home
RSS
When Christians become a 'hated minority'
Evangelical Christians say they are the new victims of intolerance - they're persecuted for condemning homosexuality.
May 5th, 2013
06:00 AM ET

When Christians become a 'hated minority'

By John Blake, CNN

(CNN) - When Peter Sprigg speaks publicly about his opposition to homosexuality, something odd often happens.

During his speeches, people raise their hands to challenge his assertions that the Bible condemns homosexuality, but no Christians speak out to defend him.

“But after it is over, they will come over to talk to me and whisper in my ear, ‘I agree with everything you said,’" says Sprigg, a spokesman for The Family Research Council, a powerful, conservative Christian lobbying group.

We’ve heard of the “down-low” gay person who keeps his or her sexual identity secret for fear of public scorn. But Sprigg and other evangelicals say changing attitudes toward homosexuality have created a new victim: closeted Christians who believe the Bible condemns homosexuality but will not say so publicly for fear of being labeled a hateful bigot.

As proof, Sprigg points to the backlash that ESPN commentator Chris Broussard sparked recently. Broussard was called a bigot and a purveyor of hate speech when he said an NBA player who had come out as gay was living in “open rebellion to God.” Broussard said the player, Jason Collins, was “living in unrepentant sin” because the Bible condemns homosexuality.

“In the current culture, it takes more courage for someone like Chris Broussard to speak out than for someone like Jason Collins to come out,” says Sprigg, a former pastor. “The media will hail someone who comes out of the closet as gay, but someone who simply expresses their personal religious views about homosexual conduct is attacked.”

When is disagreement hate?

Bryan Litfin, a theology professor at Moody Bible Institute in Illinois, says Christians should be able to publicly say that God designed sex to take place within a marriage between a man and a woman.

“That isn’t so outrageous,” Litfin says. “Nobody is expressing hate toward homosexuals by saying that. Since when is disagreement the same as hate?”

But quoting the Bible doesn't inoculate anyone from becoming a bigot or hater, some scholars say. There's a point at which a Christian's opposition to homosexuality can become bigotry, and even hate speech, they say.

Crossing such a line has happened many times in history.

A literal reading of the Bible was used to justify all sorts of hatred: slavery, the subjugation of women and anti-Semitism, scholars and pastors say.

“Truly damaging speech cannot be excused just because it expresses genuine religious belief,” says Mark D. Jordan, author of “Recruiting Young Love: How Christians Talk about Homosexuality.”

“Some religious beliefs, sincerely held, are detestable. They cannot be spoken without disrupting social peace,” says Jordan, a professor at the John Danforth Center on Religion & Politics at Washington University in St. Louis.

The point where religious speech becomes hate speech is difficult to define, though, scholars and activists say.

The Southern Poverty Law Center in Alabama is a nonprofit civil rights group that combats and monitors hate groups. Three years ago, it designated the Family Research Council, the group that Sprigg represents, as a hate group - a characterization the group stridently rejects.

Mark Potok,  a center spokesman, says there’s no shared definition of what constitutes hate speech.

“There is no legal meaning. It’s just a phrase,” Potok says. “Hate speech is in the ear of the beholder.”

'One of the most hated minorities?'

Intolerance may be difficult to define, but some evangelicals say they have become victims of intolerance because of their reverence for the Bible.

The conservative media culture is filled with stories about evangelicals being labeled as “extremists” for their belief that homosexuality is a sin.

Their sense of persecution goes beyond their stance on homosexuality. There are stories circulating of evangelical students being suspended for opposing homosexuality, a teacher fired for giving a Bible to a curious student, and the rise of anti-Christian bigotry.

A blogger at The American Dream asked in one essay:

“Are evangelical Christians rapidly becoming one of the most hated minorities in America?”

The reluctance of evangelicals to speak out against homosexuality is often cited as proof they are being forced into the closet.

Joe Carter, editor for The Gospel Coalition, an online evangelical magazine, wrote a blog post entitled “Debatable: Is the Christian Church a ‘Hate Group’?" He warned that young people will abandon “orthodox” Christian churches that teach that homosexuality is a sin for fear of being called haters.

“Faux civility, embarrassment, prudishness and a fear of expressing an unpopular opinion has caused many Christians to refrain from explaining how homosexual conduct destroys lives,” Carter wrote.

Some Christians fear that opposing homosexuality could cause them to lose their jobs and “haunt them forever,” Carter says.

“It’s easier to just go along,” says Carter, who is also author of “How to Argue Like Jesus.” “You don’t want to be lumped in with the bigots. That’s a powerful word."

