Gospel Irony in Maine? Yes, Lord, Yes

Maine voters are about to decide the fate of Proposition 1, which proposes a repeal of same-sex marriage in that state. And the campaign has turned … deeply ironic!

Via Avery’s good friend FK comes word of the “Yes On 1″ Singers, who vocalize their opposition to gay marriage with a song popularized by - wait for it - Kirk Talley, gospel music’s most famously outed tenor. The second time through on the chorus they’ve rewritten the lyrics, which are about good as their harmony.

Email this Post

Comments

  1. lovelife wrote:

    ouch!!!

  2. KC wrote:

    As we say where I’m from: “well bless their little heart.” :)

  3. DMP wrote:

    that was painful.

  4. cynical one wrote:

    My, my, my!

  5. Soli Deo Gloria wrote:

    Disgusting on every level.

  6. Kyle wrote:

    BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

  7. LarryS wrote:

    eeeeehhhhhh - what was the question again?

  8. Sensible wrote:

    This is an example of hearing gospel music songs, but not following the gospel music industry. It is also example of hearing but not listening to the harmony.

  9. Charlie wrote:

    I grew up with girls who looked and sounded like that and im sure had those same views.They called all of us guys “gay” because we choose not to marry within the church to women like this.We weren’t actually gay(well not all of us) we just couldn’t stomach living our lives locked up with close minded and bitter women who think singing three lead parts all over each other is harmony

  10. JLL wrote:

    I can forgive their views on Maine’s same-sex marriage laws. They have every right to oppose it. What I cannot forgive is that singing. That is the true abomination going on in Maine!

  11. JulieBelle wrote:

    I’m sure someone in their church told them they’re fabulous. Heard it too many times…how very sad.

  12. Joshua Cottrell wrote:

    #9 Who said they were bitter women? They simply have a belief, based on scriptural authority, that they are expressing.
    Maybe they are not polished singers but do we really have to make fun of someone for caring about the state of marriage in this country.
    Maybe the bitter people is Doug and the others of you who want Christians to accept your wicked unholy lifestyle.

  13. joe wrote:

    #12 OK now, take a pill and calm down.

  14. Janice Kieft wrote:

    Yes, Lord, Yes is written by Lynn Keesecker, not Kirk Talley. So I think perhaps you should alter your comment. Look it up!

  15. newlywedgirl wrote:

    That is horrible singing!!! OUCH!!!

  16. Jesse wrote:

    Ok! Great message, awful singing. The question is, does the awful singing degrade the message? Answer: You better believe it does!

  17. DMP wrote:

    #12, you are right. The state of marriage is in serious trouble, but it has nothing to do with gay people. 50% of straight people divorce.

  18. quartet-man wrote:

    Doug, are you awesome? Do you have a bro code? ;-)

  19. dd wrote:

    Fairly attractive girls. I have to wonder if this video wasn’t doctored. It sounded like someone was singing bass.

  20. Irishlad wrote:

    Girls in Ireland,esp.N.Ireland are much better looking.Walking around Louisville once or three times was to witness some of the ugliest wimmin i ever laid eyes on,ever.There i’ve said it……ouch.

  21. Lewis Wells wrote:

    #17…Well stated. Couldn’t agree more.

  22. Joshua Cottrell wrote:

    #17 The 50% divorce rate myth has been disproved many times. Here is just one link to that fact: http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/d/divorce.htm
    Sure any divorce is bad, but too many times lies perpetuated as truth, start to make the lie become truth.

  23. Clarence Grigsby wrote:

    Irishlad, you are a jerk. You can take your opinion of American women and stick it where the sun doesn’t shine. There are beautiful women in Ireland and I certainly hope, for their sakes, that you aren’t typical of the men over there. If you ever return to our fair country, I’m sure that there are plenty male American SG fans, myself included, that would be glad to teach you some respect and manners.

  24. Irishlad wrote:

    Top of the morning to ya Grigs.

  25. Odeliya wrote:

    Are those girls for real? i mean, you guys sure its not a parody, a spoof ? Someone knows them, or their church, etc to verify thats not just a clever way to make fun of stupid fundies and their idiotic,worst- possible, counterproductive ways of presenting their message, killing all respect people still have for Christians while doing it?

  26. SG Girl wrote:

    I second #6… on every level… BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

  27. wanderer wrote:

    So what if the singing isn’t 100% right on. It doesn’t look to me like they’re trying to get a record deal. Just three ladies expressing their viewpoint and doing a little backyard singing.

  28. RDB wrote:

    What were they hoping to accomplish? What was the reasoning behind this stunt? Is this supposed to spur people to support this Proposition 1? Or is it supposed to make people too sick to go out and vote?

  29. cynical one wrote:

    Irishlad — I can see how observing the NQC crowd might turn you off to American women. Who was is that said the biggest problem with SGM was that it had too many fat and ugly people?

