Quote of the day

"We are shut up in schools and college recitation rooms for ten or fifteen years, and come out at last with a bellyful of words and do not know a thing. "

-Ralph Waldo Emerson




Monday, July 7, 2008

Lies, Lies and more Lies!



From OneNewsNow.com

"Pastor Ken Hutcherson is still pursuing action against the teacher at Mt. Si High School in Snoqualmie, Washington, who interrupted his Martin Luther King Day speech to voice his opposition to Hutcherson's Christian views on marriage and sexuality."

Lie #1
Dr. Potratz did not interrupt the assembly to voice his opinion, he simply booed the blowhard when he was introduced. It was Kit McCormick who asked the question, AFTER his "speech". And for booing the guest, he was reprimanded.

Lie #2
"Teacher George Potratz later compared Hutcherson's support for the biblical condemnation of homosexual behavior with advocacy for slavery."

This is a well established falsehood. What Dr. Potratz said, and I was there is;

"Hutcherson has a right to his views...just as someone who believes in reinstating slavery has a right to theirs."

And went on to say;

"just because someone has the right to these ideas, it does not make them acceptable in a public school"

Dr. Potratz NEVER advocated a return to slavery, that was Hutcherson's own deluded interpretation of the comments.

Lie #3
"She said to me, 'Well, if you were the pastor of a black church, that would have much more impact than being the black pastor over there with a white church, and you're the one that has chosen,' basically, 'to live over there with those people,'" Hutcherson details.

Hutcherson was asked who Jenkins was referring to as "those people?" "White people," he answered.

Now Ms. Jenkins has been libeled in the spirit of Hutch's "Christianity".

Jenkins disputes Hutcherson's account of the conversation. "That's not exactly what I said. What I said was that, from the perspective of the Commission on African American Affairs, when there is an issue that's involving a church congregation and maybe a political work that that church may be doing, that it's a little different kind of role and a little different positioning for us to be able to get involved when the congregation of the church is...a black church or a black denomination," she contends.

UPDATED 7/8/2008 From the PI

"It is not what I said, it is what he heard," Jenkins said.




This seems to be a pattern with Hutch, he has a built in BS translator that makes him hear what he wants to hear, which is basically that he is a victim in all of this.


This blow hard reprobate named Ken Hutcherson has to manufacture events to appease the inner turmoil of his dark and sinister mind.

Looking for the face of evil, look no further. Ken Hutcherson is an evil man!

It's time for legal action to put this buffoon in his place!




Monday, 07 July 2008

Thank you so much for praying about the article in One News Now about the State of Washington's Commission on African American Affairs. It is out and linked below.

Pray that God will use this article. Let's make changes in the State of Washington.

Pastor Hutch





I hear God is going to DIGG this article. Oh yes she is!

79 comments:

Anonymous said...

One News Now is known for spinning incorrect and biased stories. what you are doing now by giving the facts is the correct thing to do.

Anonymous said...

Just in case there's any doubt about the credibility of One News Now as a legitimate news source, check out this PI Big Blog post about their story which identified sprinter Tyson Gay's name as Tyson Homosexual in stories about his record-setting run at the Olympic Trials.

***

In case you missed it ... Homosexual qualified for the Olympics.

Who, you ask? Well, his name is actually Tyson Gay. But an online filter on American Family Association news site OneNewsNow automatically changed his last name to "Homosexual" in the text of an Associated Press story announcing sprinter Gay's achievement.

So the first sentence of the story read like this:

Tyson Homosexual was a blur in blue, sprinting 100 meters faster than anyone ever has.

"We don't object to the word 'gay,'" news director Fred Jackson told the Washington Post's Mary Ann Akers last week, except "when it refers to people who practice a homosexual lifestyle."

Staffers have since fixed the glitch, but not without being berated by several blogs, including goodasyou.org and PageOneQ.

***

I must say that I do find it interesting that this is the "news" source that seems to be preferred by Rev. Hutcherson. They clearly share a common agenda.

Jeff Johnson, Reporter said...

Dear MtSiParents,

If you're going to accuse OneNewsNow - and more specifically me, the author of the article - of lying, maybe you should refrain from the practice yourself.

Regarding your allegation entitled "Lie #1": Booing someone who is speaking or about to speak is interrupting them. And it is voicing your opinion, that you disagree with or dislike whatever the person being booed was doing when you started booing them, or with their very presence, as was the case with Potratz booing Hutcherson. Unless you're going to argue that Potratz was booing Hutcherson to encourage him or to show his support, your characterization of my reporting on this fact as "Lie #1" is, itself, a lie.