Edward Johnson, a communication professor at Campbell University in North Carolina, says we are now living in a "postmodern" era where everything is relative and there is no universally accepted truth. It's an environment in which anyone who says "this is right" and "that is wrong" is labeled intolerant, he says.

There was a time when a person could publicly say homosexuality was wrong and people could consider the statement without anger, he says. Today, people have reverted to an intellectual tribalism where they are only willing to consider the perspective of their own tribe.

“They are incapable of comprehending that someone may have a view different than theirs,” Johnson says. “For them anyone who dares to question the dogma of the tribe can only be doing so out of hatred.”

Sprigg, from the Family Research Council, says his condemnation of homosexual conduct does not spring from intolerance but a desire to protect gays from harmful conduct, he says.

Sprigg, a senior fellow for policy studies at the council, wrote in a council pamphlet that homosexual men are more likely to engage in child sexual abuse than are straight men. He also wrote that gay men are also afflicted with a higher rate of sexually transmitted diseases and mental illness as well.

Sprigg says he does not believe homosexuality is a choice and that “personal testimonies" and "clinical experience” show that some people “can and do change from gay to straight.”

“Maybe we need to do a better job of showing that we are motivated by Christian love,” Sprigg says. “Love is wanting the best for someone, and acting to bring that about.”

'That's a lie'

Potok, from the Southern Poverty Law Center, has little use for the love Sprigg talks about.

He calls it hatred, and his voice rose in anger when he talked about the claims by Sprigg and other Christian groups that gay men are more predisposed to molest children and that homosexual behavior is inherently harmful.

He says the Southern Poverty Law Center didn’t designate the Family Research Group a hate group because they view homosexuality as a sin or oppose same-sex marriage, Potok says. There are plenty of Christian groups who hold those beliefs but are not hate groups, he says.

A group becomes a hate group when it attacks and maligns an entire class of people for their “immutable characteristics,” Potok says. The Family Research Council spreads known falsehoods about gays and lesbians, he says, such as the contention that gay men are predisposed to abuse children.

“That’s a lie,” Potok says. “These guys are engaging in straight-up defamation of a very large group of people. There are not many things much worse than you can say in America about somebody than they are a child molester.”

Potok scoffed at Spriggs’ claim that the council and other evangelical anti-gay groups are victims of intolerance.

“That’s whining on the part of people who spend their days and nights attacking gay people and then some people criticize them and they don’t like it,” he says. “That’s pathetic. It reminds me of slave owners complaining that people are saying ugly things about them.”

What the Bible says

What about the popular evangelical claim, “We don’t hate the sinner, just the sin” – is that seen as intolerance or hate speech when it comes to homosexuality?

There are those who say you can’t hate the sin and love the sinner because being gay or lesbian is defined by one’s sexual behavior; it’s who someone is.

“Most people who identify as gay and lesbian would say that this is not an action I’m choosing to do; this is who I am,” says Timothy Beal, author of “The Rise and Fall of the Bible: The Unexpected History of an Accidental Book.”

Beal, a religion professor at Case Western University in Ohio, says it should be difficult for any Christian to unequivocally declare that the Bible opposes homosexuality because the Bible doesn’t take a single position on the topic. It's an assertion that many scholars and mainline Protestant pastors would agree with.

Some people cite Old Testament scriptures as condemning homosexuality, such as  Leviticus 18:22 - “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination.” But other Christians counter by saying they are not bound by the Old Testament.

There are those who also cite New Testament scriptures like Romans 1:26-27 - “… Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men. …”

Beal, however, says Jesus said little about sex. And the Apostle Paul, who wrote Romans, was probably referring to male prostitution and men having sexual relations with boys, a practice in the Greco-Roman world.

“Paul does not understand genetics and sexual orientation the way we understand it now as something much more than a choice,” says Beal.

Some evangelicals say Christians can’t change their view of biblical truth just because times change. But some scholars reply:

Sure you can. Christians do it all the time.

Denying a woman’s ability to preach in church was justified by scriptures like 1 Timothy 2:11-12 - “… I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.” But many churches have abandoned that teaching - and some scholars say a woman preached the first Christian sermon, when Mary Magdalene proclaimed that Jesus had risen.

Slaveholders in 19th century America justified slavery through a literal reading of the Bible, quoting Titus 2:9-10 – “Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything. …” And anti-Semitism was justified by the claims that Jews killed Jesus, such as Matthew 27: 25-26 - “Let his blood be on us and on our children.”

Litfin, from Moody Bible Institute, acknowledged that the Bible once sanctioned slavery, but he said that practice was a “cultural expression” that changed over time. Evangelicals who oppose same-sex marriage by citing the Bible are on more solid ground, he says.