    But get away from the expo center, and you’ll find many great looking Kentucky girls. Remember, Kentucky is “the land of beautiful women and fast horses.” Or is it the other way around — “beautiful horses and fast women?” I always get that confused.

  30. Soli Deo Gloria wrote:

    #29- “Who was is that said the biggest problem with SGM was that it had too many fat and ugly people?”

    No idea, but I’ll second it.

  31. BUICK wrote:

    #14, Avery did not say KT WROTE it. He said KT POPULARIZED the song. Go to the top of the page and “look it up” as you so kindly phrased it. From his “OUT FRONT” recording of 2000, I believe.

  32. Butch wrote:

    Regardless of how bad that harmony was, I think there is little doubt in all of our minds what God’s opinion is on this subject. I think even Dougie knows-though he plays for the other team.

  33. Irishlad wrote:

    #29 that was a pleasant way to be reprimanded thank you.Now,i’ve had the privilige to be downtown Louisville(and many other American cities)there are indeed many fast women and beautiful horses .Vice versa.Point well and truely taken.

  34. cynical one wrote:

    Irish, I wasn’t really trying to reprimand, as much as attempting to be humorous. As I married a very pretty Kentucky girl, and she has some very pretty relatives, I’m guessing a large percentage of the ugly ones you saw in Kentucky we at Freedom Hall.

    Let’s face it, though, there are pretty girls, and there are ugly girls, everywhere we turn. We just have to learn that we can be as picky as we want. Don’t settle!

  35. wackythinker wrote:

    Well, it look like Prop 1 passed in Maine, in spite of the lack of musicality of these girls, and their changing of copyrighted material. I hate it when people do that.

  36. KC wrote:

    Maybe they’ll write new lyrics to Thank You, by Ray Boltz…Thank You, for passing Prop 1! They could have a whole video series of songs made popular by the homos, with new lyrics. :)

  37. Rick wrote:

    Re: #36- Well, KC. Maybe the “homos” could bring a fresh perspective to SG. Lord knows the breeders have put out more than their fair share of dreck.

  38. buttercup wrote:

    I guess more Maine voters than we thought are monitoring and influenced by Avery!

  39. DMP wrote:

    Rick, you must have forgotten. SG fans don’t mind womanizing, they just hate homosexuals.

  40. Odeliya wrote:

    @39 care to elaborate for me a bit, DMP?I am new to the scene. SG fans hate homosexuals? I have quite a few gay friends, so if that is true, its disturbing. Aren’t people that bill themselves as Christians suppose to love the sinner ? :)

  41. quartet-man wrote:

    #40, although there may be some who hate homosexuals, most just hate what they do because of the Bible stating it is wrong. Too often, when anyone conveys God word on the matter, we get accused of hate or being afraid of them (homophobic.) I am neither. Sure cheating on one’s spouse, sleeping together before marriage, lying, stealing, lusting (oh boy getting close to home) etc. are sinful and perhaps don’t get as much attention, but I think part of that is they don’t get brought up as often. So may homosexuals are pushing for acceptance and are fighting for it (and I do understand their doing so) that it brings it to the forefront. When brought up, of course many of us will comment. I would do the same if someone got on here and said that the previous things are fine, they were made that way and we should accept them.

  42. quartet-man wrote:

    Sorry, so MANY homosexuals……. :-)

  43. Soli Deo Gloria wrote:

    “Homosexuality is an abomination!” said the morbidly obese gospel singer from the stage as his crowd began to dwindle.

    He followed that statement with a little idol worship of the “Grand Ole Flag.” It got him a standing ovation.

  44. lovelife wrote:

    I keep coming back to this video. These girls are probably not over 25 yrs. old, yet they look….older.

  45. Irishlad wrote:

    #44 that reminds me of a quote from the “Devil’s punchbowl”by a great native of Natchez Miss.Greg Ilses.He noticed that Southern girls in their 30s looked fantastic from the rearview,however their faces told a different story.

  46. Irishlad wrote:

    BTW fundies don’t even attempt to read him,he’s much too grown up for you.You might even go to hell.

  47. KC wrote:

    #37–Maybe someday the NQC will have the Favorite Gay Quartet Award. :)

  48. Rick wrote:

    Re: #47- KC, one can always hope.

  49. Wade wrote:

    47 & 48… There are enough of them on the road… they will not even have to start a new group… just get out of the closet they keep themselves in on THE BUS!!

  50. Randy wrote:

    #47- There wouldn’t be enough awards to split it 150 different ways.

  51. Shut. Up. wrote:

    You guys are pathetic. SG is not dominated by gay people! Of course there are exceptions, but get a grip already.

