Skip to main content

Salvation Army Major contends that gays should be put to death

It appears as if the following story I'm about to share broke out about a year ago, but I just stumbled upon it the other day.

In Australia, LGBT journalists Serena Ryan and Pete Dillon engaged in the following back-and-forths with Salvation Army Major Andrew Craibe:

Ryan (reading part of the Salvation Story: Salvationist Handbook of Doctrine): "'For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error...

They know God's decree, that those who practice such things deserve to die - yet they not only do them but even applaud others who practise them.'

...that says, according to the Salvation Army, that [they] deserve death. How do you respond to that, as part of your doctrine?"

Craibe: "Well, that's part of our belief system."

Ryan (cutting in): "So we should die."

Craibe: "You know, we have an alignment to the Scriptures, but that's our belief."

Ryan: "Wow, so we should die."

and

Ryan: "It's going into Romans again... I accept that you're out there wanting to help people... I don't accept that this sexuality that is part of my DNA is a choice. I also don't accept the support of any religion in a financial sense, and this is what the gay community is up in arms about: that you're proposing in your religious doctrine and the way that you train - this is part of your training of your soldiers - that because we're gay, that - we must die. If you go to Romans, book 1, 18-32, it's all there, mate. I mean, how can you stand by that? How is that Christian?"

Craibe: "Well, well, because that is part of our Christian doctrine -"

Ryan (interrupting): "But how is that Christian? Shouldn't it be about love?"

Craibe: "-that's our understanding of that. Well, the love that we would show is about that: consideration for all human beings to come to know salvation -"

Ryan: "Or die..."

Craibe: "Well, yes."

Mr. Craibe seems to exemplify the brainwashed mentality of many far-right evangelicals. The following made-up dialogue is the basic impression I get from people like Andrew Craibe when it comes to discussing homosexuality.


Setting: A philosophy class in some town by the name of Simpleton

Professor Sue Crates: "So, Ms. Susie-Jo Donthink,  is every Commandment absolute?"

Donthink: "Yes"

Crates: "Okay, why is this?"

Donthink: "Because it's in the Bible and my momma told me it too."

Crates: "But what about if a person steals food to survive? Is that morally wrong?"

Donthink: "Yes"

Crates: "Why?"

Donthink: "Because it's in the Bible and my momma told me it's wrong."

Crates: "What about killing? Is it wrong to kill in self-defense?"

Donthink: "Killing's always wrong. It's in the Bible and my momma told me so."

Crates: "What about adultery? What if woman agrees to sleep with a man who's not her husband - a very rich man - in exchange for the man to pay the money necessary for her husband to receive life-saving treatment of some kind for a potentially fatal illness?"

Donthink: "It's wrong. It's in the Bible and my momma told me that it's wrong."

Crates: "So every Commandment is absolute because that's what you were told by your pastor and mother - is that it?"

Donthink: "If they tell me it's wrong, I know it's wrong. It's in the Bible."

Crates: "Did either your pastor or mother write the Bible?"

Donthink: "I don't know - maybe."

Crates: "The Bible was written many years before either your mother or pastor were born, so it'd be literally impossible for either to have authored any part of it."

Donthink: "Okay..."

Crates: "My point is, how can you know every Commandment is absolute when being told this information by two people whom didn't write any portion of the book?"

Donthink: "It's in the Bible and that's what I was told to believe."

Crates: "Well, why not think for yourself?"

Donthink: "My momma told me that's what the devil does."

Crates: "So, it's good to take your pastor's and mother's word for it about what the Bible is really saying even though they never wrote any part of it, and is evil to think for yourself, even though we were all supposedly created by God? Is that right?"

Donthink: "You should stop thinking so much."

Crates: "Why on earth should I stop thinking? I'm a philosophy professor."

Donthink: "Because it's what the devil does. It's in the Bible."

Crates: "I thought you said that's what your mother told you."

Donthink: "She did. She wrote the Bible."

Crates: "Ugh! Class dismissed!"

http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2012/06/26448/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...