WARNING: NSFW Video:

My thoughts on this:

 

1) If there is a gay pride parade, infiltrating the middle of it is not the best way for these "Christians" to bring people to God.

 

2) For a group (LGBT) that preaches tolerance, the people in this video are not providing good examples of tolerance towards another group [Christians].

 

3) I absolutely do not agree with the Christians who kept saying "Repent [implications of 'turn straight,' if that's even possible] and be saved," since gays and transgenders can go to Heaven. I absolutely do not agree with the parading activists who cursed out and flipped off the Christians, who in their own minds, were trying to help others.

My thoughts on this:

 

1) If there is a gay pride parade, infiltrating the middle of it is not the best way for these "Christians" to bring people to God.

2) For a group (LGBT) that preaches tolerance, the people in this video are not providing good examples of tolerance towards another group [Christians].

 

3) I absolutely do not agree with the Christians who kept saying "Repent [implications of 'turn straight,' if that's even possible] and be saved," since gays and transgenders can go to Heaven. I absolutely do not agree with the parading activists who cursed out and flipped off the Christians, who in their own minds, were trying to help others.

 

I'm taking the Chris Rock approach on this one, because it's apt. Given centuries of derision/death — and every other cruelty in between — toward homosexuals and others under the LGBT stripe by Christians, while I don't necessarily think their aggressive hostility toward the "Good Christian Preachers" is right and/or becoming, I do understand. Especially since those "preachers" are strictly there to inflame tensions by casting themselves as noble victims, knowing exactly what kind of reaction they'd get.

You call that an "attack"? Lol

 

First, these people are no preachers, they want only to cause trouble, just like the idiots that go to college campuses.

 

These people should worry about their own sins and themselves, as no matter how perfect we think we are, we all are sinners! But, God loves all of us, even those who turn their backs on Him such as atheists.

I don't think anyone in this video did anything to advance their argument. Poor representatives on both sides.

You call that an "attack"? Lol

 

First, these people are no preachers, they want only to cause trouble, just like the idiots that go to college campuses.

 

These people should worry about their own sins and themselves, as no matter how perfect we think we are, we all are sinners! But, God loves all of us, even those who turn their backs on Him such as atheists.

 

If you want to see an attack look for a video of a street preachers being run out of the Castro district of San Francisco. Good thing the police were there. Free speech doesn't exist on the public street there.

Edited June 23, 201511 yr by oldgrappler

^ Those so-called preachers on the streets, most of them anyway, are there for one reason and one reason only, and it's not to spread the word of God.

^ not sure how you know that. Google street preachers in castro district and find the interview of one woman on O'Reilly. THey play music and only talk with those who come up to them and engage them. They are there to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ. You can still do that in America on a public sidewalk, can't you?

 

I guess tolerance is a one way street in San Francisco.

^ not sure how you know that. Google street preachers in castro district and find the interview of one woman on O'Reilly. THey play music and only talk with those who come up to them and engage them. They are there to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ. You can still do that in America on a public sidewalk, can't you?

 

I guess tolerance is a one way street in San Francisco.

 

This is in DC.

Reminds me of this.

 

^ not sure how you know that. Google street preachers in castro district and find the interview of one woman on O'Reilly. THey play music and only talk with those who come up to them and engage them. They are there to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ. You can still do that in America on a public sidewalk, can't you?

 

I guess tolerance is a one way street in San Francisco.

 

First, in case you failed to see it, I said most, not all.

 

And their is a huge difference in sitting back and juts singing and "only talking to those who engage them" (which I have never seen, so it must be very rare. And the way that most of them are who yell, scream, point people out, tell people they are going to hell, they do not show the love of God.

 

Yes, a huge difference.

If you want to see an attack look for a video of a street preachers being run out of the Castro district of San Francisco. Good thing the police were there. Free speech doesn't exist on the public street there.

 

I watched the video that you are referring to.

 

Earlier in the interview Bill asks her if her group stops people while set up on the street to try to engage them in conversation, and she sheepishly says that no they don't stop people.

 

Then...

 

Bill O'Reilly says to her "Now you go down there Y'know after Gay Marriage is voted down and a lot of people are angry, but you still go down and some guy comes over and ruffs you up, how did that happen?"

 

"Well we decided going down there that we were not going to instigate conversation, we were not going to open air preach, we wanted to be sensitive to these people so we were just singing Amazing Grace. We were in a circle holding hands singing Amazing Grace when a man walked up to our group and he picked up a Bible that was sitting next to me and I approached him and said sir could you please give me back my Bible that's one of ours, and he turned around and he said "No", and he hit me upside the head with the Bible knocking me to the ground and began to kick my legs".

 

So in the beginning of this response she says...

 

"we decided going down there that we were not going to instigate conversation, we were not going to open air preach, we wanted to be sensitive to these people"

 

This would almost indicate that in the past they had, but under the circumstances knowing that people were going to be extra sensitive in light of new developments they decided in this occasion that they wouldn't which would pretty much indicate that in the past they had for that conversation between them to come up to make that decision on this occasion, which makes her earlier sheepish response that they don't instigate conversation seem all the more like a line of bull.

 

With that said, in no way do I condone the man's actions of getting violent with her.

 

Do many gays get upset with Christians getting in their faces passing judgement?

 

Absolutely.

 

Do all gays react violently to such circumstances?

 

Absolutely Not

 

Should all gays be held responsible for the actions of some gays who don't control themselves in these circumstances?

 

Absolutely Not.

 

Is it ridiculous for some to use these episodes to try to sway opinion about an entire group of people?

 

Absolutely.

 

Could it be extrapolated that in this particular episode, that past experiences of this group of Christians showing up time and again to likely instigate conversation, and although this time they hadn't, their presence helped further a continuum of frustration and anger on the part of those who had dealt with these people in the past where this guy lost it and acted violently?

 

Very possible, and again no excuses for his behavior.

 

While they are brainwashed to believe that they are preaching for the betterment of these so called "lost souls", I'm not buying for one minute that these people, or any who carry on in the same way are there for any other reason than to act all holier than thou and pretty much try to upset the group they are objecting to. It's not much different than waving a stick at a dog.

 

It might be my right to go stand in the middle of a bunch of Hell's Angels and express to them my distaste for them, but I've got enough sense not to.

 

Weather religious related or not, or having the right to, just about any group of people who show up in the middle of another group of people to voice their objection to them are simply asking for it.

 

If a group of Evangelical Christians were having a big outdoor service somewhere minding their own agenda, I wouldn't dare go stand in the middle of them with a sign promoting that "I'm gay and that I should be free to be because I am", or make out loud comments with a bull horn, or in sign form that I don't care much for their objections toward gays. I would respect their right to congregate and I believe that rights or not, they should respect gays and not show up at a pride rally and try to start trouble, because no matter what way they try to paint it, or pretend that they're doing it with love in their hearts, they're looking for trouble, and if they truly don't realize that, then they are simply just dumber than a box of rocks.

 

What is extremely aggravating to many gays when they are being preached to either by religious people, or just everyday people in society is that these people come from a point of view with a self centered authoritative reasoning, when they obviously have no clue on the matter of which they speak.

 

They're first error in thought tends to be that being gay is a choice, and no matter how many times or ways that a gay tries to explain that it is not, these people of so called authority on the matter will not budge to understand that, and even if they do then they say it is a choice and a sin to act out on your same sex attractions, but take not into consideration that with a gay person it's as natural as can be for them to be in relationship with the person of their affections and attractions, and absolutely ridiculous to think that they're going to deny themselves the opportunity to love who they love and express that love accordingly, and not much care for others who try to judge them on this, especially when they don't have the first clue of which they speak.

 

Sure we all have so called rights, but some of us also have a bit of sense to go along with those rights, and understand when you're going overboard in getting in the middle of other people's business, and that certain territory is absolutely none of your business, and absolutely ignorant and stupid to get in the middle of it.

 

No doubt there are some stalemate situations such as a gay couple wanting an objecting Christian baker to bake them a cake for their wedding. Simple solution...have your cake baked by someone who doesn't object...problem solved.

