Comments on: The Massage Table Is Back http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/23/258 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Thu, 20 Jun 2013 07:03:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Kevin http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/23/258/comment-page-1#comment-373 Kevin Sun, 25 Mar 2007 20:18:07 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/23/258#comment-373 Perhaps we should protest any religious symbols auctioned off on eBay as offensive to others who don't share those beliefs, particularly if those artifacts are linked to a history of persecuting anyone. With the number of people in this country who seem to think they see the Virgin Mary in their cereal bowl, that could make quite the interesting policy debate. I'm getting out the Alpha-Bits now. . .and spelling "Gay Rights" in the bowl. It's a sign from Jesus, ya know. Perhaps we should protest any religious symbols auctioned off on eBay as offensive to others who don’t share those beliefs, particularly if those artifacts are linked to a history of persecuting anyone. With the number of people in this country who seem to think they see the Virgin Mary in their cereal bowl, that could make quite the interesting policy debate.

I’m getting out the Alpha-Bits now. . .and spelling “Gay Rights” in the bowl. It’s a sign from Jesus, ya know.

]]> By: Jim Burroway http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/23/258/comment-page-1#comment-372 Jim Burroway Sat, 24 Mar 2007 04:54:54 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/23/258#comment-372 I do not believe it is offensive. I agree that it may be in bad taste, but I'm not offended by it. What's more, given the way the shameful response of the most visible Christian leaders compounded the suffering of those with HIV/AIDS, anyone who speaks from a standpoint of "Christian" morals have forfeited the right to chastise anyone as far as I'm concerned. I suspect the real offense on their part is more in embarrassment. I can't speak for them, of course, but it's what I suspect. I do not believe it is offensive. I agree that it may be in bad taste, but I’m not offended by it. What’s more, given the way the shameful response of the most visible Christian leaders compounded the suffering of those with HIV/AIDS, anyone who speaks from a standpoint of “Christian” morals have forfeited the right to chastise anyone as far as I’m concerned.

I suspect the real offense on their part is more in embarrassment. I can’t speak for them, of course, but it’s what I suspect.

]]> By: Steve http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/23/258/comment-page-1#comment-371 Steve Sat, 24 Mar 2007 02:43:51 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/23/258#comment-371 Ms. Booth also thinks it's self-evident that the sale of this item is offensive--and you seem to agree in some comments, Jim. I must admit that I'm mystified. Just how does it offend? I understand how Mr. Haggard might feel chastened by its public sale--one more reminder of the shame he brought upon himself, like a child forced to watch from the front yard as the window he broke is replaced. And his friends and family might feel he has suffered enough for his transgressions and should not have to face this. But I don't understand how Christians or Evangelical Christions or leaders of the various ex-Gay movements could feel personally offended. Where is the offense to them? I don't think it is at all self-evident. Can someone explain? Ms. Booth also thinks it’s self-evident that the sale of this item is offensive–and you seem to agree in some comments, Jim. I must admit that I’m mystified. Just how does it offend? I understand how Mr. Haggard might feel chastened by its public sale–one more reminder of the shame he brought upon himself, like a child forced to watch from the front yard as the window he broke is replaced. And his friends and family might feel he has suffered enough for his transgressions and should not have to face this. But I don’t understand how Christians or Evangelical Christions or leaders of the various ex-Gay movements could feel personally offended. Where is the offense to them? I don’t think it is at all self-evident. Can someone explain?

]]> By: Timothy Kincaid http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/23/258/comment-page-1#comment-370 Timothy Kincaid Fri, 23 Mar 2007 23:31:46 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/23/258#comment-370 Jim, I've noticed that Ms. Booth still refuses to discuss the funds she want to deprive the AIDS charity. I wonder if perhaps she views AIDS patients as refuse and not worthy of food. Jim,

I’ve noticed that Ms. Booth still refuses to discuss the funds she want to deprive the AIDS charity. I wonder if perhaps she views AIDS patients as refuse and not worthy of food.

]]>