Thinking Christian
"Engaging… exhilarating.… This might be the most surprising and refreshing book you’ll read this year!" — Lee Strobel
"Too Good To Be False is almost too good to be true!" — Josh McDowell
Serving with:
"Engaging… exhilarating.… This might be the most surprising and refreshing book you’ll read this year!" — Lee Strobel
"Too Good To Be False is almost too good to be true!" — Josh McDowell
Serving with:
OK, it’s time to spin the camera around — Ryan & Kellie are good, but I bet there are less than 50 people in the audience (there are too many empty chairs in front). Takers?
(Updated: definitely not more than 10 people clapping: either a teeny, tiny audience, or they hated the speakers.)
Questioner pointing out “civil unions” would solve the problem — Anderson doubles down: civil unions lead to thruples; “marriage”, the definition, is what matters. He doesn’t comment on why this implies we can legally deny civil rights to citizens.
Kellie handles it ably: there’s no civil rights violation, everyone can marry — it doesn’t matter if you’re not sexually compatible with the person you marry, gay men can marry a woman if they choose.
I guess the segregation version of this argument is that black people can choose to bleach their skin, so it’s OK if whites have privilege.
I guess the breakfast version of this argument is that eggs taste better with salt.
Or … maybe your so-called “segregation version of this argument” is a completely unrelated assertion.
The argument, Keith, is not over who can marry, but over what marriage is. When will you see that???
Further, your assertion, “he doesn’t point out why we can legally deny civil rights…” shows that you weren’t listening to what he said.
This is just sad to me. So much polarization, and so little listening to hear what the other side has to say.
Or maybe you just weren’t there earlier in the discussion when he explained that.
Comment #1 is as fatuous as it is bizarre.
Let us grant that there where only 10 people clapping . What has the size of the audience or their apparent level of enthusiasm got to do with the price of beans?
(Incidentally, Keith’s ability to discern hand-claps from audio recordings designed to pick up the speaker is noteworthy.)
If you are going to make a criticism, Keith, at least make a sensible one.
Tom Gilson @4,5:
I might have missed it (I had cut-outs in the live streaming at a couple of points in the preso, once for several minutes), but the question seemed on-point enough to me I expected a more focused/direct response. Or maybe he simply didn’t hear the question the same way I did (although Kellie certainly did).
When will the presentations be available other than as live-streaming?
Billy Squibs @6:
Not fatuous; snarky, sure, but not fatuous. If it were fatuous you’d have to question why RatioChristi is doing “5 Universities, 5 Nights, 5 Big Questions”?
I think the on-the-ground response to these presentations is just about the most interesting question of the night.
I guess we’ll just have to disagree. I didn’t see any evidence of sarcasm in your post.
Anywho…
I’m looking forward to watching these. Beckwith , the only person I’m familiar with on the list, is usually worth paying attention to.