Faith

Gay Rights Activist Dan Savage Challenges Prominent Gay Marriage Opponent to YouTube Bible Debate

Dan Savage Challenges NOMs Brian Brown to Bible Debate Over Dinner

It’s been weeks since gay rights activist Dan Savage spewed virulent and disparaging words about the Bible, but the controversial columnist isn’t quite ready to let the situation die down. Earlier this week, via podcast, Savage decided to take National Organization for Marriage (NOM) President Brian Brown up on his offer to engage in a face-off of Biblical proportions.

(Related: ‘Face of Progressive Hate?’ Gay Rights Activist Dan Savage Goes on Graphic Rant About Homosexuality & the Pope)

“So, what I’d like to do is invite you to dinner. Bring the wife,” the writer said during his “Savage Love” podcast on Tuesday. ”My husband will be there. I will hire a video crew and we will video sort of an after dinner debate. You have to acknowledge my humanity by accepting my hospitality, and I have to acknowledge yours by extending my hospitality to you.”

Dan Savage Challenges NOMs Brian Brown to Bible Debate Over Dinner

NOM's Brian Brown

This offer, of course, follows a public challenge of sorts offered up by Brown earlier this month. Following the controversy surrounding Savage’s comments to a high school journalism conference about the Bible and his subsequent “bullying” of the teens who were offended by his words (he referred to them as “pansy asses”), Brown had plenty to say.

(Related: Christian Teens Bash Dan Savage’s Bible Rant & Claim He Made Some Kids Cry: ‘Put Down & Bullied Because of My Faith’)

Below, see Savage’s original Bible rant that started the intense controversy:

“You want to savage the Bible? Christian morality? Traditional marriage? Pope Benedict? I’m here, you name the time and the place and let’s see what a big man you are in a debate with someone who can talk back,” Brown wrote in a blog post on the NOM web site. “It’s easy to make high-school girls cry by picking on them. Let’s pick on someone our own size!”

Dan Savage Challenges NOMs Brian Brown to Bible Debate Over Dinner

Syndicated columnist Daniel Keenan ’Dan’ Savage, right, poses for a photo with his husband Terry Miller, left, as they wait for President Barack Obama to speak at the LGBT Pride Month event, Wednesday, June 29, 2011, in the East Room of the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

According to The New Civil Rights Movement’s David Badash, the dinner would take place at Savage’s kitchen table. The gay rights activist would also invite the New York Times’ Mark Oppenheimer to ensure fair moderation and discussion. The hour-long debate would then be released on YouTube, unedited.

We’ll have to wait and see if this spectacle actually plays out. If so, it will surely prove to be an interesting dialogue on one of the nation’s most contentious issues.

(H/T: Huffington Post)

Comments (195)

1 2 3 4
  • sbenard
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:48am

    Since when is a Bible opponent an “expert” on Biblical doctrine?
    About 20 years ago, I went to a “lecture” by someone who tried to persuade the crowd that the Bible wasn’t REALLY opposed to homosexuality. It was a bunch of bunk! It is indoctrination and an attempt to cherry-pick verses of the Bible and marginalize them and explain them away! God has been abundantly clear on what He thinks of homosexuality! His word is enough!

    Report Post » sbenard  
    • black9897
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 10:20am

      yeah. There is no debate. Only the truth, and what others would like it to say. Dan is on a mission to try and get people to believe what he would like the Bible to say.

      Report Post » black9897  
    • MIBUGNU2
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 10:24am

      Sooooooo, this GUY has a HUSBAND, how cute…..GOOD GAWD !!!!
      The Presidents response..The American People WILL adapt…

      Report Post » MIBUGNU2  
    • SAS6907
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 10:29am

      Let me help you with what the Bible says clearly:

      2 Timothy 3

      New American Standard Bible (NASB)
      “Difficult Times Will Come”
      3 But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. 2 For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, haters of good, 4 treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these. 6 For among them are those who enter into households and captivate weak women weighed down with sins, led on by various impulses, 7 always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth….
      Rom 1:
      24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
      26 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.

