Starbucks’ CEO Cancels Church Speech because of Their Anti-Gay Bigotry

I have never much liked their coffee but may pop by for a muffin in support of this stance.

The good old “hate the sin not the sinner” style approach.

I listened to Bill Hybels’ explanation as to why he doesn’t think Willow is anti gay and it seems to me that his own explanation shows that they ARE anti gay.  All they have a rationalization that works for THEM to ease their own minds.

I also have to say that I really don’t like Bill Hybels.  I saw a video of his once where he gave tips on effective evangelism where he said it was most effective if you could evangelize to people at their lowest point when they are going through some kind of life crises.  He told everybody to look out for these opportunities.  That just made me sick.

If we take it as 1000 and give a gay man 50 years of screwing it works out at less than 2 shags a month on average.  And this is without counting them as married.

More and more it seems to me religion is just being used as a tool by people to make sure THEY have special rights, and no one else does.  I’m seriously starting to think religion is just a form of hate group, and I don’t understand how religions have gotten special leeway over the years (tax-exempt status, prayers to start city council meetings, etc).

Well…  He’s really saying that they’re no more anti-gay than they are anti-fornication.  If you don’t want to get married to someone of the opposite sex and have sex with that person only, you aren’t to be having sex. 

I’m from Seattle. Go Howard, but I agree it wouldn’t have been hypocritical. He’s got a book to promote. But he still sold the SONICS out from Seattle. In Seattle, that’s what really matters!  

I will just reiterate what I’ve said before, which is that you can’t advance the idea that gay relationships are sinful without being anti-gay. Advancing the notion that gay relationships are inferior (morally or otherwise) is by definition heterosexist.

Evangelicals need to learn this. Simple rule: if you can’t honestly say the following sentence, you are actually anti-gay and therefore have no defense. “Sexual relationships between people of the same sex are not any more wrong or sinful than similar relationships between people of the opposite sex.”

And claiming that it’s just being “anti-fornication” is a cop-out. If you think that marriage is what makes sex OK, and that gay relationships are not good enough for marriage, then that is blatantly, obviously a form of prejudice in itself. It doesn’t matter if it doesn’t “feel” hateful or contemptuous. It’s prejudice that’s directed at gay people and makes their lives more difficult.

I suppose I wouldn’t have blamed the Starbucks CEO for going, partially because I didn’t have much interest in what he does in the first place. But good for him. We need more people who are willing to say that this is a non-negotiable part of their commitment to civil rights.

I have never heard of gay marriage being accepted in the church. Do you have a source for that?
Also, how do you interpret Lev 18:22 and other verses like it: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”

Anyone else having trouble viewing the video?

“There’s something weird about having a less interesting sex life than a pastor expects you to.”

Don’t I know it. As a bi atheist chick, I’m sure I’m supposed to be spending my weekend having some particularly lascivious and blasphemous orgies by the flickering (and flattering) light of a burning stack of bibles and korans. I have a feeling that your average homophobic preacher would be desperately disappointed to see me on the sofa in my fluffy slippers with my laptop and a stack of books.

I agree whole-heartedly with  what you said Hover, minus one thing. . . Please don’t assume that this bigoted, self-satisfying view-point represents all Christians. Unfortunately the loudest people claim the public view on who they are representing.  In other words, I consider myself to be a Christian, I work as a youth leader in a UCC (United Church of Christ) church, and I would not be either of those things if all Christians had this point of view.  The UCC philosophy is one of acceptance, actual welcome (although in the interest of full disclosure, we are lacking the doormats that say so) and love.

The UCC accepts openly gay leaders and ministers as well as leads the way on Legal marriage and advocacy.  Not to be one of the “Bible-Thumpers” who get on a blog and insist on quoting scripture, BUT When Jesus was asked what the Greatest Commandment was he responded, ” Love the Lord your God with all your heart , all your mind, and all your strength. That is the greatest commandment followed only by, Love your neighbor as yourself.” For me that kind of sums it all up. If we just love each other and stop worrying about all of the other stuff that gets in the way of that love, I bet we would be a lot happier people!

