[McGavin999]

No Dan, he's right on this one. We are instructed to witness to people. How do you witness to people you shun? He is also right about the differnce between tolerance and acceptance.

[BibChr]

<< No Dan, he's right on this one. We are instructed to witness to people. How do you witness to people you shun?>>

No Mac, he's dead-wrong on it and completely morally tone-deaf. And he evidently knows less of Christianity than I do of Judaism.

If one of these homosexuals walks up and says, "I'm Bob. I'd like to serve on the campaign," he'd be welcomed, period.

But they come up and say, "Hi, we're a subset of Republicans distinguished by only one thing, that we are all addicted to deviant, immoral, and harmful sexual practices. Accept us as such, and we will get to work on our agenda to have our practices (not just ourselves) approved and protected and made equivalent to heterosexual message."

See the difference?

And as to witnessing (a distinct and unrelated issue), I have no problem at all, ever, witnessing to people whose lifestyles I find problematic. In fact, that's pretty much the premise of witness-bearing. If all were well with their souls, they'd not need the Gospel.

Dan

[Maximilian]

We are instructed to witness to people. How do you witness to people you shun?

Are you trying to tell me that Racicot was meeting with the gays in order to "witness" to them? I don't think so. In fact, in an earlier story he specifically denied that he was doing anything of the sort. And his questions to the Bauer, Weyrich, etc. group indicated that he had not even the faintest grasp of the reasons for their objections. It just wasn't on his radar screen.