You get a lot of feedback when writing about controversial topics like religion. Often times the feedback helps me. Sometimes the anger directed at my blog means that I’ve said something that needed to be said, other times that I was over the top, or that I simply wasn’t articulate enough to write anything coherent. A lot of folks write more out of anger than they do to offer praise. But I get both kinds of feedback. I listen to it.
Much of the recent feedback has dealt with the United Church of Christ's banned ad, abortion rights, and Iraq. Check it out:
Chuck Currie is a great faith blogger. He has been on my list of pals for a long time now, and he has been all over this thing. One reason- he is UCC. If you have an interest in this, I suggest you go over and check out some of his posts. Chuck deserves a medal for the way he handles the fruitcakes that surf into his blog and argue with him. There is something especially irritating about that brand of Coup-coo birds he deals with, but for the most part he is humble and patient, dare I say...Christ-like, in dealing with them all.
- Distance
Related post: Can Christians Be Pro-Choice? Yes.
UCC blogger Chuck Currie is helping mount a protest against the ad rejection. Currie sees the networks' action as a threat to religious freedom.
Insofar as some major media groups decline to air religious viewpoints unless they are antigay or have the approval of the religious right, I agree that religious freedom is an issue here.
Related Post: Help The United Church of Christ Keep Our Public Television Airways Free From Censorship
Where the UCC and the pro-gay movement are going to get into trouble is in their relentless insistence that homosexual orientation be considered the same as race or sex. Here's an excerpt from Currie's post:
CBS and NBC's refusal to air the ad "recalls the censorship of the 1950s and 1960s, when television station WLBT in Jackson, Miss., refused to show people of color on TV," says Ron Buford, coordinator for the United Church of Christ identity campaign. Buford, of African-American heritage, says, "In the 1960s, the issue was the mixing of the races. Today, the issue appears to be sexual orientation. In both cases, it's about exclusion."
Since when are behaviors and feelings considered on the same level as race or sex? I know plenty of African-Americans who are extremely offended by the comparison.
Related Post: God Is Still Speaking But CBS And NBC Don’t Want You To Hear The Message
Like a frog moving from lily pad to lily pad, I tend to jump around through the blogosphere reading articles and generally seeing what’s going on. Somehow in this process I ran across Chuck Currie’s blog. Currie is self-described as a “United Church of Christ Seminarian” and a “liberal Christian,” which is all fine and dandy. However, in the first post I read, Chuck suggested that abortion was okay. So I got into a little discussion with Chuck.
What I found fascinating is that Chuck Currie won’t answer direct questions or challenges, particularly on key issues. For example, when I asked that he provide a Biblical basis for his belief that abortion is good, he simply referred me to another article, that simply states Christians can be pro-choice with no Scriptural backing (it did include a lot of links to other people, though).
Interestingly enough, he seems to base his entire position on the fact that there are starving children in the world. Odd, huh? So it’s better to kill them before they are born, Currie seems to be saying, than to let them live in hunger. Of course, I did ask this question and Chuck did not answer it.
In my mind this is the exact problem of Sola Scriptura as I know I’ve said before. Virtually all Christians can read the Bible and agree that it requires us to protect life. However, because no Scripture says “Abortion is a horrible sin,” (even though it’s close) there will always be those who try to say it is “okay” or “good.” My question has always been: what about the Chuck Curries’ of the world, how do you point out their error? Chuck seems very unwilling to even reference Scripture, and this guy is supposed to be seminarian!
Related post: Can Christians Be Pro-Choice? Yes.
A recent action by the U.S.military appears to have rankled many of my fellow Christians. Chuck Currie says that hearing the news made his blood pressure go up while Canadian blogger Bene lists numerous reasons the decision made was wrong. What heinous act do they find so disturbing? The military giving our troops Bibles.
Yes, my fellow Christians are disturbed that people are receiving Bibles.
Apparently, some people are shocked to find that the government provides Bibles (as well as copies of the Koran and Torah) to military personnel. Although religious materials have been provided by the government since the inception of the Chaplaincy – during the American Revolution -- they act as if this is a shocking new development.
From reading their remarks it appears they’re more concerned that some sacred doctrine of church/state separation might be violated than they are with the spread of God’s word. The fact that men and women in the military might find comfort in having a sacred text available while they are in a foreign land protecting the rights of Americans (and Canadians) to worship as they choose doesn’t seem to be a consideration.
Related Post: U.S. Special Forces Will Get Special Government Issued Bible
Feel free to add your feedback anytime in the comments section. All I ask is that you be respectful of me and others offering their views here.