Oh its actually very simple! If the Bible says something you agree with, its literal. If it says something that sounds a little off, its either a metaphor or out of context.  And anyone who disagrees is wrong!
See? Easy! You can be a Christian again now!

We were inspired by these events to throw down a new podcast episode. Thanks Hemant!  

The really insidious part of this sort of thing is that this pastor and his church, in all likelihood, genuinely and sincerely believe they are not “anti-gay.” Any attempt to correct them on this or point out how hateful their rhetoric, is likely to go right over their heads and make them feel “persecuted.” This, in turn, will trigger defensiveness in them, and make them dig their heels in even harder on the matter, and could stoke their paranoia even more.

Note, by saying this I’m not defending their beliefs, or saying they aren’t a bunch of hateful bastards. Just saying that they’ve framed themselves and their views of homosexuality (mainly, by asserting it’s a “choice” and not an inherent quality) in such a way that they truly believe they aren’t hateful at all.

The problem with this, of course, is that ultimately, even this reasoning — as erroneous as it is — fails utterly, even if one accepts it as a given, especially in light of the doctrine that everyone is a sinner. They continue to rage and fume about the “homosexual lifestyle,” without realizing there are lots of “lifestyles” that people engage in, some of which really are detrimental. Take, for example, the habitual domestic abuser. How often do you hear anyone behind a pulpit talk about “the abusive lifestyle” and how horrid and sinful it is?

These people are, in a word, hypocrites (and thus are disobeying Jesus’ injunctions against hypocrisy), picking and choosing “sins” to rail against and to ignore. And they’re engaging in “public piety” by openly decrying those “sin” they dislike and implying they, themselves, are “free” of that “sin.” In that regard they are also disobeying Jesus’ injunctions against displays of public piety.

So they’ve proven themselves non-Christian in their behavior, on two separate counts. Really nice, huh?

You need to realize that a majority of Christians are anti gay because of their religious stance. You can down play it all you want and act like it’s this tiny but vocal minority but it isn’t.

Would you change your mind if you knew that Willow Creek has been associated with a notorious reparative/conversion therapy group known as Exodus International? Evidently Willow Creek just disassociated themselves after a decade of supporting them  not because they had a problem with the group but because they wanted to clean up their image some.(1,2)

Sources:
(1) http://www.christianpost.com/news/willow-creek-homosexuality-and-the-future-of-evangelical-response-53862/
(2) https://plus.google.com/105502506545735279423/posts/QReEXovMKwj

I would also commend to you this link for an example of so-called conversion therapy:

(3) http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/what-are-little-boys-made-of-main

Having said all that, I would expect the CEO of a major multinational corporation that espouses equality for all to at least be a little more careful with whom he associates with so these situations would not arise.

Women wearing comfortable footwear and reading books are the devil’s work.

This is a No True Scotsman argument.  Real Christians do endorse hate.  Not all of them to be sure but enough to be obvious.  A Christian is someone who self identifies as a Christian.  There isn’t an entry requirement.  I wish there were so we’d have fewer of you but there isn’t.

I attended Willow Creek back in the day. That’s where I was baptized, which is a big deal if you are “born again.” The last time I visited Willow Creek it looked like a mall inside. They even had their own food court. I would not be surprised if they have their own Starbucks by now. Although a megachurch and a multinational corporation are two peas in a pod – and not in a good way – Mr. Shultz made the right decision.

I’ve had at least two friends who are LGBT who made an honest sincere attempt over many many years to adhere to this particular type of Christian doctrine about homosexuality. One of them underwent exorcisms, joined a cult, and underwent ‘pray the gay away’ counseling. Twenty years later he is underemployed, living in a basement, and still living a guilt-ridden double life. In his 40s. The other one joined a cult, left the cult, attended an anti-gay church, and asphyxiated herself in her garage at the ripe old age of 30.

