1.20.2006

Larry King on Gay Marriage

I have just read Larry King script for last nights show that included Chad Allen who plays Nate Saint, one of five missionaries killed in 1956 by a tribe they were trying to reach with the Gospel. The newly released film "End of the Spear," which opened last night in 1,200 theaters nationwide.

Chad Alan is gay and his role as a star in this movie has aggravated a great number of the Christian Right. Larry King also had on the show Rev Albert Mohler, Jr the President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

King discusses the movie Brokeback Mountain, gay sex and marriage with his guests. Its a great read.

(snip)

KING: Reverend Mohler, if you believe that being gay is a choice, did you choose to be heterosexual?

MOHLER: Well, in some sense yes but when I say it's a choice and I would have to go back before that to say there are desires and even what we might call a sexual or erotic profile that goes back beyond when any of us ever knew we made a choice.I don't doubt for a minute, Larry that there are millions of people who struggle with attractions to the same sex or other kinds of attractions that they don't even know they ever chose.

They may never have and as they know themselves would never have chosen them.But the big issue for all of us is how we find out what our creation was all about and what we were made for and why this incredibly powerful thing called sex is such a big part of our lives and how we are to bring it into a right alignment. In other words, there are heterosexuals who struggle with all kinds of desires that are just not right desires and when it comes right down to it I, as a Christian, believe that we are also deeply affected by sin that we don't even know ourselves well enough to know why we desire the things we desire.What I hope for is that persons, heterosexual and homosexual, will come to know the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, would come to know new life in him, would come to understand that sinners can find the only help that is -- that is worth finding and the only salvation and solution to our problems by coming to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and then understanding that God, our creator, has the right to define every aspect of our lives including our sexuality.

KING: Do you know why if it's such a beautiful thing that it's a sin to do it?

MOHLER: To do sex?

KING: Sex, why is it a sin to have sex if it's so beautiful?

MOHLER: Well, I don't think it is a sin to have sex within the confines of marriage.

KING: I mean outside of marriage, gay sex, outside of marriage sex. It's a beautiful thing. Who does it harm?

MOHLER: Well, you know, that is the problem. I can't say it's a beautiful thing. It may be something the world finds attractive. There may be pleasure in it that is passing but I think the only thing that can genuinely be beautiful is that which is also good and true and that means just as the creator intended it for us.

KING: Right but that's what you think. You don't want your thoughts to be his thoughts. The creator doesn't say because I say it everyone must do it because you have free choice right?

MOHLER: Well...

KING: So you're not making a judgment are you?

MOHLER: Well I am making a judgment...

KING: You are?

MOHLER: ...in saying that what Al Mohler thinks about this really isn't all that important but what the creator thinks about it is determinative. It's absolutely important.

It's the criterion that will be used even on a day of judgment that I firmly believe is coming when heterosexuals and homosexuals will be judged for all of our sin. And, yes, God will hold us accountable. We have free choice in terms of free agency deciding whether we're going to obey or disobey but we are accountable.

KING: But it's not in the Constitution. Jesus isn't in the Constitution of the United States. So, we're going to get into laws now.
(snip)


You can read the whole article transcript here
or here if not there!


, , , , Movies, Films, lgbt, , ,

3 comments:

progressiveu said...

Paul Martin has no credibility left

Let’s look at the rhetoric and the reality:

They say we would “Allow a front door vote on same sex marriage.”
We won’t, they did. Paul Martin and the Liberals already allowed a free vote on same-sex marriage and 33 Liberal MPs voted against this Charter right.

They say we would “Allow a back door vote on a woman’s right to choose.”
We won’t, they did. Paul Martin and the Liberals have already allowed these votes – repeatedly – and 13 Liberal MPs (including current Cabinet Ministers Albina Guarineri and Joe Volpe) say they’ll vote against choice again.


They say we would “Cancel the national Early Learning and Childcare Plan.”
We won’t, and they didn’t do anything for over a decade in power and only began to put their national child care plan in place under NDP pressure in a minority government.

They say we would “pull Canada out of Kyoto and kill $2 billion of funding to combat climate change”.
We won’t, and their commitment to Kyoto has been entirely nominal. Since Paul Martin became Prime Minister Canada’s emissions have increased faster than the United States. When he was campaigning against Jean Chretien, Paul Martin did his best to undermine Kyoto.

They say we would “join with George Bush and put Canada into the American Missile Defence Shield.”
We won’t, they did. On February 24, 2004, 105 Liberals voted against an NDP-supported motion to “oppose the proposed American antimissile defence shield and cease all discussions with the Bush administration on possible Canadian participation.” The nays were led by a troika of Prime Minister Paul Martin, then-Defence Minister John McCallum and former Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham.

They say we would help Stephen Harper “turn his back on the Kelowna agreement with Canada’s aboriginal peoples.”
We won’t, and nothing would have happened at Kelowna if the NDP hadn’t forced the deplorable conditions at Kashechewan onto the front pages and shamed the Liberal government into long-overdue action.

Ryann said...

interesting interview.

Martin vs. Harper... pick the lesser of two evils if you must, but there are other parties in Canada (NDP, Green etc...)

I AM NOT willing to hand over Canada to the Evangelistic doctrine based on mud-slinging and anger.

HDcanuck said...

I am not willing to hand the country back over to the Liberals. I am not willing to hand the country over to the Regressive Conservatives. I am not willing to hand the country over to the NDP. GAWD!!