ten or twelve stories in height and his competitors are making investment return as well as the city making more taxes.
Laws are not made for righteousness sake, nor does the law confirm righteousness; laws are mere regulations to accomodate the times, population, housing and a host of other criteria; as NT scriptures tell you we are not governed by laws but by grace, meaning that we wear a seatbelt when driving in a vehicle not because of the law but because it is the right thing to do.
Wouldn’t the golden rule say —- if you think it’s wrong to bake the cake you don’t have to bake the cake? NO, the golden rule does not say that and does not even suggest that. The golden rule says that you should do for others as you would expect others to do for you in your need, when you ask, implore, request, pray, wish, hope, beg, beseech, entreat, purchase whether you are in business or not.
Proverbs 3: 7 Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due,
When it is in the power of your hand to do so.
Therefore it is better to do the Golden Rule than to deny the Golden Rule; it doesn’t matter about your absolute certainty. it didn’t matter to the Samaritan, it didn’t matter to Jesus and it doesn/t matter to me. It may not by my style but I do not walk in another man’s shoes either.
LikeLike
May 18, 2014 at 8:38 pm
Son of Man,
When the government changes some laws people can be grandfathered in so the new law doesn’t affect them or the government will pay compensation if costs incurred as I understand (eg. a fire arm which was legal declared illegal). As stated in my last post, I thought a business had the right to refuse service, according to you it does not and I take your word for it. So I guess the moral of the story is bake the cake, sell your business or accept the punishment. Before all this started years ago I was a very tolerant guy, live and let live out look on life. Even felt sorry for the guy on the talk show saying how all he wants to do is visit his life partner/significant other in the hospital, but he can’t because legally he isn’t family. Well now the guy can visit his spouse in the hospital any time and have the baker who doesn’t want to bake him a get well cake thrown in jail. You gotta love progress.
LikeLike
May 18, 2014 at 9:02 pm
to clarify my golden rule remark:
same-sex couple talking to baker — If you think it’s wrong to bake our wedding cake you don’t have to. we wouldn’t want you to do anything against your conscience.
LikeLike
May 19, 2014 at 10:40 am
Paul:
On this Victoria Day Canadian Holiday, a greeting grace from the Father of Jesus to the one in whose hands this letter now rests.
When this objecting generation is gone it will be like the new generation cell phones talking to their kids about the old dial-ups and saying…”Yup, it is true kids, our ancestors did have tails”!
Your golden rule remark is analogous to the black heterosexual couple in the 60’s and 70’s saying to the restaurateur: “Oh you don’t serve blacks?” Well that’s okay, we wouldn’t want you to do anything against your conscience that offends your morals”?
You see the golden rule is there for the downtrodden, the victims of self righteousness, not for the goody goody two shoes whose morals are higher than humility don’t you think?
Who was Jesus talking about when he said: Luke 4:16-18 He came to Nazareth where he had been reared. As he always did on the Sabbath, he went to the meeting place. When he stood up to read, he was handed the scroll of the prophet Isaiah. Unrolling the scroll, he found the place where it was written,
God’s Spirit is on me;
he’s chosen me to preach the Message of good news to the poor,
Sent me to announce pardon to prisoners and
recovery of sight to the blind,
To set the burdened and battered free,
to announce, “This is God’s year to act!”
Rendered somewhat differently in King James but with the same inner sense:
16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.
17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised…….
Sure we can get carried away and think that Jesus came for the Butcher, the Baker and the Candlestick Maker and so he did but his message to the rich and wealthy and self righteous scribes, Pharisees and Lawyers was somewhat different as per the indictment in Matt: 23:
13 “I’ve had it with you! You’re hopeless, you religion scholars, you Pharisees! Frauds! Your lives are roadblocks to God’s kingdom. You refuse to enter, and won’t let anyone else in either.
15 “You’re hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You go halfway around the world to make a convert, but once you get him you make him into a replica of yourselves, double-damned.
16-22 “You’re hopeless! What arrogant stupidity! You say, ‘If someone makes a promise with his fingers crossed, that’s nothing; but if he swears with his hand on the Bible, that’s serious.’ What ignorance! Does the leather on the Bible carry more weight than the skin on your hands? And what about this piece of trivia: ‘If you shake hands on a promise, that’s nothing; but if you raise your hand that God is your witness, that’s serious’? What ridiculous hairsplitting! What difference does it make whether you shake hands or raise hands? A promise is a promise. What difference does it make if you make your promise inside or outside a house of worship? A promise is a promise. God is present, watching and holding you to account regardless.
23-24 “You’re hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You keep meticulous account books, tithing on every nickel and dime you get, but on the meat of God’s Law, things like fairness and compassion and commitment—the absolute basics!—you carelessly take it or leave it. Careful bookkeeping is commendable, but the basics are required. Do you have any idea how silly you look, writing a life story that’s wrong from start to finish, nitpicking over commas and semicolons?
25-26 “You’re hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You burnish the surface of your cups and bowls so they sparkle in the sun, while the insides are maggoty with your greed and gluttony. Stupid Pharisee! Scour the insides, and then the gleaming surface will mean something.
