It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Christian publisher drops writer's book because he came out to Time Magazine as gay

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Anyafaj

The publisher is following the teachings of God and then Christ. If you think the publishers are being hateful and discriminatory, then you have to look at the source from which they derived their beliefs. In this case, it was straight from the horse's mouth.

So you are upset with the publisher for not compromising their beliefs, but you love God and Christ even though you choose not to follow their teachings and judge those of us who do?




Christ taught us to Love Thy Neighbor. Simple. No other translation can mess this up. Love Thy Neighbor. There were no stipulations to this request. Love him only if...., No. Just Love Him. Period, end of discussion. So where in the Bible does it say, to only Love Thy Neighbor, as long they as are not gay? As long as they don't talk about being gay? As long as they don't give the appearance of being gay? (See the publisher was happy publishing the book IF he didn't talk or appear gay, when he refused, they refused to publish the book.) So where in the Bible does it say Love Thy Neighbor as long as they give in to your commands?






posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 09:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Anyafaj

Yes, and if the publisher disagrees with gay marriage? Again, God and Christ even more clearly teach that marriage is between a man and a woman. Again, he is asking them to go against their beliefs. And you clearly think they should compromise them too. If you believe in God, then you don't think this is something that can just be altered at man's whim. Marriage is between man and woman.

There is a HUGE difference between knowing someone is gay and knowing they are a gay activist. The publisher likely does not want to serve as a platform for his advocacy which they now know they are at risk of doing. Are they under some obligation to support his advocacy?

As far as his private life, yes, he has a right to it, but it stopped being private the minute he splashed it all over the pages of TIME crowing that Christians were all going to inevitably accept it and give him his way now didn't it?



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Anyafaj

Stop confusing love with sex. Sometimes, the most loving thing you can say is NO.

I have no problem with him being gay. I have enormous problems with the idea that he thinks he can change God's mind. Guy is free to do whatever he wants in life within the bounds of law, but when it comes to faith, we answer to a higher power. Last I checked, when it comes to that, there is no power on earth who can rewrite God's words on the matter.


edit on 22-2-2015 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

The publisher is following the teachings of God and then Christ.


This is derailing a bit...

The scriptural support for being anti-homosexuality is not strong.

If you use the Old Testament [never-minding the inherit hypocrisy considering how often Christians say the New Covenant and the Grace of Jesus essentially nullified the Old Ways] as a scriptural basis then all you could possibly surmise is that Yahweh is against men having sex with men. It's exclusion of lesbians means it's not an all-encompassing stance against the homosexual orientation itself, rather specifically gay men acting out their desires.

If you use the New Testament then you're looking at Paul's writings. Anyone that knows anything about Paul knows he was passionate about not having sex outside of wedlock, and also celibacy. The verses of his that commonly get used are making reference to a specific practice. It's called pederasty. The sexual slavery of a younger man/boy and an adult man. Since marriage could only take place between a man and a women, their sexual activity would be out of wedlock. The sin itself in Paul's eyes was sex outside of wedlock, and not homosexuality.

Which leads to my last point. Homosexuality itself was nonexistent during Biblical times. I don't mean people weren't gay then. I'm talking about the understanding people had an underlying sexual orientation of complex biological and psychological feelings of attraction. All they knew is people had sex with people, and their terms were for specific sex acts. Sexual orientations are a relatively new understanding in the World. The modern English translations that explicitly use the word 'homosexual' or 'homosexuality' are not translating them from the source material, rather they are just plugging them in literally out of no where. I can demonstrate this if you wish.
edit on 22-2-2015 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Anyafaj

I wouldnt have asked the man to sign any statement, I simply would have fired him.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Anyafaj

I don't know why you are ashamed. He is advocating something they believe is wrong. Why would they put their name to a belief they think is wrong? If you published children's books would you publish a book from someone who came out and said they love having sex with children? Of course not.

The publisher did not say anything negative, they just won't publish his book.
edit on 22-2-2015 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

The bible specifically teaches that homosexuality is wrong. You're the one derailing here by claiming otherwise.

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them." 1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God." Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 10:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Anyafaj

I don't know why you are ashamed. He is advocating something they believe is wrong. Why would they put their name to a belief they think is wrong? If you published children's books would you publish a book from someone who came out and said they love having sex with children? Of course not.

The publisher did not say anything negative, they just won't publish his book.


Maybe because it's cherry picking at its best?


James 2:10 For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it.


They don't drop any other authors for shaving their beards or getting remarried. The publisher is playing politics and it's obvious. There is no righteous fury held specifically for gay folks any more than for children who talk back to their parents. The bible makes clear that we can't follow the law and once you break it, you break all of it. Forever.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Cuervo

Except the man in question was not dropped for his personal sin, but for promoting others to commit sin.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Cuervo




posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 10:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Cuervo

Except the man in question was not dropped for his personal sin, but for promoting others to commit sin.


