From Christianity Today’s Q&A: ‘Joe the Plumber’, said Joe when asked about same-sex marriage
People don’t understand the dictionary—it’s called queer. Queer means strange and unusual. It’s not like a slur, like you would call a white person a honky or something like that. You know, God is pretty explicit in what we’re supposed to do—what man and woman are for. Now, at the same time, we’re supposed to love everybody and accept people, and preach against the sins. I’ve had some friends that are actually homosexual. And, I mean, they know where I stand, and they know that I wouldn’t have them anywhere near my children. But at the same time, they’re people, and they’re going to do their thing.
Pronouncements such as this are yet another reason why I argued as I did on Saturday about JTP and how he reflects on the GOP. In short: the fact that portions of the Republican Party/conservative coalition keep holding this guy up as some sort of spokesperson underscores a lot that is wrong with the party/coalition. It is bad enough that Wurzelbacher feels the need to keep the “strange and unusual” gay people away from his kids (the very definition, by the way, of loving everybody and accepting people). Far worse that Christianity Today feels the need to give it a platform.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments/Trackbacks (10)|
The views expressed in the comments are the sole responsibility of the person leaving those comments. They do not reflect the opinion of the author of PoliBlog, nor have they been vetted by the author.
May 4th, 2024 at 10:48 pm
[...] In Also To: Alan Colmes of Liberaland Dr. Steven L. Taylor of PoliBlog(TM); Justin Gardner of [...]
May 4th, 2024 at 11:02 pm
He’s like a Salvador Dali painting. Every time you look, it just gets weirder.
May 4th, 2024 at 11:11 pm
In short: the fact that portions of the Republican Party/conservative coalition keeps holding this guy up as some sort of spokesperson underscores a lot that is wrong with the party/coalition.
That interview was hilarious.
To me it speaks to the need for conservatives to break with the crazy religious crowd.
The intersection between Western civilization and governance has become progressively more secular over the past 400 years. That seems to be a trend that is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.
Although one definition of “conservative” implies a resistance to change–in the end, this is futile. People (or social movements) that cling to such resistance will eventually disappear in social importance.
There is an alternate view of “conservative” which could be the basis for a legitimate political movement and that is the more libertarian variant. This variant is based more on humanist principles such as free markets, limited state intervention in social affairs, and preservation of civil liberties.
If the Republicans want to survive, they need to throw their lot in with the latter lot.
I don’t mean this to come off as a knock against religion, but it is clearly self-defeating for a political movement to tie itself to such a limited religious perspective given the realities of our heterogeneous democracy.
Are there are ANY secular conservatives in the Republican establishment anymore?
May 5th, 2024 at 7:24 am
[...] Taylor sums up just how pathetic this all is quite nicely: The fact that portions of the Republican Party/conservative coalition keeps holding this guy up as [...]
May 5th, 2024 at 7:50 am
“To me it speaks to the need for conservatives to break with the crazy religious crowd.”
I couldn’t agree more. If they try for a break, though, it’s likely to be the ugliest divorce in history.
May 5th, 2024 at 8:43 am
[...] on Joe the Plumber’s interview with Christianity Today, I expected some version of the following: (Dan Riehl) Funny how they can make a popular television [...]
May 5th, 2024 at 11:47 am
I would not know, but is Christianity Today actually a serious publication? Or did it only used to be serious, sort of like those people who are “actually homosexual” who used to be JTP’s friends?
As for Ratoe’s comment, I agree with most of what he said, but I am puzzled by the conflation of ‘free markets’ and ‘humanist principles’. I actually see them (at least as the ‘free market’ is usually understood in the modern world) being rather more opposed than complementary.
Sadly, I am somewhat less confused by the more common conflation of values expressed by JTP and “religion” in general. Perhaps I am simply confused because I am at the seemingly narrow intersection of value types that would be classified as both ‘humanist’ and ‘religious.’ We are out here and need to stand up for the idea of progressive spiritualism.
May 5th, 2024 at 11:54 am
I am only passingly familiar with Christianity Today, but it has been around a while and is a mainstream evangelical magazine, albeit a bit on the superficial and breezy side of things.
Sadly, one suspects that the views of JTP are far more mainstream amongst CT‘s readership than I would like to be the case (or, should be the case if they took their religion seriously).
May 5th, 2024 at 12:32 pm
Amein to that last (parenthetical) statement!
May 5th, 2024 at 2:20 pm
Meanwhile, Wolcott takes this exactly as seriously as it deserves.