“Marriage is a universal and timeless institution that God set up for maximum human flourishing. He set it up in the first book of the Bible with the story of Adam and Eve. It is consistent throughout the whole Bible. … Marriage is in a different category than those cultural things.”

Public jousts over the Bible's stance on homosexuality rarely change people’s minds. What changes is when people get to know gay and lesbian people as friends and hear their story, says Beal, author of “The Rise and Fall of the Bible.”

“If you open up to that other person genuinely, you basically come to a point where you have to sacrifice them to your ideology or crack open your ideology to make a hospitable place for them,” Beal says.

One Christian pastor who is gay says the uproar over the ESPN commentator’s comments can actually be good,  because debates help settle moral disputes.

“What appears to us as antiquated and prejudicial now was once a disputed issue that required debate,” says the Rev. Richard McCarty, a minister in the United Church of Christ and a religious studies professor at Mercyhurst University in Pennsylvania.

Until the debate over homosexuality is settled - if it ever is - there may be plenty of evangelical Christians who feel as if they are now being forced to stay in the closet.

Carter, the evangelical blogger, says he foresees a day when any church that preaches against homosexuality will be marginalized. Just as many churches now accept divorce, they will accept sexual practices once considered sinful.

“It’s getting to the point,” he says, “where churches are not going to say that any sexual activity is wrong.”

- CNN Writer

Filed under: Belief • Bible • Christianity • Church • Church and state • Culture wars • Protest • Sex • Sexuality • Sports

soundoff (10,982 Responses)
  1. All rise!

    A standing O to Robert Brown, Atheist Hunter, Mike from CT, Chad, Vic and the like... well done!

    👏

    May 13, 2013 at 1:04 pm |
  2. Random Seed

    Science, stop posting your massive walls of copypasta. If you hate science that much, tell us why.

    May 13, 2013 at 12:05 pm |
  3. lol??

    mama k sayz,
    "(my last post here was in wrong spot – it has been relocated)"

    BTW, what country do you live in??

    May 13, 2013 at 10:42 am |
  4. Bible Clown©

    Well, I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's all the hate and insults they fling that makes them a hated minority, but I could be the repressive legislation they get behind.

    May 13, 2013 at 8:14 am |
    • Oh you

      Yeah, because nobody else flings hate and insults. Those Christians!

      May 13, 2013 at 8:57 am |
  5. alpeaston

    I don't believe, even for a second, that hatred of bigotry is "bigotry!" Bigot ARE the correct people to marginalize!

    May 13, 2013 at 2:55 am |
  6. Alan Sammet

    I don't dislike Christians for being "Christian". I dislike ignorant xenophobes who rely on such a silly crutch to explain away their own bigotry. Bigots are discriminated universally for being bigots. Yawn.

    May 12, 2013 at 10:29 pm |
  7. Bob

    "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My Words will not pass away". ....Jesus Mark 13:31

    May 12, 2013 at 6:50 pm |
    • #gospel

      👍 👍

      May 12, 2013 at 7:00 pm |
  8. The Sad Floppy Life of Cluckles the Boneless Chicken

    After 2,000 years of being intolerant repressive haters, are they really surprised that they have made themselves hated?

    May 12, 2013 at 1:39 pm |
  9. Fallacy Spotting 101

    Recent posts by 'Vic' contain multiple instances of the Argument from Ignorance fallacy.

    http://fallacyfiles.org/glossary.html

    May 12, 2013 at 12:54 pm |
  10. Vic

    In reference to:

    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/05/when-christians-become-a-hated-minority/comment-page-105/#comment-2336619

    Science that is discovered by man is "NOT EXACT," it is only "approximate" (The Scientific Community attests to that) for we are limited and can not know everything!

    Exact Science is the expression of the Mechanism of this Physical Universe (that is the how of its interworkings/the nature of it/laws of physics/laws of nature/God given nature.)

    – God created this Universe and its Exact Science, and set it in motion! All Natural Processes are Automatic thereafter!

    – Whatever science man arrives at (approximation) is part of the Natural Revelation by God.

    Science (discovered by man science, that is) can only explain some of the existing phenomenon in mathematical terms and come up with recipes for existing materials but CAN NOT CREACTE A SINGLE ATOM!

    The visible Universe we can observe consists of Ordinary Matter which accounts to ONLY 4% of it! The other 96% of the Universe is invisible Dark Matter & Energy!

    Every Ordinary Matter Object in this Universe is surrounded by Dark Matter about 10 times its mass!

    Every single atom is a System, every System is a DESIGN, and every DESIGN has a DESIGNER!!!