      Report Post »  
    • encinom
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 11:05am

      “It was a bunch of bunk! It is indoctrination and an attempt to cherry-pick verses of the Bible and marginalize them and explain them away!”

      Cherry picking quote, yeah, just like the bible bigot do day in and day out on the Blaze.

      Report Post »  
    • JGraham III
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 11:09am

      The Books of Ecclesiastes and The Song of Solomon have much to say about human nature and marriage in particular. The reason gay “marriage” will never pass muster is that God is the one who ordained marriage to be between a man and a woman, with the intention that He would also be present in the marriage covenant. That is why it says in Ecclesiastes that a “three-fold cord is not easily broken”. Man-God-Woman; no manner of redefining marriage will ever get God to enter into ANY arrangement other than the one He has established. Homosexuality is nothing short of open rebellion against God and His precepts. There would be no profit whatever gained by “debating” this foolish man and/or his “husband”. The so-called ‘hate speech’ I have heard lately is coming from the militant gay end of the “rainbow” as it were. Savage is one of the spokesmen.

      Report Post »  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 11:29am

      Cherry picking ENCIDIOT? I took you to school on this subject and you and your numerous online personalities picked up your bat and ball and ran crying home. Idiot.

      Report Post »  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 11:30am

      It‘s doesn’t get creepier than that picture of Savage and the guy he pretends is his husband. You can almost hear the Twilight Zone theme playing behind them.

      Report Post »  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 11:32am

      Brown shouldn’t accept the offer. It’s a trap. First red flag is bringing in an NYT commentator to “moderate” the exchange. If there is to be a debate it should be neutral ground, no moderators, no dinners…just the facts.

      Report Post »  
    • MIBUGNU2
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 11:48am

      or In O’Blamers words, “EVOLVE” he says it’ good for him
      and OBiden, so it has to be OK with the AMERICAN People…
      I Think Not Mr. President..

      Report Post » MIBUGNU2  
    • Soul Leister
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 1:50pm

      Read Genisis again… Man was an after thought. after god had created everything “he needed a gardener to tend it”…

      …he did not create man and a mate (like he had already done for all the other animals)… god suggests man MAN TRY TO FIND A MATE AMOUNG THE ANIMALS ALREADY MAD (BEASTIALITY 101)… afterwhich, having or having not tried them all out (none could be found)… he surgically removed one of man’s ribs (insert laghter here) and made woman from man… he did not make another man for him to pass the time with… read the book.

      …man knew eve and cain was born.
      …eve says, look what I have gotten with the help of the lord (sex with god?) and able was born…
      …cain kills able because his dad (god) preferred his offerings over adam’s son cain… maybe cain killed him because he was GAY??? The bible is pretty entertaining when its read in context (and it does not marry up well with the movie versions).

      Report Post » Soul Leister  
    • NHwinter
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 2:56pm

      “Let’s pick on someone our own size!” If you mean Savage, you need only be 1″ high. He is a very small man in every sense of the word.

      Report Post » NHwinter  
    • NHwinter
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 3:00pm

      Soul Leister – you are one sick illiterate. You need a lot of help understanding the bible and God.

      Report Post » NHwinter  
    • Gonzo
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 3:22pm

      Encinoman bought some of the new line of Dan Savage boxer shorts. There’s a fly in the front and the back.

      Report Post » Gonzo  
    • Gonzo
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 3:23pm

      Hey Encinoman, how can you fit Dan and his husband and two of their best friends on one bar stool?
      Turn it upside down.

      Report Post » Gonzo  
    • Hollywood
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 6:21pm

      RomansChapter ONE, says it ALL re SIN,including God giving up women to their VILE affections,and men burning in lust for each other. Eventually they will be given over to a REPROBATE mind with their destination Hell for eternity, UNLESS they REPENT, and seek God’s forgiveness through Jesus Christ. I pray Dan Savage does so,and his “husband”
      Maranatha

      Report Post » Hollywood  
    • tmarends
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 7:03pm

      Dan Savage studied in a Seminary to become a priest.

      Report Post » tmarends  
    • TheEDGE
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 7:17pm

      I just read another story about the flesh eating bacteria. Is there a way we could bottle this stuff up, send it to Dan and his hubby disguised as a bottle of KY? Heck, let‘s send some Shabazz’s way in a 40 oz. of Colt 45.

      Report Post » TheEDGE  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:53pm

      Yo Soul:

      You tried to discredit the bible with the 3 days and 3 nights thing, and you were promptly corrected. You’re efforts to do this again are quite silly (to be nice).
      It is amazing to me how someone with a COMPLETE lack of understanding of the facts can act like they get it … why don’t you actually make and honest attempt to understand …. after which you don’t like it … spit it out. Of course it is a little hard to get without the help of the Holy Spirit … but then you don’t want that do you? Kinda got a problem there don’t ya … so at the end of the day you mock because you don’t understand, and you don’t understand because you mock. How unfortunate to live life in a circle… you always end up at where you start … that must be frustrating. The sad thing ….just one little step is all it takes to get out … but then you do have ENCINOM as company.

      Report Post »  
    • jwt
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:45pm

      this needs no reply. Jesus did not come to save the world but, to reconcile the seperated Children to the Father

      Report Post »  
    • Ded-Bred
      Posted on May 24, 2012 at 1:45am

      God tells us in Jeremiah,”For the heart of man is vile & desperately wicked; who can know it”?
      (Jer. 17:9
      Then He says,” …You shall find Me if you seek Me with all of your heart.” Only God knows you completely. The Bible was written by men from kings, shepherds, priests, tent makers, carpenters, soldiers, tax collectors, etc. It took thousands of years to write, & I believe every word is true. And the infallible inspired word of God for many reasons: People speak of Nostradamus as a great seer, or a wonderful prophet, Yet he made a great many mistakes

      Report Post » Ded-Bred  
    • Sunnyy
      Posted on May 29, 2012 at 12:54pm

      the New York Times for “fair moderation?”

      Report Post » Sunnyy  
  • JMJSS
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:40am

    They can debate all they want. The fact is, you can’t change gender. God’s plan is not for men to have sex with men or women with women. They can not have children.. This desire is purely a sin of the flesh and no good can come from it. You can not make what is a lie a truth! You can claim to be born that way all you want, the same can be said for murders, thieves, pedophilia s, or any other dysfunction. But that doesn’t mean its right or you have to act on it.

    Report Post »  
    • Locked
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:54am

      “The fact is, you can’t change gender.”

      Clarification: by the scientific definition, gender is defined by society and sex is defined by your biology. You can change gender. You can’t change sex (actually, even this can be argued; if your chromosomes make up your sex, or your anatomy does. Even chromosomes leave some people out in the cold, as there are those with neither XX or XY).

      Report Post »  
    • Git-R-Done
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 10:42am

      Locked – If there’s something wrong with their genetic chromosomes or reproductive organs, there are treatments for that.

      The ones who have nothing wrong with their genetic chromosomes or reproductive organs have something wrong with their mind.

      Report Post »  
    • Locked
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 10:46am

      @Git

      Not sure of your point. How does that impact the definitions of gender and sex?

      Report Post »  
    • johnjamison
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 11:32am

      locked,
      gender isn’t defined by society, It’s defined by the sex of the individual. You can’t change gender any more than you can change sex.
      You can change perception of gender and or sex but that is an illusion. Perception is only a reality to those who live in fantasy. A man who has a medical sex chnage can neither have children or go a monthly visitor that women do. He just a man with a mangled penis and fake breast….Nothing more.
      Medical science could graph fins,flippers and gills ona man …but he‘s not a fish and he can’t breath underwater.
      And no matter how many times he say it he‘s a fish throw in the water and he’ll drown. You are what you are no matter what you say or someone else says

      Report Post »  
    • Locked
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 12:09pm

      @Johnjamison

      “gender isn’t defined by society, It’s defined by the sex of the individual. You can’t change gender any more than you can change sex.”

      False.

      Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary definition:
      “the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex”

      Gender is fluid and changes as behavior changes. It’s the difference between saying “act like a man” and “you have male chromosomes/anatomy.” The fact that you have certain beliefs about the topic doesn’t matter.

      My original response to @Jmjss is because people so often use sex and gender synonymously. They are related but different and people frequently mix the two up. As you did.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 1:24pm

      Locked

      You do realize that a dictionary is not static. It reflects current usage and/or science (& politics nowadays).

      You also went to a medical dictionary. It does not reflect what the majority of people have thought the word gender has meant for the last 12,000 years or more.

      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gender?s=ts

      3. informal the state of being male, female, or neuter
      4. informal all the members of one sex: the female gender

      ***
      I just saw an article on the next Eurovision to be held in Baku. It was very disturbing. I for one want no part of the gender benders. I will separate myself from them. Be careful who you get in bed with. You might not like it after a while.

      Report Post »  
    • Locked
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 1:45pm

      @Walkabout

      “You also went to a medical dictionary…”

      … and you expect something different when I specifically said “by the scientific definition, gender is defined by society and sex is defined by your biology”?

      “3. informal the state of being male, female, or neuter
      4. informal all the members of one sex: the female gender”

      And this echoes exactly what I said in response to @Johnjamison:

      “My original response to @Jmjss is because people so often use sex and gender synonymously. They are related but different and people frequently mix the two up. As you did.”

      Sure, you want to make an argument that 12,000 years ago gender and sex were used as exact synonyms? Go for it; that’s not discussing what it means right now, which is the topic at hand. It’s interesting to note that some indigenous people have literally equated gender and sex, where “masculine” women were considered men and could marry women. The Kootenai, living in what is now Canada, were one such tribe. But I digress. Fact of the matter is that according to our modern language and culture, sex is biological and gender is a mixture of behavioral and cultural. That’s what I originally wanted to clarify.

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 2:50pm

      Locked loves playing word games.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • Locked
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 3:17pm

      @Billy

      Word games? No. But the nice thing about the internet is that words are the most common way to communicate – and they remain up and visible. You’re accountable for what you say, and when you reword something or try and claim someone said something else, it’s easy to call people on it.

      I’m not sure if calling people on their errors or catching them in lies is a game. I do find it fun though :-)

      Report Post »  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 3:42pm

      Easy RIGHTSOFBILLY….you’ll get “rainman” LOCKED started. “Rainman” minus the indiot savant brilliance of course.

      Report Post »  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 3:58pm

      Locked just rocked your all.

      And the creed of the loser, “You’re just arguing semantics!”. Well yeah… that was his point from the beginning. When someone corrects you that 2+2 does not equal 5 don’t cry, “You’re just arguing mathematics!” because that’s trivial.

      There would be no argument if you would have realized your error in the beginning instead of grasping at straws to salvage your point.

      Now shut up and thank the man for setting you straight.

      … I love it when a little intelligence surfaces on this site.

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • Locked
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 4:03pm

      @Avengerk

      Or we get you, who will lie through his teeth in one breath, insult people with the other, and dance around a topic all night without giving an answer on topic :-) I’d prefer being accurate and honest than off-topic and dishonest like you, little buddy!

      Report Post »  
  • JShope
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:35am

    Why debate? “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God”

    Seek the truth in earnest prayer, not contending against man or men.

    Report Post »  
    • Bryan B
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 3:50pm

      The clear way to deal with the Homosexual issue,

      Is to make Homosexualilty illegal.

      I don’t mean putting homosexuals in jail. Rather writing them Tickets and Fining them.

      State Legislators can Arrest , Ticket and Fine people for…..

      Driving without Car Insurance

      Not wearing a Seatbelt

      Texting while driving or walking

      Smoking

      Being Fat…..and so-on

      If State Legislators can punish people for doing these thing, then why should homosexuals be off the hook ?

      Just think of the REVENUE that can generated from this……

      Report Post » Bryan B  
  • SquidVetOhio
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:34am

    “Cast not thy pearls before swine”

    -Jesus

    Report Post » SquidVetOhio  
  • SpankDaMonkey
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:11am

    .
    Once again God said don’t put that in your mouth……

    Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
    • almont
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 2:27pm

      And don’t put your tongue and penis in the anu$.

      Report Post » almont  
  • TC
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:02am

    It seems too easy. Jesus said in Matthew when the disciples asked him about divorce 4“Haven’t you read,” He replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ 5and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.” Jesus had a perfect time to change the definition of marriage here if he wanted to. Not only does he define marriage here as between a man and a woman, but also reminds them this is what God has sanctioned. A double whammy against anything else.

    It seems so simple and logical to me. Then there was the joyful time at the wedding feast where he turned water to wine with his first miracle at a wedding between a man and a woman.

    Marriage is internalized in the gospels. While the Old Testament law was designed to guide and protect the external aspects of the institution of marriage, Jesus establishes new expectations for marriage that focus on its internal aspects. So, as Jesus declares in Matthew 5:27-28, adultery is not something that only happens externally. Instead, He interiorizes the command to make it an issue of the heart. Jesus will not stand for even internal thoughts that corrupt our view of marriage because it corrupts our view of Him. Jesus extends the importance of marriage by making it an internal issue as well.

    Report Post » TC  
    • rangerp
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:07am

      Savage can not debate Bible topics, as he does not actually believe the Bible.

      Report Post » rangerp  
    • Independent4233
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:29am

      What isthere to debate?

      Savage has two contentions to entertain: 1) Homosexuals are born that way, making them FREAKS OF NATURE.

      Or, 2) Homosexuals are the way they are due to a mental disorder.

      So they‘re either freaks or they’re crazy.

      That’s the bottom line.

      And theissue has nothing to do with religion.

      Nature implants in every NORMAL human being the compelling trait to procreate with his own species, and it’s perfectly normal for a person to naturally regard anything other than that with disgust, revulsion and disdain.

      It has nothing to do with religion.

      Body parts meant for the eliminatuion of body waste are not supposed to be used or abused for anything else. The result is high instances of many diseases, including very high ratesof anorectal cancer.

      But the worst of it has to do with other diseases among homosexual men that can be passed by them to the general population through ordinary, non-sexual contact.

      http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/male-homosexual-behavior/

      So, objections to homosexuality has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with natural revulsion and the spread of diseases. Bringing religion into the equation only serves to ignore legitimate concerns that homosexuals are a very real threat to our communities.

      Report Post »  
    • Locked
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:50am

      @Rangerp

      “Savage can not debate Bible topics, as he does not actually believe the Bible.”

      This doesn’t make much sense. You can debate the Qur‘an even if you don’t believe in Islam or Allah, can’t you? The words are free for all to read and debate.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:54am

      Independent4233

      I found that when I stopped using scripture & started arguing science that the LGBT/homosexuality promoters ignored me in the forums & kept going after the people quoting scripture.

      Rarely when they do engage in debate, some of them say “We just are , now just accept it. There does not have to be a reason.”

      The basic mode of attack is to debunk get rids of religion. Then say that animals engage in homosexuality & therefore it is natural & normal. Counter arguments that many of the natural acts in nature are domination displays, confusion or something else are “shouted down”. The LGBT activists have got to own science or they feel that they will lose. If they own science there is no more science.

      They also discount that animals with harems force others to be gay by default. It doesn’t fit their dogma.

      Report Post »  
    • Dr Vel
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 10:18am

      Not to mention the vanity of mankind wasting time debating with dogs.

      Report Post »  
    • Independent4233
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 11:23am

      Walkabout
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:54am
      Independent4233

      They say that animals engage in homosexuality & therefore it is natural & normal. Counter arguments that many of the natural acts in nature are domination displays, confusion or something else are “shouted down”.

      Yes, I understand homosexuals will offer a defense to every legitimate scientific reason, but that doesn’t validate their arguments, which are feeble attempts that only the ignorant believe.

      The animal behavior they refer to IS NOT true homosexuality. The animals they example
      did NOT show a preference for the same sex. Certain motions they went through were the result of over crowding, which has also been known to occur with bulls mounting others in crowded cattle trucks as an instinctive response to various stimuli much like what some dogs do to the legs of a person sitting down.

      Trying to shout down anything by them doesn’t alter the facts one iota. Animals cannot be homosexuals. The animal kingdom has deeply rooted impulses to perpetuate its species and anything in opposition to that just doesn’t occur. Nobody has ever seen two male birds building a nest together.

      In humans the anomaly occurs, as do other mental disorders, and it is a mental condition that could well jeopardize many innocent people because of the plethora of germs and diseases spread by homosexuals.

      It isn’t only cancer and aids these people spread within our communities. They’re dangerously dirt

      Report Post »  
    • Cesium
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 1:04pm

      RangerP obviously does not function with a rational mind.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 1:34pm

      Independent4233

      I have & will argue that “some” so called animal homosexuality is dominance displays & not true homosexuality.

      But gays will not have it whittled down. It hurts their argument. So they will poison science.

      They claim thousands of species engage in homosexuality. I do not agree with that. There may be some. We need to become cognizant of this argument & defeat it.

      If there are some species that are homosexual, I would argue that people are not like animals. We are better. We are special.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 1:39pm

      Cesium

      No ranger has a point. You cannot read the Bible serially one page after another & then say that you know the message. The limitations of paper mean that it is printed that way, but a person has got to see the way that the stories are linked.

      If you don’t look at the links like a priest, scholar or believer would, you will get the wrong message.

      It doesn’t mean that a non-believer will always get the wrong message, but the probability is quite high. Especially when the have a visceral bias against it.

      Report Post »  
    • Locked
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 1:57pm

      @Walkabout

      “If you don’t look at the links like a priest, scholar or believer would, you will get the wrong message.”

      As a fun mental exercise, does this not mean that one could read the Qur’an and completely gloss over the “unpleasant” passages to declare it a Religion of Peace? And when someone from outside of Islam comes up and says “But it says here to do these horrible things,” they too can claim that the reader is not connecting the stories and looking for the true message, but only taking things literally at their word… just as an atheist like Savage would do with the Bible?

      Just some food for thought. I’m not a literalist (ie, young earth fundamentalist) either when it comes to Scripture; but if we make allowances for Christianity it seems hypocritical to insist we know others’ religions better than they do… even if we read the same words.

      Report Post »  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 4:02pm

      Locked again with the fatal blow! Well worded and logically sound; you wont be hearing any arguments from me.

      @RangerP and @Walkabout
      Roll over, throw in the towel, wave the white flag, just do something because there is no way you’re walking out of this one on top.

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • Independent4233
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 6:43pm

      WALKABOUT:
      “But gays will not have it whittled down. It hurts their argument. So they will poison science.

      There’s nothing they claim that refutes anything about science and homosexuality.

      “They claim thousands of species engage in homosexuality.”

      Animals do not engage in homosexuality. Not even “some.” And their pitiful attempts at refuting that isn’t taken seriously by anybody with half-a-brain.

      Just look at the nonsensical points they raise on here. It’s always the same ones.

      Somebody wrote that what they say is so illogical and foolish no one is influenced by them, therefore, there was a good possibility they were plants for one reason or another.

      That’s not true either. Homosexualsare beset with mental illnesses and do not think in rational terms. And homosexuals actually think the statements they make…. that seem to be coming from the mind of a child…… is going to have an impact on the way people view them.

      In the final analysis, nobody wants to accept a segment of the population that is responsible for the spread of deadly diseases into our communities.

      One third of homosexuals are infected with the anal herpes virus. 80% of syphilitic patients are homosexual.

      http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/male-homosexual-behavior/

      http://tinyurl.com/78odxmc (American Scientist)
      A study says that marriage for gay men and lesbians is more dangerous than smoking.

      If you’re around one, just make sure you don’t touch the

      Report Post »  
  • Trebuchet
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:00am

    I have a better idea. How about Danny boy steps in the ring with Manny Pacquiao?

    Report Post »  
  • conservativemom99
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:55am

    The bully is setting the table to have his opponent for dinner…pick a neutral restaurant…pay for your own meals…have two “moderators” there. An uninterested camera crew who then posts it all to Youtube AT THE RESTAURANT before all parties leave. Now that sounds like fun! But…bullies don’t “perform” well when they’re not in control…when they haven’t set up their victim…so…it’ll never happen.

