First Rush, then Coulter, and Now Glenn Beck ... What’s Happening?

Life Site News ^ | NEW YORK, August 12, 2010 | Commentary by John-Henry Westen

[GonzoII]

Friday August 13, 2010

---

First Rush, then Coulter, and Now Glenn Beck ... What’s Happening?

Commentary by John-Henry Westen

NEW YORK, August 12, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Appearing on The O’Reilly Factor yesterday, famed conservative Fox News host Glenn Beck may have shocked many Americans by noting that he was not very concerned about homosexual 'marriage.'

O’Reilly asked Beck, “Do you believe that gay marriage is a threat to the country in any way?” Beck replied, “No, I don't,” adding sarcastically, “Will the gays come and get us?” 

After being pressed again on the question, Beck said, “I believe -- I believe what Thomas Jefferson said. If it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket, what difference is it to me?”  Showing his own surprise, O’Reilly remarked, “Okay, so you don't. That's interesting. Because I don't think a lot of people understand that about you.”

The Glenn Beck revelation comes on the heels of two other startling announcements by conservative celebrity pundits in the last couple of weeks.  Earlier this week it was announced that conservative pundit Ann Coulter would headline a fundraiser for the homosexual activist group within the Republican Party, GOProud.  And on July 29, although his position had been revealed before, talk radio host Rush Limbaugh again came out in favor of homosexual civil unions, while being opposed to same-sex ‘marriage.’

To be fair, it must be pointed out that Beck said he was looking at the ‘big picture’ and promoting faith, the answer to all such things.  Moreover, he added that he was okay with gay ‘marriage’ with a caveat.  “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 oppose it,” he said.

But even to have suggested, as strongly as he did, that he was not opposed to gay ‘marriage’ is detrimental and demonstrates a ‘small picture’ approach.

Beck seems like a good guy. He’s thoughtful.  He’s right on many matters in the culture war.  For instance, when O’Reilly followed up and asked if Beck thought abortion threatened the United States, Beck replied dramatically in the affirmative.  “Abortion is killing, it’s killing, you’re killing someone,” he said.

So I thought it’d be worth it to calmly and persuasively share concerns with Beck on his approach.  He may not read my email, but I’m sure if enough pro-family folks were to get the message to him, he’d reconsider his outlook.

Here’s Beck’s email:

And here’s the gist of what I wrote:

Laws teach people what is right and wrong and thus homosexual acts will implicitly be given the stamp of approval where such legal recognition is granted.  The young will be given the false impression that this behavior is safe and acceptable, or even good.

Society has a duty to legally recognize and support married couples since they are, through procreation, the source for the continuation of human life and thus society itself.  Homosexual couples cannot properly procreate and thus have no such claim to societal recognition.

The question is not so much about marriage, but about homosexual acts.  The acts are harmful to the individuals who engage in them. They are harmful physically, emotionally and spiritually. 

With regard to persons engaged in such behavior or identifying with it, there must never be unjust discrimination.  All gay bashing, name-calling and the like should be condemned.  However, there must be discrimination on this front, a just discrimination, to preserve societal recognition for marriage between one man and one woman. 

URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/aug/10081315.html

---

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.

[Darksheare]

"..The Pharisee Matchett-PI stood and prayed, "God, I thank you, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess."
Yes, you are to make a distinction between good and evil Matchett.
The behavior at the link supplied is what you are trying to embace, excuse, turn a blind eye to in the name of not being judgemental or appearing to condemn.
What's that saying about the road to avery hot place and what it is paved with?

[Darksheare]

Heh?
Standup comic?
Naaah, I’m only good in print media.
And I could never compete with with the Dummie Funnies juggernaut.

[DBeers]

It takes two to disagree.

It would appear you agree with my position now as you no longer address it -instead addressing me -claiming I am being dramatic and ignoring the truth.

Your arguments have been soundly put down as will the arguments of the rogue judge in this case...