Regarding your allegation entitled "Lie #2": You state, "Dr. Potratz NEVER advocated a return to slavery." You are correct, as far as I know, and I NEVER reported that he did. What I accurately reported was that he "compared Hutcherson's support for the biblical condemnation of homosexual behavior with advocacy for slavery." News Flash: The statement, "Hutcherson has a right to his views (opposition to homosexuality)...just as someone who believes in reinstating slavery has a right to theirs," is COMPARING opposition to homosexuality and advocacy for reinstating slavery. Potratz made the comparison as I reported. So, your characterization of my reporting of that fact as "Lie #2" is, again, a lie.

Regarding your allegation entitled "Lie #3": There is no recording of the conversation between Hutcherson and Jenkins (of which I am aware). Hutcherson paraphrased what he claims Jenkins says and she replied, "That's not exactly what I said." (Inflection means a lot in a statement like that.) We accurately reported the dispute. So, again, your characterization of my reporting of this dispute as "Lie #3" is "not exactly" the truth.

Are you getting the point, yet?

Also...

Anonymous #1 said "One News Now is known for spinning incorrect and biased stories." Really? We report news from a biblical perspective and clearly advertise that fact in the "About" section on our site. If you reject the Bible as the infallible Word of God, you're not going to agree with our perspective on stories involving homosexuality. Similarly, if you are politically conservative, you're not going to agree with the perspective from which The New York Times reports political news. All news outlets report from a perspective. The difference is, we admit ours.

Anonymous #2 wrote: "Just in case there's any doubt about the credibility of One News Now as a legitimate news source, check out this PI Big Blog post about their story which identified sprinter Tyson Gay's name as Tyson Homosexual in stories about his record-setting run at the Olympic Trials."

Yes, we set up an automated filter to catch the politically correct word "gay" in reference to people who choose to have sex with others of the same gender, who are more accurately referred to as "homosexuals." And, yes, we forgot to take into account that there are some people whose first or last names are "Gay." The error has been corrected.

The Associated Press uses the word "gay" instead of the word "homosexual" because that's the word homosexual activists prefer. Those activists prefer the word "gay" because it's a very positive word that takes the focus off the fact that the issue under debate is their choice of sex partners.

By that reasoning, the Associated Press should refer to people who oppose abortion as "pro-life" because it is the term that group prefers and it's a positive term that takes the focus off their advocacy for restriction access to abortion.

But the AP is biased in favor of homosexuality and in opposition to restricting abortion. So they use the positive term "gay" to refer to those they support and the negative term "anti-abortion" to refer to those they oppose.

OneNewsNow tried to automatically write the AP's obvious pro-homosexual bias out of their stories as published on our site and the initial way we chose to do that didn't work out so well. Another News Flash: We're human. We made a mistake. The difference between us and the "mainstream" media is, when we became aware of the mistake, we admitted it and corrected it. Try to get that kind of response from a major newspaper or television news network.

I don't want to get into the debate about what teachers Potratz and McCormick should or should not have done at the assembly or afterwards. As a parent, I have my opinions, but they don't belong and don't appear in my reporting on the issue.

But I will challenge anyone who uses the word "lie" to describe my reporting. You may not agree with the biblical perspective from which I report the news. That is your right and I am thankful that we live in a country where we can agree to disagree on that issue. But I ALWAYS endeavor to report the truth as accurately as possible within my human limitations of gathering information and discerning who is and is not being honest with me.

A "lie" is an intentional misrepresentation of the truth. There are no lies in my reporting, unless I quote someone who is lying, and I will not knowingly report even that kind of statement.

I do make mistakes in my reporting and, when they happen and are brought to my attention, I will gladly correct them. That's what journalists do.

But, until you can present evidence that there are factual inaccuracies in this article, I stand by my reporting. I also, respectfully, ask you to apologize for characterizing my work as "lies."

jeff.johnson(at)onenewsnow.com

MtSiParents said...

If you're going to accuse OneNewsNow - and more specifically me, the author of the article - of lying, maybe you should refrain from the practice yourself.

No one is accusing YOU of lying, you are merely printing Hutchersons LIES!

Any good reporter would actually fact check their sources before making such allegations.

All of the facts are readily available to anyone who wants to be informed.

Tell me Mr. Reporter man, did you contact Dr. Potratz for his side of the story?

Have you read through the archives of the local media covering this story for the past six months?

Of course not! You just take the word of a blow hard bigot like Hutch as the truth!

Do some research and pretend you are a journalist!

-MSP

MtSiParents said...

BTW

This isn't the first time you have printed falsehoods because you failed to research. Here is just one example;

As previously reported, one of the teachers who booed Hutcherson sponsors the school's Gay Straight Alliance -- and also happens to teach his daughter's advanced placement British literature class. According to the pastor, his daughter has continued to suffer emotional stress in that classroom since the school assembly. But his requests to have the teacher removed from the class have been denied, forcing him to enroll his daughter, who is a senior, in an online class with the University of Washington.

