[andrewlittle]

I agree with ‘nelopinion’ that Ms Kramer’s piece is grammatically well written. It should be, considering her profession. Grammar, however, is not the only consideration for that accolade. To be well written, an article should also be somewhat factual and accurate.

I will begin at Ms Kramer’s ending point. While the notion of Christians being reflections of Christ is common, it is inherently flawed. Christian means “little Christ”, so we are not to reflect Christ but to actually be Christ-like to the extent we are able.

What is wrong with the mirror analogy? A mirror does not reflect truth, it reverses it. In a mirror the original is reflected right side up, but backwards in the horizontal plane. This is why most people don’t like to see their photographic images. They are so used to seeing themselves as a reflection, seeing ourselves as others see us is uncomfortable. Likewise, we are not to be a reflection of Christ, one in which Christ is shown to the world in a reversed and distorted fashion, but living examples of what Christ is, albeit imperfect.

Being Christ-like means that truth matters. Truth does not include dissimulation such as quoting an incomplete news story from Sweden as having dire consequences for Middle America, as if the laws of Sweden held sway in the U.S. Truth would also require correcting the statement that “a minister can be arrested and jailed,” for the reasons stated by ‘Amphikalein’.
Ms Kramer’s use of Rev Green as an example is unfortunate for another reason – Rev Green was far from Christ-like in his searing criticism of GLBT folk. Besides the examples given in the aforementioned comment, Rev Green also argued that, while all GLBT are not pedophiles, all pedophiles developed “by changing their gender relationships.” He also calls for GLBT to be “vomited out” of Sweden before God “vomits us all out of the land.” Can you see Jesus likening anyone, with the possible exception of the Pharisees, to a cancerous growth – a disease? There is much more that can be said about Rev Green’s sermon, but I will suffice to say that his sermon was filled with distortions, inaccuracies and false statements.

With regard to the Zondervan lawsuit, I have yet to speak with, exchange messages with, or read any comments by GLBT that state that this man is anything but a buffoon and that the suit runs afoul of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. That doesn’t mean there aren’t those, straight and GLBT alike, who agree with him – but they are not among the hundreds of GLBT folk that I communicate with regularly. This suit is far from a credible threat to anyone.

It is also telling that, while discussing the issue of homosexuality, Ms Kramer uses a text that speaks of adultery and promiscuity. Would that be because the does not exist a text in which Jesus addresses homosexuality? Indeed, it would.

Ms Kramer’s assertion that we should speak the “truth in love” is one I commend. It has two components – truth and love. Slight of hand, or in this case word, does not constitute truth. Being reckless with the truth is also never loving. Speaking the truth in love makes it incumbent on the speaker to make sure that what is spoken is actually “truth”, not just ideologically motivated false-speak. It is, thankfully, even allowable to speak falsely in this country unless that speech approaches slander, libel or incitement to violence. That, however, does not make it Christ-like.

Lastly – a question for the paper. You ran an opinion piece about a contentious, contemporary issue. Where is the counter arguments – the opposing views – the balanced commentaries? Would it not have been truth-telling to put two pieces that disagreed with each other on the same page?

Rev Andy