Over the last week two different posts have provoked a lot of response. I can kind of understand one but the other has left me a little confused. The first one has to deal with Nickelodeon's decision to air a television show that deals with the issue of children of homosexual parents. Within a day over 30 people had e-mailed to criticize the post and many were very angry. I deleted seven or eight posts from my commenting feature because of the language. I made an effort to e-mail back anyone who wanted to dialogue and have had some excellent exchanges and just ignored some that crossed the line. In some people's minds, that post even made me unfit to parent. You can read what I wrote here.

I have several problems with the responses I got back. All Nickelodeon professed to be trying to do was create a discussion on the topic through a child's eyes. Let me explain it this way. My own dad walked out the day before my little brother was born in 1982. He was in an adulterous relationship. Being in a single parent family and going to evangelical churches who spoke strongly against all parties in a divorce was really hard. I heard sermons where my single mom's (like my Mom) were called horrible things and I walked out feeling less then worthy too. I still remember when a Sunday School teacher was talking about children with no father. One of the kids asked if myself and another kid were "bastards" (his dad left his family too). After thinking about it for a while, the rather dense teacher said, "yes". It was my Dad that committed adultery and broke his wedding vows, not me yet the church could be so totally cruel and awful to kids who parents had gone through a divorce. (that being said, from the time I was in high school on I was blessed with some amazing pastoral role models) One of the coolest things about being at Lakeview is that is a church that opens its arms to those who are going through the same thing that we as a family went through. It warms my heart to see it on a consistent basis.

It seems to me that elements in the North American church are at it again. Nickelodeon wants to look at what it means to be a child of homosexual parents. It isn't promoting homosexuality, they have invited and have taped people saying it is wrong from a Christian viewpoint. What I want to know is why is the church so afraid of this discussion. It seems to be that some elements of conservative Christianity is responsible for creating the problem in the first place. In our "hating the sin", we forget that we have deeply wounded and prejudiced against the children who have done nothing wrong. What does 100,000 phone calls and letters from the religious right say to the children and families of those who are gay? I haven't seen the Nickelodeon special but I support it. It may suck but at least someone has the courage to talk about it in an open matter. Good for them.

The other posting that has gotten some response is the quote I posted by Kierkegaard. It seemed to provoke a response in a way I never intended. I assumed that my readers would assume that Kierkegaard was writing about a western context and not global Christianity. I was wrong. A lot of people got angry and e-mail and posted on blogs that they were quite disapointed in the quote and in my blog (what else is new). Before you burn my site in effigy, let me explain.

The quote was posted as a thought from a fairly respected thinker. I got the quote and it gave me the opportunity to think about it and I thought it has some value. I posted it on my site as what I thought it was, a quote to ponder. It never was meant to be a reflection of global Christianity or a mini-commentary. I know it offers a very small picture but it was of that picture Kierkegaard was talking about (yes I do read his works).

For those of you have read my site on a regular basis, you will know I post a fair amount without a lot of context. It is just a thought or an idea and one of the things that Blogger does so well is it lowers the bar to the point where you can do that. Those thoughts and quotes often end up in my sermons and article but more often then not are things that impacted me at that moment. Often times I don't provide a lot of context because sometimes the thought itself doesn't come with a lot of context either. (like the SK quote) I also assume that for the most part, I have a fairly intelligent readership and you can provide the context.

What I am really trying to say, if I offended you, I am sorry and I would ask that you show me some grace sometimes too.

Jordon