It matters to those 2 souls that Mr. Schultz was going to speak at Willow Creek. And it matters to them that he chose to cancel.

PS – I’m sitting in a Starbucks as I type this.

As a former Xian, we had this stupid phrase ‘hate the sin, love the sinner’ that made us feel justified in our stance. Total bs in retrospect.

“I wish there were so we’d have fewer of you but there isn’t.”

Well, depending on the entry requirement, we might have more like FisherL and less like Bill Hybels.  Which would be good IMO.

For anyone following the comments in email, please note the video is back up.  I would sum it up as “We’re not anti-gay because we say we’re not anti-gay.   We don’t really know what it means, but aren’t anti-anything, so we can’t be anti-gay.”

He encourages people to write to Starbucks telling them they’d love to have Howard Shultz back another year.  Once I’m done here, I’m going to write to Starbucks telling them they made the right decision.

About the “public piety” angle, lots of people accuse some anti-gay Christians of being anti-gay because they’re actually gay themselves, it upsets them that they are, so they become “self-hating” opponents of their own nature. I admit this is true for some (e.g. George Alan Rekers and Ted Haggard). But for most I think it’s as simple as knowing that, since they’re heterosexual themselves, that homosexuality is a “sin” they can never engage in and can never be accused of. So they’re very public about announcing that, and about denouncing it as a “sin.”

Nah – we just hate ignorance.

Hi hoverFrog. See, for example, “Note, by saying this I’m not defending their beliefs, or saying they aren’t a bunch of hateful bastards…”

Often, if you call people “hateful bastards,” it implies that you do not like them very much.

Hemant has been nothing but pleasant. You however, are being a disgusting little troll. If you’d like to twist the definition of morality to a priori exclude people who don’t believe your supernatural habberdashery, take your ball and go home. No one will miss you.

You’re totally right. I belong to a UCC church too. I’m gay, so is my pastor. But were the ones in the minority as Chsristians. But I think were growing. And were trying to speak louder but the ultra consevea are larger and have quite a bit more money to speak with. Ugh.

I agree completely ! Very well spoken and articulated. 

Hi hoverFrog. I have a really hard time seeing how someone can read this blog and see nothing but sweetness and light. I would categorize it as a shabby little hate site. What is the need for all the filthy language?

Again you are building a straw man.  ACN wrote that “Hemant has been nothing but pleasant” and you are committing the fallacy of composition by asserting that all atheists are either as pleasant as Hemant or hateful bigots.  Atheists have one thing in common: we don’t believe in gods.  Such a disparate group will come from a wide variety of backgrounds and hold a wide variety of opinions.

We come here because Hemant reports news and makes statements that are of interests to atheists.  All too often this is to report that one religious group or another has done something hateful but occasionally it is the opposite.  That Christians do more hateful things than good things is something that you should probably take up with the various Christian denominations.

Also if you don’t appreciate what Hemant has to say or what the comments say then you are free to interject something constructive or simply to withdraw.

As for “filthy language” surely you know that there is no such thing.  There is only language that people object to.  The problem lies with the listener or reader. 

Wow, surprisingly edgy move there, urging congregants to “put on the moccasins of a homosexual just one time.” That’s bound to lead to some cognitive dissonance.

And the word of God behind them.

Frank, Jesus is nobody’s friend.

He’s exactly the kind of date you want to avoid at all costs. He stalks you, he watches every move you make, either you love him or he tortures you (which is the equivalent to “if I can’t have you nobody can”), he’s over two-thousand years old and he still lives at home, he’s unwilling to commit to a ‘single’ relationship, he insists that we be the ‘bride,’ he’s a martyr (if you won’t love him he crucifies himself), and despite of what he thinks of you, he won’t give up the twelve other men he travels around with everywhere he goes.

Sure, he’s got amazing abs, but a sexy body doesn’t overcome  emotional instability.

What an adolescent comment!