    Can science create a single living cell?! SURE NOT!

    Can science reverse engineer Evolution?! SURE NOT!

    Can science repeat Evolution?! SURE NOT!

    Can science continue/resume Evolution?! SURE NOT!

    Can science animate matter?! SURE NOT!

    Can science find the origin of matter?! SURE NOT!

    Can science find the origin of life?! SURE NOT!

    I have everything to do with science, and I know that firsthand!!!

    As for my Evidence,:

    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/05/when-christians-become-a-hated-minority/comment-page-90/#comment-2330390

    Happy Mother's Day 2013 Everyone

    May 12, 2013 at 12:43 pm |
    • Vic

      Every single atom is a System, every System is a DESIGN, and every DESIGN has a DESIGNER!!!

      Every single living cell is a System, every System is a DESIGN, and every DESIGN has a DESIGNER!!!

      Every single Creature is a System, every System is a DESIGN, and every DESIGN has a DESIGNER!!!

      This Creation and Life in it ARE !!! Prima Facie EVIDENCE of God !!!

      May 12, 2013 at 2:01 pm |
    • redzoa

      @Vic – Science has repeated evolution, e.g. SELEX/RNA aptamers, speciation in labs, Lenski's E. coli experiments, artificial selection in domesticated organisms, etc, etc. More importantly, Science has observed the fundamental processes of evolution from the molecular (i.e. mutation/adaptation/positive selection) to the organismal (speciation events) in the wild. In other words, science has observed and replicated every feature of evolution expected within the time scales available. If you are demanding that science replicate within a human life span a process that requires millions of years, then this demand only demonstrates how poorly you understand the relevant science. The irony of creationist demands is that they limit their unreasonable doubts only to the science that contradicts their preferred religious narrative, but never subject their own magical claims of special creation to similar demands for evidence; rather, they invoke "God did it" and believe this to be a sufficient response.

      Furthermore, evolution is a "designer." It selects from available pieces and filters for functionality. On the other hand, the evidence against design of biological systems is significant as I suggested before, e.g. molecular and anatomical vestigial artifacts like male nip-ples, our fused 2nd chromosome, and our defunct gene for egg yolk protein, etc, etc.

      "I have everything to do with science, and I know that firsthand!!!" It's clear from your posts that you have very little understanding of the relevant science. Your "evidence" is nothing more than a series of non sequiturs capped off with a false dichotomy (i.e. if science can't do/explain "x", then God).

      May 12, 2013 at 4:50 pm |
  11. Douglas

    Science has been trumped by the Bible again!

    Thank you believers for showing us the way to salvation.

    Happy Mothers Day Amber and Nicole!

    Yours in Christ,
    Douglas

    May 12, 2013 at 12:33 pm |
  12. ME II

    @Bill Deacon,
    (from conversation of p102 at time of posting)
    "Also, I think you are making my argument for me. You claim it is easy for you to place the line where you think it should be. I claim the same. Again you have agreed with me that there should be a line, we just disagree on it's placement.

    Actually, I was saying that in your example, gay marriage versus NAMBLA, the line was simple, i.e. informed consent.

    Furthermore, it seems reasonable to me to allow marriges between any two consenting adults, excepting close fanily, for the simple equitible reason that there is no secular reason to disallow such marriages. If the government is going to make marriage a special class, then, as a law, all people should be treated equally under it. This is an accepted priciple of the US, from the 14th amendment, if nothing else.

    "I hold forth centuries of Judeo-Christian ethic as justification for my placement of the line. What have you got? Because it sounds fair?"

    I hold forth 2+ centuries of freedom from strictly Judeo-Christion ethics. As has been stated earlier, I think, equal treatment under the law, i.e. non-discrimination, is sufficient reason. Your fallacious slippery slope argument does not hold water.

    May 12, 2013 at 12:05 pm |
    • bill deacon

      Hey Me II just saw this and maybe board has moved on but thought i'd respond. I use the example of NAMBLA as an extreme reference for moving the line. The first part of your post makes putting the line where you think it should be seem like a reasonable move by comparison which it is. But, using the rationale of subjective placement means that whatever "sounds" reasonable can become the new norm, at which point there is no reference and the slippery slope suddenly appears level. It hasn't been all that long ago that if you had made the argument that allowing interracial marriage would lead to gaay marriage, people would have accused you of a slippery slope fallacy. Yet, here we are today and you are making that exact argument that gay marriage is equivalent to interracial marriage. See how the slope recalibrated? Some might call that progress, some might call it decline. I call it a valid reason for utilizing objective morality.

