This is a bizarre bit of TV, sure to make the Religious Right lose its collective mind:
It’s not that they’re actually supportive. It’s full of Glenn Beck’s wingnut stuff about the country “burning down,” and Bill O’Reilly’s moralistic mewling about some bullroar or another, but here’s the key passage in O’Reilly and Beck’s intercourse [grin] on the subject, via Media Matters:
O’REILLY: But let’s take the gay marriage deal. Big ruling in California. You really didn’t cover that much, right?
BECK: Nope.
O’REILLY: Why?
BECK: Because honestly I think we have bigger fish to fry. You can argue about abortion or gay marriage or whatever –
O’REILLY: Yeah.
BECK: — all you want.
O’REILLY: Yeah.
BECK: The country is burning down. I personally think these–
O’REILLY: But isn’t that one of the reasons because we are getting away from the traditional way we used to live into this progressive–
BECK: So let’s get back to — instead of arguing about these divisive things, let’s get back into our churches and our synagogues and–
O’REILLY: You’re not going to get people going back unless there is a reason to go back.
BECK: But here is the reason, America. Your country is burning down. I don’t think marriage, that the government actually has anything to do with -
O’REILLY: But they do have.
BECK: –what is a religious right.
O’REILLY: I know, but they do have something to do, because gay marriage is going to be a reality in this country in 10 years.
BECK: Why do they have anything to do with it?
O’REILLY: Because they choose to, and you’re not going to stop ‘em.
BECK: This is where we disagree.
O’REILLY: The Supreme Court may rule against gay marriage, very possible it would be a 5-4.
BECK: You’re willing to continue to go down the road of just accepting well that’s the way it is.
O’REILLY: I’m not accepting anything. I wrote a book about it! Don’t give me this “accepting.” Come on.
BECK: He’s so hostile.
O’REILLY: Yeah
BECK: Need a little Jesus?
O’REILLY: I have to correct you. I do. You are ignoring the profound change in the American family. In the way –
BECK: No, I’m not. No I’m not.
O’REILLY: But you are not covering it?
BECK: Because I think that the thing that needs to be covered — Bill, I believe in a symphony. If we are all playing clarinets we ain’t gonna get very far. A symphony needs to sound. I’m covering what I cover. You cover what you cover. Both of us are saying the same thing. Watch the culture.
O’REILLY: Do you believe — do you believe that gay marriage is a threat to the country in any way?
BECK: A threat to the country?
O’REILLY: Yeah, it going to harm the country?
BECK: No, I don’t. Will the gays come and get us?
O’REILLY: OK. Is it going to harm the country in any way?
BECK: I believe — I believe what Thomas Jefferson said. If it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket, what difference is it to me?
O’REILLY: OK, so you don’t. That’s interesting. Because I don’t think a lot of people understand that about you.
BECK: As long as we — as long as we are not going down the road of Canada, where it now is a problem for churches to have free speech. If they can still say, hey, we –
O’REILLY: Oppose it –
BECK: — we oppose it –
O’REILLY: Right.
BECK: — but we’re not trying to kill anybody or trying to –
O’REILLY: In Sweden they have that too. OK, so gay marriage to you, not a big a threat to the nation.
Huh. That’s bound to make Maggie Gallagher roar.
Also: tipping point, tipping point, tipping point.
“As long as we — as long as we are not going down the road of Canada, where it now is a problem for churches to have free speech.”
Um….I’m from Canada and no one is preventing freedom of speech in our churches, we do however prevent HATE speech in our country. Perhaps this is what Mr. Beck is confused about, that we don’t allow our citizens to just spout whatever nasty vitriol that pops into their minds like the United States does ie: The Westboro Baptist Church.
Perhaps you can clear this question up.
Can a pastor be arrested for preaching from the pulpit that the Bible condemns homosexuality?
Same-sex marriage is inevitable; Beck knows it and Bill O’Reilly knows it, too. I used to watch the O’Reilly Factor when it first went on the air many years ago. O’Reilly repeatedly said that he “didn’t care” if same-sex marriage were legal. He seems to have tacked right a little bit (probably playing to his audience), but he is hardly a firebrand on the issue.
