You may have heard how last week USA Christian Ministries called upon all Christians to boycott Starbucks.
“Starbucks hates God!” declares USACM’s press release announcing the boycott. “Homosexual laws remove Americans’ Christian freedoms! Starbucks is against our Founding Fathers and God’s liberty!”
And so on.
What you may not know is that USA Christian Ministries consists of exactly one person: pastor Steven Andrew. (Shades of George Michael hospitalized: Christians For a Moral America praying for his death!) Pastor Steven and his “organization” are so obscure that, even though stories of USA Christian Ministries’ boycott of Starbucks went viral, the “group’s” Facebook page still has only 34 members.
It’s almost sad.
Speaking of sad, below is Pastor Steven talking about God and America and values and stuff. As we listen to him, let us take a moment to ponder the deep and almost impenetrable mystery of what exactly it might be about the gay issue that so fixates him.
Additional Reading in Christian Issues...
- From hell to Crazy Town
- They’re here; they’re queer; they’ve plenty to fear: LGBT students form secret club at conservative Christian university [now including updates]
- When evil is serious, it reaches for a Bible and cross
- Guest post: “A Good Week to Hate Christians”
- From gay-hating fundie to righteously angry lesbian. Now what?
![John Shore on The Huffington Post](http://johnshore.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/huffpost.jpg?w=120 "John Shore on The Huffington Post\")
{ 236 comments… read them below or add one }
← Older Comments
John,
I know you’re a funny guy and all (super funny, in fact).
But are you ABSOLUTELY sure this isn’t a parody?
Because, DANG. His cute little expressions, his voice, his flowery language, the props–it just screams parody to me.
Anyone else?
I couldn’t watch the whole video. Even though I took my Adderall today, my attention span is too challenged to spend a whole twelve minutes trying to listen to crap that makes my butt itch.
In all compassion, I hope that “Pastor” Steven comes to know, either in this life or the next, that God’s love truly encompasses all people and that he finds the ability to be a little more focused on his own personal growth and less on what he deems objectionable in others.
How dare he suggest boycotting Starbucks? Corporations are people, you know.
“How dare he suggest boycotting Starbucks? Corporations are people, you know.”
Oh Barnmaven! That was priceless!
I’ll believe a corpoartion is a person when Texas executes one.
Annon.
How do we get so many nut cases in one country?
Too many nut trees?
it’s a big country.
By the way, what sort of computer is uploading these videos from, since both Apple and Microsoft support this legislation as well? Why don’t we hear him calling for a boycott of them? Is he merely in the pocket of some secret organization that’s behind all those Christian coffeshops out there competing against Starbucks? ‘Cause you know he ain’t making money off that book of his, and you know, involving itself with politics as it does, his “ministries” don’t qualify for tax-exempt status as a religious organization.
In fact, “USA Christian Ministries” is designated an unregistered trade mark, explicitly declaring its commercial intent.
And it does seem almost a parody. Could perhaps Starbucks itself be ingeniously behind this, figuring that condemnation from guys like this actually does service to their brand image and, in net, their bottom line?
Of course, I don’t really think any of this is true, but… *something* doesn’t add up. The most likely explanation, of course, is the most obvious: that he’s gay, closeted, repressed, and not thinking very clearly at all.
Hey, Matthew! You’ve been quiet (absent?) for such a long time, I was beginning to wonder if you were still out there and/or ever coming back to John’s blog. Whatever the reason for you recent silence here, it seems that you are back, and firing on all cylinders…. I have been thoroughly enjoying all your posts here
Thanks, vj! (And you too John. I see you. Or I did, and I’m pretty sure why now I don’t, but I don’t really care.)
Yeah, I… stepped out for moment. Thanks for welcoming me back.
I appreciate that you’d think enough of me to take the time to do that. (Not that I think anyone who doesn’t doesn’t notice me or anything; I mean, the comments aren’t *supposed* to be about me or anything. In fact, in general, I prefer they NOT be about me, but I’ll make an exception just this once.)
Yes. Good to hear from you again. Hope you are well.
I hope so too.
I mean, I am.
I mean, I did have a bit of a stomach bug earlier today, but I think I’m good now.
No wait, I mean, TMI.
I mean, thank you, Christy.
I trust you all are well as well, or well as well gets, so long as you don’t draw water from a contaminated well, yes?