This is NOT true.

Dr. Potratz booed the blow hard, NOT Kit McCormick who is the GSA advisor in question.

FACT CHECK, it's not hard!

-MSP

JC said...

Jeff,

#1) Your story says Potratz interrupted Hutcherson's Speech. Since all contemporaneous accounts of events have the booing occuring while Hutcherson was introduced, this is false. Hutcherson's speech had not started when he was being introduced, hence said speech was not interrupted. Also, did you speak to Potratz? If not, how did you determine that his booing was in objection to Hutcherson's views on marriage and sexuality, and not in objection to his advocacy for discrimination against gays?

#2)Potratz's comments at the school board meeting made an analogy between offensiveness of Hutcherson's extremist (and constantly fliting with violent) anti-gay bigotry to equality minded people like him and the offensiveness of advocating a return of slavery to Hutcherson. He was not comparing anti-gay discrimination (which Hutcherson advocates) with slavery.

As for you ONN apologetics, you folks are nothing like the New York Times, they make an effort to report the truth, you folks "report" pleasing spin for your fundamentalist audience.

As for your rewriting of AP stories to conform to your version of Political Correctness, just where was your published correction on the Tyson Gay debacle? I must have missed it, from what I saw you merely corrected the story and pretended that the error never happened. Unlike a real news source (e.g. the NYT, which publishes a correction when they make a mistake.)

So maybe you didn't intentionally misrepresent the facts in your story, but for someone, who labels himself a reporter, you showed an appalling disregard for the accuracy of your reporting. Where is your interview with Potratz to get his side of the story? Did you even bother to speak to him? Or did you just accept Hutcherson's version of events because you knew it would be pleasing to your readers (and undoubtably your bosses as well)?

Another thing journalists do is investigate, rather than just regurgitate one sides talking points. Your story reads like a Ken Hutcherson press release from a conservative activist(a fairly common thing on ONN).

Your work may not be intentional lies, but it is dishonest and disingenuous, just like your defense of it here.

Anonymous said...

dear jeff,

A lot of times, One News Now articles are just one-person interviews with someone who takes their point of view.

If you doubt me, take a look at their site now. There are several Barack Obama articles present but none of them have any comments from the Obama campaign.

Being Christian is no excuse for bad journalism.

BlackTsunami said...

and let's not forget when one news now (when it was agape press) used to freely cite paul cameron as a pro-family expert without filling its readers in on his history of distortion, censures and organizational rebukes (like from the APA for example)

MtSiParents said...

Regarding your allegation entitled "Lie #3": There is no recording of the conversation between Hutcherson and Jenkins (of which I am aware). Hutcherson paraphrased what he claims Jenkins says and she replied, "That's not exactly what I said." (Inflection means a lot in a statement like that.) We accurately reported the dispute. So, again, your characterization of my reporting of this dispute as "Lie #3" is "not exactly" the truth.

So what you're saying is that you report hearsay!

Well isn't that special.

Here is a story for you. Although I did not record the actual conversation...

God appeared to me last night in the physical form of a talking cricket. She told me that Jesus was coming back to Earth this weekend!

PRINT IT! IT MUST BE TRUE!

Anonymous said...

MSP - no you report hearsay - what Jeff said was that Ms. Jenkins said "not exactly" - as in - HE TALKED TO HER!!!!!

MtSiParents said...

Anonymous said...
MSP - no you report hearsay - what Jeff said was that Ms. Jenkins said "not exactly" - as in - HE TALKED TO HER!!!!!


First of all I'm NOT a reporter.

Second, here is what a REAL media outlet printed when they RESEARCHED the issue;

"It is not what I said, it is what he heard," Jenkins said.

That seems pretty clear cut to me!

Anonymous said...

MSP - just proves Jeff's point in his article, one that he freely admits to, that his point of view is different than what you'll get from the NYT, ONN takes on the news from a Christian perspective, whereas the NYT takes one from a liberal perspective. However, at least ONN will admit it! You simply choose which outlet to believe - does not make one a LIAR and the other a truth teller, that is your own bias at work, and your OWN decision as to who you are going to believe.

As you've been admonished before, just be intellectually honest about your bias and perspective!

MtSiParents said...

Anonymous

So you are saying that Hutch is not a liar?

I was there. Hutch IS a liar!

ONN is nothing more than a propaganda machine for the simple minded readers they cater to.

Anonymous said...

MSP - please follow - you referenced that Jeff Johnson in his article was LYING. My response to you was that he was not LYING rather that you decided what news source to rely upon. You specifically mentioned Ms. Jenkins and that was the comment I disputed.

