On Easter morning, Sally Kern faced off with Cathedral of Hope pastor, Dr. Scott Jones for a spirited debate regarding her comments on terrorism and homosexuality. The show is Flashpoint on KFOR-TV. The video with Kern and is the first two segments with an analysis by their hosts in the third. I cannot embed it here but provide the link to the Flashpoint page.
She asserts scientific evidence proving her views but provides none. I have asked her via email for this evidence and asked those who I assume have her ear for it as well with no response.
28 thoughts on “Sally Kern on morning talk show, Flashpoint”
Warren, go to any pro-family organization’s website and see what stuff you can come up with. I recommend the Family Research Council’s book “Getting It Straight: What the Research Shows about Homosexuality.” 🙂
Well, for what it’s worth, I consider myself an “evangelical” Christian. I don’t see it as a dirty word. I looked up the derivation of the word and found this:
” Evangelicals often appeal to the derivation of their name from the Greek New Testament word for the ‘gospel’ or ‘good news’ of Jesus Christ. On their own account, they are ‘gospel people’, committed to simple New Testament Christianity and the central tenets of apostolic faith, rather than to later ecclesiastical accretions.”
Too bad this word has come to describe only right-wing, Bible-thumping, self-righteous, fear-mongering, Republicans who absolutely know what each passge of Scripture means (even though they only obey the Biblical laws that suit them) — and the rest of us are just “radical liberals” — and probably not “real” Evangelical Christians like them anyway..
I don’t see anything wrong with defining it each time its used – being more specific probably WOULD be helpful – If it is a conservative Evangelical group or Leader (such as Focus on the Family), call it such – If its a Catholic group or leader – call it such – If its a group of conservative Christians of different churches (AFA, CWA, Exodus Int’l ), call it such. The same rules would apply if it involves liberal Evangelicals.
The word “Evangelicals” keeps popping up lately as the label for those ‘bad Christians’. I think this needs to be curbed immediately. There are many non-Evangelical Christians who sport the rigidity being described (i.e. traditional Catholics) and, conversely, there are many Evangelicals who don’t subscribe to it. Truthful communication would be better served if that ill-fitting term either weren’t used at all or would be defined by the user each time its used. (Yeah, kinda like ex-gays and ‘change’.) 🙂
I’m a Christian too Marty – I doubt we disagree on everything 🙂
I must be doing something wrong jay. This is a first for us 😉
I don’t disagree with you here Marty 😉
Jayhuck, I need not remind you that the words of Jesus Christ himself were deemed so offensive that they crucified him for saying them…
Even today, some “respected scholars” will insist that Jesus was “misrepresenting” Christianity… lol!
No one spoke of Hell more than Jesus, yet these “christians” would deny that such a place even exists. Go figure.
Do I need to remind you of all the people who have claimed to speak for Christianity??? Does the name, David Koresh ring a bell? All sorts of people throughout history have claimed to be speaking on Christianity’s behalf, sometimes shedding the blood of innocent people to further their beliefs.
When people start comparing others to terrorists they are, inadvertently or not, encouraging violence against these members. Remember what happened in the United States right after 9/11 – how Muslims became the target of violence and abuse? One doesn’t have to directly suggest violence in order to encourage and perpetuate it.
As for the preacher in this Flashpoint video, I can only shake my head and laugh. Yes, “many respected scholars” believe all sorts of nonsense. And many people who want to justify their behaviors will latch onto their claims.
He actually reminded me of the Islamic apologists who continually insist that Islam is a “religion of peace” (nevermind those verses in the Quran), and that Osama Bin Laden doesn’t speak for Islam (nevermind that Osama himself claims to speak for Islam).
About all we can learn from this debate is that all generalizations are false in many specific cases, while still being generally true. And we learn that more debate — not less — is the way forward. I won’t be participating in any “day of silence”.
Okay jayhuck, care to show me where exactly Ms. Kern “encourages violence perpetuated against the gay community”? I listened to the clips, and I just can’t find it.
Warren said “Social conservatives need to make their case without sensationalism.”
Surely the same holds true for radical liberals.
As for any evidence that gay people are “born that way, can’t possibly change”, surely anyone who follows this blog must admit — the jury is still out.
Now, you are entitled to your sincerely held beliefs, no matter how offensive they are to me. Surely the same holds true for me and Ms. Kern, does it not?
There is plenty of evidence, but you are wanting proof, which is another thing altogether. However, let’s go the other way. You have no proof that people are not born that way and that they can all change their orientation (I’m not talking behavior, I’m talking the actual desires, arousal, attraction – I’m also not talking celibacy, which is behavioral). Certainly the evidence is there that suggests the vast majority of people who try to change cannot. Even “ex-gay” leaders admit to still having the desires.
I’ve seen conservative religious people constantly trot out Freud’s hypothesis for why some are homosexual – a hypothesis that is no longer accepted as a primary explanation because of the actual evidence. Yet , that doesn’t stop evangelical leaders from constantly touting it. It’s clear they don’t care about actual evidence – they only care about promoting their bias.
The question is where does the evidence lie. On this, respected people disagree. But, importantly, the trend is toward sexual orientation being inborn – a trend even recognized by the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
I, like Sally, have been shocked, offended, and outraged many times by gay activist assaults on the innocence of children, the importance and meaning of the family, and the value of our sincerely held values….
