Why the press distorts Pope Francis' statements

This writer, Jim Yardley, is incorrect in his statement:

"The interview is the first time Francis has explained the reasoning behind both his actions and omissions. He also expanded on the comments he made about homosexuality in July, on an airplane returning to Rome from Rio de Janeiro, where he had celebrated World Youth Day. In a remark then that produced headlines worldwide, the new pope said, “Who am I to judge?” At the time, some questioned whether he was referring only to gays in the priesthood, but in this interview he made clear that he had been speaking of gay men and lesbians in general."

In his article about Pope Francis' interview.  Jim Yardley tries to say that Pope Francis'

How differently people hear Pope Francis' statements

I was amazed to hear on WLNS this morning that they thought from the various people that are Catholic that they interviewed, that Pope Francis' statements on social issues including the topic of homosexuality are interpreted in such different ways.  So many people just can't seem to understand and accept what he is saying, because he is being so gracious in what he is saying.  Same-sex sexual attractions are not a sin and all intimate same-sex sexual behavior is a sin.  And that we should love all people and not focus just on their sexuality. 

AP article on Red Cross accepting blood

I have asked about this situation when I give blood at the Red Cross.  I especially appreciated the part of the AP article that talked about how inviting friends to come with you to give blood might not be appropriate in terms of the questions they are asked about their past sexual behavior.  I was surprised by this statement from the FDA:

"According to the FDA, men who have had sex with other men represent about 2 percent of the U.S. population, yet accounted for at least 61 percent of all new HIV infections in the U.S. in 2010."

How does this statement compare to the general public myth of 10% of the population being gay?

John Shore's odd blog post, from my perspective

This was an odd post, from my perspective, that John Shore made to his blog site, when you consider that he has blocked my further comments there, as Wayne has done with my comment to his site about the NALT project.  As I said before, I have no confidence that if I made a video and submitted it that it would be included. 

I still get the notifications, "JohnShore.com <donotreply@wordpress.com>" for new posts to the site. 

They had time to read my comments to decide to block them...  Is this really about not having time to respond?  And of course, John or anyone else associated with this project has yet to define what the term, LBGT-affirming Christian, means.  

Excellent interview article on George Silberschatz

I found this to be an excellent interview article, paralleling my own observations in so many ways. 

George Silberschatz on Psychotherapy Research and Its Discontents by David Bullard

Clinician and researcher George Silberschatz, PhD, discusses both the benefits and limitations of psychotherapy research, as well as its misuse by therapists marketing their services.

Wayne's video of support for NALT project

I posted this to the video Wayne made for the NALT project: 

I watched John and Catherine Shore’s video that they made on Sept. 9th for the NALT project. 

For those who are interested, I worked through each point in the video at my Blogger site entitled Our Culture and Society.  The title of my post there is:/ethnologystudy.blogspot.com/2013/09/reviewing-john-and-catherine-shores.html 

Reviewing John and Catherine Shore's video for NALT project

My title of this post:

This is one of the poorest explanations of the pro-gay Christian positions that I have ever heard.

Working through the video by John Shore and his wife, Catherine.  It is 12:51 minutes long.  The title is, “My wife and I on why “God condemns homosexuality” is irrational, unbiblical, unfair, and un-Christian.

But first, John hasn’t yet stated what type of intimate sexual behavior is consistent with Scripture, from his perspective as a Christian and thus where that behavior crosses the line into being sinful in his opinion.  He seems to focus on the far ends of the spectrum.  Does he agree that all sex anytime, as Evan Hurst has said, saying sexytime, whatever that actually meant, is biblical?  And is John comfortable saying that he is more than a cultural Christian as Evan Hurst says that Evan is and as Evan says that Dan Savage says that Dan is?

Working through the video. 

·         Being gay, lesbian, bisexual, transsexual, transgendered.  However is that about behavior or identity, orientation or attractions? 

I'll let you make your own decisions about...

I'll let you make your own decisions about this one commenter:

6 Comments

1. 

   Mike Jones

   Sep 6, 2013 at 9:49 am

   I didn’t see that the focus of the NALT project was to “distance themselves from others who oppose gay marriage,” as Sarah Pulliam Bailey says here. It seems to have a much wider focus. John Shore and other co-founders of the project do address the topic of gay marriage here: http://notalllikethat.org/about/ where they are explaining the project.
   

Comment to John Shore's article on NALT

I posted this as comment #29 to John Shore’s article entitled “Introducing The Not All Like That (NALT) ChristiansProject” The article was written on September 4, 2013.

Mike Jones September 5, 2013 at 2:22 pm

John, if you had listed “Q” as well, when you said “LGBT-affirming Christians,” I would have at least known that I fit in there, as I am always questioning many things, it seems. The only thing that I’m pretty sure that I am not is ever-straight, other than I have only dated women. What category do you place someone like myself in who is a Christian man who is single, who experiences primarily sexual attractions toward men, who is not ex-gay, not gay, only bisexual way over on the homosexual attractions section of the Kinsey Scale, who isn’t gay-affirming himself and who is not sexually active with anyone, but who has non-sexual attractions mostly toward men? And who accepts and respects people who are gay, ex-gay, anti-gay, bisexual, straight, not yet Christian, or never to be a Christian.
 

Continuing... Sept. 8th:
The commenter, Lymis, had welcomed me with the label of bisexual. 

Comments dialogue at the LA Times article

Dialogue about the LA Times article

I think that it will be informative for people, who are interested, to read through the comments dialogue for the LA Times article on California SB 1172. 

Well, the dialogue continues between me and one commenter, as of Thursday evening, Sept. 5th.  [it continues as of Saturday evening] One thing that I suggest that you watch for is what commenters say about the reasons they think I say something, and see if you think this is a reflection of what they are doing in their comments. 

In Brian Pellot's article on 9/6/13 for his Blog at the Religion News Service, he interviews Dr. Heiner Bielefeldt, where Dr. Bielefeldt says,