      The second part of your statement brings us full circle. You claim that legalization of gaay marriage will make it legal, simply by government fiat. I say the government can call midnight noon, but everyone will still know when the sun is up or down. Politicians are notorious, particularly in the country, for giving people what they want in order to garner votes regardless of the long term effects (say it with me: 16 trillion dollars) The mere fact that a political decision is made may suffice for proponents but you and I both know that political victory doesn't equal moral certainty

      May 12, 2013 at 10:51 pm |
    • ME II

      @Bill Deacon,
      As I said, "slippery slope" is a logical fallacy, regardless of how "reasonable" you try to make it sound.

      "I call it a valid reason for utilizing objective morality."

      The problem is that there is no evidence of this "objective morality" which you claim. There are definitely objective measures of ethical behavior, but you have yet to show that there is any absolutely "objective" morality.

      "You claim that legalization of gaay marriage will make it legal, simply by government fiat."

      Not sure that I said that, but technically legislation is exactly what makes something "legal". That does not make it right necessarily, in an ethical sense, I agree. But it does make it legal.

      "I say the government can call midnight noon, but everyone will still know when the sun is up or down."

      False analogy. We are not talking about physically objective, measurable, phenomena; we are talking about human relationships. If we as a society want to imbue certain relationships with certain legal rights and responsibilities, that is what we do. If we want to define a master/slave relationship in such a way that the slave cannot be beaten to such an extent that s/he dies within 3 days, then that is the relationship, under the law. I would disagree with such law and fight to get it changed, but it would none-the-less be the law for that relationship. Whether we call that legal relationship, slavery, indentured servitude, chattel, feudalism, etc., makes little difference.

      May 13, 2013 at 10:33 am |
  13. Vic

    In reference to:

    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/05/when-christians-become-a-hated-minority/comment-page-105/#comment-2336619

    Science that is discovered by man is "NOT EXACT," it is only "approximate" (The Scientific Community attests to that) for we are limited and can not know everything!

    Exact Science is the expression of the Mechanism of this Physical Universe (that is the how of its interworkings/the nature of it/laws of physics/laws of nature/God given nature.)

    – God created this universe and its Exact Science, and set it in motion! All Natural Processes are Automatic thereafter!

    – Whatever science man arrives at (approximation) is part of the Natural Revelation by God.

    Science (discovered by man science, that is) can only explain some of the existing phenomenon in mathematical terms and come up with recipes for existing materials but CAN NOT CREACTE A SINGLE ATOM!

    The visible universe we can observe consists of Ordinary Matter which accounts to ONLY 4% of it! The other 96% of the universe is invisible Dark Matter & Energy!

    Every Ordinary Matter Object in this universe is surrounded by Dark Matter about 10 times its mass!

    Can science create a single living cell?! SURE NOT!

    Can science reverse engineer Evolution?! SURE NOT!

    Can science repeat Evolution?! SURE NOT!

    Can science continue/resume Evolution?! SURE NOT!

    Can science animate matter?! SURE NOT!

    Can science find the origin of matter?! SURE NOT!

    Can science find the origin of life?! SURE NOT!

    I have everything to do with science, and I know that firsthand!!!

    Happy Mother's Day 2013 Everyone

    May 12, 2013 at 12:03 pm |
    • ME II

      @Vic,
      Your logic is ridiculous. Science fuly supports the Theory of Evolution and no evdience has been found yet that is contrary to evolution.
      Your supposition of an "Exact Science" is opinion and not based on evidence.

      May 12, 2013 at 12:22 pm |
    • required

      ME2, black widows, both male and female have been reported to eat their mates, not a great trait to pass on for evolution.
      Reverse evolution has been found too. Evolution is not. God exists.

      May 12, 2013 at 3:51 pm |
    • lol??

      Hasn't worked so hot for humans, RC.

      May 12, 2013 at 5:07 pm |
    • required

      The word of God, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

      May 12, 2013 at 6:03 pm |
    • ME II

      @required,

      If nothing else, it's simple math. If a organism can pass on its genes to 3 (counting both parents) or more offspring that survive by sacrificing itself then the sacrifice is beneficial, is it not? Especially, if the sacrifice give the offspring an edge over the nearest competi.tor.

      Also, God would still be required to follow the rules as well. If the spiders didn't have enough offspring surviving, then they would exist for more than a few generations. Unless, of course, He is generating new individuals all the time.

      May 12, 2013 at 6:15 pm |
    • required

      ME2, the bible has within it, what I would describe as the thrills of a lifetime that I wouldn't trade for anything.

      You are I guess thrilled that the spiders hopefully don't eat their offspring... so you can enjoy thinking about nothing.