  52. Wade wrote:

    51… Shut Up…not tell you to shut up you just chose that for your sockpuppet name… but yeah SHUT UP… if you only knew. Do you really think Kirk Talley was the only one. Not bangin’ on Kirk cause I am listening to I KNOW A MAN WHO CAN right now on he Cat’s Reunion CD… But PULEASE… it is way more than you think… if some of the folks really knew the realness, as my friend Irish Laddy & before Him Tangie says, you fundies would not go to a multiple group event!!!

    Shut Up as you say get a grip…believe me that is what they are doing and you don’t even know it!!

    Keep your head in the sand all ya want. But There could be Gay Days at many multiple group events.

    RIGHT BEFORE YOUR EYES!!!

  53. Shut. Up. wrote:

    Not among the groups I listen to. Sorry. Name one member of Gold City that is gay. How about the Kingdom Heirs? Or, let’s say Triumphant Quartet? Perrys? Hoppers?

    Negative. So, I repeat SHUT THE FREAK UP.

  54. Odeliya wrote:

    @41 Thanks for the explanation, Quartet -man.I thought so; most SG fans i’ve had privilege to know and communicate with so far appear to be decent people, i cant even imagine that they could feel deep hate against homosexuals or any other sinner for that matter.

    As for “eye, log speck” situations, we all are guilty of that at times :)

  55. Wade wrote:

    Shut Up… So the NEVER in MY HOUSE defense huh??? Well by that defense and the groups you named you showed just how naive you really are.

    I am not going to name names because it does not make any difference to me. I am not a HATER!!

    Like I said earlier I was enjoying listening to Kirk Talley’s I KNOW A MAN WHO CAN just earlier this afternoon!!!

    But I will help you get the sand outta your ears from your head being in the sand!!

  56. kingsmenfan2008 wrote:

    #53, Shut Up… Are you even serious? There are 3, if not 4 musicians in the groups you named that are flamers… besides that, Wade is right!! as in right on!!!
    Wake up dude!! You are enjoying music filled with homos and cussin sailors! And they are in the groups you mentioned. OMG!!! Say it isn’t so!!!

  57. Joe wrote:

    Sigh. Haven’t been here for 6 weeks, and what is the first thing I see? Another homosexual thread. Every time I return, makes me glad I stayed away.

    Might as well rename this web site AVERYGAYFINELINE, Doug. That is about all it has become.

    To my now good buddy Wade- just because a thing is, doesn’t make it right. And if it really is, and it is wrong, then it is best not to glamorize it, methinks.

    My wife and I just got back from 6 days in New Orleans. Had to go for the national conference. Yes- we walked Bourbon Street. In the middle of the day. Felt like a fish out of water. Never saw so much abject, disgusting, in-your-face unrighteousness in my entire life.

    How ANYBODY can claim that this behavior is “normal”, has simply transcended abnormality. Common sense would tell you that, and very quickly.
    Scriptural sense is far harsher of a sentence upon this behavior. So harsh, that none of them will find a place in Heaven.

    As Billy Graham once said, “If God doesn’t soon punish the USA, He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrha”.

    At least He’s punished New Orleans an inordinate amount of times- but they haven’t awakened yet.

  58. Smokin' Gun wrote:

    One must consider these ladies are in New England. Perhaps they studied harmony and theory under Charles Ives.

  59. Irishlad wrote:

    57 Joe,you just might have been in N’Orleans when God decided to “punish” it.Pity.

  60. Lewis Wells wrote:

    #56…While I agree that there’s no scarcity of homosexuals in gospel music, whether closet or practicing, suspected or known, I can speak from absolute certain knowledge concerning one of the groups mentioned by #53 that there are no homosexuals in their organization, as I was a part of it for several years, and knowing the majority of the personnel fairly well in the other groups mentioned, I believe I can say the same of them with some certainty.

    If you want to throw stones at any of those groups, that’s your choice as, just like you and me, they’re far from perfect people, but the one you throw in your post is misguided.

  61. Lewis Wells wrote:

    To clarify a point re: my previous post, I don’t know the Kingdom Heirs particularly well and can’t speak for or of them on a personal level, but the rest I do.

  62. Lewis Wells wrote:

    #22…Keep in mind that you’re using a website called “truthorfiction.com” as a definitive source. They may be right. I don’t know. But even THEY, who appear to approach the issue with an agenda, conceded the research of one group suggests/projects that as many as 43% of marriages are apt to end in divorce.

    Regardless, too many people, and far too many Christian people, don’t value and protect their own vows of marriage nearly as much as they worry about the “sanctity” of marriage in the political realm. I know a professing Christian man who gets red in the face about “gay marriage”, wants to protect the sanctity of marriage, yadda yadda. This man is also working on his 4th marriage, which I expect to be over in less than 5 years - if it lasts that long.

  63. wackythinker wrote:

    Lewis #62 — I imagine the man you referred to in the latter part of this post wanted to protect the sanctity of ALL of his previous marriages, just as much as he’d like to protect the sanctity of his latest one.