Meanwhile GLSEN etc is busily telling our kids that gay people are “born that way, can’t possibly change”.
I have been incredibly shocked and appalled at the astonishing lack of Christian compassion from people, like Sally, who profess to be Christians. I am offended by people like her who refuse to live in peace with their gay neighbor, who refuse to acknowledge and give equal rights and benefits to gay couples and gay families, and who encourage the violence perpetuated daily against the gay community.
As for GLSEN telling our kids that gay people are born that way – there is plenty of evidence out there to suggest that genetics plays a part in the development of both heterosexual and homosexual orientation. Whether YOU personally choose to acknowledge that evidence is another matter entirely.
Right Nick. Meanwhile GLSEN etc is busily telling our kids that gay people are “born that way, can’t possibly change”. No facts, no evidence required…
You are more than welcome to voice your objections. However, we take offense when you (collective you, not you as personally) lie, misrepresent, fear-monger and distort. If you keep to the facts, use evidence, and don’t make insulting and intentionally derogatory comments, then we don’t have a problem. The problem is, that doesn’t happen very often.
Nah, I don’t think so.
I, like Sally, have been shocked, offended, and outraged many times by gay activist assaults on the innocence of children, the importance and meaning of the family, and the value of our sincerely held values.
What, do our feelings and experiences not matter? Or are we just not allowed to voice them?
Seems like a double standard.
Marty – I am not a gay activist and it shocks me.
Social conservatives need to make their case without sensationalism.
Sally is certainly entitled to her opinion — it seems to be honestly held.
There are a great many people out there who experience “gay activism” as a direct assault against their children, their families, and their values. It would be no suprise to find that many of them see it as a more dangerous long-term threat than terrorism.
If that shocks gay activists, well good. It ought to.
Thanks Jim – Just keep putting those nails in the Evangelical coffin 🙂
I think she is relies on her religious beliefs to “prove her” views and not so much the “science”. You may be wasting your time.
If homosexuality and terrorism is an oxymoron, so is a gay pastor.
Um and oh yeah – if John Adams had been able to (remember it was a long hot summer) then would they not have included spcifically in the constitution a christian relgion as the law of the land???
OK, now for a little history lesson:
My grandmother didn’t grow up pledging allegiance to one nation under God. Nor did yours. “Under God” was added in 1954, some 57 years after the rest of the Pledge was written, as the result of a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic Men’s group.
And surely (surely!) you know that the reference to nature and nature’s God was an appeal to Deism and not to Christianity.
Oh, and John Adams also said
Our founding fathers were well versed in religion and had a great respect for the various institutions. Many of them attended church and all of them had a good working knowledge of the Bible, just as they had of Greek mythology and philosophy and other “classics”.
But it was not the intention of our founders to make our government’s documents subservient to religious texts or doctrines.
Man has the choice to follow God or not. It’s not your job to make sure everyone does what you want them to do. I know I can’t handle that job. Have you ever considered how unfaithful people have been to God by allowing hate to run rampant in the crowds? Where was your patriotism then?
Dave G: Have you somehow acquired absolute knowledge of the laws of God and nature? Please, for heaven’s sake, leave yourself a little wiggle room for some humility and the remote possiblity that you may be wrong.
The New Testament tells us: “Our knowledge is incomplete and our ability to speak what God has revealed is incomplete.” — 1 Corinthians 13:9 Also check out 1 Corinthians 8:2 — ” If anyone supposes that he knows anything, he has not yet known as he ought to know.”
Paul’s letter reminds us that “What we know now is only partial, then it will be complete, when we behold HIm face to face.” Not until then, Dave. Not until then.
John Adams described the US Constitution thusly:
“Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.”
—Something to think about. Civilizations have crumbled under the weight of their own immorality –not just homosexuality. But the legal endorsement and enforcement of one such form of immorality engenders a loosening of personal constraint on all others, and government constraints must multiply. It becomes a downward spiral of moral consensus and upward spiral of government control.
This is a definite threat to our American way of life and freedom “under God” –meaning a concerted effort to obey “the laws of nature and nature’s God.”
The thing that destroys christianity are christians who do not walk the walk. I have to include myself in that group since I falter almost everyday. I do wish someone would talk to Kern about her walk and how God is really in control – not “the gays” and their “agenda” and not Kern and her office.
If she wants to insure that her society continues – she can study the rise and fall of Rome, Warfare, Tibetian monks, WWII and the National Socialist Party, etc… and learn. Her ideas about homosexuality acceptance and fall of Rome is an old rumor that she is only repeating. She truly does think that is reality. And if she is so concerned – she ought to be glad that Rome fell so other nations could rise – one such as America. If she studied further she might see that our constitution is different than Rome’s. She really is ignorant – and I’m saying that in a nice way.
Warren, thanks for providing this and following up on her supposed scientific evidence.
What particularly stood out to me while watching the video is how she refused to let the pastor speak. She continually interrupted him and did not allow him to explain his theology. Meanwhile, he was more than respectful to her, allowing her to speak uninterrupted.
As she said, you’ll know them by their fruit. Her fruit was pushy and inconsiderate. His fruit was polite and respectful.
Comments are closed.