Further, don't even try to cloak yourself with the ridiculous notion that "you're not a reporter". Excuse me? No, you're worse because you represent yourself as a "Mount Si Parent" yet you remain anonymous and most likely are NOT a parent, but part of the administration of Mount Si. Part of the English department? Perhaps the librarian? Hmmmm....talk about a bias in your reportage.

Finally, I was there, too, and Hutch is NOT a liar. Again, you've been reminded politely time and time again to stop being a hypocrite - you say this is a no hate zone, yet continually violate your own standard.

MtSiParents said...

Anonymous

Since you either unable or unwilling to read, here is a clear statement I made up above...

No one is accusing YOU of lying, you are merely printing Hutchersons LIES!

I'm not saying Jeff is lying, he is just a poor journalist.

Hutch is the LIAR.

Is that clear?

Anonymous said...

oh i get it. a "Christian" news services is one-sided and biased, but admits their faults, so it's okay.

whatever happened to integrity? I thought if you were Christian, you wouldn't be biased at all.

JC said...

Who are you, anonymous, to be berating MSP for not using their real name? You lack the integrity to so much a register a screen name, so that you can be tied to what you say here.

Why are you so frustrated by MSP's pseudonymity (not anonymity)? Does it frustrate your desire to exact retribution (either professional or personal) for MSP's temerity to hold, express and defend positions different than your own?

As for your charges of hypocrisy, if the weren't comming from an anonymous poster, hurling personal insults at a named poster, they might be more than the laughable sham they currenly are.

Anonymous said...

MSP & JC & Anonymous –

One – I will not identify who I am unless and until MSP “comes out” from the shadows and owns up to who he/she/it is. I am simply one responding to the mischaracterizations and misrepresentations made by an individual who is bold enough to create a blog, but coward enough not to identify who he/she/it is and put forth for all to see what bias he/she/it brings to the table. I think MSP is duty and integrity bound to reveal who he/she/it is.

Second – where in the Bible (the guide for a Christian’s life) does it say “Thou shalt not be biased”??? I don’t seem to see that anywhere and since you obviously can’t accept that two people can see the same situation differently (which I alluded to in an earlier post), let me remind you of the MOST biased of all Christians, Jesus Christ Himself, when in the Gospel of John, Chapter 14, verse 6 He states: “I am the way and the truth and the life. NO ONE comes to the Father except through me.” But, I suppose that’s one of the reasons they killed Him, He was telling the folks something they didn’t want to hear! And since that probably won’t satisfy you, give me a BREAK when a single news outlet out there actually puts something into a Christian perspective in its reporting you absolutely FREAK OUT – whereas the rest of us Christians and conservatives have to endure the biases of the likes of the New York Times, The Seattle Post Intelligencer, every major network’s nightly news programming, etc, etc, etc….you throw stones at One News Now’s reportage of the current situation (which by the way, Jeff Johnson spoke to both Ms. Jenkins and Mr. Hutcherson), yet you cite the PI for truth and veracity of their reportage, yet, excuse me, when did Ms. Guzman actually speak to Hutcherson? Now, since you claim that ONN is not true journalism, then you must be absolutely OUTRAGED when one of your golden stars, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, doesn’t follow true journalism. I look forward to your post ridiculing Ms. Guzman for her shoddy journalism skills – MSP – this is a true teachable moment where you can point out that reporting like Ms. Guzman did is poor journalism and that the goal of all true journalists is to be free of bias in their reportage.

Third – it’s becoming a bore to repeat myself, but as I said, since you were there and have one recollection of what was said and since I was there and have a different recollection of what was said and due to the fact that there is no recording of the live testimony that was given at the SVSD Board Meeting, then it is just that, a different recollection. It does not make me (or Hutcherson) a liar, nor does it you – it simply means that our recollection of the events that occurred that evening are different. You can have Potratz on here all you want to explain away his disgusting, racist analogy, but it does not diminish the fact that it was irresponsible and worthy of serious discipline. Further, I do not understand how maliciously calling someone a Liar, a wind bag and all of your other choice names somehow falls in line with your description of this site as a “hate free zone”. I find that to be not only inconsistent, but in fact, hypocritical.

ps – just for JC – “exacting retribution” is not my way; perhaps it is yours, but I believe in an America where we have intended First Amendment protections, political expressions and the free exchange of ideas, that truly makes this the best country to live in throughout history. Just because someone disagrees with me does not mean I want to cause them “harm”. What about you? Is it okay to disagree with your view of the world or is the First Amendment limited to the way that YOU see things?

BlackTsunami said...