One can not argue against that which is irrelevant -the very fact that ones argues against it implies its very relevance... That is the truth you ignore albeit only passively now...

[little jeremiah]

Maybe just a little occasional knockoff?

Pretty please?

[RFEngineer]

“One can not argue against that which is irrelevant -the very fact that ones argues against it implies its very relevance... That is the truth you ignore albeit only passively now... “

You are uncommonly stupid.

I don’t know where you get the arguments you attribute to me, but let me be clear: You made them up, not me.

I am not “ignoring passively” I am getting in your face and pointing at your nose and telling you to put up or shut up.

Where did you find the arguments that you attribute to me? If you have a specific post that says what you claim I said, post it.

You simply do not understand the point I was making, and I grow tired of trying to explain it to you. You don’t get it. I accept that. Now, will you post exactly what I said and argue against it (I know whatever I say, you will argue against it....that’s become clear)

Otherwise go away. You are annoying and fake. I have no time for your games.

[vox_freedom]

He calls me a liar and when I reply with evidence that I did not, (and pull the great Oz curtain back on him, LOL) he tells me not to post to him. What a jerk.

[Darksheare]

There may be copyright issues involved in that one.
But, I did once upon a time do something called the HK409 treatment to trolls.
In honor of the troll HK409 whose posts I.. er.. altered.

[DJ MacWoW]

Yup. Narcissistic too.

[vox_freedom]

So, Darksheare, if you are a pharisee, you must be a young, and immature one, besides! LOLOL.

These trolls are too much. They don't believe in restricting homosexuals (and their agendas) because it would be too much guvment intrusion on our liberties, but they castigate we posters who have the temerity to take them to task with facts and evidence. Then they call us liars and all sorts of other names. Too much...

[vox_freedom]

Now you’ve gone too far, DJ. Stop using words that I have to look up! :-)

[Darksheare]

Yeah, I loved that one.

---

“But.. but.. *trembling lip* we shouldn’t Juuuuuuuuuudge!” [insert bawling cries here] “We must embrace them in luv!”

*Show them what they are embracing and excusing*

“You’re childish!”

---

The pro-homo-TrLoLs are vastly amusing to me, especially when they try to use religion to justify aberrant behavior in direct contradiction to major tenets of said religion.

[Darksheare]

I’m heading off to bed for the night, I have a long day ahead of me tomorrow.
I head in to work early, to deal with truck drivers who act like some of our recent TrLoLs.

[DJ MacWoW]

Sorry! You just need to be more perspicacious. :-)

[DJ MacWoW]

I know that you’re kidding but about 20 years ago I had these 3 friends that had never met a dictionary or any grade above a “C” in school. We’d be chatting away and inevitably one would yell “Stop! What was that word you just used?!” And I would have to try to discern what word it was in the english language that they had never heard before. It got to the point that I had to measure every word I used in order to be understood and not play “public dictionary”.

[vox_freedom]

great story. Maybe it is because I sometimes use voluminous (large) words when communicating ... as I left a company to join another a long while back, I was given an unabridged Webster as a parting gift. Of course, we now have immediate computer access to any word definition, and that elephantine (huge) dictionarius is a bit of a bookend, but it was an indisputably thoughtful (appropriate) gift at the time. lol

[vox_freedom]

thanks Darksheare, and see you later; hopefully sooner rather than...

[DJ MacWoW]

I still keep a Merriam - Webster on my desk. And I use it. It’s by my monitor. I have a Thesaurus too. I do use online dictionaries sometimes.

[DBeers]

You aren’t even close to discussing the reality of the influence of Christianity in politics today. Its like you don’t want to admit the truth.

Your words...

[DBeers]

You are uncommonly stupid.

Your words... I disagree with you -you are wrong -I will not shut up -calling me stupid is irrelevant.

[RFEngineer]

“Your words... I disagree with you -you are wrong -I will not shut up -calling me stupid is irrelevant.”

lol.....okay.