Comments on: Top Evangelical Leader Resigns After Voicing Support for Civil Unions

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:38:04 +0000

Gosh,

And it’s only been two years since the last president of the National Association of Evangelicals resigned over his own – ahem – gay policy (for those who have forgotten).

By: Jim Burroway

Jim Burroway — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 17:29:21 +0000

For the record, I believe that as Cizik was a leading figure in a policy advocacy group, if his publicly expressed opinions indeed were not in line with the group that he purported to represent, then it was his obligation to step down and the group’s prerogative to fire him.

It’s just very sad that his publicly expressed opinions are not in line with the group that he represented.

By: Jim Burroway

Jim Burroway — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 17:27:34 +0000

@Ephilei.

I implied no such thing. Which is why I wrote the sentence very carefully to reflect what Cizik said, that young people are more willing to support pro-choice candidates because of their stances on other issues.

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 22:02:04 +0000

After listening to a local Christian radio on December 6, the host and his guest were ready to lead a tar and feathering party or worse for Cizik due to his comments. Apparently “true Christians”(tm) must believe that abortion and gays are evil and fomenting the down fall of “true American civilization”. With an attack like that, Cizik was doomed.

http://thechristianworldview.com/tcwblog/archives/1221

By: Ephilei

Ephilei — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:37:21 +0000

@Jim

I hope you’re not implying young EVs are pro-choice. Cizik emphasizes that they are pro-life but are diverse regarding LGBT issues.

By: werdna

werdna — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:46:40 +0000

Gee, just a couple of posts ago ago Cizik was denounced for his “shameful anti-religious sputterings,” but now he’s apparently a thoughtful fellow who’s not completely bound to regressive politics? Maybe my suggestion that TWO’s use of his quote about Evangelicals and Mormons was less than completely honest wasn’t so off base…

It’s a shame that Cizik may be backing away from his comments on Fresh Air, but his resignation suggests that he might be as tired of the NEA as they are of him.

By: homer

homer — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:18:03 +0000

These bozos are the leaders of the fundamentalist Christians?

By: Ben in Oakland

Ben in Oakland — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 02:17:07 +0000

So he tries to be a decent human being, and they force him out.

They claim to be for civil unions, except for actually being “for” them, and they force him out.

I wonder if he is actually going to think about the pond scum he has been associating with, or is he going to take those thoughts and force them out.

This mindset never ceases to amaze me. If i didn’t know better, I would think they are communists circa 1951

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 02:10:55 +0000

It’s unbearable that they would engage in such religious intolerance and force the resignation of those who spoke their conscience and supported civil unions.

/see how easy that was

By: Rick

Rick — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:32:07 +0000

The article doesn’t explain when, exactly, Cizik made these backtracking comments. It claims they were made ‘after the FA interview,’ which is quite vague. ‘After’ as in, moments later or weeks later? Was he in the presence of others there in the studio or in the bathroom at home talking aloud to himself?. So, did Cizik actually say what Bassett claims he said? Or is Bassett speaking for him in order to achieve some damage control?