Gay man sues publishers over Bible verses

[pepperbear]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-07-09-gay-bible_N.htm

A gay man is suing two heavyweight Christian publishers, claiming their versions of the Bible that refer to homosexuality as a sin violate his constitutional rights and have caused him emotional pain and mental instability.

*snip*

Fowler, 39, alleges Zondervan's Bibles referring to homosexuality as a sin have made him an outcast from his family and contributed to physical discomfort and periods of "demoralization, chaos and bewilderment."

The intent of the publisher was to design a religious, sacred document to reflect an individual opinion or a group's conclusion to cause "me or anyone who is a homosexual to endure verbal abuse, discrimination, episodes of hate, and physical violence ... including murder," Fowler wrote.

[davidinalameda]

1. good luck with that suit

moron

[ben_meyers]

2. Well at least he couldn't find a lawyer to take his case

and he is representing himself. You know what they say about a person who represents themselves....

[ChazII]

4. Thanks for the

reminder about fools.

[Smarmie Doofus]

3. I'll buy this:

>>>"The intent of the publisher was to design a religious, sacred document to reflect an individual opinion or a group's conclusion to cause "me or anyone who is a homosexual to endure verbal abuse, discrimination, episodes of hate, and physical violence ... including murder," Fowler wrote.">>>


Zondervan... whoever he or they may be... are doing what religionists have done down thru the ages: enshrined their own prejudices in their sacred texts.

Nothing new about it but it's a an interesting strategy: challenging the process in the court system.

Put me on that jury.

[Zuiderelle]

5. I believe his point is that they added a reference to "homosexual" in their translation of the bible

"Fowler's suit claims Zondervan's text revisions from a 1980s version of the Bible included, and then deleted, a reference to homosexuality in 1 Corinthians without informing the public of the changes."

I don't think we're getting the whole picture here.

How about if they added a reference to how women or people of color are not equal to white men, or are evil, that didn't exist before?

[and-justice-for-all]

10. That sounds correct...

"Homosexual" is not in any babble. Their own interpretation is that it 'refers' to, but it does not anywhere in the babbles SAY 'Homosexuality is a sin'.

Even if it did, I really do not give a fuck.

[darthmix]

6. Constitutionally idiotic; tactically disasterous.

There's no legal merit to this, and it plays perfectly into the hands of our opponents, who will use it to claim they're being attacked. It's a dream story for them. For us, it's exactly the wrong way to go about this fight.

[Zuiderelle]

7. It's not "us"... it's one person.

He's fighting his fight his own way. I have no problem with it.

[baby_mouse]

8. And who knows? Others might try something similar with less famous publications

... and get somewhere. I think that would be good.

[seaj11]

9. unbelievable

I guess he's trying to call attention to how ridiculous it is that homosexuality is a "sin" according to an ancient text, but he'd also validating those beliefs. Besides, why blame the publishers just because his family is bigoted? What a waste of people's time.