Christians Won't Be Punished as Long as They Do What We Say, Rolling Stone Reporter Responds
Conservative websites were wrong to claim that an LGBT mega-donor wants to punish Christians; Christians have nothing to worry about, as long as they support an LGBT agenda, reporter Andy Kroll concluded.
Kroll's response to conservative reactions to his profile of Tim Gill is presented as a correction but in reality confirms the concerns of conservatives.
In Kroll's June 23 profile for Rolling Stone, tech billionaire Gill says his goal in funding LGBT activism is to "punish the wicked."
On June 30, The Christian Post reported on that quote, noting that, in context, "the wicked" are opponents of gay marriage. Recently, conservative news sites began to notice and reported it, which led to Kroll's supposed corrective. These sites "badly mangle" the quote, Kroll says, because Gill never said that he specifically targets Christians.
"'The wicked' is anyone who stands in the way of progress on equal rights for LGBTQ people: politicians, activists, lawyers, some people of faith, and plenty more with no religious affiliation whatsoever," Kroll explained.
Fair enough. Gill is not targeting Christians, he is targeting opponents of gay marriage (and other LGBT activist agenda items). But what should happen to those Christians who oppose gay marriage?
As evidence that Christians aren't the targets, Kroll provides several examples of Christians who were able to avoid punishment by going along with what LGBT activists want.
"It's worth pointing out that Gill and his foundation actively fund organizations that team up with faith leaders in support of LGBTQ equality," he wrote.
So, as long as Christians "team up" with Gill "in support of LGBTQ equality," they need not worry.
Are conservative Christians supposed to find this reassuring?
While Kroll starts with the claim that conservatives are misreporting the story, he ends up providing more support for their point.
Kroll can legitimately claim, of course, that the targets aren't Christians but LGBT opponents. Yet, the targets have been Christians. I don't know why conservative Muslims, for instance, haven't been targeted; but so far, the targeting appears to be directed at Christians. And we can assume that Gill was speaking of "punish" as electoral defeat. But LGBT activists have actually punished conservative Christians in severe ways, as I've pointed out many times before.
Kroll should be made aware that conservative Christians know there are liberal Christians who support gay marriage. Quite a large number of speeches, discussions, articles, op-eds and books have been produced on the topic, in fact, because it is an issue of great concern.
Kroll used Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal as an example of a "deeply religious" "professed Christian" who vetoed a religious freedom bill opposed by LGBT activists. But Deal's church belongs to the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, a liberal denomination. Should we be shocked that a liberal Christian took a liberal position?
Kroll's attitude seems to be, "if those conservative Christians just become like those liberal Christians, they have nothing to worry about; so what's the problem?"
But the reason conservative Christians aren't liberal Christians is because conservative Christians don't believe what liberal Christians believe.
Conservative Christians aren't going away. I'm sure that Kroll could find examples, if he looked harder, of conservative Christians embracing an LGBT viewpoint, when it becomes beneficial for them to do so (perhaps to avoid "punishment"). But those Christians who hold deeply to the view that the Bible is God-breathed and holds timeless truths regardless of what the prevailing culture might say will not bend, regardless of how "wicked" they are perceived to be or what punishment they must endure.