At least that’s what the American Family Association is saying.
Now, I appreciate debates/arguments over what the Bible says on many issues, homosexuality included. And I have no problem with the AFA purporting their interpretation.
What is amusing/sad is the manner in which they go about it.
“Miller’s article is one of the most biased and distorted pieces concerning homosexual marriage ever published by any major news organization. The article is much too long for this e-mail.”
While the AFA may not agree with Lisa Miller’s article (which can be found here), she does not distort. Her interpretation is certainly different, but it is not distortion. It is also amusing to me that they say “The article is much too long for this e-mail” knowing that most of their readers will not click though and read Miller’s article. Moreover, the e-mail offers Al Mohler’s response and encourages its readers to read Mohler’s article before reading Miller’s. Are they afraid that if someone reads Miller’s article without Al Mohler glasses that they will be tainted or not be able to clearly discern for themselves?
I very much appreciate that the e-mail offers both sides, but am troubled by the implication that people need to read Al Mohler before they read Lisa Miller so they can know what to think about the article. Further, I do very much take issue with the AFA asserting that someone else has distorted the Bible for the simple reason that they read the Bible and came down on a different side than did the AFA. I am fond of referencing Jewish rabbis who say that every verse has 70 interpretations.
I encourage you to read both articles and let me know what you think.