Who would have guessed that Ted Olson would have taken up our cause. While Mr. Olson never did appear to be a social conservative, his support was so surprising that many people in our community thought, even if only for a moment, that he was taking the case just to sabotage it. It is clear from his eloquence that he truly believes that this is a human rights issue in no uncertain terms.
The road ahead will not, of course, be easy; who knows how many bumps in the road there will be? But we do know one thing, and that is that victory will be ours, and that history will reveal our opponents to have been deeply mistaken and misguided. Kind of makes you love America, doesn’t it? :)
Regarding comment #2, no, a pastor cannot (and should not) be arrested for preaching, from the pulpit, that homosexuality is a sin. No one has ever suggested this.
Chris,
I should have clarified that I was asking about Canada in reference to comment #1. Is that what you are answering?
Bob, it’s one thing to say that the Bible condemns homosexuality.
It’s quite another thing to use the Bible as an excuse to espouse violence and defamation (malicious falsehoods) against LGBT people.
Which are you asking about?
Truth Wins Out supports free speech. pastors should say whatever they want. However, no church has the right to force non-members to follow it’s rules by enforcing it’s creed in civil law.
Michael, I was asking regarding ETownCanuck’s statement “no one is preventing freedom of speech in our churches, we do however prevent HATE speech in our country.” if saying homosexuality was wrong from the pulpit was considered legal hate speach in Canada. and I agree with the second part of your comment. I think ETownCanuck probably meant that it does not. his example of the The Westboro Baptist so-called Church should have made it clear. I think the Baptists should sue Westboro to stop using their brand. Westboro is really a small single issue cult revolving around one family and a few followers. It’s sad they are perceived as representing anything more.
Wayne, I agree no church has the right to force non-members (and really no legal right to force members) to do anything. They can only try to persuade members and the community at large like any other political, social or religious group but they would have to give up charitable tax status if they tell their members how to vote.
How come my answer to comments #6 and #7 does not show up? Or does it?
Just because 52% of Californians voted to take away the rights of other Californians does not make it legal. Radical anti-gay activists cannot defy the Constitution and pretend that they have the special right to take away the civil rights from other law-abiding, taxpaying Americans. The majority is not always right in our country and that has been demonstrated many times. If we let radical anti-gay activists run our government, the legislative and judicial branches would be abolished and every law would be based on majority vote. What a mess we would have then!
Bob asked “Can a pastor be arrested for preaching from the pulpit that the Bible condemns homosexuality?”.
No, in Canada you absolutely cannot be arrested for preaching that the bible condemns gayness.
You can be arrested for advocating that gays and lesbians be put to death but there is specifically a religious exemption in the hate speech law that allows people to quote the bible passages that call for gays to be killed. Preachers in Canada are constantly quoting the bible condemning gays and calling for gays to be put to death – nothing has changed with the advent of equal marriage here. While two people have been initially charged with hate speech both such incidents were eventually ruled in their favour. No one has every been convicted of hate speech against gays in Canada and had the ruling stand.
Priya, thank you very much for clearing up misconceptions I had heard about Canada’s laws.
This is very good news for us and it confirms what some polls that have been posted here indicate. I really see Beck as more of a businessman than a true, die-hard conservative like, say, Limbaugh. Beck panders and sells books. It is wonderful news if he thinks attacking gay marriage will not benefit his bottom line. Perhaps Beck’s demographic is a lot younger than Limbaugh’s?
It’s my understanding that tax money goes to Canadian houses of worship, or is it only parochial schools? Is that true? And if so, that’s all the more reason why they should be beholden to the same laws and standards as everyone else. I saw a ‘true story’ movie on tv about a gay Canadian boy who wanted to take a male date to the prom at his Catholic high school. Of course they said no, but they sued the school/church on the grounds that since they take tax money, they couldnt discriminate. The gay kid won.
Bob,
Actually where the right wing comes up with the story is there was a minister up there who was charged with hate speech. The argument was he was inciting violence. It went in front of the human rights counsel up there who found him innocent because of what was stated above.
Gary, Canadian tax money does go to parochial schools. It comes out of property taxes and when paying them a person can select whether the tax money allocated to schools goes to the public or Catholic school system. As far as I know, no other tax money goes to churches, apart from the property tax exemption they also get.