27-28 “You’re hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You’re like manicured grave plots, grass clipped and the flowers bright, but six feet down it’s all rotting bones and worm-eaten flesh. People look at you and think you’re saints, but beneath the skin you’re total frauds.
29-32 “You’re hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You build granite tombs for your prophets and marble monuments for your saints. And you say that if you had lived in the days of your ancestors, no blood would have been on your hands. You protest too much! You’re cut from the same cloth as those murderers, and daily add to the death count.
33-34 “Snakes! Reptilian sneaks! Do you think you can worm your way out of this? Never have to pay the piper? It’s on account of people like you that I send prophets and wise guides and scholars generation after generation—and generation after generation you treat them like dirt, greeting them with lynch mobs, hounding them with abuse.
35-36 “You can’t squirm out of this: Every drop of righteous blood ever spilled on this earth, beginning with the blood of that good man Abel right down to the blood of Zechariah, Barachiah’s son, whom you murdered at his prayers, is on your head. All this, I’m telling you, is coming down on you, on your generation.
37-39 “Jerusalem! Jerusalem! Murderer of prophets! Killer of the ones who brought you God’s news! How often I’ve ached to embrace your children, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you wouldn’t let me. And now you’re so desolate, nothing but a ghost town. What is there left to say? Only this: I’m out of here soon. The next time you see me you’ll say, ‘Oh, God has blessed him! He’s come, bringing God’s rule!’”
Luke 11:46 And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.
52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in, ye hindered.
There is a huge difference in the messages of Jesus and he was not talking to people like me in the latter but in the former because I loved his message, others did not!
LikeLike
May 19, 2014 at 1:57 pm
Son of Man,
Are there bigoted hateful people who oppose same-sex marriage, of course there are. I believe they are in the minority though. Do some people who oppose same-sex marriage get angry and say stupid things, of course they do. Does that mean they have hatred in their heart for homosexuals? Maybe, but it depends on what they said and why they said it IMO. How can I say that, because I know what’s in my heart and some of the stupid things I’ve said out of frustration. You see, I’ve seen this type of movie before so I knew what was gonna happen so I wasn’t surprised, but when you see it unfolding you can’t help but get righteously angered. Let me tell you about a new movie from the same studio that brought us same-sex marriage. I don’t know it’s release date but it’s already in production. I’ve seen the preview on CBC and read some articles in religious blogs about the movie. It’s about a young child that seems to be acting strangely. The concerned parents seek help from medical professionals. After lots of tests the parents are called in to hear the diagnose. The medical professional explains their child is in serious danger and needs to start treatment right away. The medical professional explains the treatment required to cure their child. The parents freak out and decline permission to start treatment and seek a second opinion. Mean while, the medical professional concerned for the safety of the child contacts government officials immediately and relays his/her concerns for the safety of the child. The government official is shocked that the parents won’t have their child treated and goes to a Judge right of way. The Judge reviews the information and immediately produces a court order to have the child placed in protective custody so treatment can begin immediately. The child now removed from his, oops I mean her bigoted parents is now safe and sound. The sex on the child’s birth certificate is changed from male to female and female hormones are administered immediately to prevent masculine features developing. When appropriate, the medical professionals arrange for gender reassignment surgery to take place. Now the beautiful young woman is complete, her inside matches her outside. All medical costs are paid by the government of course. She gets engaged to a wonderful guy and lives happily ever after. The wedding was wonderful, you should’ve seen the cake. And anybody that didn’t approve was sent to jail or beheaded. Crazy talk? Maybe, but lets look at one of that studio’s earlier movies called pro-choice.
Happy Victoria/Canada Day to you also. I believe you are a good person that doesn’t want to see a world with discrimination as are many people who support same-sex marriage. I’m worried if we stay on the road we’re on the pendulum will swing so far to the “Left” people will be prosecuted and jailed or killed because they disagree with what the government is doing. Or there will be such a big back lash from the “Right” will have a throw back to some type of Mosaic/Cannon/Sharia Law and of course a bunch of killing.
LikeLike
June 20, 2015 at 12:55 pm
Same-Sex Marriage alters the institution of Marriage.
We cannot agree on all the reasons for the contract called Marriage.
So perhaps the most basic reason is to provide a mutual contractual relationship between just 2 adults that is recognized for legal purposes.
Doesn’t cover children much yet, but parent(s) are may find a lasting partnership helpful. Many people never married.
Even raised children and lived to old age without it.
LikeLike
June 20, 2015 at 4:25 pm
Roz:
Your points are right and smart. A primary reason for marriage is the legal contract you mentioned so the LGBT community can come out of the closet but many people live together without the legal contract and even raise children and live together to old age without a marriage contract just as you say.
The only people who are affected by same-apparent-sex, marriage that is obvious to me are religious people who want to impose a universal morality on the rest of mankind, in their image , which is why religion has always attracted the kind of person who thinks other people’s private lives are their business.
LikeLike