Posted on 05/02/2005 3:15:13 AM PDT by infocats
REDMOND, Wash., April 29 - Before he became a born-again Christian and later a rising national star in the world of black evangelical ministers, the Rev. Ken Hutcherson started playing football because, he said, it was the best way he could think of to "hurt white people."
Dr. Hutcherson, a husky former linebacker for three National Football League teams who goes fishing with Rush Limbaugh and raises Rottweilers ("the bigger, the meaner, the better," he said of his pets), does not talk that way anymore about whites, saying his conversion to Christianity as a teenager changed all that. And a majority of the 3,500 members of his megachurch, which is based in this tidy Seattle suburb and high-tech hub, is white, as is his wife.
With a thundering charisma that makes him a hero to some and a gay-bashing bully to others, he has taken on the white mayor of Seattle, a prominent black county executive and the Washington State Legislature. In his mission to stop the legalization of gay marriage, Dr. Hutcherson has accused gay rights activists of trying to hijack and sully the civil rights movement by their comparison of the right of gays and lesbians to marry to the civil rights struggle he lived through as a poor child in Alabama in the 1950's and 60's.
Now Dr. Hutcherson, 52, known as "Hutch," and by his self-chosen nickname, "the black man," claims to be the person who forced Microsoft, situated near his Antioch Bible Church offices, to withdraw its support of a gay rights bill before the State Legislature, one it had supported the two previous years.
Dr. Hutcherson had threatened to organize a national boycott of Microsoft if it backed the legislation this year. The antidiscrimination bill was defeated by one vote in the State Senate on April 21.
But officials at Microsoft vehemently deny that the minister had anything to do with their decision not to support the bill this year; gay rights groups and employees have since criticized Microsoft, which had long enjoyed a reputation as one of the nation's most gay-friendly companies.
"We respect Dr. Hutcherson's right to his beliefs and opinions, but he does not speak for Microsoft, and he certainly does not set Microsoft's legislative agenda," said Mark Murray, a company spokesman. "We're proud of our antidiscrimination policies and benefits for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender employees, and we are committed to diversity at every level of our company."
Microsoft officials said they were re-evaluating their legislative priorities and had decided to take a "neutral" stance on the bill long before a high-level company official met twice with Dr. Hutcherson over his concerns that the company was going to support it.
In a style that is typically blunt (and, his detractors say, typically intimidating), Dr. Hutcherson described Microsoft's version of the events as "a flat-out lie."
Asked if he thought that he alone could have changed the giant corporation's mind, Dr. Hutcherson said in an interview Friday: "I don't think. I know."
He continued: "If I got God on my side, what's a Microsoft? What's a Microsoft? It's nothing."
If there is any question about Dr. Hutcherson's intolerance of dissent or disobedience - one that is infused with a stinging sense of humor - it could be answered quickly by a glance at the mini-refrigerator in his office. Next to his chair, which is submerged under a lavish white sheepskin cover, a sign on the fridge says, "Warning: I have licked the tops of all my Snapples - Hutch. * And I have tested positive for anthrax."
He is close to some of the nation's best-known Christian conservatives, including Dr. James C. Dobson, chairman of Focus on the Family, whom he calls "Dr. D," and over the last year he has organized rallies in Seattle and Washington, D.C., drawing tens of thousands of opponents of same-sex marriage.
There is little doubt, from hearing Dr. Hutcherson tell it, that he believes not only in the power of God, but also in the power of "Hutch," especially when it comes to going up against companies like Microsoft - or anyone else, for that matter.
"God plus Hutch is enough," said the minister, who stands 6 feet 2 inches, weighs 260 pounds and has a shaved head and a thick goatee streaked with a splash of white.
He added: "I want to be to Christianity what Gretzky was to hockey, what Beckham is to soccer, what Jordan was to basketball, what Martin Luther King was to African-American rights, what the Pope was to Poland. I want to be that to Christianity."
By trusting God, he said, he hopes for "great things" and "that I will be the most feared man in America, not because of me, but because of who I got on my side."