If you are so against gay people, I question whether you have come to grips with you being gay…
I think that he is, like most conservatives, against the thing that he is. You can always tell what a conservative is/is going to get in trouble for by what the rage against the most. Anti-gay conservative=gay conservative.
I like that his “source” is his own book. I might write a book filled with all my beliefs so I can finally have a source to cite in arguments. Who cares if they aren’t real facts?
I agree with the SNL skit comment! Some people just seem hellbent on embarrassing themselves by displaying their own ignorance.
Sometimes a little honesty is refreshing! He doesn’t really bother me, but his message does!
But … you just called him hateful, horrid, awful, lost, and laughable. That IS rough.
I agree with Andrea that matching hate with hate is wrong, kind of that old “eye for an eye” attitude. Obviously this man is hateful and horrid, but even our enemies deserve to be treated as we would like to be treated. Disagreement lovingly delivered even when someone is as awful as this is what we are called to do. And I’m sorry but all this “gaydar” stuff is offensive to me. Mocking him for his apparent “gayness” is as wrong as mocking someone who is openly so. Whether he is or not is irrelevant. He is hateful and lost – and laughable – but there is no reason to be cruel ourselves.
1. Are you saying the God of the Bible is *wrong* that an eye for an eye indeed befits the principle of equitable justice?
2. This strikes me a bit like the case of someone whose not ever really been in another’s shoes not really properly being able to understand their problems but driven, out of a sympathy and/or justice-seeking heart for them, to misperceive the real issues somewhat (perhaps actually missing much of the real heart of the matter). Mr. Gordan has identified as gay, yet he seems to have no problem himself asserting that his gaydar was blaring.
3. I really don’t perceive John as coming off hateful here, and I think rather few if any are responding hatefully.
4. What John said. (Is not how you yourself describe him worse than completely morally neutral presumptions regarding his sexuality?)
I don’t think anybody is hating on this guy for being gay. They’re mad/amazed/bewildered/laughing at him for being a HYPOCRIT by hating gays when he is so similar to gay himself.
@Andrea: and here we have the dilemna of those who want to point out hypocrisy, bigotry and other evil. What do we do – slam a fist on the table and tell them they’re damned to hell? Holler them down with epithets? Those are THEIR weapons. We respond in love and kindness, yes, but dammit, there IS a place for anger here. These people are becoming increasingly petty and ridiculous and feel they are winning hearts and minds simply because not many speak out against them, and speak as loudly as they do. Give John a little slack. It may not have been the best title, but I’m certainly sympathetic to the disgust.
I get that he ‘seems gay’ and that this is therefore ironic and hilarious, but is it appropriate to out a person in your blogpost title? I think it isn’t. I think the titles of your posts about this man are at least 30% as nasty as the attitude he conveys in the video.
Say, what brand of calculator allowed you to take *that* ratio (to come up with the 30% proportion)?
Let me know what happens when you divide by zero. (My hypothesis is that it will precipitate the Rapture.)
I admire that John isn’t afraid to fight fire with fire.
Of course, it is true that it only serves to escalate tensions. But from time to time it is healthy for there to be a fire in the forest, a storm out on the plains, to rejuvenate, to renew, to remove the blinding debris of our delusions and revitalize our environs. Sometimes tensions must come to head to be finally dealt with for the betterment of all.
Moreover, I don’t think someone is outing someone simply by implying he or she is gay (which is not like—or at least shouldn’t be, at least among John’s principle audience—injurious of his reputation or anything {except taken together with the implication of hypocrisy; yet no one seems to complain over anyone’s being outed as a hypocrite}) but rather by witnessing to and/or providing other incontrovertible evidence of the fact that he or she is gay, and John makes absolutely no attempt to do so.
And finally, John’s a humorist (not that he isn’t anything more than that); so… lighten up, will ya’
I could not sit through that “America is a Christian nation” meme more than a couple minutes. He’s just trying to shill his book, which is bound to be a third-rate rehash. I hardly know where to begin refuting that false reading of our nation’s history. I didn’t let him get to the anti-gay or boycott Starbucks stuff before I shut him off. Sorry Steven, you are just one more of those who have been duped by thecorporate power structure into doing their mindless bidding of starting wars, hating “the other,” and using Jesus language to justify American exceptionalism. Yes, Jesus died for the sins of America but first we have to repent of the ones we are most guilty of: neglecting the poor, harassing the aliens in our midst, spending more on weapons than the rest of the world put together, denigrating GLBT people, etc., etc.