"where in the Bible (the guide for a Christian’s life) does it say “Thou shalt not be biased”???"

Did I hear that correctly? When one is biased, one is willing to replace the truth with his or her own personal beliefs. And didn't Jesus say that "I am the way, the truth, and the light."

I find it hypocritical that you cite that verse in the same sentence that you all but advocate being untruthful and biased.

Furthermore, I resent the implication that One News Now prints articles from a "Christian" perspective. So a Christian perspective is quoting only people who believe in your point of view and calling it a legitimate article? So a Christian perspective is calling a man who was kicked out the APA for bad research a "pro-family" expert? So a Christian perspective is publishing lies regarding Barack Obama's middle name and his alleged Muslim identity without even trying to talk to his campaign people?

What we are talking about here is entitlement. You seem to think believe that you are such a warrior against the "forces of evil" that God will turn a blind eye when you stoop to unprincipled and un-Christian tactics.

Sad.

MtSiParents said...

And in what way will my identity make a difference?

Are you planning on sending me death threats like some of the teachers and students of Mount Si have received from "good christians" like yourself?

Tell me, what difference does my name make?

Suffice it to say that I fear you nuts!

I will say this, I am not a teacher or faculty member. I am indeed a parent of 4 kids that are now or have been in Mount Si.

If you can explain in clear terms why my identity is important to you I will take it under advisement.

But for all I know, you wish to do me harm. What other reason would there be for your demand?

Someone took the initiative to try and keep the community apprised of your friends evil deeds and I am somehow to blame for documenting the events?

Better that you just beat your dog when you get frustrated than take it out on us!

If I really cared about who the hell you were I could simply trace you with your IP address and provider which is logged here...

But I don't care. If you choose to be morally depraved, that is the choice of all reprobates!

Anonymous said...

No, Jesus is the LIGHT of the world, but said "I am the way and the truth and the life."

MtSiParents said...

Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 7:12)

So we can assume that you want us to attack your "lifestyle" of christainity and threaten your children with possible violence?

Perhaps we should crusade to eliminate ANY demonstration of religion at school, either before, during or after?

And you call yourself a christian?

You break the most important of God's laws according to Jesus!

Anonymous said...

MSP - I care for multiple reasons, none of which you assume. I care because you claim to represent ALL Mount Si Parents; I care because you initially presented your site as official and attached to the school, lending a misleading credibility to what you had to say; I care because I have always believed that you are associated with the faculty and/or administration of the school and this would be a dereliction of duty and responsbilities to your job as a teacher, faculty member or staffer at the school; I care because you willy-nilly make statements about others on your site and given the above statements it gives credibility to those statements when some of them are only your perception, yet presented as fact.

And, I care because you simply are the one that tells lies - you misrepresent who I am, the things that I believe and just as important, you misrepresent and tell lies about Ken Hutcherson, who he is and what he believes. Evil deeds? yeah, right...

Anonymous said...

MSP - no, I want you to be willing to stand on God's Word and speak the truth about what it says and what He expects out of each of us. Although it is a catch phrase, it remains true - Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven.

It is MY hope and I know Ken Hutcherson's hope, that ALL would come to know Christ, not just as Savior, but as Lord also - as Lord, it means obeying what He has commanded. Encouraging any kind of sexual immorality is NOT what the Lord set for Christian behavior.

BlackTsunami said...

I am talking about this particular post on my blog, holy bullies and headless monsters -

http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2008/07/one-news-now-journalist-gets-taught.html

BlackTsunami said...

And I apologize for the serial posting - but anonymous, you can't lead people anywhere by being deceptive.

MtSiParents said...

I care because you claim to represent ALL Mount Si Parents; I care because you initially presented your site as official and attached to the school, lending a misleading credibility to what you had to say;

There YOU go LYING!

I have NEVER claimed to be associated with the SVSD or MSHS.

And perhaps I should rename the blog "A Mount Si Parent".

Please do take the time and list the "Lies" we have made here...

Go on I dare you!

I double dog dare you!

Anonymous said...

blacktsunami - come on, don't distort the point you know I was making - you are a gay, black man and have a bias to your thoughts and the manner in which you approach things because of WHO YOU ARE!!!! Jeff Johnson works for ONN and approaches things from this perspective just as Jason Blair at the NYT, oh, wait, bad example, other journalists at the NYT approach their stories with their own predilections. As Jeff said, at least he admits it whereas other news outlets don't - I wonder, which side of that equation do you fall on - being someone who will actually admit your biases or someone who will claim to be completely objective?

MSP stated that Christians shouldn’t be “biased” and I was simply making the point that MSP’s contention was inaccurate in the life of the Christian. Amongst other things, we are to be biased towards holiness and goodness and Christ, fleeing from immorality, evil and Satan.

