Okay. Hopefully someone can find the cite for me.
This morning on the local Cleveland Ohio news, a church custodian Church On The Rise in Westlake Ohio was beaten up, supposedly told “This is for Paul” the pastor, who had just preached that homosexuality was a sin.
The custodian was interviewed and said he thought the attackers were gay.
The pastor, a Paul Endrei, said this was a violation of free speech.
The media interviewed a Buck Forgothislastname, a gay rights spokesperson, who said this was preaching violence, and violence begets violence, thus seeming to claim that the pastor had it coming.
Comments?
I hope someone can find the link, it wasn’t in this mornings paper, but on the news.
I couldn’t find the cite either. But regarding the post, I believe that Buck Forgothislastname was right in a way…the preacher DID have it coming to him. Does that excuse it though? Absolutely not. But of course, this country is all about double-standards, so I wouldn’t be surprised if it were.
Well, I searched for this but have come up empty.
I’ll just comment on it as if it was true.
!)I think it’s a fruitless endeavor to do the apparent “eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth” thing.
2)If the preacher was speaking against homosexuality and then had a custodian beaten up because of it. Well, I really don’t follow how this equals itself out to “violence begets violence”.
3)If the preacher just said “this is a violation of my free speech” I think he’s missing the boat completely. This is just an act of violence that is no way condoneable.
4)Someone needs to smack some sense into Buck _____(Naked, perhaps?)
Without a cite it’s hard to evaluate this. We seem to have only the custodian’s word that incident happened at all or that they said what he claims they said (and how does he know they were gay?).
If a couple of gay men did beat up a custodian then they are idiots and they should go to jail but it really means nothing about gay people in general and the incidents of violence against gay people still outnumbers incidents like this by a factor of about a billion to one.
The pastor is a moron too, btw, but morons have a right to preach moronic opinions without getting attacked.
found it. Its not the whole thing, and they don’t mention Buck;)
www.fox8cleveland.com/dynamic/story.asp?category=140
On the interview this morning (and the guy looked beat up) , the custodian said they “looked gay” not that he was certain they were, or that thye even said “we’re gay!”.
I’m about to read the article you linked, and I can’t wait to find out how preaching that homosexuality is a sin is equal to preaching violence (although both could have happened).
How exactly does somebody “look” gay? :dubious:
Whatever happened, it was stupid and any violence committed on behalf of gay rights only hurts the movement instead of helping it.
Preaching bigotry can always be perceived as giving permission to commit violence.
I’d be interested in knowing exactly what the pastor said about homosexuality sand how harsh it was. Calling it a “sin” is in and of itself idiotic but he may have said more.
I totally agree with you there, Diogenes,. although sometimes, I have to admit. A good Rev Phelps whoppin’ sure wouldn’t hurt. (only joking)
Maybe the custodian has gaydar or maybe it was the “Fab 5” that bullied him up…
On a serious note,
If this happened as being reported, I have to say I’m really surprised. I echo the sentiments by saying that any movement towards equal rights for gays will be quickly hindered by this attack.
Is it idiotic or is it just preaching what the Bible says? I believe that the Bible does condemn homosexuality as a sin. If a pastor wants to relay the word of the bible and keep it truthful to its sources and the intended meanings behind the passages then that’s what he’s got to do.
Well, not much in terms of details yet. Beating up an innocent bystander because you disagree with what their pastor said – needless to say, that’s indefensible. Heck, the custodians at our church don’t even attend there – this guy could have been a gay-rights advocate for all the attackers know.
Of course, even their motive right now is just speculation.
The person was beaten with tennis rackets and lead gloves. I’d be on the lookout for a roving gang of country-club going welders.
It’s very debatable whether the Bible actually condemns homosexuality. Those passages that are often cited can be interpreted quite differently, especially when read in their original linguistic and cultural contexts, but even so, the Bible condones slavery as well. A pastor who was thumping the Bible in favor of slavery might be “Biblically correct” but he would still be an idiot.
I don’t understand this. Why should it mater much WHY they did it. They broke the law, punish them.
And it’s not a vialation of his free speech. It’s simply violence. Not to mention, only the government is prevented from violating. People can tell you to shut (although beating someone is not the way to do it).
Here are the Anti-Gay Interpretations
and
Here are the pro-gay interpretations
They’re both definitely fodder for another thread (and have been )
But still there doesn’t seem to be any more info about this OP info, for all we know, it could be the Gay Mafia doing a collection stop. Hopefully we can get fox8news to do some more reporting soon. (You know it’s a sad day when you’re waiting for Fox to give you “news”)
Its local Fox8, not teh “fair and balanced” one.
The pastor was shown mentioning Leviticus and had apparently said during sermon that homosexuals will go to Hell.
Although why beating up a custodian to “send a message” is odd.
We still don’t know thats WHY, they supposedly said to him “This is for Paul, the pastor”.
Maybe paul owes some money, I dunno. Will watch at 10 tonight for furthur info, though i am tempted to call the church as ask, not as a media person, but as a fellow chrisitian.
Will let ya know…
Though I can just hear some churches now saying Sunday"See! Persecution for telling the truth! The gays are after us! This is part of the agenda!"
Don’t think they won’t…
So it sounds like there’s no evidence that these guys were gay or that the assault had anything to do with anything the pastor’s views on homosexuality. All they said was “this is for Paul.” Like you said, vanilla, maybe he owed somebody money…hell, maybe he was boinking someone’s wife. From what we know currently I don’t see how we can conclude that the pastor is being targeted by homosexuals for his sermons.
Right, and maybe Matthew Shepard made a sexual advance to the guys who killed him.
Always interesting to see the instantaneous flip-flop in standards based on who gets targetted. If the victim is even tangentially pro-gay, it can’t possibly be anything but gay-bashing, the attackers are automatically guilty and deserve to rot forever in prison, it is society’s fault for not implementing gay marriage, etc., etc. If the crime is allegedly committed by gays, it’s probably the victim’s fault.
Nice.
Regards,
Shodan
I found Buck!!!
First however:
That’s according to Pastor Paul Endrei, the original alleged intended victim of this assault.
Then, to which Buck ignorantly responds:
By saying that, Buck is in turn preaching/condoning violence whereever tolerance isn’t. :wally
Buck needs to chill if he wants anyone to take him seriously.
First of all, “we love the homosexual” is not exactly intolerant hate speech, even when followed up by “we hate the sin [of homosexual behavior].”
Secondly, even if it were intolerant – let’s say he said, “we hate those gays and won’t have anything to do with them” – that’s not the same as advocating violence. It’s protected free speech. It’s ugly and unchristian, of course, but someone would have the right to say it.
Third, even if he had preached violence against gays, beating up the custodian because of it is a terrible response and brings the attackers down to the same level of depravity.
So Buck is way off base both in his characterization of the pastor’s sermon* and his defense of the attackers.
*based only on the short quote in the linked article