Posted on 10/30/2005 9:10:08 PM PST by Between the Lines
If ACT-UP donated blood, that shouldn't be passed out either.
Seriously, the SBC pastor did not have to make it an issue. Water is water. the idea is to help people in distress, not constrain their relief because of your beliefs.
I think Jesus would have just given out the water.
"If the analog to the condom is beer, please be aware that no beer was provided and no one was expected to hand out beer."
The analogy was condoms to handing out water cans advertising a beverage they don't approve of.
Not the same thing.
"Seriously, the SBC pastor did not have to make it an issue. Water is water. the idea is to help people in distress, not constrain their relief because of your beliefs."
They weren't withholding water in general from people, just that particular water with the advertisement. Who cares what they didn't pass out, everyone still got water. And that's what truely matters, right?
"Not the same thing."
Two different physical things, both causing moral objections to dispensing them. Same concept.
The cans didn't say "beer."
The cans didn't say "beer."
Just the company which produces primarily, beer.
Not at all. The cans didn't even mention the offending product.
The said "Drinking Water" and bore a black-and-white rendition of the Anheuser-Busch corporate logo.
It's a silly fetish.
Outside of the fact that Bud is water anyways, these people are fools and obviously put their own egos in front of Christian love and charity for those in need.
It's not a requirement.
No one said anything about requiring them to do anything.
No, they're even worse. They're so self centered and egotistical, they prefer people suffer then take the cans from that unclean alcohol company. /sarcasm
It would have been tacky if they gave them cans of beer (which can be argued in Bud's case are water) but they gave them something that people needed. The SBC showed their Christian humility and love alright. They deserve the criticism.
The Southern Baptist should take a step forward and refuse the contributions of members who drink. Better yet just kick them out of the church.
The little packets of pretzels served on airlines sometimes have the dreaded Beer Company name on them.
This is stupid, the very existence of the canned water in such volumes states that this is more than a Beer Company.
As for the Lord Jesus at the sinners' feasts, he'd probably shun beer because he's sharing wine along with the Gospel.
Nah, Keystone or Rolling Rock.
Meaning it's still an advertisement for the beer company. Look, this is a dumb argument when nothing bad happened to begin with. SBC had plenty of water to give out, they didn't hand out a particular drinking water made by a beer company, people still got their water, the media made a big deal over it, and some of you are falling for the spin. This isn't a matter of whether or not you agree with their stance on alcohol (I don't, by the way), it's just some reporters making a big deal about nothing and people getting mad at the Southern Baptists for no reason (just what the news people intended). It's within their right to not hand out Anheuser-Busch's water despite whether or not you agree with their moral stance on alcohol. No reason to criticize them or argue with each other over something trivial.
No, I think they gave Jesus Christ a black eye.
And not just wine, but what would be considered Port these days.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.