Peter Labarera spews, obfuscates, and misrepresents the work of a pantheon of evangelical theologians, who misrepresent science daily and think they have the intellect to represent science correctly.

I really have to be updated. Per the above and twitter, Peter Labarbera states:

“Tim Tebow now joins pantheon of celebrities who’ve cowered before the Homosexual Lobby. Very sad that he threw Jeffres under the bus.”

This is a laughable statement. If Tim Tebow cowers to any “lobby” it is his fault, not the fault of homosexuals.”

I have done a number of Internet seaches. I have found no direct evidence that Tim Tebow “cowered” to any lobby.

Peter Labarbera makes up shit on a daily basis.

We shall thank BTB and TWO (Truth Wins Out) for being vocal.

Labarera in his rhetoric uses superlatives at every chance he gets – he has no history of language arts – and rewords the work of theologians in a dumbed-down way, misrepresenting his education.

I have no doubt that Pete L, a minion of R. Gagnon,who states such things as the “immutability of race and skin color.” What? The Jesus people eschew science, investigation, and inquiry daily.

Genetics is a very hard study – it does require a working knowledge of Algebra.

As a student of evolutionary biology, I do stand with Richard Dawkins in that there is no such thing as immutability of race and skin color.

Skin color has been mutable since the emergence of australopithecus afarensis, and the ancestry walked with the shifting sands of time. Genetics (color of skin) can be reversed when the need arises.

Labarbera and Gagnon are idiots. They only have one looking glass, pointed into a past that they relish but cannot claim.

Why, just the other day, i saw Teboy on the street. This 62 year old man walked up to this 25 year old, 6’3, 236 pound man, and said,

“Teboy, you better not talk to that church. Because if you do, I’m going to pound your face into rubble. I will destroy your career. I will ridicule you in the press everywhere.”

That pus**yboy was so frightened that he got down on one knee, put his hand to his forehead and capitulated on the spot. I was going to make him foreswear his Christianity and worship Cthulhu, but Cthulhu said I had to have pity on that pu**yboy.

Why is that a certain class of so-called Christians need to believe they are persecuted? Oh yes. Because it’s for “my name’s sake.” and being Jesus’s BFF is almsot as good as being Jesus yourself, without having to do all that humility and forgiveness stuff.

so annoying. Next up: my secret cabal in the catholic Church will force Benny the Rat to resign.

I’ll get you, my pretty. and your little altar boy, too.

“The hard part, whether dealing with attention-seeking whackjobs or attention seeking children (and it can be hard to distinguish between the two sometimes) is deciding at what point you starve the beast.”

Immediately. Don’t even let them get to first base.

Unless God places something much much more important in this path. Like, I dunno, researching just how many porno movies were released this year with “leather” in the title. But something really really important.

It’s not that he ran from the debate at all and don’t you forget it. It’s just that God has him doing more important things. Much more important things.

Hmmmm… maybe he should expand it to all pornos that have a man in leather on the cover.

On the one hand, if you feed the beast, it reinforces and reinvigorates them. They get off on it. (And if we’re being honest, to a certain degree we do to, even though we have reason to believe, for the most part, we’re engaged in justifiable parenting… I mean corrective argumentation).

On the other hand, if you don’t stand up and speak, you may wind up allowing a temper-tantrum to result in real damage as arms, legs, and arguments flail.

More relevant to our community, you run the risk of apparent tacit approval through silence. And we know through hard experience what silence equals.

And, like I said, we wouldn’t be here if we didn’t relish a little righteousness of our own – and that’s our cross to bear, and it’s what makes it all so tricky – when to stop arguing and let them cry it out all by themselves in the corner.

IMHO, a lot of folks here put a little too much stock in the Labarberas and Livelys of the world. I say that knowing full well that sometimes we turn our back on them for two minutes and they rile up an entire region of Africa to hunt down gay people like it’s pheasant season. It’s a tough call – draw attention to them to discredit them, or ignore them so no one will know who they are.

In my experience, Rob, you seem to get a solid B+, so I’m inclined to say “trust your judgment and go forth”. Priya, you’re a little too much like me. To both of us I’m inclined to say “sleep on it before hitting post” sometimes. Either way, though… I’m glad we’re all here. Someone needs to keep an eye on the kids…. err I mean whackjobs. And, let’s admit it, it’s a little fun.

That’s a hard lesson for me because you know how I love my point-by-point rebuttals.”.

I sometimes have the same problem. I started out having a debate with Scott Lively over morality. I countered him perfectly at first and then asked him a series of questions on the topic. He responed saying “Its very easy to answer those questions.” but didn’t do so and instead changed the subject to the Nazi party supposedly being made up of gays. I responded to his argumenst point by point and then repeated my questions on morality. He just ignored them again and again and kept changing the topic back to “the nazis were all gays” and eventually I said “Either you respond to my questions as I have to yours or the “conversation” is over. He of course ignored my questions one more time and continued to rant about Nazis being gays and that was the end of it.

Should I have just ignored his off-topic Nazi/gay rants and repeatedly replied only with my questions on morality?

Point, set and match.