The tricky thing I have found in writing my column these many months is people read it sometimes as though I am speaking as a representative of some formal church organization. I am not. I am speaking as a comedian.

True enough I have opinions and concepts that I believe to be true but I am going to use humor, sarcasm, satire and politically incorrect phraseology to deliver the message. That is what I do and is why sometimes I believe people miss the point when they read my column.

Unfortunately when it comes to the “liberal” mindset it is similar to talking to a child. They see and hear what they want your ideas to mean so they can ignore their muddled position and justify their intolerance of mine. Thus when I began my column speaking about a conversation with a friend I didn’t realize it would cause such hate from the “liberal” left.

By the way, if you haven’t noticed, I have recently been putting the word “liberal” in quotations. I use the word mainly as a bookmark, if you will, to describe in a word the depth of the left leaning worldview.

A better more accurate term for the ideology of the “liberals” who hate me and hate my ideas and hate my right to express them is simply post-modernism. (By the way I don’t believe all “liberals” actually hate me but I wanted everyone to see how stupid and disingenuous the use of the word is and yet how powerfully it comes across since it used by “liberals” against my people daily.)

Ok, let’s recap shall we? My first observation was not to engage the anonymous poster. The precedent being Jesus words in Matt 10:14.
The idea of shaking the dust from our feet reference I used as an analogy that the only people we are obligated to engage are those willing and able to receive truth. If someone wants to define his or her POV from its presuppositional reference point then and only then can we begin to engage in productive dialogue. 2nd I spoke about the use of the word hate to stifle dissent.

The commandment “bear no false witness against your neighbor” is exactly what the politically correct do to conceal the fact that they don’t like dissent and want it eliminated (think thought police) so by accusing someone of hate, those who are logically impaired come to the aid of the “oppressed” thinking they are doing a loving thing and instead have been transformed into Nazi brown shirts without having any idea they have been manipulated.

These Christians don’t believe in absolute truth, which is the antipathy of authentic Christianity. It is an old song and dance. Did God say not to eat of that tree? Did God say not to have sex outside of marriage? Thirdly it is important to realize the tactic of correlating 2 ideas that have no relevance to each other. One of the comments said “Wow, you had the willpower to wait until the 5th paragraph to pull out that oldy but goody: bestiality. Sheesh”.

The fact that he wasn’t put off by the pedophilia and necrophilia references is a little disturbing to me but I digress. More importantly he tried to synergize the black civil rights movement with gay marriage by saying I was on the wrong side of history.

First off I take my cues from God who wrote the rules. I could care less if gay people got married if God of the Bible ordained it. He didn’t. Again Christian worldview lives by Biblically mandated morality. Also it is disingenuous to compare one group who are defined by the melanin level of their skin and another group who are defined by biologically defined abnormal behavior. This is what one does when ones argument is weak and so one tries to attach their cause to a legitimate one.

This argument I easy to see through but what we really need to examine is how do we reach boundaries for what marriage and sex are for. Tune in next week.