Their bias is showing

The editors of the New York Times are über-religious about their pro-same-sex stance. Whether this stance is mere expediency or not is up for debate. Today they whitewash a nominee for Surgeon General who, by their own description, seems to be a man of integrity and without a (monochromatic) political agenda.

In the snippet that follows the only issue I find problematic regards a pastor keeping someone out of a congregation merely for their sexual orientation. I believe all sinners are welcome to come to church and become part of the Body of Christ. Where else will they hear and see the love of Christ and be exposed to the possibility of their being healed? Jesus said “Repent and come follow Me.” We let other sinners not live in repentance (e.g., I’m thinking of the alcoholics not in recovery); they should be allowed as well. The offenders’ role in the parish should be circumscribed and leadership in the congregation should be withheld until repentance (sobriety or abstinence) is demonstrated for a significant period of time.

Read for yourself and see how the NYT stacks the deck with a house of cards.

“Dr. Holsinger served for 26 years in the Department of Veterans Affairs, where he rose to be chief medical director and under secretary for health. After retiring, he became chancellor of the University of Kentucky Medical Center and, briefly, secretary for health and family services in Kentucky.

“Although he is a Christian conservative, he is difficult to pigeonhole ideologically. He testified against an anti-cloning bill in Kentucky that he felt would impede research, a position at odds with that of the president. He backed a session on lesbian health issues at a state health conference despite protests from angry legislators, favored raising cigarette taxes in a tobacco-growing state and worked to limit junk food in schools.

“What’s troubling is the view he once expressed — and may still hold — on homosexuality, through his activities as a lay leader in the United Methodist Church. On the church’s judicial council, he supported a minister who refused to allow a gay man to join his congregation and argued that a lesbian minister should be removed because church doctrine deems the practice of homosexuality to be “incompatible with Christian teaching.” His supporters say these rulings should not be read as his personal views because the council can’t change church doctrine. However, some council members opposed his views, and the bishops later rejected one decision.”

The rest is here.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: