Stop the presses! Newsflash from NBC’s Jamie Novogrod! Here’s the scoop:
Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann yesterday attended a church here in Iowa, where the pastor called homosexuality “immoral” and “unnatural,” and later showed a testimonial video from a man who claimed to have been gay before having a conversation with God.
Hold on a minute. A Christian presidential candidate visits a Christian church that espouses Christian doctrine. I don’t know about you, but I’m not exactly sure what is so newsworthy about this report. Let’s think through the possibilities. Which of the following do you think makes this item newsworthy?
1. Christians still believe what they’ve believed for 2,000 years—that the only sanctioned sexual union is the covenanted union of one man and one woman in marriage. All other sexual unions are “immoral” or “unnatural.” Is that a surprise to anybody? This observation is akin to reporting that the grass is still green or that the sky is still blue. Surely this isn’t the news item.
2. Christians still believe that God saves sinners—yes, even homosexual ones. This is good news—the good news in fact. But surely this isn’t the news item—that Christians still preach for the conversion of sinners. It has to be something else.
3. A presidential candidate attends a Christian church. What presidential candidate in the history of the Republic has ever failed to attend a Christian church at least once during a presidential campaign? Maybe you know of one. I don’t. Again, no real news here.
4. A presidential candidate is a bona fide believer in the Christian faith. This would be an important fact to know about any candidate. And perhaps there have been fewer authentically Christian presidential candidates than we’d like to admit, but is this really earth-shattering news? It must be something else that is newsworthy about this story.
5. People reporting the news now believe that the Christian faith is outlandish and extreme and that any presidential candidate that holds to Christian teaching must be exposed. Aha, now I think we’re on to something. This report doesn’t tell us anything new about Christians or presidential candidates. This report tells us something new about the people reporting the news. They believe it to be a liability for presidential candidates to hold to Christian teaching about human sexuality. This hasn’t always been the settled opinion of America’s reporting class, but now it is.
Now that’s news.
It was reported in the Vainity Fair article that “she prays each day.” DaDaDAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
Denny, you hit the target right in the center! It’s just amazing that journalists treat homosexuality and sexual activism as if they had just discovered the civil rights movement. And the bad guy in the story is Christian faith in some form.
Some years ago The Economist had a cover that captured the deplorable decline of news journalism. The cover had a huge clown face with a big red nose. The caption read: “And now the news …”
Novograd and her journalist colleagues got really excited a couple of years, particularly during the 2008 elections, when they reported one story after another about younger Christians who were abandoning the beliefs and convictions of their parents. To them, this was the most important news of the decade, even more important than 9/11. So she is shocked and upset whenever something doesn’t fit into their narrative, i.e. that Christianity will be dead in America within 20 years.
Its a new trend I have noticed in journalist reading history and thinking they are breaking news.
They did the same thing with Bachmann and a story about Lutherans and Catholics having some disagreements a few weeks back.
The right did this with Obama’s former pastor, so that Obama ended up leaving when he would not be quiet. This seems like a left attempt (from their perspective) to do similar with a Rep. candidate.
The “right” did not do this primarily Don, but I am sure that makes for a better victim story.
If you remember correctly the pastor Wright debacle happened during the primaries and it was Mrs. Clinton leading the charge with all of that.
Obama’s former pastor Jeremiah Wright does not belong to the left or the right, though he definitely holds positions of the left. He is a conspiracy theorist who holds to beliefs that 99% of Americans reject, such as his theories on the spread of AIDs. Obama did not abandon Wright because of left wing beliefs, he left him because the center, right and most on the left denounced his ideas as wreckless and outrageous.
Then again, and I just throw this out there…how many churches regularly, semi-regularly, or when they know the press will be there, decide it a wise idea to preach on a flashpoint subject that will surely raise eyebrows. Certainly, at no church that I have ever attended (I was raised AoG, certainly no weight to a claim that that’s a liberal denomination) has ever wasted time on a sermon on the evils of homosexuality. There are simply bigger fish to fry.
The fault lies clearly at the feet of this pastor, who, knowing there was going to be a presidential candidate in the pews, and therefore the press as well, decided to preach a sermon that would bring heat on both him and Bachmann. This isn’t to say that said preacher shouldn’t have preached Biblical truth. He should always do so. But there are plenty of Biblically pure sermons that someone could preach that wouldn’t have provoked outrage from an evil, terrible, no good, very bad press that decided to cover the event.
The more I read and learn about Michelle Bauchman and her husband and their background, the more I like them.
Looks she is one of the few Republicans left clearly saying that homosexuality is a sin and so called “same sex marriage” is wrong. Herman Cain is good and clear also. As is Rick Santorum.
The left is trying to “fry” her like they did with Sarah Palin. Let us pray for them and that God will give them strength and wisdom.
Sarah Palin fried herself, Ken. Let’s get that straight.
And since when is a stance on homosexuality a huge reason to vote for a president? Good people skills to handle diplomats and leaders from around the world? That’s a trait I want in a president. Great legislator that works both within his/her party and reaches out to the other side to make sure that things get done? THAT’S a trait I want in a president. Our best presidents (and I’ll even throw Reagan in there to be nice) have all been great communicators, great delegators, great negotiators and great statesmen. Obama’s not been that. Bush II was not that. And knowing the above, I can’t see for a minute how you could vote for any of the folks that you’ve mentioned.
Shame on all of us (I’m guilty of it too) for putting wedge issues ahead of the good of our country.
That is not the only issue. Bauchman is right on the financial issues. I am not saying she is the best candidate, but she is forcing the main issues – the debt, taxes, financial issues, and repealing Obama Care to be the main thing and standing on the correct side of the issue.
But allowing the evil of homosexuality to be something approved of is a great danger – it is great danger to society.
But most Rep. are correct on financial issues, security issues, and moral issues; so hopefully, the best one will rise to the top.
McCain would have been much better than Obama, even though he was not all that great.
I am glad Sarah Palin is not running – personally, I think she should have stayed home and stayed closer to her daughter, and not be too busy. The attacks on her character and rude and evil stuff (dirty) was wrong. But, she is also right on most issues, even though she cannot answer follow-up questions very well.
I checked out your website – I like your musical interpretation on Eleanor Rigby – cool – that is my all time favorite Beatles song.
Also cool that you are the percussionist – I am a drummer myself.
Take care man.
Ken – thanks for the kind words.
And, I reckon we’ll have to agree to disagree on what “the right position” is on issues of finance and reform. You’re pro-tea party, and I am more pro-Bernie Sanders.