MtSiParents said...

BlackTsunami

You are are always welcome here, post away baby, post away!

Anonymous said...

Simple MSP - let's start with Hutcherson advocating VIOLENCE agains gays & lesbians. Or preaching anti-homosexual sermons. good grief, I'd be here all month...

You copied the picture of the Mount Si High School's web site to your own and continued to change yours to match theirs, giving the appearance of being associated and offical and yes, I think that is one of the BEST ideas you've had - change this to "A Mount Si Parents Blog". Catchy!!!

MtSiParents said...

"MSP stated that Christians shouldn’t be “biased” "

There you go again!

Please be specific as to when I said Christians shouldn't be biased!

Christians are biased by their very nature. I am not naive enough to believe that you are capable of being non-biased.

Your posts demonstrate that quite clearly.

Fanatic!

MtSiParents said...

Simple MSP - let's start with Hutcherson advocating VIOLENCE agains gays & lesbians.

“God hates soft men” and “God hates effeminate men.” Hutcherson went on to say, “If I was in a drugstore and some guy opened the door for me, I’d rip his arm off and beat him with the wet end.”

-Sermon at Antioch Bible Church by Ken Hutcherson.


Or preaching anti-homosexual sermons. good grief, I'd be here all month...

Check out his online sermons, all kinds of Anti-Gay preaching!


You copied the picture of the Mount Si High School's web site to your own and continued to change yours to match theirs, giving the appearance of being associated and offical


The original banner was provided by a student, James Brulotte, from which we gained permission to use it. We changed the banner, as it is now, when Mount Si changed theirs and we did not have permission to use it. Sorry for not taking the time to go snap my own photo!

and yes, I think that is one of the BEST ideas you've had - change this to "A Mount Si Parents Blog". Catchy!!!


How about "A Mount Si Parent defending against religious hypocrisy and deviant reprobates"

I like that better!

Anonymous said...

MSP - my apologies - it was an anonymous poster who claimed Christians shouldn't be biased.

again, my apologies.

signed, the fanatic

BlackTsunami said...

anonymous, i also have a b.a. in mass communication. regardless of how i personally feel, when i write an article (and i have written many) my job is to be unbiased and to get both sides of the issue. my personal feelings are irrelevant.

what mr. johnson and one news now does in general is the exact opposite of this.

Anonymous said...

MSP - there are two sermons on the web site that deal with homosexuality. Hutcherson is an expository preacher and if it's in the Book he's preaching on, then he preaches on it - if you don't like it, take it up with God, He wrote it.

The comment that you so oft cite and have on your web site was bad hyperbole and nothing more. It's not as though it was a sermon on "How to Rip off Limbs and Beat Up Anyone who Opens the Door".

Anonymous said...

blacktsunami - have you ever interviewed Ken Hutcherson? How about written an article on him? Tell me how you reconcile that with your B.A. in mass communication?

BlackTsunami said...

i'm definitely confused with your question. but if i had to write an article on hutcherson, i would show fairness, unlike one news now

Anonymous said...

blacktsunami - where was your fairness when you summarily dismissed Hutcherson's account of the DOS on your blog? did you call Hutcherson to get his take or did your BIAS prevent you from seeing what you wanted to see?

So, either, you do have a bias or you aren't be consistent with what you expect of others and what you do yourself. Thus, the problem of reconciliation.

MtSiParents said...

Hutcherson is an expository preacher and if it's in the Book he's preaching on, then he preaches on it - if you don't like it, take it up with God, He wrote it.

Jesus advocating violence against homosexuals?

I guess I missed that part in the bible.

Please, for your own sake, seek mental help!

BlackTsunami said...

now that was silly. a blog is where someone can put their personal opinions. i do it as well as folks who are on your side.

and it seems to me that you are distracting from the issue. one news now claims to be a news site that looks at things from a "Christian" perspective. But it is hardly a news site and through its articles, it trivializes the integrity of Christianity.

MtSiParents said...

"I think it's going to be controversial to those believers who don't want to admit the suffering that Christ had to go through to pay for our sins. I think it's going to be controversial to the whole view of the Jewish nation. The truth is that they did push to have Christ crucified. That's just plain truth... that's Biblical truth."

-Ken Hutcherson on The Passion of the Christ.

I seem to remember a famous German dictator using this same argument.

Would you like a direct quote?

And what about his close buddies like Scott Lively who says;

“the National Socialist revolution and the Nazi party were animated and dominated by militaristic homosexuals, pederasts, pornographers, and sadomasochists.”

Yes, the holocaust was perpetrated by the homo's!

When in REALITY...