  64. DMP wrote:

    No, this site should be called a very hypocritical line. I had my head removed for asking questions about the Penrod departure. I was told to let people have their own personal lives, they are not owned by us, and what they do in their own time is their own business. But start talking homoerotic love, and the gloves come off. Love the sinner, and go worry about your own sin. You guys are the McCarthy’s of a southern gospel homo hunt.

  65. Lewis Wells wrote:

    #63…You would be incorrect. He valued the sanctity of marriage number three by fooling around with future marriage number four.

  66. DMP wrote:

    Lewis, they don’t care about unbiblical sex unless it is homosexual sex. Then, it matters. Seems to me they should be more worried about the log in their own eye. Pun intended.

  67. Shut up wrote:

    Wade, kingsmenfan2008, et. al,

    Funny how you have YET to mention one name. Further, a former member of one of these groups just commented and shot down your theory.

    Still waiting…until you give me even ONE name what your saying is a pile of….

    Still screaming, shut. the. lies. up.

  68. quartet-man wrote:

    DMP, do not lump all of us together. I know I am not the only one who believes that sex outside of marriage (fornication OR adultery) are wrong and that is because the Bible says it. I am relatively sure I have gone on record here regarding that (likely more than once and possibly most, if not all the times this subject is broached and I commented.)

    I also believe abortion is murder, lust is wrong (and I am really sure I have said that and that it is something I have had problems with in my life) Stealing is wrong, lying is wrong, envy, greed and many other things,

    SO, you are wrong. Perhaps there are some who only see homosexual sex as sin, but I am also convinced that most believe it is wrong too, but the homosexual thing is brought up here a lot and thus commented on. Just because disclaimers are not uttered saying premarital sex and adultery are wrong each time the homosexual thing is brought up, doesn’t mean we don’t believe it is.

    As far as the Penrod thing, as I recall, I don’t think anyone was saying whatever he did (if he did) wasn’t wrong, it was that we shouldn’t disclose what it was. If you notice, people also haven’t pointed out who are homosexuals (except Doug who sort of outed himself in a way), we are talking about the action itself. I would hope that if whatever Guy might have done was brought up as a subject, that we would say it was wrong if it is. I would.

    However, it must also be noted that these actions (be it being an active homosexual or whatever else sin is brought up) can be discussed without saying who is doing them and it also depends on whether these things are attempted to be justified by those who did them, or if the person knows they are wrong and says they were wrong and either have or are working on stopping them. If you notice, most people didn’t give Michael English a pass with his adultery and although we hated that it happened, loved him and wanted him to get past it, forgiven and restored, we didn’t justify the action. His attitude at the time also kept people from supporting him as much because in some ways it seemed to many that he was trying to excuse it.

    So, you are very wrong with most.

  69. cynical one wrote:

    DMP — Isn’t the line supposed to be “Love the sinner, if he shares your own secret sin”?

    By the way, the rumor I heard about GP had to do with [edit]. Don’t know if it’s true, but it’s the one I heard. And if it’s true, I can understand the poster who said it wasn’t big enough to get fired over. Not that I agree, but I can understand the statement being made.

  70. DMP wrote:

    Cynical, I’ll guess by the edit you are right. And I agree.

    Quartet Man, are you a father? Most guys I know would wish their son to be a womanizer than a homosexual…

  71. Lewis Wells wrote:

    DMP…Your point in #70 is a valid one. If I had a son, it would be mentally and emotionally easier for me to deal with him being a womanizer than being a homosexual…and I would be using a gross, horrible, spiritual double-standard.

    There are many womanizers, homosexuals, potty-mouths, people who strike me as ego-driven, and people whom I generally question their salvation experience involved in gospel music - on ALL levels, from weekend warriors to top-dogs. Always has been, and unfortunately, until “image” becomes less of a factor in the industry, and artists actually allow people to see how the sausage is made without trying to frame it all in wholesome, gooey, evangelical goodness, well, there always will be.

    Not trying to throw stones here with what I’m saying, but really, anyone with any common sense realizes that performers are people, just like we are, with everyday problems, just like everyone else, and what you see on the stage is often merely a sampling of the whole. While you don’t have to condone any particular behaviors, none of it should come as a realistic surprise.

    And, there are some very genuine people involved in gospel music despite the unsavory stuff. There are a handful of people whom I wouldn’t hesitate to call if I wanted a prayer partner. Connie Hopper, Joel Hemphill (despite what many have heard about him), Channing Eleton, Johnathan Bond among them. Many others.

    That said, there are those who shall remain nameless who I wouldn’t want praying for the family pet.

    Those who enjoy the music should just enjoy the music, because sorting the good from the bad, heart and people-wise, with as little of the artists lives as the public sees, could make one’s head explode.

