12 responses

  1. Ben in Oakland
    November 29, 2007

    Could we ask Mr. chambers for the same courtesy to be extended to his gay brothers and sisters that he would extend to a mere politician?

  2. Allyson
    November 29, 2007

    Question: Why do we feel it’s okay to refer to Senator Clinton as “Hillary,” when no one’s calling Senator McCain “John” or Senator Obama “Barack?”

  3. Emily K
    November 29, 2007

    Chambers would say he DOES extend the same warmth to his queer brothers and sisters – and honestly, campaigning political is a very peaceful way to bring about the kind of change you want to bring about (e.g., a constitutional ban on same sex unions). But since he is such an advocate of religious freedom and of Christianity, he should stick to declaring God against us, instead of our own government.

  4. Timothy Kincaid
    November 29, 2007

    Classy article, Alan.

  5. John
    November 29, 2007

    I have always been surprised at the strong reactions that Hillary Clinton seems to get, even long before she ran for the Senate. I am convinced that some of this is gender based.

    I wonder if Alan has spoken to Mike Ensley about this subject. He has been particularly harsh about Sen. Clinton and has referred to her on his Spiritual Oddity site as Hitlery (?sp).

  6. Mike A
    November 29, 2007

    Umm, guys, Clinton is not the only Democrat who has been called names.

    Edwards and Obama have been called much worse things. I appreciate Alan’s gesture, but I dislike efforts to single her out as a victim. Are the defenses of Clinton motivated in part by the assumption that women should be less subject to insults?

  7. Patrick
    December 1, 2007

    Kudos to Alan. It’s nice to see a conservative Christian not always driven by a political agenda.

  8. Alan Chambers
    December 1, 2007

    Allyson, calling Senator Clinton “Hillary” is the same as calling President Bush “W”. I think it shows their human and isn’t meant to be disrespectful. As for calling Senator McCain “John”….there is a John around every corner.

  9. Jim Burroway
    December 1, 2007

    I’d also add that simply calling Sen. Clinton by her last name (a la Giuliani, McCain, Obama, Edwards, etc.), which is also a common practice, would leave some ambiguity as to which Clinton you were referring to since Bill Clinton remains very much in the public eye.

    I don’t think there’s any inherent disrespect by calling her Hillary. Especially considering that her supporters are as likely to call her by her first name as her opponents.

  10. Timothy Kincaid
    December 1, 2007

    Calling the Senator by her first name is no more offensive than calling the previous NY mayor “Rudy”, which do most of his supporters and much of the press.

  11. Jonathan
    December 2, 2007

    I was watching my local news the other evening after HRC spoke at Rick Warren’s church in Orange County. The OC is an incredibly conservative county and many of Warren’s paritioners identify as such. Several who were interviewed found their opinion of HRC to be totally changed after listening to her speech. One said that while his politics wouldn’t allow him to vote for her should she win the primary, he wouldn’t be uncomfortable if she were elected President. Another flat out said that he might actually find himself voting for a Democrat for the first time in his life.

    I’m not sure I’m ready to cast my support behind her. However, I am finding that people who are adamently opposed to the idea of her as President come away feeling a little less strident about their position after having heard her in person.

    I’m glad Alan has made these comments!


  12. Jason
    December 2, 2007

    how funny, I had to read Jonathan’s comment twice. HRC = Human Rights Campaign in my vocabulary. That’s interesting that HRC = Hilary Rodham Clinton as well…

Leave a Reply




Back to top
mobile desktop