The Nazi campaign against homosexuality targeted the more than one million German men who, the state asserted, carried a “degeneracy” that threatened the “disciplined masculinity” of Germany. Denounced as “antisocial parasites” and as “enemies of the state,” more than 100,000 men were arrested under a broadly interpreted law against homosexuality. Approximately 50,000 men served prison terms as convicted homosexuals, while an unknown number were institutionalized in mental hospitals. Others — perhaps hundreds — were castrated under court order or coercion. Analyses of fragmentary records suggest that between 5,000 and 15,000 homosexual men were imprisoned in concentration camps, where many died from starvation, disease, exhaustion, beatings, and murder.

JC said...

I don't debate anonymous cowards.

You want to pick a name, any name, fine, we can debate and discuss like human beings. I have no desire whatsoever to know who you are in real life, I just ask that you have the integrity to stand by your words. Coward.

Anonymous said...

JC - thank you! Now I don't have to worry about responding to your posts!!!

JC said...

and yet you just can't help yourself, pathetic.

Emproph said...

Anonymous said…

“let me remind you of the MOST biased of all Christians, Jesus Christ Himself, when in the Gospel of John, Chapter 14, verse 6 He states: “I am the way and the truth and the life. NO ONE comes to the Father except through me.” But, I suppose that’s one of the reasons they killed Him, He was telling the folks something they didn’t want to hear!”

OMG, you have GOT to be kidding. Do you have any idea of how horrible and terror filled life was back then? Of course they didn’t want to hear it!

Do you know what it feels like to be stoned to death?
Do you know what the fear feels like to know that you are about to be stoned to death?
Do you know what the fear feels like to know that a loved one is about to be stoned to death?
Do you know what the memory of knowing that a loved one was stoned to death feels like?

How would you feel if someone then came along and said not only that there is a god, not only that that god is a god of love, not only that that god of love “has a plan” for your continual and unmitigated ocean of TERROR, but that this one person, Jesus, is claiming to be this god?

Are you actually suggesting that you wouldn’t take offense to that? Because if you are, then I take offense to that. Not that you care, of course, but how dare you use the foremost supremacist line that came out of the Prince’s of Peace mouth, as a weapon - in the name of love?

If God is truly love, and Jesus is God, then who are you to suggest that atheists (or anyone else you may not approve of) who believe in love -- and thus, “worship” Love -- are not the product of a relationship with Jesus Christ?

According to the Bible quote that you reference, he said that they had to come through him to “come to the Father,” not that they had to acknowledge, or even realize that they were coming through him.

I realize that that may sound ridiculous to you, but my reasoning is thus; If, as per Jesus Christ’s words, the only two commands are to love God (who is Love itself), and to love others as one’s self, then the statement that “NO ONE comes to the Father except through me,” applies to that, where as your supremacist reasoning contradicts it.

IOW, love is inclusive, not exclusive as you suggest. And yes, that includes evil, Who do you think allowed “Satan” to rebel in the first place?

Evil is still love, it’s the love of the absence of love. The whole purpose of life on Earth is to master the understanding of this difference - and thus, to master the ability to choose what is best for all in any given situation.

The Biblical statement itself is antithetical, it’s your choice as to how to take it.

And if you truly believe in a god who is in control, then the presentation of that choice is NOT a coincidence.

May said...

I am a longtime resident of the Valley, work here and I am the mom of three MSHS grads, so I am certainly included in Mount Si Parents. The name could be changed to "Some" Mt Si Parents, definitely not "A". The blogger is not alone.

The owner of this blog has been receptive to suggestions to change things that were at times more inflammatory than need be. This blog is a great public service!! Thank you, MSP!!!

An observation to pass on:
I recently hung out with a bunch of MSHS grads who had heard Hutcherson speak at MSHS a couple years back. What did they remember about what he said? Basically one thing: that he went into playing football, then pro-football so he could legally hurt white guys.

They came away with Hutcherson teaching that if you pick and choose you can legally hurt. And from talking to kids around town and the looking at the news, what these kids figure now is that the with his pulpit and with his actions before and after and on the Day of Silence, (protected by the First Amendment right to free speech), Hutch is still legally hurting people.


In the same vein, to satisfy something deep in his psyche, his admittedly giant ego, Hutcherson is making his best effort to legally hurt the GLBTQ community and those who support equal rights for all. And MSHS was a target he could easily rationalize.

And this he does in the Name of Our Lord. Which is such a shame, because it really excites his teammates - who he doesn't need to convince in the first place - and really turns off those who might be helped or touched by an all encompassing realization of the Love of Christ.

Thank God for ministries such as that at Tolt Congregational Church in Carnation and Eastshore Universalist Unitarian and the teaching of His Holiness the Dalai Lama that in spirit and in practice encompass love and compassion and where all are welcome.