    Report Post » conservativemom99  
  • sjohn70037
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:55am

    Twink

    Report Post » sjohn70037  
  • Locked
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:43am

    I imagine it would go back and forth, with Savage quoting passages out of context, and Brown reinterpreting the literal words to get what he believes the meaning to be. In the end both sides would be convinced they’re right, and the others wrong, and nothing would be solved.

    I don’t see either of them remaining civil during the “friendly discussion,” and I anticipate both of their spouses either getting into the heated argument or squirming uncomfortably the entire time. The entire debate would likely be cringe-worthy.

    Report Post »  
    • Gonzo
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:55am

      It’s more about Dan Savage boosting his gay street cred than solving anything.

      Report Post » Gonzo  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:02am

      Yep.

      My initial thought was there is nothing to debate. However, after reading the article and seeing that Brown made the challenge there is no doubt that he has to carry through with it. It will be an exercise in futility.

      Report Post »  
    • Locked
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:15am

      @Gonzo

      I completely agree. His words will just get his side nodding, while Brown’s will do the same. It’s a loss for Brown either way; if he backs out he looks cowardly but if he agrees he gives Savage even more time.

      Really, shame on him for even challenging Savage in the first place. The outcomes are only positive for Savage. At best Brown can hold his own. At worst he becomes a poster-boy for the bumbling, angry, ignorant Christian that the anti-Christian groups in our country so love to paint us as.

      Report Post »  
  • Silversmith
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:41am

    Sure have him over for dinner – at your house – with your choices, surroundings, moderators etc.

    Set up – set up – set up!

    I have nothing for this bully.

    Silversmith

    Report Post » Silversmith  
  • BradLee
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:37am

    Someone should put a price on his head…oh wait…that would all of a sudden be a hate crime and that person would be in jail immediately for threatening an abomination.

    Report Post »  
  • momrules
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:36am

    Being able to recite Scripture is different than understanding Scripture and the Word of God.

    Dan Savage may have memorized the Bible for all I know but he does not understand or believe any of it. He is the type that would deny Jesus Himself if He were sitting at the table with him.

    The Devil can recite Scripture too.

    Report Post »  
  • dave88
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:35am

    Someone tell Dan Savage that you can make it legal but you cannot make it natural.

    Report Post »  
  • flipper1073
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:33am

    Dan Savage is free to call himself
    anything He wants.
    But He’s not Free to change the
    Definition of Marriage.
    it’s One Man An One Woman.
    You’re a smart guy make up your
    own Word.

    Report Post » flipper1073  
  • Crazyotto
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:32am

    Dan Savage seems to be a person who is desperately trying to justify his lifestyle CHOICE!
    He like so many gays is terribly insecure about his choice and therefore feels better when he is bullying kids into believing that anal sex is somehow safe and natural (when it is clear it is neither).

    Report Post » Crazyotto  
    • CMDR6
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 10:06am

      Trying to justify and validate a lifestyle that has given society AIDS, a typically promiscuous sexual lifestyle, rampant STDs, and a suicide rate so far beyond average it is almost unfathomable…..but yet they say it is natural. The only thing natural about homosexuality is the evil of it. Straight from the pit of H*ll.

      Report Post » CMDR6  
  • mrsmileyface
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:29am

    The problem with Savage isnt that hes a militant ****, which he is. The problem is there is no common ground with him. Its the whole “Im right and your wrong syndrome”.

    Report Post » mrsmileyface  
  • Gonzo
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:23am

    “The gay rights activist would also invite the New York Times’ Mark Oppenheimer to ensure fair moderation”
    Yea buddy, that’s who I would want as the arbiter of fairness. You can’t get any more neutral than the NYT… am I right? Huh, huh?

    Report Post » Gonzo  
    • marvlus
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:38am

      My thoughts too.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:40am

      That is what I was thinking. Partisan does not begin to describe The New York Times. Anyone from the NYT is a polemist of the left.

      Report Post »  
    • Murkman
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:43am

      The New York Times! ROTFLMFAO!

      Report Post »  
    • girlnurse
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 1:45pm

      not to mention…“sitting at my kitchen table” Ewwww yea that sounds fun.
      These guys are creepy

      Report Post » girlnurse  
  • Meyvn
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:18am

    Because we deny Him as Creator, He will give us over to that which appears unseemly. At this moment in time you’re watching it happen.

    Report Post » Meyvn  
  • Robert Hawk
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:18am

    I would be willing to debate him over his supposed knowledge of biblical text. That would be a simple and short debate.

    Report Post » Robert Hawk  
    • sndrman
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:39am

      the left picks and chooses Bible Verses and then spin them outta context……to benefit the left.the basic example is “money is the root of all evil” when actually it’s “the love of money is the root of all evil”……

      Report Post »  
    • Meyvn
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:45am

      It would be much akin to arguing with a parrot.

      Report Post » Meyvn  
  • Walkabout
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:17am

    Dan Savage has to be on steroids. Looking at his age, his brothers physique & everything else, he has to be on steroids. It fits & explains a lot.

    Report Post »  
    • Gonzo
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:25am

      No kidding, bow tie boy better watch out, Danny is on the prowl…grrr.

      Report Post » Gonzo  
    • Meyvn
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:42am

      His physique looks down-right strange. Maybe even stronge.

      Report Post » Meyvn  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:45am

      Gonzo

      It is not only age. I am willing to bet that he was not that buff at age 22.

      That much steroids over time could contribute to roid rage or something a little more subtle but still dehabilitating. I am sure that much steroid use affects his aggresiveness in social interactions.

      I seriously considered taking steroids15 years ago. I didn’t. I am glad. There could be so many unforeseen consequences. Now they say that liposuction increase deep fat or brown fat over time. That is the worst kind of fat. He can’t skew the system. Karma is a biatch.

      Report Post »  
    • Gonzo
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:58am

      I couuldn’t care less about his health. You made the right decision though Walkabout.

      Report Post » Gonzo  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 1:45pm

      Gonzo
      I wasn’t talking about his physical health so much as his mental health. It is nigh impossible for him to think correctly.

      Emotions are kind of like sluice gate or valves in the mind & affect which neural pathway your conscience thoughts go down/use. At leas t that is what I read & it also seems obvious.

      the problem is that he is artificially making his thoughts go down certain pathways by using drugs.

      Report Post »  
    • Gonzo
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 3:19pm

      OK, I couldn’t care less about his mental health either.

      Report Post » Gonzo  
  • oldsoldier10
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:17am

    Who will be the first to spontanously combust? My bet is on the flamer.

    Report Post » oldsoldier10  
  • oldsoldier10
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:17am

    Who will be the first to spontaneously combust? My bet is on the flamer.

    Report Post » oldsoldier10  
  • bpodlesnik
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:16am

    Dan Savage has absolutely NO understanding of the Bible, so listening to him rabble off would just be a waste of time.

    Report Post » bpodlesnik  
    • tmarends
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 7:07pm

      Dan Savage studied at a Seminary to become a priest.

      Report Post » tmarends  
    • OhSnappage
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 10:53pm

      Plenty of people study to enter into priesthood, not all are qualified. Dan Savage has no understanding and would not qualify. His current antics is proof of his inept understanding of faith. A debate is fruitless and would amount to him staisfying his need to belittle and destroy that which he spites without care of understanding.

      Savage and that loser Black Panther King Allah Shabazz Shabing Shebu bubbuh should get together and exchange ideas. They have the same mentality.

      Report Post » OhSnappage  
  • Git-R-Done
    Posted on May 23, 2012 at 8:16am

    I wouldn’t waste my time with Dan Savage.

    Report Post »  
    • TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
      Posted on May 23, 2012 at 9:24am

      Down here in the Tampa/St. Pete/Clearwater, Fla area there is a free paper that comes out on Thursdays called “Creative Loafing”. Never read the thing before until a few weeks ago and discovered pretty quickly that it‘s a hippie wanna’be/LGBT promoting lifestyle rag for social outcasts. I did however make my way through it and saw this Savage guy had a sex advice column for the LGBT community.

      The guy is absolutely one sick and savage rump ranger for the “cause”.

      Report Post » TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love