From Raw Story:
In a Friday appearance on the Family Research Council’s Washington Watch radio show, show host Craig James claimed to not have an opinion on the topic of whether or not LGBT people who file discrimination suits should get the death penalty.
Right Wing Watch reported on Monday that James said, “I don’t know about the executions” when a caller suggested that litigious gays be put to death.
He then went on to say that Christians need to be “bold and firm” in their efforts to prevent LGBT people from realizing their full rights as Americans.
Okay. Surprisingly, my first step here is to kind of defend Craig James on one point. While we would have all liked a more forceful rejection of the “execution solution,’ his use of “I don’t know about the executions” was clearly an example of the technique hosts use when they want to skip past a callers more extreme views without offending them. So I’m not joining Raw Story in suggesting that Craig James is actually undecided on the issue of executions.
But by skipping over the more extreme viewpoint to get to the point of agreement, Craig James, and other hosts who employee this tactic, are silently condoning and endorsing these extreme beliefs in their attempts to not offend the radicals and keep them listening and donating. Craig James has some pretty outdated views on homosexuality and equality, that is unquestionable. If you got him alone and completely off the record perhaps he would advocate the execution of homosexuals. Who knows? Publicly at least he is not that extreme in his views. But this is a textbook example of how the so called moderates provide cover for the radical fringe, something that seems to be beyond the comprehension of a large group of people.
This is not just an issue when it comes to gay rights either. When religious moderates attempt to move faith based beliefs into a special, “untouchable” category, out of bounds and off limits to rational discourse and probing questioning, they shield the fundamentalists and beliefs they may personally find abhorrent at the same time. The majority of anti-abortion protesters may not support the killing of the doctors and other employees of abortion clinics, but their rhetorical flourishes comparing abortion to the Holocaust and/or first degree murder serves to logically justify the killing of providers. Just as when Craig James skips past the execution part with a quick wave of the hand he reinforces to the caller that even if he, the host, wouldn’t go quite that far, execution is still a rational option on the table.
The proper response to someone who feels execution is a justifiable sentence for homosexuals who attempt to litigate for their rights is to point and shame. No matter what your position is on the issue of rights for homosexuals, our culture has moved past stoning people for “crimes against morality.” What should Craig James have said? How about “Whoa. Hold on there. While I agree that we need to fight back against this in the courts, remember that one of the Ten Commandments is ‘Thou Shall Not Kill.’ I know that you are frustrated, I am as well. It seems like the court system keeps handing us defeat after defeat. But never forget that we are Christians. While we may hate the sin of homosexuality, and strive to fight against the corruption of our culture led by Satan, we have to remember that Jesus forgives all the sinners who repent. Our job is to try to make the gay mafia see the truth and the way, to experience the total love of our savior and turn to him and ask for forgiveness. Remember Philip, God has a plan. If we step in and take the power of life and death for ourselves, and start passing judgement ourselves, perhaps we would kill the future Paul of the homosexual movement. I know it is hard to watch the way our culture is rotting away, but when it gets unbearable remember this: Eternity is ours. This life is but a blip on the timeline of existence, and if they stay in their sin, they will get what is coming to them when they step before the almighty judge.”
How was that? I tried to keep enough hate involved to make it realistic. Of course it will never happen, because talk radio hosts know who listens; the fringe. They can’t afford to alienate the radicals who make up their audience, so instead of something like my above reaction, we get “Well, I don’t know about punishing women who engage in premarital sex by ripping their clitoris out with red hot pincers, but I agree that we have to strongly fight against the new sexual permissiveness.”
To finish out the story, here is what our friendly caller said:
“I want to say something very horrific, a solution, and I think it’s the right solution,” said Phillip. “We pray for the homosexuals, we’ve prayed for our enemies but at the same time when they try to force us to go against God, I think that’s where they cross the line and we should pass laws to execute them when they have judges to go against our businesses.”
To which I feel any sane person has to put their foot down and say “whoa.” Instead, here is what James said in response:
“Thank you Phillip,” said James on the air. “You know what, that part there, I don’t know about the executing, but I do know that we have to be bold and firm and much stronger.”
Most people only know what the media tells them, which means the vast majority of American’s have no idea the kind of powder keg this nation has become. There are some on the right who are playing a very dangerous game with the extremist fringe. You can’t keep telling a group that they are being oppressed, that the government is coming to take their guns away, that homosexuals are taking away their rights, that blacks are a dangerous thug race, that immigrants are taking their tax dollars and jobs, that all Muslims are terrorists, and that Christians are being persecuted for their faith and then act surprised when that group strikes back.