 

There's two sets of principles here and I understand both. I might not be on the same page as the objecting baker, but I still think it's overboard for the gay couple to insist all for the sake of their rights and making a statement. You're not gonna win any friends if you try to hold the law over their heads and force them to bake a cake all for "The principle of it all".

 

Now that gays are more accepted, they also still need to exercise a bit of patience and give society a chance to develop an understanding and not feel forced to. Just relax and it's all bound to settle more peacefully in the long run. I do understand the many years struggle and not wanting things to roll backwards, but don't get too cocky with your newfound freedom. Just chill and let things fall into place.

 

I might not be too thrilled that someone objects to me being gay, but it's a big world and I've discovered that there's enough people who don't have a problem with it and I'm selective enough not to waste my time with those who do. If some are willing to have a sensible conversation with an open mind then I'll award them my time, otherwise I'm not going to be wasting it on misguided shallow people. I've got my own alarm clock to set and I'm not responsible for setting everyone else's.

^ B-Ball-Fan: that is a pretty reasonable post. I don't take issue with a lot of what you wrote.

 

However, I don't think that what that group was doing there was what you assume when you hear "street preaching." There are some street preachers who are insulting to the crowds around them and I don't think they represent their cause well. There is other street preaching that is what you might hear in church only it is out on the street. The Salvation Army is famous for this. The brass band plays and a crowd gathers. Then a SA officer preaches to the crowd. That sounds more like what this group does on a regular basis. In fact, they had been going there every Friday night and singing, and making themselves available if anyone wanted to talk to them. Sometimes one of their leaders may preach. I don't get the sense that it is the kind of screaming, condemning style that sometimes is done by others.

 

Here is a link to a description reported to be by one who was there that night. Christians Attacked by Gays in Castro District, San Francisco

 

The worst of the account above is disputed in gay news accounts. I wasn't there.

 

It seems the crowd was stirred up by the recent Prop 8 stuff but the street preachers were not there about that at all and have never been there about Prop 8. They go there every week to share the gospel with those who are willing to listen. They sing, they sometimes preach, and they talk to individuals who engage them. Apparently, homosexuality is not the topic they speak about. Rather they are sharing the love of God. But that night was an emotionally charged night and the Christian ministry folks nearly paid a high price.

 

It is interesting to hear what one of the Christian girls later said--I think the one that got hit and kicked. Huff said she believes her group, whose members all live in San Francisco, will return to the Castro at some point.

 

"We understand that not everyone in the LGBT community is violent and angry" like the people they encountered Friday night, said Huff.

 

"We go to the Castro all the time," she said. "We have friends there. We love the people who live in the Castro, and in no way hold what happened Friday night against them."

 

The bottom line for me is that I am opposed to intimidation and bullying. I support the right of free speech on public property. Furthermore, what that group does is seek to engage a people that may often feel alienated from the church and they try to show them the love of God. Perhaps you may disagree with their method, but they appear to be a pretty respectful group trying to reach people they would not have much contact with otherwise.

First, in case you failed to see it, I said most, not all.

 

And their is a huge difference in sitting back and juts singing and "only talking to those who engage them" (which I have never seen, so it must be very rare. And the way that most of them are who yell, scream, point people out, tell people they are going to hell, they do not show the love of God.

 

Yes, a huge difference.

 

Perhaps we are talking about two different incidents. I introduced another occasion that occurred in the castro district of San Francisco. My comments related to that.

 

But in the instance when street preachers are rude, surely you support the right even of insulting, and arrogant people to speak freely on a public street. And I would hope you would not support a crowd turning into a mob threatening violence, hitting, spitting on, throwing coffee on, and perhaps worse. Mob rule is wrong.

 

I would agree that what some street preachers do is arrogant and obnoxious and IMO does not represent Christ well. It does not mean that a mob can intimidate and bully them into leaving.

^ I didn't see where you were talking about. Particular incident, if I missed it i'm sorry.

 

A quick YouTube search I found tons of them with bullhorns intimidating people and calling them out.

 

As far at running them out, I have no issues if it's the ones who are judging and calling out people, yell and scream at people, ect.. Just look at Westboro, people like them need to be ran out of ever spot they stop to hate.