  72. quartet-man wrote:

    #70 DMP, no I am not. I am single and I am a virgin. I chose to remain so due to my beliefs. I am putting my money where my mouth is.

    I concede that you do have a point that given a choice between the two (meaning it had to be one or the other and couldn’t be neither), many men would choose for their sons to be womanizers over homosexuals. However, that is not much of a point. It might show that most men might find being homosexual disgusting, unnatural, etc. but it doesn’t mean that they find the other to be okay. Some might even go as far as to think or say that being homosexual is worse than being a womanizer. However, both are sin and both can send one to hell. Now I am defining a womanizer as someone sleeping around, if you just mean that they date I would change my stance.

  73. quartet-man wrote:

    #70 DMP, By the way, I went back and looked at the first part of your comment that I had replied to, and what you said was “they don’t care about unbiblical sex unless it is homosexual sex.” That is not the same as saying that they find homosexuals to be worse. On that I might just agree that at least some just might feel that way, but I still disagree that they don’t care and besides, your words were “they” which I take to mean anyone who objects to homosexuality, but admittedly I haven’t looked back (at least not now) on what the person you were replying to said to set this up.

  74. Shut up wrote:

    I love it how these guys never answered my question.

    They obviously have no idea what they’re talking about.

    And Wade, don’t even bother responding if you can’t give me a name.

    This is truly hilarious. Silence….

  75. Shut up wrote:

    “These guys,” meaning Wade and kingsmenfan2008. Not quartet-man, Lewis Wells, etc.

  76. DMP wrote:

    But the point is, I don’t ever see anyone trying to “out” womanizing SG singers. There is an obsession when it comes to homosexuals. I agree they are equal sins, but within this realm, they are not treated equal.

  77. Lewis Wells wrote:

    DMP…For the most part, I agree, but I can tell you of one instance, without going into the specifics, where some powerful men in the industry were having a meeting, and a name was brought up which has been attached to the homosexual lifestyle, with the undercurrent being that this person should be less considered, perhaps even punished in a sense, for his lifestyle by the powers that be, and another man in the meeting spoke up and reminded this group of men that some of them hadn’t exactly been saints themselves (i.e. womanizing), and if they were going to judge one, then judge all - equally. Good for this man.

  78. quartet-man wrote:

    #76, once again you are correct that more people try to out gays than those who do other sins. I don’t know if that is due to the fact that because being gay is something they aren’t tempted with so it is easier to point fingers, or if it is due to the Bible’s calling it an abomination, or what, but you might be right that more people want to “out” that behavior. It still doesn’t mean that the other is condoned or not cared about.

  79. quartet-man wrote:

    You know, thinking about it a little more makes me think that part of it might be that “womanizing” although wrong seems more natural than being gay. That might be it.

  80. DMP wrote:

    “I don’t know if that is due to the fact that because being gay is something they aren’t tempted with so it is easier to point fingers”

    I think you have it 100% right here.

  81. quartet-man wrote:

    #80 Nonetheless, Even if their motives are less than stellar. Now, that might make them go after that sin with more fervor and certainty, but it doesn’t change what the Bible says.

  82. Wade wrote:

    Dr. Joe… We had been doing good while you were gone I promise. But when you have ppl like SHUT UP claiming there are NO Gay ppl in the groups she likes then she can be proud for being a follower, probably a diesel sniffer of some.

    SHUT UP …Honey I could name some names for ya, but 2 things. Dr. DH would probably not let them through and 2nd some of them are married and just CARRY on while on the road.

    Also it would not really matter but my offer is still open to help you get the sand outta your ears!!!

    God Bless Your Heart!!

  83. Odeliya wrote:

    The only problem with this is that by doing it they come dangerously close to appear hypocritical speck-from-brother’s-eye removers.
    And I personally seen how this type of behaivor of loveless religionists drives unsaved people away from the church and Christianity.

    All my gay friends know what i am a Christian and condemn homosexuality. However i never fail to assure them that I am often guilty of bigger sins, like hate, and that makes me a murderer.

  84. Odeliya wrote:

    Oops, previous post was a reply for the gentleman #81 :)

  85. Lewis Wells wrote:

    #82…No one is claiming there are no homosexuals in gospel music, but do me a favor, please: Name the homosexuals in the Hopper, Triumphant, Gold City, or Perry organizations, because where at least THOSE groups are concerned, I’d prefer you either fess up or drop it.

  86. DMP wrote:

    Don’t you realize how stupid this is? What if he gives you a name? Unless you email the singer and ask him if he really does “know a man that can,” it is pointless.

