Dan Savage Reminds Ben Carson: Christianity Is A ‘Choice,’ But Being Gay Is Not

[Purveyor]

David Edwards
08 Mar 2015 at 16:18 ET

Sex columnist Dan Savage explained over the weekend that he challenged possible Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson to give him oral sex so he could make it clear “how low and disgusting” his comments about gay people were.

In a syndicated column published last week, Savage had fired back at Carson’s assertion that being LGBT was a “choice” because people “come out gay” after going to prison.

“If being gay is a choice, prove it,” he wrote. “Choose it. Choose to be gay yourself. Show America how that’s done, Ben, show us how a man can choose to be gay. Suck my dick. Name the time and the place and I’ll bring my dick and a camera crew and you can suck me off and win the argument.”

Speaking to CNN’s Brian Stelter on Sunday, Savage said that politicians could no longer duck the issue of LGBT rights.

“Whenever someone says that being gay or lesbian is a choice, I always look at them and say, ‘Prove it. Choose it,’” he remarked. “It’s not a choice, and they know it’s not a choice. And that’s really not the argument that they’re making.”

more...

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/dan-savage-reminds-ben-carson-christianity-is-a-choice-but-being-gay-is-not/

[rurallib]

1. I'd love to see Savage debate whatever POS the tea party runs for prez

[whatthehey]

2. I understand the rhetoric, but it's false

At least in one direction.

I could no more choose to believe in the divinity of a possibly apocryphal 1st century Judaean itinerant preacher whose miracles are mentioned only in cult hagiographies than I could choose to find Rush Limbaugh sexually appealing. Given the right hypothetical incentives, aka guns to the head. I coud fake either obviously.

Could a Christian choose not to believe? I doubt it. I'm not talking about deconversion; that's a daily occurrence when the lack of positive evidence for faith (utter) finally collapses it into in the sea of logical inconsistencies and more credible alternatives. But that's not an act of will. In fact quite the opposite it's almost a wrenching away from willful cognitive dissonance clinging on to the last wisp of hope that it's really true. In all honesty the opposite is theoretically possible. Given a properly controlled and repeatable Elijah-like test I am rational enough to accept a demonstration that a god exists and can be at least identified if not, QED, comprehended. I would then become a believer; not by choice or act of will but by overwhelming evidence that wipes away reluctance.

[Coventina]

3. I love Dan Savage, but his argument doesn't work with religious homophobes.

They believe that homosexuality is a "choice" in the sense that it is a choice to follow a sinful prompting by Satan or one of his minions.

Dr. Carson only has to say that he is under the spiritual protection of his god, and therefore cannot "choose" to be gay.

The argument Dan Savage is following only works for secular homophobes, sadly.

[Orsino]

4. Religion is not "a" choice, either.

One can certainly begin calling oneself by a religious label as a result of some epiphany, realmor feigned, but real faith is a way of life that doesn't come from any one choice. Now, if all of the so-called faithful could admit that sexual orientation is at least as complicated, perhaps we'd never again see it trivialized as "a choice."

[haele]

7. I don't know about that. I've observed the louder the exibition of religieous fervor -

The more religion seems to be a choice to that person, either as some sort of safety net/blanket to avoid facing internal short-comings or working on the real problems, a way to avoid taking responsibility because "Gawd Forgives them/Gawd intended for that to happen", or as some opportunity to be someone of consequence - as if they were standing up there with all the other righteous Heroes of Gawd, and they just know that Gawd thinks the way they do. Loud, Proud, out there "Religion (tm)" is a way for them to make the world much smaller and much more manageable for most people.

There are people out there who wonder at the marvels of the Universe, of "creation" as it work. There are people out there who understand that they are part of the greater "Creation", no matter how it was created. There are people who are spiritual, philosophical, however one would put it and believe in some form of Creator(s) or of natural orders and possibilities beyond that which can currently be experience.

However, most of those aren't standing there at public megaphones pointing fingers and treating every contradiction to their comfortable theology as if it were a nail and they had the hammer given to them from some sort of Meglo-maniac supernatural construct.

The greatest blasphemy of all is to think that one knows the mind of a Being that created Everything - and needs to protect that being as if it were some sort crotchety grandparent that just happened to have one on the short list on his/her will.
And that is a choice.

Haele

[Orsino]

9. What you're describing is much more than a single choice.

Rather, a way of life.

[Bluenorthwest]

10. And yet religious people constantly ask others to make a single choice and convert.

It is a way of life that can be chosen, rejected, traded in for a new model whenever the person so desires. It's a religious lifestyle. Until it isn't.

[Omaha Steve]

5. Here is the video

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017250423

[Wella]

6. Said Mrs. DeBlasio?

?

[bullwinkle428]

11. The "B" in LGBT refers to bisexual.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

8. Religion is only a choice if you're doing it wrong.

It should be a conclusion, based on the evidence. If you're choosing what to believe, rather than working it out, you're doing something wrong.