As even some of the church members say, there is good reason to fear Dr. Hutcherson. The church's motto is "black and white in a gray world."
On Sunday mornings, a half-dozen trailers pull up to Lake Washington High School in nearby Kirkland, filled with risers, microphones and other equipment, turning a school parking lot into what looks like a staging area for a rock concert. Antioch, which has offices but not its own church building, holds its rollicking, multimedia Sunday services at the school's gymnasium.
Dr. Hutcherson is known for publicly chastising and excommunicating members if he finds out they are sinning, calling adulterers, for example, up to the pulpit and demanding they repent, congregants said.
"And if they don't want to repent of it, he'll let them know that this is not the church for you," said John Stachofsky, 42, a longtime friend of Dr. Hutcherson and a member of the church who goes bird and deer hunting with him.
Many African-American ministers and conservative Christians share Dr. Hutcherson's opposition to same-sex marriage, which he calls "the greatest danger to America." But Dr. Hutcherson also often criticizes gay rights activists for drawing comparisons between their quest for equal rights and antidiscrimination laws and the struggles of other groups facing prejudice.
"You tell me what I went through as an African-American, when they talk about discrimination, compared to what gays go through with discrimination - it's the difference between night and day, not even close," Dr. Hutcherson said. "I even get upset when people say, 'Well, you got to understand what they go through.' Not when they've chosen to do what they do. They can stop choosing what to do what they do, and they can hide it anytime they want. They can hide their homosexuality. Could I take a 'don't ask don't tell' policy as an African-American? I could try even to pretend I was Puerto Rican, but I'm still going to get blasted for my skin color."
Dr. Hutcherson's views have earned him a fast-growing stable of enemies and critics.
"He came across as a bully, somebody who was threatening people, someone who was using the Scriptures, not for love but for hate," said Ed Murray, an openly gay state legislator from Seattle, a practicing Roman Catholic and a sponsor of the antidiscrimination bill.
Mr. Murray said he heard Dr. Hutcherson testify at a House hearing against the bill last February. Two Microsoft employees testified on behalf of the bill, prompting Dr. Hutcherson to demand the two meetings with Microsoft and to threaten the boycott. Microsoft officials have said the employees were testifying as private individuals, not on behalf of the company.
"I think he didn't so much as change Microsoft's mind as he caught them off guard," said Mr. Murray, who has also said that Microsoft officials told him Dr. Hutcherson had a role in their decision not to support the bill this year. "I think he was successful in throwing a ball at them and that they fumbled."
Ron Sims, the King County executive, has been a target of Dr. Hutcherson's protests because of his support for gay marriage. Mr. Sims, who is black, said he strongly disagreed with the minister on the civil rights question.
"I don't think that civil rights is the province of any particular group," said Mr. Sims, who earlier this year publicly invited six same-sex couples to sue him for the right to marry in King County, a case that is now being decided by the State Supreme Court and could determine whether gay men and lesbians can marry in Washington state.
"African-American homophobia is just another form of discrimination," he said.
How do you account for the story of the Sacred Band of Thebes, and elite unite supposedly composed of 150 pairs of lovers? While homosexual bonds certainly were an element of elite culture, they were not strictly limited to the class of the symposia.
Also, Alexander's men were hardly "the average Greek farmer" once his campaign was under way.
There's your problem. The current media culture by and large is obsessed with bringing every period and personage down to their level. There must be no heroes or examples of true virtue, for to admit this is to admit that they themselves are less than heroic in their chosen lifestyles. Therefore, to put it bluntly, they revise history to make it more palatable to the current culture. Everybody was a homosexual, don't you know?
Obviously you don't watch the history channel. I'm afraid you are just stating another case that if you don't like the message, you shoot the messenger...a rather tired but old story.
I think it's telling that it originally began simply as a legend of an elite unit and that the legend degenerated along with Greek life to the point where in the Hellenistic period a sexual element was introduced into the story - just at the same time as Greece was becoming debauched.
