As most of you around here know, just a few days ago, Chris Craddock -- Republican House of Delegates in the 67th district -- was quoted by the Washington Blade as saying, ?Christians and gays hate and despise each other.? Since then, the debate has raged, both here and on "Not Larry Sabato's" blog: Did Craddock REALLY say these words? If so, did he mean what they SEEM to say? Could they have been taken completely out of context? Well, to all this, I have just two word's, two simple words in the English language: "Occam's Razor." Not familiar with the concept? Here's how Wikipedia defines it:
A principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham. In its simplest form, Occam's Razor states that one should make no more assumptions than needed. Put into everyday language, it says "The simplest explanation is the best."When multiple explanations are available for a phenomenon, the simplest version is preferred. For example, a charred tree on the ground could be caused by a landing alien ship or a lightning strike. According to Occam's Razor, the lightning strike is the preferred explanation as it requires the fewest assumptions.
OK, so what's the "Occam's Razor" explanation here? Given that Craddock is a far-right-wing, socially conservative Republican with ties to people -- like Rev. Pat Robertson -- who certainly have no love lost for gay people, "Occam's Razor" would say that Craddock obviously meant exactly what he said. However, Occam's Razor could also, just as plausibly, say that the Blade simply had an agenda to "get" Craddock. Which is it? Damn that Occam, why'd he make it so hard to be simple? :) Still, Craddock's other comments about gays (e.g., even his gay "friends" are "immoral") and positions over the years on gay issues tend towards the Occam's Razor explanation that Craddock said the words ("Christians and gays hate and despise each 0ther") and meant what he said.
The bottom line at his point is that, despite Occam and his famous Razor, uncertainty remains in this case, and that's unfortunate. How to clear it up? For starters, it would be great if the Blade had a tape of the conversation, or at least a full transcript, that it could release to the public. Also, are there any credible, unbiased witnesses to the conversation? Inquiring minds definitely want to know.
"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.