I think his “deep and impenetrable mystery” has probably been penetrated deeply and often.
better latent than never, I guess.
ROFLMAO!
http://youtu.be/AvtjYne9his
He needs to REPENT for his ignorance!
This man isn’t ordained and he does not work for or within a church.
Donations are to him personally to compensate for his “lucrative” career he left to lead America to Christ through his teachings.
He’s gotten his 15 minutes of fame, let’s keep it at that and no more.
Will continue to LOVE Starbucks!
It is a scream that we all came to the same conclusion. Anyhow, in the end he was just advertising his book and asking for money. Pretty cheap really.
Actually, this is win-win either way! If fundies are desperate for a latte, they might not let the idea of Adam and Steve stand in the way of their fix. But if they do boycott Starbucks en masse, maybe they’ll start patronizing local coffee shops (who are probably pro-gay marriage too, ssshhh). In the meantime, if you just want a fundie-free environment, you can go to Starbucks! You know, kind of like after the Rapture, just not as awesome.
Interesting thought… that the purpose behind the Rapture might not be so much to save the people of God from a corrupt world, as to save the world from a corrupt people of God.
Kathleen, you are hilarious!
I’m with you all, but I wonder if this isn’t counter productive, now that I’ve thought about it a little longer.
This fellow will go back to his church fans and say, “look at how I’m being bullied, they just call me gay!”
Truth is, we can’t ever know FOR SURE. So maybe we should go back to being more direct and attack his arguments on the merits, and leave the poor man to define himself with the same amount of truth or delusion accorded to the rest of us.
I agree 100%.
I’m guessing people are assuming due to his voice? I don’t judge people on their voices – and his voice struck me as less “camp gay” and more “man talking down to the audience in a soft, soft voice that people typically reserve for telling stories to young children.” In other words, he came across to me as less “gay” and more “Guy trying to be the worst PBS children’s edutainment show host ever.”
Then, I didn’t bother to watch the entire video. I also found out that my local Starbucks does, indeed, carry white hot chocolate. The latter discovery has made me very happy.
But look also at how he’s dressed, and the way he gestures, and the way he’s coordinated his props for this shoot. Now, don’t get me wrong, the gay guy I know best doesn’t talk or move like this guy at all, but a disproportional number of them, relative to straight guys, do seem to talk and act more like this guy does. And then, of course, there’s a certain issue that seems inexplicably and disproportionately important to him, even for a right-wing “Christian” nationalist (calling him “Christian”, in quotes, I will allow myself here, as he denies Barack Obama and Mitt Romney said label, whilst, in my—dare I say, the orthodox—understanding, Christianity and nationalism are not exactly right bedfellows).
I don’t accord anyone any self-delusion that becomes evident to me. (Probably explains why I’ve never really been a very popular person.) I hold delusion to be the root of—if not all—far more than its fair share of evil. I would go so far as to say that delusion–the ultimate perversion of truth, which I hold to be divine in nature—is in essence the evil one himself.
I say this, of course, in regards to the proper reaction to Mr. Andrews (I don’t reckon him worthy of the title of Pastor) here. It is of course a matter wholly apart from the matter of our debating the matter. As you rightly point out, we really don’t know for certain, in which case someone’s difference in judgment and opinion is not at all to be misconstrued as indicative of any delusion. But if Mr. Andrews knows the truth somewhere deep within, and represses it through delusion—which delusion, moreover, he goes on to infect others with, or at least to encourage others in maintaining—then he is a sinner of the highest caliber—trust me, it takes one to know one. Moreover, he is living in sin. While I am among the worst of sinners (I hope it isn’t just my sinful pride speaking here), I do try (what I am under the delusion is) my best to acknowledge my sins, continually to seek forgiveness (to the extent that I can overcome my pride, or might that really be my fear?), and gradually to amend my ways. Mr. Andrews, on the other hand, *if* this is the case—and it is meet to emphasize again that I do not know with any certainty—would seem refusing to confess it, but rather in his confessions to admonish himself for what, if only he might with a pure, loving heart and clean conscience do, really would be no sins at all.
Also, allow me to point to Gordon’s much more excellent remarks below, February 8, 2012 at 11:24 am.
← Older Comments