« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


Evangeli-clash: Tentative gay acceptance enrages the ranks

by Jeremy Hooper

Oh, poor evangelicals. It seems that even some of their own are turning against the constant gay marriage bashing for which their team has become so well known in recent years. It seems that some evangelical leadership can see the writing on the wall, and fully realize that Falwell/Dobson/Schlafly are not the authors.

What makes us say this? Well, on 12/2, National Association of Evangelicals spokesman Richard Cizik appeared on NPR’s Fresh Air program with Terry Gross. CizikOn said program, Cizik rocked and shocked the evangelical world by saying that he's pretty much down with same-sex civil unions, by highlighting the divide between older and younger evangelicals, by saying that he himself is "shifting" on the issue, and by intimating that marriage equality is an inevitable. He also talked about how the evagelical set needs to "reevaluate" their stances (*listen to it all here).

Well hell hath no fury like a professional anti-gay scorned. Here are just a few examples of the "pro-family" community's reaction to Cizik's words:

Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America: “Mr. Cizik claimed that his views are five years ahead of his constituency, but these views are not anywhere close to Biblical orthodoxy, traditional Christian theology nor the bulk of Evangelicals who ground their faith in the Bible. Perhaps this is why he espouses them in forums to which most of his supposed 'constituency' do not listen.

Janice Shaw Crouse, Director and Senior Fellow of Concerned Women for America’s Beverly LaHaye Institute:The NAE consists of 45,000 churches, 50 denominations and 30 million constituents. I cannot believe that they are happy to have a spokesperson, who supposedly represents them, expressing views that are contrary to Biblical authority and contradict theological orthodoxy. I think, perhaps, my dear friend Rich has been inside the Beltway for too long and has swallowed too much of the NPR and Vogue Magazine Kool-Aid.

AFA: "Many have tried for years to get the NAE to drop Rev. Cizik, but the NAE has refused to do so. Churches have a right to know how the money they give to NAE is used."

Ingrid Schlueter, co-host of the nationally syndicated Crosstalk Radio Talk Show: "Richard Cizik seems more concerned about impressing NPR's liberal audience with his broad-mindedness than being faithful to the Lord Jesus Christ,” ... “As an adoptive parent of two children given life by their birth mothers, I find it abhorrent that Mr. Cizik would sanction Christian support for the most radically pro-abortion President in the history of the nation.

Family Research Council: "This revelation should not come as a surprise. This is the risk of walking through the green door of environmentalism and global warming - you risk being blinded by the green light and losing your sense of direction. How else can you explain enthusiastic support for what will probably be the nation's most pro-abortion, anti-family president in our nation's 232 year history?

The question, however, remains. If Cizik does not speak for the NAE, as the Rev. Anderson has said, why is he on Capitol Hill representing NAE and claiming to speak for Evangelicals? Is it possible for a human being to come with a disclaimer?

But ya know, who can really blame them? Turning tides are scary for those whose life's work the new wave will surely wash away.

**SEE ALSO: Is Richard Cizik Trying to Get Fired? [Right Wing Watch]


space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

"You risk being blinded by the green light and losing your sense of direction?"

It seems that these 'people' would rather be in the dark with no sense at all.

With each screed that I read from these 'people' the more I am glad to be an atheist.

Posted by: John Ozed | Dec 11, 2008 10:47:27 AM

from the AFA "Churches have a right to know how the money they give to NAE is used." haha Now who is using a "blacklist" to boycott or suggest to other people that they stop giving money to an organization?

Posted by: shaun | Dec 11, 2008 10:50:49 AM

Jeremy -

Cizik has been in hot water with Dobson et al before. Specifically over his stance on Green issues and Global Warming. The thing is, many in the evangelical world have warmed to his positions on those topics. I wouldn't be surprised at all that his evolving positions on this topic will soon be evidenced in the pews of many churches. Of course, the professional Christians, Dobson, et al, will continue to blast away at him and those like him, but they are a dying breed.

I had conversations with my parents this past weekend while visiting them and was surprised that they seemed much more receptive to the idea of at the very least civil unions for gay people. Coming from two rather high profile and quite conservative people within the evangelical world (and with very close ties to Dobson no less), it was incredible.

"The times, they are a changin!"


Posted by: Jonathan | Dec 11, 2008 12:11:31 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails