Thursday, May 28, 2009

Politics Makes Strange Bedfellows



This week the Shelby County Board of Commissioners considered an ordinance that would prohibit discrimination against gay and transgender employees. The same rules would apply to contractors who do work for the county as well as private businesses in unincorporated areas of Shelby County. Alliances of disparate groups formed quickly, and their protests were loud.

County ordinance targets discrimination against gay, transgender people

On Tuesday, May 26th, a group of local pastors and protestors on both sides met for a news conference in front of the Shelby County administrative building.

Memphis pastors, county commissioner speak against anti-discrimination measure

Video

In a vote the following day the proposed ordinance did not receive a deciding vote with the vote split 5-5 with two abstentions. The proposal will be read before the full commission on Monday where it must pass three readings to become law.

Anti-discrimination policy fails to gain majority support in Shelby committee

In a surprising classic example of politics making strange bedfellows, Steve Gaines was a guest on Thaddeus Matthews' radio program Tuesday afternoon. Thaddeus Matthews, for the uninformed, hosts a talk radio program on AM 990 KWAM in Memphis. No stranger to controversy, the foul-mouthed, seemingly sex-obsessed Matthews does not mind taking on many controversial subjects. To his credit he's exposed a lot of the corruption in Memphis and Shelby County government some of the local black churches.

Then he made headlines last year when he posted autopsy photos of one of the victims of the Lester Street murders on his
blog. (Warning: Content, particularly in the comment threads, is likely to be offensive!)

Postmortem photos draw ire

I had never listened to Matthews' radio show until reviewing Tuesday's broadcast. I listened to most of it live Wednesday. I can only describe the man as a cross between Rush Limbaugh, Mark Driscoll, Eddie Murphy, and Charles Barkley -- loud, obnoxious, opinionated, and, I have to admit, often right. He spent the better part of Wednesday's show talking with callers about rumors regarding the sexual orientation of a number of local black pastors and church musicians as well as a lively and graphic discussion of oral sex and homosexual acts. Then he preached a little in the last hour, actually making some good points -- interspersed with a few more expletives. That's why the guy is such a enigma. He's not stupid. He says what he thinks, and he sticks with his position and defends it well, but after listening to him you experience an overwhelming need to take a shower and wash your ears out with soap.

You can listen to Steve Gaines' interview with Thaddeus Matthews
here. (May take a while to load. The interview begins at 4:50 if you want to skip ahead.) There's a rather disgusting conversation between Matthews and a female caller at the beginning (which will give you a good idea of the caliber of his program and many of his callers), then the interview with Pastor Gaines in which Gaines defends his position thoughtfully and clearly, followed by some closing commentary by Matthews and a commercial that I think you'll find worth the wait.

I'm going to assume Steve Gaines has never listened to Matthews' radio program or read his blog.

69 comments:

BkWormGirl said...

You are a stronger person than I. I can't stand to listen to either SG or TM.

BkWormGirl said...

Oh, on the topic, I do think this is an issue that needs attention. And I somewhat agree with SG. (I know I looked to see if lightening was about to strike.) If a business person hires Joe today and Joanne walks in tomorrow the owner needs to have recourse. I heard people say that it is wrong to punish those who are GLBT for someone's prejudice. However, why should either myself or my child be traumatized by someone else's actions. Why do "straight" people have no rights? Why is it that GLBT individuals do not deserve to feel "negative experiences" but everyone else just has to suck it up and move on. This is something that REALLY confuses me. I was reading the CA today and Wendy Thomas (who sometimes - often times is a nut job) compared voting against this type of ordinance to the most "brutal" forms of discrimination. Seriously?? I think not. However, subjecting children to "confusing roles of identity" has been linked to depression and other issues of identity. Our world really is messed up. Stepping off of my soap box now. (For a moment.)

New BBC Open Forum said...

In case there was any doubt in anyone's mind, I agree with SG on this one, too. I did think it was interesting the way he tripped all over himself denying there are any homosexuals in our church. "There may be somebody we don't know about." Probably several "somebodies" if the truth be known.

Wendi Thomas is a lot like Thaddeus Matthews. She can play the nutjob, or she can hit the nail on the head. Here are two examples of the latter:

Moral Failures Thrive in Silence.

Best to ignore Herenton's latest childish stunt.

I just love it when she beats up on Willie!

gopher said...

But while agreeing with Steve on this issue and may sympathize for the attacks on him,

Don't forget how he treats

Bellevue Employees

Who are Terminated "At Will"

Bellevue People

who are treated like


Steve Gaines Attacks Bloggers Steve Gaines tells Peacemakers to Attack Trouble Makers

New BBC Open Forum said...

Hello, Blogger! You still need to fix the formatting problem which was introduced several weeks ago!

"Gopher's" comment has two links:

Steve Gaines Attacks Bloggers.

Steve Gaines tells Peacemakers to Attack Troublemakers.

New BBC Open Forum said...

LOL! I think I like this person's title better.

New BBC Open Forum said...

Well worth your time...

The Wartburg Watch.

There is a new article every weekday.

Thy Peace said...

"Hello, Blogger! You still need to fix the formatting problem which was introduced several weeks ago!".

NASS, I have not seen this bug in the known issues for blogger. If you wish to submit this problem, please do so. Here are some helpful links:

Blogger Help Group.

Known issues for blogger - comments.

Known issues with blogger.

Correction:

It has been reported already and they are working on a fix, but it has not made it to the known list of comments problems ...

Discussions > Something Is Broken > Comment formatting when using HTML tags is somewhat broken.

Discussions > Something Is Broken > Regression - Line breaks eaten after closing HTML tag in comments.

Discussions > Something Is Broken > HTML in Comments is not working properly.

New BBC Open Forum said...

gopher,

That first one sounds an awful lot like a threat! I wonder if the MPD or SCSD would be willing to conduct an investigation.

fogmachine said...

You can take the worst individual you know and eventually find things you agree about or have in common.

That means nothing.

Let me get this straight, Gaines doesn't like homosexuals in the church but pedophiles don't seem to bother him until he gets caught harboring one.

That's why someone like him doesn't need to be the spokesperson for issues such as this. He has no credibility.

gmommy said...

I so agree with fogmachine!! Steve always seems to have a lot to say about gays and drinking...but doesn't have much compassion or interest in victims of clergy sexual abuse. He was so arrogant about being able to just slide under the law when it came to PW ...and his other little mistakes of the mind.
I didn't listen to the thing but if this radio guy is so uncouth what the heck was SG doing being on the program??
And he stumbled around about gays at BBC??? Is he blind???
Actually, I don't care about what SG thinks anymore. Fogmachine is right...he has NO credibility.
Maybe that's why he was on that radio show.

turtlegirl said...

Have we not learned anything from the great Martin Luther King? Dr. King was a champion of civil rights..of HUMAN rights. It is ones' right to agree or disagree with homosexuality but to not support the welfare or simple protection of another human being simply based on their sexual orientation is heartless, cruel and ignorant. Gay men, women and CHILDREN (12 year old Lawrence King was killed in his classroom due to his sexual orientation) have been discriminated against, beaten, and killed. This is OK?? This is acceptable?? I find it hard to believe that jesus, or rather the jesus that I believe in, would condone such brutal and inhumane behavior. One of Dr. King's closest associates, Bayard Rustin, was a known homosexual. Dr. King knew this and this did not affect his friendship in any way. In fact, Bayard Rustin was the driving force behind the historic 1963 March on Washington. Now, wouldn't it have been a pity if Dr. King ended his friendship with Mr. Rustin based on his sexual orientation and the historic march never took place? Dr. King was an extraordinary man. A brilliant man. He cared about all beings...such a pity so many people have forgotten to uphold his teachings.

New BBC Open Forum said...

In yet another display of idiocy, the Blogger folks have introduced a new "feature" which limits comments to 4096 characters. (That's a lot less than you might think.) Therefore, my response to "turtlegirl" will have to be broken into two parts. Here's the first.

Gay men, women and CHILDREN (12 year old Lawrence King was killed in his classroom due to his sexual orientation) have been discriminated against, beaten, and killed. This is OK?? This is acceptable??

I find it hard to believe that jesus, or rather the jesus that I believe in, would condone such brutal and inhumane behavior.

Nice diversionary tactic, but it doesn't fly. This discussion is about the ordinance currently before the Shelby County Board of Commissioners regarding non-discrimination in hiring and firing based upon sexual orientation or "gender identity." How would that prevent any of the incidents you mentioned? You can legislate 'til you're blue in the face, but laws don't change people's hearts.

The question is not whether to afford simple, basic, human rights protection for everyone. I know of few people who would not condone that. The question is whether a group of people, people who have made a choice in life -- as opposed to their sex or race -- deserve special treatment. As Steve Gaines said, they're not asking for equal treatment (just as some racial groups want quotas and special treatment), they want it all. Thaddeus Matthews, in that interview, stated that he doesn't believe in equal rights for gays. I disagree. As long as they're not making spectacles of themselves (overt, in-your-face behavior), and they're acceptably performing the job for which they were hired, they should not be discriminated against in hiring and firing. The Declaration of Independence contains the statement, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

I do not believe that someone should be discriminated against simply because of his or her sexual orientation, but at the same time the right to the blatant expression of that sexual orientation in the workplace should be able to be determined by, and if need be limited by, the employer. The county also has no right to dictate to other employers who they hire and fire. "Equal rights" in this case opens the door from simple non-discrimination (with which I agree) to recognizing gay marriage, full benefits for gay "spouses" and "partners" (health and life insurance for gay "spouses," pensions for surviving "spouses," family leave, etc.) and in the most extreme, though unlikely cases, allowing people to use whichever public restroom they want, regardless of their biological sex. I think the latter is a ridiculous argument to use as the main basis for your objection to this ordinance the way Thaddeus Matthews did, but it is at the bottom of the slippery slope. In case you didn't listen to the interview, his argument against the ordinance is that a little boy in a Shelby County school can put on his "little girlie dress" and go into the girls' restroom. Hello! Unless the county is hiring minors now, this ordinance has nothing to do with children. It's as ridiculous as Phyllis Schlafly back in the '70s screaming we'd all be using unisex restrooms if the ERA passed. If you're going to argue for or against something, at least use logical, realistic arguments!

Continued in next comment...

New BBC Open Forum said...

Continued from previous comment...

There's no such thing as "gay marriage." Marriage is, by definition, a covenant between a man and a woman. Period. Today there are some people in society trying to redefine marriage. If a gay person wants to have a "civil union" which gives them the right to make decisions on behalf of his "partner," that's okay with me. I do not believe employers should have to foot the bill for medical insurance and pension benefits for gay partners. Call it a "marriage" if you want. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig. Calling something a "marriage" doesn't make it so.

What's the difference between requiring an employer to provide benefits for "gay spouses" and live-in boyfriends or girlfriends? Some employers already provide benefits for "domestic partners." Here's a list of companies that provide health insurance benefits to "domestic partners." In my opinion, a company should be under no obligation to provide such benefits.

If the ordinance before the Shelby County Board of Commissioners added to the existing policy of not discriminating against an employee because of sex, race, or religion the phrase "... sexual orientation" and left it at that, I probably would have no problem with it. A gay person who is performing his job duties and not flamingly flaunting his "lifestyle" in everyone's face shouldn't be discriminated against. When the "expression" of one's sexual orientation or "gender identity" becomes a distraction to his/her/its fellow employees and a business's customers, that's where I draw the line. Most homosexual people perform their jobs every day just like the heterosexual population. I think the "flamers" are a minority and job discrimination based upon sexual orientation is not a big problem. I do believe this ordinance, worded as it is, represents a slippery slope that most thinking people don't want to go down.

gmommy said...

Giving extra rights to gays has nothing to do with ending relationships with gays. Is this about friendships or laws? Is there not already laws against hate crimes???
This has nothing to do with gays being beaten up. It's about giving them something more than what everyone else has.

B. Walker said...

"A gay person who is performing his job duties and not flamingly flaunting his "lifestyle" in everyone's face shouldn't be discriminated against."


What are you calling discrimination? If you want homosexuals teaching your children, then you are extremely blind. Christian men and women should set an example before God. The Lord never oriented anyone anything but a HETEROSEXUAL! Homos and transsexuals are led by Satan.

Until a few years ago, sodomy was against the law for heterosexuals. Your anus was meant to be an EXIT. ONLY.

The Bible calls homosexuality an ABOMINATION before God; not just sin.

New BBC Open Forum said...

What are you calling discrimination? If you want homosexuals teaching your children, then you are extremely blind. Christian men and women should set an example before God.

Adultery is an abomination, too. I dare say there are more adulterers than closet homosexuals teaching our children (and in positions of leadership in our churches). I did not say I "want" homosexuals teaching children, so don't put words in my mouth. I don't want adulterers, thieves, liars, or abusers teaching children either, but if you start eliminating people from employment based upon specific sins, pretty soon there will be no one working.

B. Walker said...

Don't put words in My mouth. PLEASE. I NEVER stated that you desired homos teaching your kids. I said "IF."

So in essence, you are claiming that when it is impossible to find upright, godly men and women to teach, we should lower standards. No... the answer is to pray to God. He has a solution, you know. Homeschooling? Perhaps.

It is never right to accept homosexuality or become blind to the devastating, evil effects of it.

monkeygirl said...

So, laws don't change people's hearts? Yes, not everyone's heart is changed because of the passing of a law. I mean, despite slavery and segregation being outlawed, there are still racists. So, should those laws not have been passed, then?

I'm sure your argument to this will be that a gay man or woman chooses this lifestyle. I still find it amusing that anyone would think someone would choose to be subjected to so much discrimination by the likes of people such as yourself. How can YOU be so sure that someone isn't born this way?

How can you say that being able to be hired and not be fired is "wanting it all". Really?? You say that as long as someone doesn't make a spectacle of himself then he should be allowed to keep his job. Make a spectacle of himself? Wow. I wouldn't want you deciding whether or not someone is making a spectacle of themselves. How arrogant and judgemental. Your pastor allowed a known pedophile to remain at your church in a position of authority. Now, in my opinion, that is making a spectacle of himself.

I understand that the bible is taken literally by many people and that the bible speaks out against homosexuality but the bible also doesn't speak out against slavery. Exodus Chapter 21 Verses 20-21 states that while a slave owner should be punished if he kills a slave he shouldn't be punished if the slave survives a day or two. Do you agree with that? I doubt it. So why do you ignore some things from the bible but enforce others? You can't pick and choose, you know?

Why are you so threatened by homosexuals having insurance? At the end of the day how does it affect you if a gay man or woman gets to choose an HMO/PPO? What business is it of yours if a company pays out benefits to homosexuals. Doesn't God speak out about being arrogant and judgemental?

You allude to a little boy in a dress being able to use a girls restroom and that this ordinance has nothing to do with children. Those that killed the 12 year old were taught to hate gays most likely from a parent or family member. Hate is something that is learned. You can't see that discrimination of any kind is a form of hatred that will be passed down from generation to generation? This in turns leads to the beatings and killings that I spoke of. That was my point. Surely you understand that. I mean, being a "thinking" person and all.

People have a right to their opinion but when that opinion can cause harm to an individual or oppress an individual..well..I think that is a more dangerous slippery slope than the one you speak of.

New BBC Open Forum said...

So, laws don't change people's hearts? Yes, not everyone's heart is changed because of the passing of a law. I mean, despite slavery and segregation being outlawed, there are still racists. So, should those laws not have been passed, then?

No, laws don't change people's hearts. Of course those laws should have been passed, just like I think abortion on demand should be illegal, but passing such a law isn't going to make abortion go away.

I really have no desire to get into a back-and-forth discussion with you on this subject. You have your opinions, and I have mine, and we'll just have to agree to disagree because it's obvious neither of us is going to change our minds.

B. Walker,

I dare say that any of us who has been a student in a public (or private) school has knowingly or unknowingly had at least one homosexual teacher in our lifetime. They are everywhere in all occupations and walks of life, and most of the time you never know the difference because they're doing their jobs and nothing more. That doesn't mean I approve of their lifestyle, but as I said, I don't approve of adultery, fornication, stealing, lying, etc. However, we all deal with adulterers, fornicators, thieves, liars, etc. every day. You sound as arrogant and intolerant as "monkeygirl" is accusing me of being!

gmommy said...

B.Walker is crude and apologized for putting words into your mouth and then did it again! LOL!

I think there is a difference in those that believe it's inappropriate for people of the same sex to be married and those that think homosexuals are "evil and cause so much evil" in the world. Why can't we have our opinions without hating them??

Why can't we ALL be discreet and use good judgment and taste when in public...out of respect for each other??I don't appreciate hearing filthy language when in Target but I do b/c people have no respect for anyone or anything anymore. I don't appreciate seeing heterosexual people acting like they need to "get a room" in public. Why does EVERYTHING we do have to be in someone's face??

The reality shows are humiliating to me...I don't watch them. I don't go to movies where I have to watch people having sex.
I don't hate those people.

I wouldn't dare go toe to toe with anyone who feels so strongly that homosexuality is right...BUT I don't think anyone knows all there is to know about the "causes" of homosexuality. I don't think it's an easy issue.
I do know that they were made in the image of God. I don't think most of us hate gays for being gay....but some do and that's sad.

I hope we can respect that we all feel passionate about different things. Sadly I don't think we are headed in a good direction as human beings.
Using sexual abuse as an example...nothing has improved in 30 years. The way BBC and many other Baptist churches have dealt with clergy sexual abuse is the same as it was when I was young.

New BBC Open Forum said...

gmommy,

I missed the apology.

gmommy said...

"Don't put words in My mouth. "PLEASE. I NEVER stated that you desired homos teaching your kids. I said "IF."

(OK...not really an apology)

"So in essence, you are claiming that when it is impossible to find upright, godly men and women to teach, we should lower standards."

(where did you say that??)

B. Walker said...

My family and church family have taken a stand against homosexuality and abortion and this is not "arrogant." You are evidently blind and desensitized to the horrors of the evil of homosexuality. You sound very unstable.

God WILL give homosexuals over to a reprobate mind. He is truly awesome. The Bible is NOT outdated!

The Lord has never called ANY Christian to be "tolerant" of the sin of homosexuality.

When a country or church has given itself over to immorality and all pleasures of the flesh, and abominations of the flesh, then that country or church will fall!

Ever heard of Sodom and Gommorah? Or is that too "arrogant" for me to ask? Our land is headed in the very same direction if we do not repent. 2 Chronicles 7:14.

Regarding the slavery topic, the Bible says "the labourer is worthy of his hire." I agree.

B. Walker said...

Your asinine accusation of "arrogance & intolerance" reminds me of something I read lately...

"All sin is bad (I Jn. 3: 4, Isa. 59: 1, 2). Some sin, however, is suggestive of a greater degree of depravity and rebellion. We must remember God does not always see things as man does (Lk. 16: 14, 15). The foregoing references are often not appreciated today - "You are judgmental and too intolerant," we hear. However, God's word remains true, whether we like it or not! Man may laugh at the above, but such is a repulsive odor in the nostrils of God. More and more today, the "respectable clergy" is found justifying matters such as homosexuality and dishonesty. How sad and contrary to God's pronouncements!"

gmommy said...

B,
If you could say what you believe without all the anger, you might be heard.
I agree that when churches begin to justify sin they lose their credibility. We see that happening everyday. But I don't believe even the KJV teaches us to hate the sinner.
I'm not real crazy about sexual predators but I try not to blame them for all that is wrong in the world...it's tuff but I do try.

New BBC Open Forum said...

B. Walker,

Do you go to Bellevue? If not, would you mind telling us where you go to church or what denomination it is? I promise not to comment or make any judgment. I'm just curious. Thanks in advance.

B. Walker said...

Gmom:

I am not seeking to "be heard." If finding favor with shallow or disobedient "Christians" is being "heard"...forget it.

I simply state truth and fact from God's Word. The unsaved will not recognize truth most times because they live in darkness.

I never stated Christ taught us to hate sinners. We are instructed to ABHOR sin and ESCHEW evil. HOMOSEXUALITY is a SIN and very EVIL! We are created in the image and likeness of God. Homosexuality is VERY far from that.

You are mixing righteous indignation and Bible convictions with "anger." God never made anyone on this forum a "fruit inspector."

God did not HATE sinners when he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. He did not hate sinners when He obliterated New Orleans. But, He DID hate the SIN!


To NBBCF:

I do not attend Bellevue. My church is non-denominational.

gmommy said...

"He did not hate sinners when He obliterated New Orleans. But, He DID hate the SIN!"

To make that statement I guess you believe God made you the fruit inspector.
Does he send you emails about this sort of thing??

Britt said...

A lot of you are acting as if the clergy-abuse happened under Gaines' watch. It did not. The handling of the matter did. The incident itself happened under Rodger's watch. I don't know if Rodger's knew anything about it or not, but if Gaines has no right to speak on such manners based on his role in the scandal, than surely Rodger too had no right to speak in the same way.

New BBC Open Forum said...

The handling of the matter did.

What "handling"? Gaines tried to sweep it under the rug (or "under the blood") where it would remain to this day, and PW would still be on staff had the victim not come forward.

It's "Rogers," not "Rodger" or "Rodgers." PW himself said Dr. Rogers didn't know. I realize PW hardly makes for a credible witness, but think about it from the standpoint of logic (something which you seem to have trouble with). If Dr. Rogers did know, would it not make PW somehow look better if he admitted that? Why would he cover for Dr. Rogers? It makes no sense. And neither do you.

Britt said...

I do not know if PW would cover for Rogers, but some poepl on this board have said that since Gaines is the Senior Pastor, then he should know the happenings of the church. Same with Rogers. I am not blaming Rogers or saying that he knew anything, but it seems that many people on here are very quick to cast blame on Gaines in situations simply because it is Gaines. If something happens that Gaines didn't know about then people have said that he should have known because he was Senior Pastor. If thats the case, then the same should be true of Rogers. But many on who who dislike Gaines love Rogers. I just do not wish for there to be a double standard.

New BBC Open Forum, your attacks saying that I have no logic and make no sense are really unnecessary for our discussion. I have just wanted to discuss, not to attack on a personal level.

On the topic of the story. Gaines did right to stand up against this. He was not alone...the pastor at Faith and other all are standing against this bill

gmommy said...

"...but if Gaines has no right to speak on such manners based on his role in the scandal, than surely Rodger too had no right to speak in the same way"

I have no idea what that statement is suppose to mean.

BTW Britt...child abuse is never an "incident"...that IS the word the Baptists(not just BBC but the SBC) have chosen to use for clergy sexual abuse.

New BBC Open Forum said...

Again, Britt, you're just making up things and throwing them out there. I've never heard anyone say Gaines should have known about PW. (I do recall hearing one person say Rogers should have known, but that person isn't playing with a full deck.) If Rogers didn't know for 15-16 years, I wouldn't expect Gaines to. Why should he? Pedophiles are usually very adept at putting on a good front. Nobody is saying Gaines should have somehow known about it... except perhaps you. The issue is what Gaines did (or did not) do for the six months he DID know about it.

gmommy said...

AND SG lied that he was inexperienced and it was a new day for him. That's crap. The most country uneducated people understand the dynamics of sexual abuse...and a minister is suppose to know and obey the Biblical standards for a minister (he sure can yell and dictate what the Bible supposedly says on less important issues)...and SG repeatedly ignored the victim's requests to meet with him and for PW to be removed from the ministry.
Then the "report" made very little of the many women PW had revictimized in the church. That same legal document gave more sympathy to PW than it did to those he hurt. It also used the word incident over and over instead of crime, sin, and sexual abuse. SG also thought himself pretty clever and was very smug in joking around about shutting the mic down when a life time church member and victim of PW stood at the mic the day of the monkey business meeting. He knew this man was not a trouble maker...knew he was hurt by the way the people in the church had treated him. SG didn't so much as look at him as he passed him on his way up to the pulpit.
To say he was new and didn't want any more exposure other than the little mistakes of the mind had already caused him is no excuse for lying, disobeying scripture, not caring about the safety of others once he had knowledge of his perversion or his arrogance to this day concerning this issue.

BkWormGirl said...

Since I do not know any of the players in the BBC scandal personally, I will only comment on what I had first hand knowledge about.

SG stood in the pulpit, and with fake tears in his eyes asked to stay. (Wasn't actually there, watched it on TV.) He did not apologize for the harm done to victims of abuse of clergy (either PW or any other clergy) instead he has made it seem like victims are the problem in a host of examples as given in mostly Sunday night sermons.

Additionally the document produced by BBC was full of statements that anyone with any education in either psychology or criminal justice knew to be a big bunch of lies. The church has yet to publicly amend or withdraw that garbage and bogus document.

To me it is EXTREMELY sad and ironic that SG is now concerned about the damage done to Shelby counties youth by cross dressers and the like. Now before anyone starts carrying on - I did not say there was no damage. I am saying I find it strange that he cares about youth he has no responsibility for - yet for those GOD commanded him to shepherd - he couldn't give two hoots in Hades about them.

He just ends up looking stupid for not realizing his role and place.

That all being said - I stand in opposition of this ordinance and strongly hope it is defeated. While the religious implications weigh heavy on my heart, I realize that is not the case for everyone. So if the religious argument against this ordinance is not a concern. Please think about the fact that this is one more way in which business is controlling commerce and industry. Just one more step down into the pit of socialism.

gmommy said...

Well said BWG!

Lin said...

"Let me get this straight, Gaines doesn't like homosexuals in the church but pedophiles don't seem to bother him until he gets caught harboring one."

That is exactly what I was thinking.

Britt, Gaines did know because he was told by both the perp and the victim. the point is what he did AFTER he was told. And what he did AFTER he was told was a direct violation of scripture. So, either he is ignorant of scripture or just ignored it.

That is what we have a problem with and what disqualifies him as an elder much less even discuss this issue as a pastor.

So, it boils down to this message:

Homosexual employees in secular world bad? Molesting little boys- not so bad for SBC staff ministers?

BkWormGirl said...

I am sorry, I just realized I made a mistake in my previous paragraph.

This is what I said.
That all being said - I stand in opposition of this ordinance and strongly hope it is defeated. While the religious implications weigh heavy on my heart, I realize that is not the case for everyone. So if the religious argument against this ordinance is not a concern. Please think about the fact that this is one more way in which business is controlling commerce and industry. Just one more step down into the pit of socialism.

I meant to say:
That all being said - I stand in opposition of this ordinance and strongly hope it is defeated. While the religious implications weigh heavy on my heart, I realize that is not the case for everyone. So if the religious argument against this ordinance is not a concern. Please think about the fact that this is one more way in which GOVERNMENT is controlling commerce and industry. Just one more step down into the pit of socialism.

Britt said...

Again, Britt, you're just making up things and throwing them out there. I've never heard anyone say Gaines should have known about PW.I never said that anyone did. I simply was saying that posters have spoken on other topics about how it is silly to think that things happen without a Senior Pastor knowning about it. I simply was saying that Senior Pastor's can't know everything. If they could then Rogers should be held in the same regard. I used him as an example because it seems that many on here hold him as untouchable compared to Gaines.

New BBC Open Forum, you always seem to have a snide remark. Saying that I am making up things on this past comment. Is that really necessary? We are both discussing the topics from point of views, not on made up thoughts. Thank you! :)

New BBC Open Forum said...

Britt,

Your comments speak for themselves, so on this topic you may have the last word.

I'm not being snide when I say I find it scary (in more ways than one) that you're "a graduating Mid-America student." Of course, that's just my point of view.

Britt said...

I guess you may find it scary if you wish, sir. I am glad to have attended a place of higher learning that teaches pastors to critically examine religous practices in Christian life today by seeing if they agree to the Word of God. To not blindly follow tradition, but to strive to follow the Word.

All that to say, fellowship much not be broken over anything except disagreement over the plain doctrine of the Lord. So many topics over which Christians loss fellowship are not worth losing fellowship over.

BkWormGirl said...

I am quite certain, Pastor/Shepherd hurting the flock that God has commanded him to protect leads to a scriptural break of the flock.

And breaking the law that God has commanded him to submit to their authority (Romans 12:1) - those are both issues that even you Britt would agree are Biblical issues to break fellowship with. The only time we are instructed to break the law in the Bible is when the law conflicts with God's word. (Reporting a child rapist is not antithetical to God's word. In fact harboring a person who harms children, for such individuals Jesus said it is better to put a millstone around his neck then to cause children to suffer.) So, maybe they should withhold your diploma dear lad, it seems that possibly you haven't quite paid attention to ALL that you were taught! The break up at BBC was not over whether the carpet should be blue or taupe. I am certain there are many who long for days when that is the "hot topic" of the week.

ezekiel said...

turtlegirl,

" I find it hard to believe that jesus, or rather the jesus that I believe in, would condone such brutal and inhumane behavior."

I would repectfully suggest you take another look at the jesus you believe in.

Jesus is and always will be Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.

Lev 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Lev 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

Couple that with Malachi

Mal 3:6 "For I the LORD do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed.

Understand that the Jesus you should know is the Son of the Father that said what He did in Leviticus. The Son doesn't condone the abomination, He mediates for those that commit it, then repent of it and ask forgiveness for it. The same as He does for every other sin man can find to commit.

Without His mediation, without repentance and without that forgiveness then the sinner is bound for the pit just like all sinners are that don't claim and have the sacrifice of Jesus, His Blood washing that sin away and thereby making him righteous in the eyes of the Father.

I would think it much more brutal to accept and condone this type of behavior which will ultimately lead to eternal life in the pit and much more loving to expose it, and show folks how to be free from it, just like any other sin.

But then that would require one to stop doing it. Just know that the abomination is still an abomination, in a class all its own.

1Co 6:18 Shun immorality and all sexual looseness [flee from impurity in thought, word, or deed]. Any other sin which a man commits is one outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.

B. Walker said...

Very well said, Ezekiel. You are Biblical and honest. It is great to see you are not a compromiser!

New BBC Open Forum said...

B. Walker,

Here's a site you should appreciate. Not treating someone with utter contempt is a far cry from "accepting and condoning" and "compromising."

B. Walker said...

I barely have time to visit THIS forum much less other sites so...no thanks.

The Bible is very clear about homosexuality. It is not ambiguous.

The Bible teaches us this:

"He that walketh with wise men shall be wise, but a companion of fools shall be destroyed."

"Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them."

Psalms 1:

"Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful."

Lin said...