How was he promoting anybody to do anything at all in regards to his relationship with the publisher? He wrote a book. That book had nothing to do with his sexuality. It is a Christian book.

There are gay Christians, gay pastors, and gay everything. Gay gay gay. That beard you rounded? May as well be a gay beard. That divorced woman you married? I guess she made you gay. Working on Sunday promotes sin, as well... I hope none of their authors write on that day or they may as well be gay. Even the NFL players. Totally gay.

Don't you see? The bible clearly states that if you commit ANY sin, you are as good as gay. A gay sinner.

When you go out tomorrow, make sure your head is covered and there aren't any tears in your pants. That's a big gay sin, too.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cuervo

How was he promoting anybody to do anything at all in regards to his relationship with the publisher? He wrote a book. That book had nothing to do with his sexuality. It is a Christian book.

Are being purposefully obtuse?

Man makes a children's book that is perfect. Man starts promoting love between adult men and little boys in consentual sexual relationships. Publisher says we can't publish you if you are advocating that. Man says well I am. Book is pulled. Same thing.


Don't you see? The bible clearly states that if you commit ANY sin, you are as good as gay. A gay sinner.

The publisher says nothing to dispute that. They did not pull his book for him having sinned. They pulled for him PROMOTING sin and telling others to live a Sinful lifestyle. I already explained this. The publisher gave him the opportunity to say he does not advocate others to sin, he refused. The book was not pulled because he sinned, it was pulled when he began advocating OTHERS to sin.
edit on 22-2-2015 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 10:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Cuervo

How was he promoting anybody to do anything at all in regards to his relationship with the publisher? He wrote a book. That book had nothing to do with his sexuality. It is a Christian book.

Are being purposefully obtuse?

Man makes a children's book that is perfect. Man starts promoting love between adult men and little boys in consentual sexual relationships. Publisher says we can't publish you if you are advocating that. Man says well I am. Book is pulled. Same thing.


Don't you see? The bible clearly states that if you commit ANY sin, you are as good as gay. A gay sinner.

The publisher says nothing to dispute that. They did not pull his book for him having sinned. They pulled for him PROMOTING sin and telling others to live a Sinful lifestyle. I already explained this. The publisher gave him the opportunity to say he does not advocate others to sin, he refused. The book was not pulled because he sinned, it was pulled when he began advocating OTHERS to sin.


Oy vey. It is the same thing (not your strange fetish story but about the author being gay). That's my point. Do they send authors letters to sign that promise they won't promote writing on Sundays or shaving their beards?

His book had nothing to do with sexuality and his personal life promotes no more sin than a Christian barbershop owner.
edit on 22-2-2015 by Cuervo because: c



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 10:53 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

There's no such thing as grown men and little boys in consensual relationships.

Little boys can't consent to a sexual relationship.

You wouldn't happen to be a priest in a church that begins with a C and ends with an C by chance?

No?

Either way to the OP:

This guy should have done his research on the publisher before signing a deal. However, if the publisher didn't have a clause in the contract in regard to something like being gay then the guy probably has a case to file a lawsuit.

Also someone asked will the LGBT community buy this book just because the dude's gay and the publisher sucks...

I can't speak for the whole community but for me the answer is no.

I buy good books and inspirational Christian coming of age books aren't really down my alley.




edit on 22-2-2015 by OrphanApology because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 10:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko


Yes, and if the publisher disagrees with gay marriage? Again, God and Christ even more clearly teach that marriage is between a man and a woman. Again, he is asking them to go against their beliefs. And you clearly think they should compromise them too. If you believe in God, then you don't think this is something that can just be altered at man's whim. Marriage is between man and woman.

There is a HUGE difference between knowing someone is gay and knowing they are a gay activist. The publisher likely does not want to serve as a platform for his advocacy which they now know they are at risk of doing. Are they under some obligation to support his advocacy?

As far as his private life, yes, he has a right to it, but it stopped being private the minute he splashed it all over the pages of TIME crowing that Christians were all going to inevitably accept it and give him his way now didn't it?




