Guilty on Two Counts



Comments (11)

Comment Feed

WARNING: I'm a Texan and this response predictably braggadocious!

Should we also apologize and repent for the lowest black and Hispanic unemployment in decades or ever? Should I feel remorse that the food stamp rolls have dropped significantly since January 2017? Am I to be judged because the Veterans Administration is being rebuilt to serve my fellow veterans rather than have them wait in line until death comes? Should I fall to my knees that a successful businessman is applying his strong skills of negotiation into our international dealings as opposed to apologizing for America’s exceptionalism?
Au contraire! I just bought a new motorhome with savings nearly equal to the amount my portfolio has increased! I feel no guilt at all! Evidently, all those other people buying RVs in that dealership didn’t either – the place was packed – and, neither did the employees there, or the factory folks who made the RVs or the oil industry people who will sell us the gas, or the RV park folks who will rent us the slot! All the people who are working now appear to feel no guilt! Shame on them, right? People seem happy. I put out flags on veterans' graves Saturday and we had the biggest crowd in years, maybe ever! There was PRIDE! Pride in being American and free!
And, on the homosexual question, here’s my question: If we Methodists have been so hard and unfair to them, why did they ever join our church? Why have they stayed? We have heard their complaints for 50 years, but their ranks have grown exponentially during that time. Why? How? Does a cook who serves bad food feel guilt when more and more people show up to eat?
And, why should “Methodists” ask forgiveness for having rules that reflect the cultures and religions of thousands of years? We Methodists did not invent the guidelines and mores reflected in our Book of Discipline. Heck, some cultures still kill homosexuals. We Methodists never do that.
Well, time for me to put on my MAGA hat, climb in the new motorhome and make some serious contributions to my carbon footprint. Try to be happy and enjoy life!

Reese more than 3 years ago

Valid Christian Concerns

Rich Peck made many valid points. Christians are called to welcome immigrants and we are commanded to care for the poor. The Right is scapegoating Gay persons as people in order to sidetrack people from being concerned about the irreversible damage to this planet that Trump will inflict on us all.

Daniel Wagle more than 3 years ago

Au contraire Daniel

Trump is doing what he said he would do. How refreshing. As for Christians being called to welcome immigrants and care for the poor. I am all about welcoming legal immigrants, but when they break our laws and immigrate illegally, they should be shipped back to their countries. As a country, we can’t welcome all the world’s immigrants. We don’t have the resources. As for caring for the poor, that is our responsibility as individuals, not our government’s responsibility. God wants us to be cheerful givers. The government forcing us to pay taxes to pay for the poor is not cheerful giving.

The author of the original post has confused his secular humanist biases to follow a social justice agenda with biblical teachings. The two are not the same.

However his post is a prime example of why the UMC needs to split. Progressives not only want LGBTQ to destroy our faith and BOD, they also want us to follow their social justice agenda. I for one reject the author’s and Progressives’ agenda.

Steve more than 3 years ago

Governments DO have a Biblical responsibility to the poor.

If you think governments are not obligated to the poor but only individuals, then how would you interpret Psalm 72:1-4 which states, "Give the king your justice O God, and your righteousness to a king's son. May he judge your people with righteousness, and your poor with justice. May the mountains yield prosperity for the people, and the hills, in righteousness. May he defend the cause of the poor of the people, give deliverance to the needy, and crush the oppressor." Where does it say here that the King or the government is NOT to defend the rights of the poor? And in Matthew 25:31-46, it is the "nations" or the ta ethne (τα εθνη) who are judged as to whether they fed the hungry, clothed the naked, etc.

Daniel Wagle more than 3 years ago

Splitting hairs I know

I am a firm constitutionalist and also a Christian. I believe in a MUCH more limited government that only implements what the Constitution spells out (defense, judicial system, trade). Everything else is for the states to decide. Nowhere in the Constitution is there Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, etc. I believe these need to be phased out (along with oodles of other federal programs) and let each state decide if they are needed.

As to the biblical teachings, I believe the Bible is directing the people of the nations are to serve the poor, not the nations themselves. I believe in free will. Again, I don’t believe it is a nation’s responsibility to force its citizens to pay taxes to serve the poor. That is the people’s responsibility through their churches, clubs, voluntary organizations, and individual efforts. It is not the country’s responsibility. Besides, the government is so inefficient and bureaucratic, so much of the funding is wasted. Remember, government is the problem to getting things done. Less government, less problems.

Steve more than 3 years ago

The KING defends the poor.

Why does Psalm 72 only speak of the King defending the poor. It doesn't speak of the people. The Old Testament often spoke in collective terms. Also, Medicare has lower overhead than private insurers do. I don't favor getting rid of all private insurance, but I strongly disagree with you about getting rid of Medicare. It IS in the Constitution to "promote the general welfare" which having Food Stamps and Medicare is quite consistent with.

Daniel Wagle more than 3 years ago

We will need to agree to disagree

I believe the “promote the general welfare” clause is for things such as a common militia, vaccines, or anything that helps the general population as a whole. Again, I do not believe that Food Stamps, Medicaid, etc. apply as they are only there for the poor, not the general population. Whenever the federal government “picks” winners and losers with any legislation, that is not promoting the general welfare.

We will need to agree to disagree. Again, I am not speaking for all Tradtionalists/Conservatives. I just believe this country’s Constitution and Declaration of Independence were inspired by God and that we need to look to them as well as the Bible for how we act and the laws/policies we follow. Our federal government has gone way to far astray with its laws, policies, Executiveorders. Our forefathers wrote a Constitution built around a very limited federal government. They wanted most of the decisions to be at the state or local levels, closer to the people affected. That is the exact opposite of what we have today.

Steve more than 3 years ago

Pathetic Straw Man Argument

C'mon man. Your argument is a classic bait and switch. If you're not for normalizing same sex sexual relations among the clergy and laity, then you must be an evil Trump supporter. That's just plain pathetic.

Dan more than 3 years ago

This is nothing more than party politics

You seem to equate being a Christian with being a liberal Democrat. How is that any different than challenging Evangelicals for being pawns of the Republican Party. Your arguments have very little to do with religion and a lot about your bias towards a particular wing of a particular political party. Perhaps it's inclusion on this site says much about the political persuasion of its operators. I didn't vote for the current occupant of The White House, but I can certainly distinguish between referring to gang members who glorify the rape of women as animals from a general condemnation of all immigrants. Not that this is relevant to anyone, but this is not supposed to be a political blog but one about our Church. I suggest you go post on Real Clear Politics or perhaps The Nation. Traditionalists are interesting in harming anyone. A LGBTQ person is welcome to worship with me in a pew, as we're all imperfect sinners who need guidance from Scripture.

John more than 3 years ago


Typo: Traditionalists are NOT interested in harming anyone. My sincere apologies to anyone offended for my less than stellar typing skills

John more than 3 years ago

It seems to me

What is called conservatism or traditionalism is founded on the principle of harming others not in the particular conservative's or traditionalist's group, by definition.

George Nixon Shuler more than 3 years ago