A Religious Liberal Blog

This site hopefully can provide some vehicle by which I can comment, complain, and once in a while praise the state of religion in this country and around the world from a liberal protestant perspective.

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

Media Bias

The Telegraph cast pot shots at those working for inclusion in the Episcopal Church. Their convention will be a "test of how far the liberal leadership has pulled back from its radical agenda"

I'm curious, what makes the inclusion of gay and lesbians radical? In the context of this piece, it's clearly a bad thing. And gay marriages are in quotation marks, as if they were less real.

And if ECUSA keeps pushing "ahead with its liberal policies, Williams may have little choice but to refuse to invite its leaders to the 2008 Lambeth Conference", making it sound as if this whole crises is by ECUSA and not those on the right who are pushing for their expulsion.

Another piece of bias is an otherwise fine piece by Andrew Sullivan who contrasts the religious right with Christians who privately try to live out their faith without trying to gain political control. Who are these Christians..well, legit ones of course.

They would be evangelicals, catholics, good solid orthodox folks. Mainline or liberal protestants are not included in this list, presumably because he was trying to convince the reader that indeed legitimate Christians (not us) are unhappy with the religious right.

Just some examples of the way in which mainline and liberal protestants are generally treated or prevented from being heard in the media. Given this fact, I'm impressed that the United Church of Christ is addressing this with their site accessible airwaves.


At 5:45 AM , Anonymous Tim said...

Um, yeah. Well, in the UK `gay "marriages"' would be correct quotation, since they don't exist yet - `civil partnerships' do not convey the full rights of a marriage.

But I'm not sure where others get off on talking about a `liberal agenda' from. Show me the documents saying `first we've got to corrupt the world by being inclusive on grounds of sexuality, then...'.

And I'm quite optimistic that Archbishop Williams will not want to `refuse to invite' anyone - he seems more inclined towards dialogue (at least) than those who would break off communications at the drop of a biretta.

At 9:21 AM , Anonymous Chris T. said...

Sorry Tim, but marriage is more than a civil institution. There exist gay marriages in many places where the state (and even the church) won't solemnize them. I'm not willing to abandon that word to the state.

Incidentally, Dwight, I mentioned to Virginia this morning that I saw references to the "gay crisis" in the ECUSA a number of times this morning. Perhaps we should be calling this the straight crisis in the Episcopal Church instead? It is, after all, straight people who have the problem, not GLBTs. :-)

At 10:08 AM , Anonymous Tim said...

Chris, please note that I said `in the UK', which is a statement of fact, not opinion.

At 4:31 PM , Anonymous Chris T. said...

Once again, even in the UK, marriage is more than just a civil institution. It is possible in any society to be married in some way (for instance, in the eyes of God or the Church) without being married in the eyes of the state.

So what I'm saying isn't opinion. Marriage is far from just a state matter, and the state saying something isn't a marriage only makes it not a civil marriage. It can still be marriage of another sort.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home