  87. KC wrote:

    #85 - I’m no guru on the homos in southern gospel. Nor am I even up on who is currently in each group (they change like the weather). Nor have I been engaged in this gay topic. But, I thought I’d chime in anyway! I thought Shannon Childress, Greg Bentley, and Kirk Talley (all former Hopper members) were a tad gay. Therefore, I would assume Claude and Connie are gay-friendly at the least. Have you seen Connie’s outfits lately? She MUST have southern queens helping her out. ;-) Or maybe they’re just Eunuchs!

  88. Lewis Wells wrote:

    #86…DMP, I wouldn’t need to email. I know these people personally. I know them well. I’ve known most of them for many years. They, like the rest of us, have many elements in their lives that one could take issue with if so disposed, but being “homos” isn’t one of those issues.

    I agree that by and large it’s a pointless exchange. I suppose when people I know are concerned, and statements about them can be construed as defamatory, I tend to want to defend them.

  89. quartet-man wrote:

    #83, there is a difference in saying it is wrong and not saying it. Between telling them it is fine and it is not. Between knowing you fall short and being afraid to tell them what God says. Part depends on the attitude of the person saying it. I am less than perfect and realize it. I don’t point out that it is wrong and do the same thing or think I am perfect. And most importantly, telling them what God says isn’t be hypocritical. What would make it hypocritical is if I said it was wrong to do something, and me say it is okay for me to do it.

    I am not about to say that every time I see a homosexual I always remind them that they are wrong, if at all.

    However, one thing about homosexual sin that is different than other sins is that if someone chooses to be an active homosexual (in contrast to someone who had the feelings like Kirk Talley and not act on them (going by what he said, I wasn’t there. ;-) ) is that it isn’t like deciding to steal a candy bar, lie, sleep with a girlfriend or whatever, is that it is often a lifetime decision (meaning to keep doing it.) Sure, someone can decide to always cuss or take up a life of crime or to always remain single, but sleep with women at which point it is the same type of thing.

  90. Shut. Up. wrote:

    Lewis, you’re right on. I have actually contacted Wade on his facebook account, to no response.

    Bottom line: He’s making wild, unbased, untrue, defamatory statements about men of God and I. Have. HAD. IT!

    SHUT. UP.

  91. cynical one wrote:

    Quartet-man, it’s like you’ve been having an epiphany. The homosexual attraction, unlike some would have us think, is not the sin. It’s the action. Just as admiring a beautiful woman whom we’re not married to, the candy bar we can’t afford, or that huge meal we know we shouldn’t eat, would not be sin. It’s how long we linger on those thoughts/feelings (lust) and whether we act.

    And you were right — the Bible makes no distinction that one sin is any worse than another. It’s our own perception and society that makes those distinctions. And as for your comment that one is more “natural” than another, that’s only what seems “natural” to each person. I’m not sure we should consider ANY sin “natural’, since they’re all against God’s will. Some people would even use the idea that because something “feels natural”, it must be ok. Not so!

    Now, as for the people here who claim they KNOW these performers, and can vouch for every area of their lives: BALONEY!!!! Most of us who say that only see these folks in and around concert situations. We don’t visit them in their homes, or have them in our homes, go fishing with them, shopping at the mall, etc. We only see them when they have their public faces on.

    Now a few of you may be exceptions to that, but many of those performers probably have secret sins you and I know nothing about (hence the word SECRET). People who have gone to church with you for decades (even family members) don’t know your secret sins. They only THINK they know you. Your dog probably doesn’t even know ALL there is to know about you, and he probably knows you as well as anybody on earth.

    So there!

  92. Odeliya wrote:

    #88
    Absolutely not, that is not the definition of hypocrisy.

    Hypocrisy is not just advocating or condemning a particular act while doing the opposite. It’s pretending to have a certain set of virtues, values and standards that you don’t have.

    For example: Carrie Prejian, disgraced Miss something, is a hypocrite. Proclaiming to be a godly christian woman and bash homosexuality because God condemns is (which is true!) while making porn videos, and videos of herself masturbating for her boyfriend is classical case of hypocrisy.

    Hyporcisy is essentially “not practicing what you preach” That means if we preach christian virtues , we should practice them, and when we fail, openly admit it.
    To say “I am an adulterer but i am not a homo, so i can bash homo lifestyle as being ungodly” is HYPOCRISY.

    That is what my post 83 was about.

    Also re: lifetime of sin, its a deeper issue..Many christians engage in lifetime sins, homosexual that makes a lifetime choice is not worse then greedy pastor that made a lifetime choice to be such ;)

  93. Lewis Wells wrote:

    #87…You assume incorrectly. Although they don’t judge any particular sin or shortcoming any more harshly than another, people have been let go from their organization for behaviors or choices unbecoming a Christian ministry over the years. Remember, it’s one thing to be perceived as gay, a womanizer, or whatever, another thing to actually engage in or promote those behaviors.

    I’ve heard the words from Claude’s own mouth, “any behavior that brings reproach upon the Lord”, as the standard.