      May 12, 2013 at 9:24 pm |
    • ME II

      @required,

      What? That doesn't even make sense.

      May 13, 2013 at 10:12 am |
    • fintastic

      @required................ another christian dum dum

      May 13, 2013 at 12:33 pm |
  14. jacksonwolff

    The thing that I find most offensive about this is the fact that these people view themselves as "victims" I'm sorry, you are not a victim, you are not the ones being fired, evicted, disowned, beaten, tortured,and in some cases murdered. You make stuff up as you go along and whenever someone DARES to correct you, you SCREAM about freedom of religion and how "oppressed" you are.

    May 12, 2013 at 11:07 am |
  15. hippypoet

    Since when has any widely held belief been anything but an incitement of hate on others upon knowledge of differing beliefs?

    For any fellow atheists looking for some fun times and conversation, check out https://www.facebook.com/PoeticAtheism

    May 11, 2013 at 11:24 pm |
    • Mark from Middle River

      >>>"Since when has any widely held belief been anything but an incitement of hate on others upon knowledge of differing beliefs?"

      "There is only one God and He is God to all; therefore it is important that everyone is seen as equal before God. I’ve always said we should help a Hindu become a better Hindu, a Muslim become a better Muslim, a Catholic become a better Catholic. We believe our work should be our example to people. We have among us 475 souls – 30 families are Catholics and the rest are all Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs—all different religions. But they all come to our prayers." Mother Teresa

      Sorry HP... Stop listening to only the voices of hate. You sound like some of my African American brothers and sisters talking and ranting about how Whites only have brought death and destruction. It is a stupid statement and view of people.

      May 12, 2013 at 12:30 am |
    • .

      How in the hell do you get "Sorry HP… Stop listening to only the voices of hate. You sound like some of my African American brothers and sisters talking and ranting about how Whites only have brought death and destruction. It is a stupid statement and view of people." out of "Since when has any widely held belief been anything but an incitement of hate on others upon knowledge of differing beliefs?”

      Your whole answering post is the height of stupidity; and has NOTHING to do with what hippypoet posted. What an asshole post. My African-American friends think so, too. (Snerk)

      May 12, 2013 at 1:23 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      ROF'ingFL,

      Wow..a person that hold a different view from me declares that my post was not on target. That ...with great sarcasm ....has never happened before.

      Let's see....you called it stupid and not on topic ....

      Well, before I find a tampax and take you away.... HP wrote that he or she could not think of a time when belifs did not work together. I could have posted examples of the Muslim Saladin but I just wanted to show that there are those of Faith that have worked together and advanced.

      But, your African American friends should back your view... maybe they can help you make an argument instead of just posting the "whining" example you have given. Come on dude....you can do better than a "I Hate your words" post.

      May 12, 2013 at 3:35 am |
    • Malcolm Z

      hippypoet, the number of believers has nothing to do with whether or not it is used as a basis to hate anyone.
      I think you'll find most people believe that breathing air is a good thing and that that belief is not used to hate on anyone.

      Mark, your post is racist. You assume that everything is about black vs white. No. It's only that way in your fat head.
      And using a heretical statement by Mother Theresa does nothing to address hippypoet's post.
      Instead of saying something relevant, you go on to accuse hippypoet of being a major hater and insinuate that he is no better than a racist ready for a race war. Racist much?

      May 12, 2013 at 5:05 am |
    • .

      And I'll repeat it, Mark, because you didn't seem to get the gist of it the first time:

      Your whole answering post is the height of stupidity; and has NOTHING to do with what hippypoet posted. What an asshole post. My African-American friends think so, too. (Snerk)
      You also, I might add, brought up the word "stupid" in your original answering post. This is why I said your post was the height of stupidity, because it is. I guess correlation isn't your game, is it?

      May 12, 2013 at 12:10 pm |
  16. Vic

    Hey Science,

    You keep posting the Dover Trial transcripts as, presumably, supporting evidence for Evolution! Well, teaching Evolution in Public Schools is a matter of Law AND it is NOT a matter of Science!

    That being said, Evolution remains UNPROVEN SCIENTIFICALLY, and a small minority in the population believe in it!

    Like I expressed before, here is my take on Evolution/Abiogenesis:

    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/05/when-christians-become-a-hated-minority/comment-page-95/#comment-2332481

    May 11, 2013 at 11:11 pm |
    • Athy

      Bullshit, Vic. Evolution is accepted by all but the most retarded. What does that make you? Do you need a hint?

      May 11, 2013 at 11:15 pm |
    • .

      Knock it off with the html. You look RETARDED.

      May 11, 2013 at 11:16 pm |
    • ..

