Letter: Editor should live up to own standard


I find it interesting that whenever our arguments are weak, we have to resort to personal attack to try to win a debate. Having worked alongside Jonathan Lange for several years in the Wyoming Pastors Network, and knowing his personal charity toward people with whom he disagrees, I found it laughable that you would cast aspersion on his character.

“Love thy neighbor as thyself?” Perhaps you should live up to your own standard of passing judgment when calling our current president “lunatic-in-chief.” Whether one agrees with our current president’s policies is not the point — respect for his position would dictate a higher standard of journalistic excellence.

When you said that you did not want to make this a debate about the Bible, I can understand why, seeing that every reference to scripture that was used in the piece was horribly taken out of its context. 

The Church is not built upon the whimsical tides of public opinion or political correctness. It has at its foundation the Bible, in its entirety — not just sound bite passages pulled from context for the personal convenience of espousing a message of non-judgmentalism.

It should be noted that the Church, in its many denominations and branches, has consistently stood for 2,000 years on a consensus view of what the scripture teaches concerning marriage and sexuality. It could be argued that some denominations have grown up with the times and changed their position to reflect the current dogma.

Having given that point, it can also be affirmed that those denominations did not change their view because they had arrived at a better understanding of the Bible; no, it was simply a reflection of their desire not to run counter to the present riptide. 

Having said this, it is also important to remember that Christians in America are not only members of Christ’s church, they are also citizens of the United States. Therefore, they are afforded the protections of the Bill of Rights, as is everyone.

This includes freedom of religion, not just worship. This means adherents of a religion are free to practice their beliefs in the society at large, not just within the four walls of their churches. Also, they are afforded the right of freedom of speech. This protection is not intended to allow speech that is currently popular — rather, it affords the protection to speak out with a message that is not.

The current debate is not just about equality for LGBT folk; rather, it has become about silencing the voice of those who do not consent. You could have done better; how about a real debate about ideas, not merely casting stones from your bully pulpit. 

Tim Moyer



More In Opinions