    By the same token, Claude and Connie, more than most people realize, believe in giving a person every second chance. They probably wouldn’t want me to say as much, but when people in the industry fall into the aftermath of poor personal choices, Claude and Connie are usually among the first to step in to try and help an individual rebuild whatever may be broken.

    They’ve dealt with a lot in over 50 years, and by anyone’s standard, dealt with it fairly well. Their bus and office isn’t one known to accommodate behaviors unbecoming to their ministry or the vision of their ministry. Nevertheless, they’re people just like you and me, and as public figures, they’re prime targets for scrutiny in their field. I, and they, have no problem with that. I would just hope the criticisms are fair and honest.

  94. quartet-man wrote:

    #91, I had that epiphany quite some time ago because temptation isn’t sin, it is doing it. I thought I had said as much here before when this came up, but maybe not.

    My comment about natural is that God made men and women to be together, therefore, man wanting to be with a woman is natural. Taking it to the extreme and lusting after a woman you aren’t married to or acting on it the same is where sin enters the picture and it is a corruption of what God intended.

  95. quartet-man wrote:

    #92, yes you defined hypocrisy well too, but I have also been taught the way I at least tried to explain it. I could say lust is wrong even if I have lusted before because God says it is. If I tell someone they are wrong to do it and then don’t realize that I do it (or realize it is wrong when I do it) or see it in me, then I am a hypocrite.

    As far as Carrie Prejan, first she did not BASH homosexuality. She answered a question that was given to her likely to trip her up. Even if it weren’t, it had no place there. One judge was trying to push his agenda. Nonetheless, she was very respectful and honest in her answer and her answer is the same that Obama has, but no one bashed him for it. At least not the same who are bashing her.

    As far as her being a hypocrite, I disagree. Her video and other things are wrong, but they weren’t done the day before she was asked that question. It was likely years before. If someone cannot say what God says or share an opinion based on what God says or they interpret God says because they have sinned in life before limits Jesus to being the only one who can.

  96. Wade wrote:

    Tyler…aka… SHUT UP!! Why would I name names???… I like the music and I like some of the ppl I would name.

    Some are married and have kids but get a little freaky. I am not a hater. But you seemed to be WAY MORE in to this than a normal person should.

    I like the music… it does not matter to me some1’s person life.. Ahhh for the days of being idealistic.

    Plus to you have all the ones messing with THE OPPOSITE sex out of marriage, well some in but messing with others…

    But really just enjoy the message and the music… if you are around long you will figure some of it out!! or NOT.

    Sorry I mistaken you for a woman… very few straight guys worry about stuff like this…

    As far as shutting up and being silent some of us just have a life and do not worry who is gay and who ain’t.

    Get one… you will care less too!!!

    Your probably just wanting leads!! ;-)))

  97. DMP wrote:

    Wade has names and yooooooou don’t. Wade has names and yoooooooou don’t. Geeee Wade, does your post remind you of anything? Speaking of Hypocrites.

  98. Wade wrote:

    DMP…

    The difference in what you did and what I have said is I doubt seriously you had your facebook & regular inbox blowin’ up over your teasing cause THAT is what you were doing… I am not.

    I do not care. I still love the music they make gay, straight, bi, womanizers, swingers, drug users. drinkers etc. There be some of them in ALL those groups.

    Everybody I saw on the site was just trying to get you to SHUT UP and you kept wanting to talk. I will be fine if I never talk about this again.

    I was just trying to jade a young idealistic fan who will probably get hurt real bad some day when he finds out his HERO(s) just like many actors, are not the same ppl that are on stage or at the product table!!

    You DMP where just trying to be SMARK… yes SMARK… a Smart Mark… but you were really a blow hard fan who’s information nobody cared about and several told ya.

    But every time they did you came back and did it again…and you know what…

    WE STILL DON’T CARE!!!

  99. DMP wrote:

    Wade,
    You are an odd man. I say you know nothing. And if you do, perhaps it is because you have “first hand” information about the situation. You hate me because you think I am doing what you ARE doing. And what on earth do you know about my inbox?! Take your meds Wade. Take your meds…

  100. Faith wrote:

    Wow, this has gone totally off topic here! But those singers…fugly. And tone-deaf.

  101. QwertyJuan wrote:

    I can’t believe some of you here think that homosexuality is ok. It’s as much a sin as, stealing, swearing, cheating or lying… well if you believe the Bible it is. I guess maybe some of you guys believe in Evolution too??

  102. KC wrote:

    #101- hi, thought you may find this interesting :)

    http://home.earthlink.net/~ggghostie/abominations.html

  103. QwertyJuan wrote:

    Nice to see that site pulling everything from the old Testament. How about something from the NEW TESTAMENT?? We are no longer under the law… but seeing as you are such a BIBLE scholar, you already know that, right??