      As I recall, your view was soundly refuted, Vic. You may continue to cling to it, but you were/are wrong.

      May 11, 2013 at 11:21 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      Vic,

      Name a scientist who rejects evolution who also is non-religious.

      May 11, 2013 at 11:31 pm |
    • Vic

      http://scienceagainstevolution.org/v5i10f.htm

      May 12, 2013 at 12:00 am |
    • Athy

      You're hangin' your hat on that, Vic? Wow.

      May 12, 2013 at 12:03 am |
    • Vic

      @Athy

      I am being cordial!

      My belief in Creation is principled.

      May 12, 2013 at 12:10 am |
    • Athy

      Well Vic, that's your albatross, not mine.

      May 12, 2013 at 12:13 am |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      So Vic,

      I asked for a scientist that is non-religious tha rejects evolution.....and you post an article about religious scientists.....thanks for proving my point.

      May 12, 2013 at 12:17 am |
    • Michael Lee

      Vic i dont even know you....but you seem full of it...

      lucky for us...people like you dont make it into the history books...you and your philosophy will die and be forgotten forever...thats your inescapable fate lol

      the guy who preached the world was flat didnt make it into the history books

      May 12, 2013 at 12:27 am |
    • Athy

      Vic can't help it. His brain was muddled by the bible and cannot be repaired. Cut him some slack and rest assured his beliefs will eventually die out. It'll just take time. Two or three generations maybe.

      May 12, 2013 at 12:42 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Even the Catholic church is still growing and Islam and Mormonism are making gains. Sorry about raining on a Atheist parade 🙂

      May 12, 2013 at 1:09 am |
    • Athy

      It's "an atheist's" (not a Atheist) parade. And don't capitalize atheist. It's not a proper noun. Holy shit, don't you religies know basic grammar? Not surprising actually.

      May 12, 2013 at 1:15 am |
    • Joe Bauers

      Mark from Middle River,

      "Even the Catholic church is still growing and Islam and Mormonism are making gains."

      Mainly from their high birth rates. Watch the movie "Idiocracy" sometime - hilarious, but terrifying too...

      May 12, 2013 at 1:18 am |
    • redzoa

      Evolution is both a proven fact and a scientific theory. Evolution the proven fact involves a change in allele frequency in a population over time. Evolution the scientific theory involves empirical mechanistic evidence from every relevant scientific discipline to explain the pattern and processes producing observable extant and extinct biodiversity. If evolutionary theory were false, this would require that the entire scientific enterprise be so fundamentally flawed as to be effectively useless. Not just biology, but geology, physics, chemistry, astronomy, etc.

      Science doesn't "prove" anything. "Proof" is only available for math and formal logic. Science deals in evidence, probability, and validation. Science can be validated in repeated successful prediction. Evolutionary theory has been validated in the successful prediction of a wide range of biological observations, e.g., the fused 2nd human chromosome, the phylogenetic distribution of endogenous retroviruses, the relative positions and features of intermediate and transitional fossils, etc, etc. Evolution is further validated via direct applications ranging from medicine to agriculture to conservation biology.

      Evolution is taught in science classes because it is the only explanation supported by empirical physical evidence and validated by testing under the scientific method. ID/creationism is non-scientific, offers no testable hypotheses or mechanisms, and is invariably conceded to reflect a purely religious perspective. ID/creationism is not taught in science classes because it would violate the Establishment Clause's prohibition against advancement of religion with no legitimate secular purpose. Kitzmiller is only the most recent in a strong line of precedent reaching this holding.

      Regarding Vic's previous post, perhaps he should take a look at the science since Darwin. And by take a look at the science, I mean the actual science, not the negative arguments of incredulity targeting the religiously-motivated and scientifically illiterate as produced by AIG, ICR, and the Discovery Insti-tute. Lastly, given Vic's prior reference to the YEC site, ICR, I would ask how many oil/mineral companies employ the "superior" model of "flood geology" to locate reserves? Of course, the answer is zero. The real question is why would profit-motivated companies knowingly adopt such worthless mainstream geological science? I might also ask why humans have a defunct gene for egg yolk production, or the recurrent laryngeal nerve, or male nip-ples? In light of the failures of the various YEC models (ecozonation, hydrodynamic sorting, floating biomes, etc) why can creationists provide a reasonable explanation for the patterning of the major vertebrate classes within the fossil record, i.e. first fish, then amphibians, then reptiles, then mammals, then birds? Etc, etc, etc . . .

      May 12, 2013 at 1:23 am |
    • redzoa

      Oops. In the first paragraph of my post above, "proven fact" should have been in parentheses to reflect Vic's inappropriate use of the words . . .