We all know that Paul made his way in chains to the Roman Empire to tell them homosexuality is a sin and they must clean up their act. Right? Wrong.

He went with the Gospel. He did not fight the culture. He knew the Gospel is what transforms people.

Now, if a believer tells you it is ok if they are a homosexual, that is quite another thing. 1 Corin 5 has the answer on how to handle that among other verses quoted here that refute that view.

Why does the SBC spends so much time and money fighting the culture when our own house is defiled?

New BBC Open Forum said...

Why does the SBC spends so much time and money fighting the culture when our own house is defiled?

One word, Lin... diversion.

New BBC Open Forum said...

This is the revised resolution which was passed by the Shelby County Board of Commissioners today by a 9-to-4 vote. What do you think? Good compromise? Slippery slope? An abomination?

RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH NON-DISCRIMINATION PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO SHELBY COUNTY GOVERNMENT'S EMPLOYEES. SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER SIDNEY CHISM

WHEREAS, It is important to ensure that Shelby County Government's employees are not discriminated against.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SHELBY COUNTY, TENNESSEE, That discrimination against any Shelby County Government employee on the basis of non-merit factors shall be prohibited.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That this Resolution shall become effective upon signature of the Mayor, the welfare of the public requiring same.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That any phrase or portion of this Resolution that may be declared unlawful shall be severed with no effect on the lawfulness or effectiveness of the remaining portion of this Resolution.

BkWormGirl said...

It is what is already on the books. So for me it is a non-issue.

gmommy said...

I sure am hearing alot of positive buzzing about Cross Roads Church. That is where Rob Mullins is the pastor.I know some of the familiar BBC people we knew from choir are there.
I say this for 2 reasons...if some "refugees" are still holding out about church...it may be worth a visit. Rob is definitely NOT arrogant or a control freak.

For some of you already going...how is it??? Is it nice to use a hymn book again??? Or is that a rumor???
Does Rob use the Bible during his sermons?? or grab a few verses he can rant and rave about...OK...that was a trick question...I know Rob wouldn't rant and rave :)
What's the scoop?????

32yrs@bbc said...

For some of you already going...how is it??? Is it nice to use a hymn book again??? Or is that a rumor???
Does Rob use the Bible during his sermons?? or grab a few verses he can rant and rave about...OK...that was a trick question...I know Rob wouldn't rant and rave :)
What's the scoop?????

Gmommy: The scoop is this - Crossroads is like a refreshing oasis for the wandering cast-off and cast-down sheep from BBC and other churches. The service is simple but simply sacred and satisfying spiritually. Emily Davis plays the piano beautifully,
Steve McCune leads the singing graciously (Jim Whitmire would be proud of him:0)), God is shaping Rob into a really good expository preacher with a spoonful of humor, and the congregation averages 350 each Sunday with a good mix of all ages.In fact, the young adults with children may out-number the oldsters. Which blows the theory that you've got to entertain with a contemporary service to bring the young ones in. Now that school is out, there is also a good number of college-age who are attending. And, yes, we sing out of hymnals. There have been 10 baptisms in the 12 wks. the church has been functioning. Not bad. And the majority of the baptisms are in the lake on the property.
Go to Crossroads-baptist.net and check out the pictures under News and Events.

gmommy said...

Thanks for the info!!! I wasn't sure if the rumors I have been hearing were for real! 350 is no small church...wow!!! Hope it doesn't get too big!!!!

New BBC Open Forum said...

Commercial Appeal - Win for rights: Shelby job-bias bill silent on gays, but activists roar

I must agree with David Coombs on this one:

One opponent of the original ordinance said the measure won't mean much.

"This is exactly what it says in the (employee) handbook," said David Coombs, a staffer at Bellevue Baptist Church, whose pastor, Steve Gaines, had spoken against the amendment on religious grounds
.

New BBC Open Forum said...

Oooh, Steve, not one of your best shots!

gmommy said...

I'm sure many who spoke out against the ordinance were heckled. I do think it's sad that the gay reps were able to heckle SG about allowing a confessed child molester to remain on staff at BBC.
I was told today (by a current BBC member) that SG's inaction to respect and protect the victims and those vulnerable as the pastor of BBC came back to bite him. They also brought up the fence hopping/law breaking "incident" to show that SG had no credibility... How sad. This member was embarrassed that SG's behavior made him a joke in the community. Embarrassed that the "world" knew SG behaved inappropriately....but so many Christians and the pastor himself seemed clueless.

gopher said...

Oh My, What a picture.

So much for "Belleuve Loves Memphis"

For the past 3 years, people have been turned off by Steve's angry demeanor, which flares up at the slightest hint of disloyalty. Rather than listen to the concerns, Steve has made it a policy to purge Bellevue of all "troublemakers."

Unfortunately, "private" change is too late, as the mirror (i.e. this photo) of Steve's persona is displayed publicly.



Steve Gaines Attacking Bloggers.

Steve Gaines Reprimanding Choir.

No wonder Steve fits in so well with Memphis Mayor Willie W. Herenton

Johnathan_Bradshaw said...