  104. KC wrote:

    #103 - Ha! I am FAR from a Bible scholar, my friend. Was just thinking you’d enjoy the link (I’m not the author). Hope you have a blessed day! :)

  105. QwertyJuan wrote:

    The link is interesting for sure, but I am not an Orthodox Jew, and as such, the Mosaic Laws mean nothing to me. Even a Jew that has been converted to Christianity doesn’t have to abide by the Old Testament laws according to Paul.

    P.S. I am not a Bible scholar either, but have memorized many verses of the Bible, and according to Paul, us Gentiles don’t even need to be circumcised, and what more reason to rejoice! :)

  106. KC wrote:

    Hi QwertyJuan: I’m glad you enjoyed the link. At first I thought I riled you up and caused you to yell at me. :-)

    I decided to e-mail the author of that link and share with him your feedback. Here is what he e-mailed back today. Maybe you’ll be interested in reading it, too!

    “I’m delighted to have a reader, and while I’m not an expert on these matters, I generally include several parts of the NT in my thinking. One, Christ never mentioned homosexuality; others grandfather it in because Christ did not reject the OT, and St. Paul did mention it, but it wasn’t a hot button for Jesus himself.

    Two, St. Paul said that women should keep silent in church, and that’s pretty universally ignored these days; people tend to take his advice selectively, as they do that offered in the OT.

    Three, in 1 Corinthians 6:9-20, Paul pretty much unloads on everyone: swindlers, the greedy, drunkards, adulterers, prostitutes of all genders. The commentaries note that he was trying to distance Christianity from other sects and from the general depravity of the public, but I simply take it as condemnation of all sin and a warning that sin has a price in this world as well as the next. It fits in with “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”

    Christ made the point that even thinking sinful thoughts is sinful, so there’s no real beating it; no one lives a sinless life. We’re all sinners, and suggesting that some sins are “real sins” or worse than others is a sneaky way of excusing our own sins while directing attention to others.

    I think the reason homosexuality is such a big deal with some Christians is because it’s only 4% of the population, so they feel safe in condemning it. Who wants to hear a sermon on “Let he who has two tunics give one to he who has none”? Because lots of people have two tunics, about 100% of almost any congregation. So, people look for a sin that isn’t theirs, and condemn it to show their own holiness. It might work on Sunday, but I wouldn’t want to try it on the Day of Judgment.

    At the end of the day, I’m simply pleading “no contest” and throwing myself on the mercy of the court.

    I hope this is in some way helpful.”

  107. QwertyJuan wrote:

    Guess what? I agree with this guy 100%. All of the things he listed are indeed sins. And not to sound Holy or righteous, but I try my very best to adhere to all of them. I don’t work on Sundays, I try my best to not lust after woman, I don’t drink(or do drugs), I give THOUSANDS of dollars every year to my local church as well as missionaries in other countries.(Nearly 20% of my GROSS income in fact).

    P.S. I will also mention that the New Testament DOES mention that Homosexuality is sin, and even states that just “ACTING” effeminate is a sin in itself….

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effeminacy

  108. KC wrote:

    I guess the point is in your reply. :) You list “sins” you don’t do (work on Sundays, drink, drugs), but even you have a “sin” you TRY not to do (lust)! That made me giggle (not effeminately, mind you!). But yeah, that’s the entire point. No one is without sin. Hope the Lord doesn’t return during that minute you fail, and start to lust - because some “Christians” would have you immediately thrown in Hell! I’m glad I worship a Savior of grace and mercy. I’m just a sinner. Saved by grace.

    But that’s just how I see it. :)

    You seem very pleased with your spiritual place. So, as I often hear, out here in the midwest, “good on ya!”

    Hope you’re having a great 2010 so far!

  109. QwertyJuan wrote:

    I guess the problem I have KC is that a lot of people aren’t considering it as a sin… when I DO “sin” I don’t try to cover it up and say it isn’t one. If I looked at someone to lust after them for instance, I wouldn’t go around with my head in the sand and say that it is “alright”. I will be the first to admit I did wrong, and will try to correct that area of my life. However, I don’t see many homosexuals ADMITTING that what they did/are doing is sin.

    P.S. I agree 100% that God is a God of grace and mercy… I doubt very much that if we DO sin that we will go straight to hell if the Lord came back at that very instance… I cannot believe that our salvation is that fickel. BUT can we LIVE in sin everyday all day and expect to make it? If I steal something everyday from now until the Lord comes back… should I be shocked when I didn’t make it? If I commit adultry everyday?? etc…

  110. KC wrote:

    Here are some homosexuals who believe it’s a sin:

    http://www.dennisjernigan.com/
    http://www.exodusinternational.org/
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex-gay

    If you’re in a humorous mood, here is a hilarious video on Eunuchs. I’ve always been perplexed by them in the Bible.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3viQHsBFc4

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked * Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

*

*