      May 12, 2013 at 1:25 am |
    • Malcolm Z

      redzoa, nice post. Good ending, too.

      May 12, 2013 at 5:27 am |
    • Science

      Evolution wins Vic time for god(s)),,,,fairy in the sky ..........to get the HELL out of the way so HUMANITY can evolve.

      May 12, 2013 at 6:00 am |
  17. Vic

    In reference to the Confirmation Bias comment regarding:

    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/05/when-christians-become-a-hated-minority/comment-page-104/#comment-2336070

    I couldn't agree more!

    A classical example of confirmation bias is accepting the Evolution Hypothesis as fact!

    May 11, 2013 at 9:23 pm |
    • Rick

      It is a theory with glaring gaps.

      May 11, 2013 at 9:29 pm |
    • .

      A classical example of confirmation bias is accepting the Bible and Genesis as the way the earth was created as fact!

      May 11, 2013 at 9:38 pm |
    • Kell

      Vic is far too stupid to comprehend what confirmation bias is.

      May 11, 2013 at 9:58 pm |
    • Science

      Dover Trial Transcripts............................................. FACTS.

      Below are the complete transcripts from the Dover Trial. Thanks to our friends at the National Center for Science Education for helping us fill in the missing transcripts.

      http://www.aclupa.org/legal/legaldocket/intelligentdesigncase/dovertrialtranscripts.htm

      Education works for children

      May 11, 2013 at 9:59 pm |
  18. Haime52

    Edward Johnson, a communication professor at Campbell University in North Carolina, says we are now living in a "postmodern" era where everything is relative and there is no universally accepted truth. It's an environment in which anyone who says "this is right" and "that is wrong" is labeled intolerant, he says.

    ........ Today, people have reverted to an intellectual tribalism where they are only willing to consider the perspective of their own tribe.

    “They are incapable of comprehending that someone may have a view different than theirs,” Johnson says. “For them anyone who dares to question the dogma of the tribe can only be doing so out of hatred.”

    Well stated. This is the state in which we find ourselves. Civil conversation has become uncivil argument and hatred, on both sides of so many discussions.

    May 11, 2013 at 7:20 pm |
    • Piccard

      Very well said. There is no civilization any longer as I see it. But I remember it fondly.

      May 11, 2013 at 7:26 pm |
    • Doobs

      "Today, people have reverted to an intellectual tribalism where they are only willing to consider the perspective of their own tribe."

      Take out the word "intellectual" and he could be describing most religions.

      May 11, 2013 at 9:03 pm |
  19. Hey CNN Belief Blog

    I demand an article by Mohler.

    May 11, 2013 at 4:18 pm |
    • Belief Blog council

      NO! Stephen Prothero is next!

      May 11, 2013 at 4:22 pm |
    • I seen

      They have a Southern Baptist Minister lined up to demonstrate the correct way to burn a cross for Jesus.

      May 12, 2013 at 6:51 am |
  20. Andre (chosenone) Himes

    In a attempted to do the bidding of the white feminists as well as those SATANISTS from the deep south who have a long history of embracing whiite supremacy ,BILL CLINTON (the beast of revelation chapter 13) and his fallen black antebellum and hip hop angels have a made a strategic miscalculation ,since ANDRE HIMES miraculous survival in the future will be instrumental in leading many to the LORD JESUS CHRIST who had been guarding ANDRE life since the day he was born at SHAW AIR FORCE BASE on APRIL 30 1965 and there fore fulfilling bible prophecy ZEPHANIAN CHAPTER 3 verse 10 From beyond the rivers of Ethiopia my suppliants even the daughter of my disperse shall bring mine offering, Mean while a new demonic Black America has arisen from both the black antebellum and hip hop nation and have takening up stereotypicall images of low class, poverty stricken and criminally prone blacks and have replace the black human population who were exterminated during the black holocaust 1968-1993-2001.

    May 11, 2013 at 4:07 pm |
    • Athy

      Andre, are you by chance related to Lionlylamb?

      May 11, 2013 at 4:29 pm |
    • lol??

      lol??
      Your comment is awaiting moderation.
      Beasts are gubmints. The spirit that was in charge of Rome is in charge of the diverse beast, the USA. The NT version of the OT is Rome, Spain, British, Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and the melting pot.

      May 12, 2013 at 9:29 am |
    • midwest rail

      lol?? – it's a bit early for hallucinogenics. You should cut back.

      May 12, 2013 at 9:31 am |
    • fintastic

      Andre didn't get the warning about the brown acid...

      May 13, 2013 at 12:47 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.