I know it's off the subject but several things seem to have fallen off the radar the last few months and weeks. I'm still at BBC, not by my choice, but I feel I need to stay the course. I am curious about a few things......Does anyone know what the attendance numbers and offerings at BBC are looking like the past few months? They are not giving any information out on it. Also what has happened with the Jamie Parker issue? There was an incredible amount of talk within the congregation and now nobody knows what's happening. Has there been a back track? Any info on this would be much appreciated.

New BBC Open Forum said...

Welcome, Johnathan. I haven't seen any attendance numbers since December 2007. They were providing attendance figures to the deacons, at least until then, but even those numbers seemed to be exaggerated compared to the obvious decreases in attendance. It's been evident for quite a while they could easily go to one Sunday morning service. I've heard from two people who've attended that Wednesday night attendance is running around 150, and children's church has about half the attendance it used to.

As for Jamie Parker, who knows? The last I heard he's now been given a "reasonable" amount of time to find other employment -- whatever "reasonable" means. We're getting dozens of hits on this blog from people all over the country seeking that same information, including someone who keeps looking for information on "Jamie Parker Appreciation Day." (I've heard nothing about that.) My impression is he was originally given a termination date, then for whatever reason SG backed off and gave him more time, but that's just my gut feeling based mainly on the fact he's still there.

Johnathan_Bradshaw said...

I can only estimate on the numbers in worship I have no idea on Bible Fellowship numbers. For the past few weeks I have looked in on both morning worship services and by my estimations, the combined attendance is probably around 3500-3700. I just talked to a friend in the Music Dept. by phone on the Jamie Parker issue. This person is a reliable source and informed me that the Jamie Parker issue was on hold indefinately. They said that the church office and Music Ministry lines were flooded with calls from angry members demanding to know why Jamie was being asked to leave. This person also stated that a large number Choir members threatened to leave the Choir if he was ousted. Anybody heard anything else?

gmommy said...

The member I spoke with yesterday had no idea what Jamie's status was. She did know that Steve had talked to the choir and that his little talk (Jamie's not fired....Jamie doesn't know when his last day is...)didn't do the magic SG thought it would do.
I think the few people paying attention are not falling for Steve's spins like they used to.
He thought he could make everything sound better than it was.
I DO believe Jamie and Dana are under a silence threat.
I hope their eyes are wide open now.
Why do the elders we didn't know we had continue to go along with this man who is a joke in the community?????
Wait...they have no character either...forgot.

New BBC Open Forum said...

They said that the church office and Music Ministry lines were flooded with calls from angry members demanding to know why Jamie was being asked to leave. This person also stated that a large number Choir members threatened to leave the Choir if he was ousted.

That was what I heard, too. The week I heard about it, the following Sunday was said to be his last day. (Not saying that was set in stone, but it was what some people were led to believe.) Then things abruptly changed. I figured someone had backed down due to the public outcry.

I believe the Parkers are under radio silence now, too. Keeping your mouth shut is a small price to pay for a nice severance package, especially when you've got a very large mortgage to pay.

The choir has lost more members lately anyway. One recent Sunday there were only two rows in the choir. Contrast that with the days when there were five rows.

All For HIM said...

This is Johnathan_Bradshaw. Swapped to another account. Sorry! To continue what we were discussing. It is kind of embarassing to see all the empty seats in the Worship Center. Even on television, there are not enough camera angles to hide the empty seats. I was told actual Choir attendance is around 130-150 combined. I just got a little information on giving though. I was told that offerings are barely reaching $200,000 sometimes a little over and that the church is severly under on revenues. How can they be sustaining. We don't even know if there is anything left in our reserves. The budget was set on offerings of around $400,000. They surely can't keep on going at this rate.

New BBC Open Forum said...

I was told that offerings are barely reaching $200,000 sometimes a little over and that the church is severly under on revenues. How can they be sustaining. We don't even know if there is anything left in our reserves. The budget was set on offerings of around $400,000. They surely can't keep on going at this rate.

The budget for the 2009-10 fiscal year is $21,000,000. If what you're saying is true, and let's be generous and assume weekly receipts of $220,000, that's only $11,440,000. I don't see reserves listed in the 2009-10 budget, but projected interest income is $200,000 for this year versus $540,000 for 2008-09. That may tell you something.

It will be interesting to see how big the fireworks show is this year. For a non-profit organization that's experiencing the financial difficulties BBC seems to be right now, it seems more than a little "unstewardly" to be blowing up thousands of dollars in pyrotechnics. Not that it hasn't always seemed that way. It just seems more obvious now than ever before.

Bellevue ♥'s Memphis?

New BBC Open Forum said...

Where in here would one find "pyrotechnics show"?

All For HIM said...

I sure don't see that line item in the budget. Not even mentioning the fact that the facilites are 20years old now and are in need of some major repairs. The carpet is coming apart in areas, the walls are scuffed and seats are stained. The outside of the church needs a good cleaning and fix up, just to mention a few outward issues that need to be addressed. Not even counting the inside, and I'm not talking about wood, metal and glass. I really wonder who's in charge here??

fogmachine said...

The only thing Gaines knows is money. That's what he has in common with the Elders who brought him here and have kept him here.

For this reason, Gaines will be gone when the money runs out.

It's a money thing.
That's what makes these guys tick!

New BBC Open Forum said...

Someone noticed David Coombs standing in the background in the photo on the front page of the CA.