[marron]

I’m generally civil because I’m civil. Not because I sign something and not because I agree to be.

I personally would never sign anything that has Jim Wallis’ signature.

The remark that Wallis doesn’t have to be civil to Beck because Beck is a mormon is proof to me of how empty this thing is. Wallis is a marxist. If you can be civil to a marxist you can be civil to a mormon. Are marxists to be construed as members of our “family of believers” now? More sleight of hand and more reason not to engage in this kind of clownery.

[cripplecreek]

I’m generally civil because I’m civil. Not because I sign something and not because I agree to be.

Exactly. And guys like Wallis will want to hold the right to a standard he and the left have no intent of holding themselves to.

[Colofornian]

I personally would never sign anything that has Jim Wallis’ signature.

Well, I would certainly agree that Wallis has raised mega red flags in his writings. But as Colson says, it doesn't mean we don't challenge Wallis. It means that as we do it, we keep our tones in check.

So, what's wrong with keeping our content challenges the same for people like Wallis, but exercising self-discipline of our tone???

[eeevil conservative]

well said!

thank you!

[reaganaut]

Don’t like/agree with Wallis but your political views are not what saves you, your theology (faith in Christ) is what saves you. Theoretically you can be a marxist and be a Christian, however you CANNOT be a Mormon and be a Christian. The two are mutually exclusive based upon theology.

And i used to be Mormon so I am VERY familiar with LDS theology.