It's the same today - every historical figure who was not a notorious womanizer is nowadays retroactively portrayed as a homosexual.
This is true. But I still doubt that Egyptian, Parthian and Syrian footsoldiers were so much wealthier than their Greek counterparts that they could, almost each and everyone of them, afford a separate, kept boy toy.
You caught me dead to rights. I do not watch the History Channel. I don't have cable. I made a dangerous assumption that since it was a part of the current media, that it joined the rest in a tendency toward cultural revisionism.
They won't be shattered. They'll just be...,be...,be different. Hmmmm..... whats the word I'm looking for?
Oh yes. ALTERNATE
They'll have an alternate life, because of they're alternate lifestyle. The shatteredness you perceive will be from your own perverse percetions, exposing the fact that your intolerant of another group of people.
(SARCASM OFF)
I'm sure that like everyone else, they come in with a point of view dependant upon the particular producer, but to my simple mind, they seem to offer their programming in a pretty fair and objective manner.
Is this really true? Or is this false opinion of yours exempt from cultural influence, in contradiction to your axiom?
The state mandates a lot of this garbage...I was checking out our health coverage forms to take off an employee that recently passed away. There was a new section on same sex partner benefits blah blah blah.
Is this really true? Or is this false opinion of yours exempt from cultural influence, in contradiction to your axiom?
With the possible exception of the ten commandments...and some physical constants like the speed of light, force of gravity, plank's constant etc., I don't believe there are many absolutes in life.
Since perversion is not specifically spelled out within the ten commandments (unlike for example killing, covetnousness etc.), then perversion is defined by a given culture at a given point in time...and certainly not by me.
So you're not buying the fact that the human reproductive system was designed for reproduction?
So you're not buying the fact that the human reproductive system was designed for reproduction?
I'm not sure I understand your point. First, let's assume as a given that the human reproductive system was designed by an intelligent force as opposed to by mere natural selection.
I'm not sure what this has or hasn't to do with perversion by which I'm assuming you mean to be the use thereof for reasons unintended.
I personally don't agree that time frame has anything to with wether or not homosexual behavior is a perversion - the fact that the Bible would indicate is its a perversion is enough for me.
Anyone believing that the classic Greeks were A-OK in their homosexual activities is demonstrating Moral relativism. It's the same as what they are teaching in the public schools - that what's OK for me is morally alright.
Anyone believing that the classic Greeks were A-OK in their homosexual activities is demonstrating Moral relativism. It's the same as what they are teaching in the public schools - that what's OK for me is morally alright.
1) much of the activity in question occurred long before the Christian Bible.
2) with the possible exception of the ten commandmants, the bible is largely the word of man, not the word of God.
3) Homosexual behavior is mentioned perhaps a half dozen times throuhout the bible...and that almost in passing. As a percentage of the total biblical real estate, it occupies a diminimus percentage of the whole...yet by listening to modern fundamentalists, one would come away with the impression that homosexuality was a core fundamental message of biblical teaching.
To my mind, this is no less a perversion of true intent that let's say, Al Qaeda's interpretation of the Koran.
Wasn't a core teaching of Jesus that "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"...or the biblical admonition of "judge not lest ye be judged?"
If you want to discuss true perversion, I can't think of a better place to start.
If you believe in God, then this must be so, whether He brought His designs into being by evolutionary means or by some kind of special creation.
I'm not sure what this has or hasn't to do with perversion by which I'm assuming you mean to be the use thereof for reasons unintended.
That's what I mean. This isn't an obscure point. Who would argue that eyes weren't designed for seeing or that ears weren't designed for hearing? Similarly with the human reproductive system; the reproductive system was designed for reproduction. The pleasurable aspect of intercourse is ordered toward reproduction. Intercourse also serves to unite the couple. The pleasurable nature of intercourse isn't an end in itself. If intercourse wasn't pleasurable, neither of us would be here today.