I said the publisher has a right to NOT publish his book. Please quote me where I said they should be forced to publish it. I never said anything of the sort. Just as I think bakers and florists should not be forced to do a wedding they don't agree with. "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." That goes for all companies. Anyone can find a company that believes in that individual, or couple. Including this young man. What I did was post what this young man is going through at this moment in his life. You are welcome to disagree with it. I respect you. I will still respect you even for disagree with it, I won't force you to agree. That's not my wish. My wish was to share this article, my belief in the young man, and have a healthy discussion about it. So far, I think we've accomplished this, no? No yelling, no screaming, no name calling. I call that healthy as of this far. If I may, I'd like to keep my respectful relationship with you on this site going and I hope this thread doesn't ruin it.








edit on 2/22/2015 by Anyafaj because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 11:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: OrphanApology
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

There's no such thing as grown men and little boys in consensual relationships.

Little boys can't consent to a sexual relationship.

That does not change the fact there are those who advocate for it.


You wouldn't happen to be a priest in a church that begins with a C and ends with an C by chance?

No?

It's an actual group, NAMBLA. North American Man Boy Love Association.


Either way to the OP:

This guy should have done his research on the publisher before signing a deal. However, if the publisher didn't have a clause in the contract in regard to something like being gay then the guy probably has a case to file a lawsuit.

Also someone asked will the LGBT community buy this book just because the dude's gay and the publisher sucks...

I can't speak for the whole community but for me the answer is no.

I buy good books and inspirational Christian coming of age books aren't really down my alley.



He did do his research I am sure. Which is why this should come as no surprise to him. I bet there is a clause that is overarching in regarding Christian values and I would be surprised if there is a lawsuit even if there was not.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 11:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Anyafaj

Stop confusing love with sex. Sometimes, the most loving thing you can say is NO.

I have no problem with him being gay. I have enormous problems with the idea that he thinks he can change God's mind. Guy is free to do whatever he wants in life within the bounds of law, but when it comes to faith, we answer to a higher power. Last I checked, when it comes to that, there is no power on earth who can rewrite God's words on the matter.




I've never said sex. I said love thy neighbor. I'm not rewriting God's word. It was perfectly clear. Love thy neighbor. It was the publisher who told him to sign a statement stating



He alleges that he was then asked to sign a statement that he does 'not condone, encourage, or accept the homosexual lifestyle'.


I didn't say it. HE did. So I'm confused where I brought up sex. in "Love Thy Neighbor".



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 11:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cuervo

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Cuervo

How was he promoting anybody to do anything at all in regards to his relationship with the publisher? He wrote a book. That book had nothing to do with his sexuality. It is a Christian book.

Are being purposefully obtuse?

Man makes a children's book that is perfect. Man starts promoting love between adult men and little boys in consentual sexual relationships. Publisher says we can't publish you if you are advocating that. Man says well I am. Book is pulled. Same thing.


Don't you see? The bible clearly states that if you commit ANY sin, you are as good as gay. A gay sinner.

The publisher says nothing to dispute that. They did not pull his book for him having sinned. They pulled for him PROMOTING sin and telling others to live a Sinful lifestyle. I already explained this. The publisher gave him the opportunity to say he does not advocate others to sin, he refused. The book was not pulled because he sinned, it was pulled when he began advocating OTHERS to sin.


Oy vey. It is the same thing (not your strange fetish story but about the author being gay). That's my point. Do they send authors letters to sign that promise they won't promote writing on Sundays or shaving their beards?

His book had nothing to do with sexuality and his personal life promotes no more sin than a Christian barbershop owner.

You can say oy vey all day long, they can choose what they believe is a sinful lifestyle. They believe this is. Another publisher might not. It's a simple concept for anyone who is not intentionally being obtuse. This is not a debate as to what is and is not sinful. They decided he was PROMOTING sin. He can find a publisher who does not agree.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 11:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Anyafaj

I don't know why you are ashamed. He is advocating something they believe is wrong. Why would they put their name to a belief they think is wrong? If you published children's books would you publish a book from someone who came out and said they love having sex with children? Of course not.

The publisher did not say anything negative, they just won't publish his book.



And that is their right, as a publisher, and a public company. As I said he is more than welcome to find another publisher who is more understanding of his situation. I have no issue with that. If it is true that they tried to make him sign a statement in order to publish the book,



He alleges that he was then asked to sign a statement that he does 'not condone, encourage, or accept the homosexual lifestyle'.


I find that reprehensible. He shouldn't have to give up his values, any more than they should have to give up theirs. As for their "Christian attitude", I will say it is definitely not one I subscribe to and leave it there.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 11:14 PM
link   
My stance on this is the same as it was with Phil Robertson and A&E and the Benham brothers and HGTV. Companies are not compelled to publish content that could reflect negatively on their image. I'd be really surprised if there wasn't some morality clause in this author's contract.

What would be interesting is to compare some of the comments here in defense of this publishing company with comments made by the same people in the threads about Phil Robertson's suspension or the Benham brother's show getting canceled. I remember there being a lot of blabbering about political correctness and the First Amendment.




top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join