Want to "Raise the Roof" for Tim Kaine? You'll have your chance on August 28...just click here for more details, sign up, invite your friends and neighbors, and "party hearty" for our next Governor!?She asked me right away about the tension between the Christian and the gay community. I answered ?Many people say that Christians and gays hate each other, but I think we need to treat each other with respect.?".
Applying Occam?s Razor in this situation, I clearly conclude that this reporter cut off part of the Craddock answer to her question and quoted it inaccurately to try to imply that Craddock believes Christians (and himself as one) hate gays and vice versa. The truth is plainly seen in the full quote that Craddock believes some people have this view, but that he himself actually believes the opposite in that all people should be ?treated with respect?.
If you don?t want to believe me on this btw, I suggest you contact Craddock himself. He is easily reached via his campaign web-site.
Asked how he thought his religious values would affect his work as a delegate, Craddock said, ?I am a Christian.?
?Christians and gays hate and despise each other,? Craddock said in a follow-up phone interview. Still, Craddock said, he is not the monster some gay voters may perceive him to be, and that he believes everyone deserves to be treated with respect.
My opinion -- I think it's a thinly disguised, calculated piece of hate campaigning which he thinks will pay off in a fairly conservative district.
Another interesting bit is the paper's assertion that Craddock misrepresented something. "...falsely claiming that Reese was once endorsed by the Washington Blade. When pressed for specifics on the claim, Craddock said that Reese was backed by the Blade 15 years ago. But Lisa Keen, the Blade?s senior editor at the time, said that during her tenure, the Blade did not issue candidate endorsements." It will be interesting to see how that all sorts out, and if Reese will comment.
It also is disturbing that he misrepresents the views of "Christians," who hardly are a homogeneous lot. For example, Zogby, hwo polls Catholics periodically for LeMoyne, says: " On the issue of homosexuality and marriage, the definition of ?marriage? used had a large impact on Catholic approval ratings. When ?marriage? was defined religiously and respondents were asked whether the sacrament of marriage should be made available to same-sex couples, just over 29% agreed. When ?marriage? was defined legally and respondents were asked whether same-sex couples should be allowed to legally marry, 39% agreed. American Catholics showed the highest approval (62%) for civil unions, which provide the same legal rights and protections as marriage without being called ?marriage.? I know these questions do not probe the "hate" issue, but a pollster would have a tought time framing that question because respondents might not answer a question truthfully that had such a loaded term.
Pew Research shows the main opposition to gay rights coming from, you guessed it, evangelical Christians. Main line Protestants and Catholics have a more split view.
Some evangelicals do not consider main line Protestant churches or the Catholic Church to be "Christian."
I also respectfully disagree with the gentleman who said much of the opposition to gays is a political disagreement. When I read the socially conservative websites, I see a lot of vituperation. You may want to check out this website: http://www.hatecrime.org/subpages/hitler/hitler.html
It shows how the Nazis' description of Jews parallels what many U.S. social conservatives say about gays. Scroll down to the bottom of the page and you will see some very frightening quotations.
As to Craddock being anti-gay, this is a common misconception. Social conservatives for the most part have a political disagreement with gays and oppose many of the efforts of gays to create policies normalizing gay behavior. This should not be confused with "hating" gays. They are two different things and I would also venture to say that most social conservatives in fact do not "hate" gays. In fact the opposite is more likely true in that they are absolutely concerned for and care for people who are gay.
Finally, I think everyone including Craddock himself would willingly admit that he is a social conservative. Do you think that Caputo will admit to his liberal leanings????
The Blade is far from a reputable newspaper as far as I'm concerned when it comes to reporting on conservative political candidates. It has a clear conflict of interest based on its main reason for existence. The later quotes in the article, I'll paraphrase, where Craddock expresses that "all people should be respected" and that "he has many gay friends" do not add up with quote about "despising eachother". It seems to me to be a shoddy hit piece that was grappled onto by the liberal press and this blog without bothering to check the facts. The blogger's comment seems to me to flow much more logically with the overall tone of Craddock in the interview. For this reason I tend to believe it. However, if this is proven to be wrong, I will be more than willing to apologize for my statements. Do you think the people at the Blade or at this blog will be similarly willing?
After all it wouldn't be the first time the press has twisted things to attack a conservative ( can you say "60 Minutes"?).