We can also see in nature that children are happiest when they're raised by their natural parents in a committed, lifetime relationship. So we see that the act that conceives children was also designed to unite the parents for the benefit of the children, each other, and society.
To argue otherwise results in absurdities.
Contraceptive agents (self-induced sterility) or acts (like withdrawal) then, are intrinsically evil, since they violate the order of nature, just as binging and purging violates the order of nature.
I completely agree with you, I just never heard the point put..well so humorously
This viewpoint would indicate that you are admitting that you are not a Christian. As Christianity is based upon faith - and guidance from the Bible. If the Bible is not 100% truth as inspired by (and some say dictated by) God, then it would be difficult to defend any portion thereof.
Truth is in the eye of the beholder or believer as the case may be. I didn't ask, nor do I require, anyone's help in that regard.
My mother was a Catholic, my father was a Jew. I am neither; rather I am a Deist with very strong leanings toward Buddhism, where the emphasis is on how, as opposed to what, to think.
We cannot pick and choose the parts of the Bible we think are applicable and trash the rest. It's either all right or all wrong. I choose to believe that it is all right and correct.
And that is certainly your right; faith is a strong belief in an ideology or doctrine in spite of sometimes overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
"much of the activity in question occurred long before the Christian Bible." - OH - really? Ancient Hebrews make up the human characters of the Old Testament - part of MY Bible.....
Organized religion hardly started with the Hebrews. The Phoeniacian, Etruscans, Persians, Egyptians etc. all worshipped Gods. As a point in fact, it is thought that monotheism was based upon a Persian God, although to be honest, I can't remember which one.
Exactly how many times does God have to mention something in His Word for it to mean anything? Once should be enough....
Again, you are assuming that the Judeao Christian Bible is the literal word of God which I categorically reject. Excepting for the ten commandments which were handed down from God to Moses, much of the rest is folklore, second and third hand accounts of he said she said, and much of it by mad prophets. If you could reference some Biblical Rosetta Stone that states that the bible is literally the word of God, I would certainly appreciate the reference.
Without a significant knowledge of the Bible (through diligent study and prayerful consideration) you are not qualified to analyze the Bible and if my or anyone else's interpretation is "perversion". And calling a "Spade" a spade is not judgment. I am not convicting anyone and punishing them. That's up to God. But I should not have to "tolerate" such behavior in my presence or in connection with me or my business. But you have already demonstrated a more "Secular Humanist" WorldView - and thus have decided that Christianity is wrong - so I see no further reason to argue with you.
I didn't realize that a discussion was the same as an argument. I am not trying to convince you of anything because faith is faith and that's the name of that tune. You have yours and I mine.
Where I believe you are making a mistake is in your assumption that the world begins and ends with the Judaeo Christian Bible. There is a wide world of global history, especially as it pertains to faith and religion, in which Christianity should be viewed contextually.
I in no way endorse homosexuality in particular or perversion in general other than to say that it has always existed and no doubt, always will. As it turns out, it is a dangerous practice in light of current STD's.
Two other quick points. When men lying with men was first described as sinful, I would be remiss if I didn't point out that it was probably done so because the then world was sparsely populated and this practice would hardly have solved that problem.
As far as hoding out the early Hebrews or Canaanites as some paradigm of absolute virtue, they routinely practiced ritual child sacrifice.
Which was an abomination to God (the God described in the Bible, which you made it a point of saying you "categorically reject" as being the Word of God.)
I don't understand it either. When you consider that Microsoft gave (not sold, gave) it's source code to the Communist Chinese government...
and Bill Gates funds abortions and forced sterlizations...
and the Microsoft corporation's positions on homosexuals...
and the fact that the DOJ anti-trust suit against Microsoft was started under Bush the Elder and turned into a cash squeeze by the Clintons...
I simply don't understand the fascination that conservatives have for Microsoft.
They make money. So what? So does George Soros. So does Teresa Heinz. So do the leftists in Hollywood.
Conservatives don't let friends send money to companies that fund socialist causes.
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.