I am thankful for this blog and for the info and news items it posts - like the kids doing yardwork to raise money for Camp Korey.

And it is interesting when the trolls come out and bluster. I never knew about ONN. It is interesting, from a sociologist's point of view to see how opinions and beliefs are formed and solidified and supported. And how very scary it is for folks to examine, let alone question, the underpinnings of those beliefs.

Some people never do... and for those who do it is often a very difficult process... kind of like getting out of a gang.

MtSiParents said...

The owner of this blog has been receptive to suggestions to change things that were at times more inflammatory than need be. This blog is a great public service!! Thank you, MSP!!!

Always open for suggestions.

Thank you for your support!

-MSP

Anonymous said...

MSP – your mental help quip is absolutely childish. Isn’t the idea to have a respectful back and forth exchange of ideas? Your often inability to do so is what I find inconsistent with your goal of having your blog be a “no hate zone.” You’re correct, Jesus didn’t advocate violence against homosexuals, but neither has Hutcherson. And more to the point, Jesus said to the woman caught in adultery, “Go and sin no more.”

MSP II – what does your quote from Hutcherson on the Passion of the Christ prove? That you are a believer in revisionist history when it suits you and that no group (outside of Christians, of course) has ever done anything controversial, violent, perhaps even despicable? Again, let’s go to the Scriptures, Matthew 27: 22-25 as Pilate is speaking to the crowd of Jews:
“What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called Christ?” Pilate asked. They all answered, “Crucify him!” “Why? What crime has he committed?” asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, “Crucify him!” When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility!” All the people answered, “Let his blood be on us and on our children!”
Now, this is an historical FACT, but I will guarantee you, you will find no greater supporter of God’s chosen people than Ken Hutcherson, so what is your point?

Scott Lively? Whatever – I hope you take the same position when it comes to Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright because the connections and associations between Obama and Wright are far more significant than any tangential association between Lively and Hutcherson.

Anonymous said...

blacktsunami – no, I don’t think it’s silly. I think the fact that you would parade out that you “also have a B.A. in Mass Communication” and that because of this, it absolves you of the very journalistic practices you are condemning others of. How do you know that Jeff Johnson didn’t attempt to get a hold of Potratz or McCormick? You’re making assumptions based upon your bias, are you not?

Anonymous said...

Emproph – I don’t understand what are you talking about with this stoning to death thing and how that factored into the conversation? I wonder whether you understand what was going on when Jesus walked on the face of the earth – the Jews were awaiting their Messiah, they were EXPECTING someone to show up on the scene and declare that they were the promised Messiah. The problem was, He didn’t appear as they wanted Him to appear, as a conquering King, rather He came as a servant to show how much He loved all of us by taking upon Himself all the sins of the world and suffering the punishment that is rightfully each of ours and that by “confessing with our mouths and believing in our hearts” in those things that we might be saved from this penalty, this penalty of death and separation from God.

You state “If God is truly love, and Jesus is God, then who are you to suggest who believe in love – and thus, “worship” Love – are not the product of a relationship with Jesus Christ” – Emproph, I am not suggesting it, God more than suggested it He made it perfectly clear that if you don’t believe in His Son, Jesus, and his atoning death and resurrection, that you will not have eternal life.

Romans 10:9-11 states:
That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.”

Further, your theology is flawed because YOU are making it up as you go along, whereas God laid out how we are to be as His church and as His followers – this gameplan, if you will, is found in the Bible. Perhaps, if the Bible were as simple as you make it out to be, two laws, then it might work, but you’re mis-stating what the Scripture actually says. It says the following in Matthew 22:34-40.

Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

In order to truly love someone, you need to know them and know who they are, what they believe, what they expect of you – what Jesus said in response to the Pharisees trying to trap Him into declaring one law as being more superior to the rest is say, ALL laws are encompassed within this one law, no, two laws of loving God and loving your neighbor. It doesn’t do away with the details found in the balance of Scripture – otherwise, the Gospels which include many of Jesus’ commandments to His followers wouldn’t be needed.

Further, LOVE is extremely exclusive, particularly as you are using it as a synonym for Jesus – if it is not, then how to you reconcile Jesus’ words in Matthew 10:34:
“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
This division is between good and evil, between obeying His commandments and not, between recognizing and worshipping Him as Savior & Lord and claiming that this is just a bunch of lies. Thus, what LOVE requires is choosing to be obedient to Him or be subject to God’s consequences. At the same time, don’t boil God down to this one attribute, He is far greater than being this finite concept of love that we as humans are only capable of – when God shows perfect love, included within that is perfect justice, perfect wrath, perfect goodness, perfect judgment, etc.

Ultimately, it is up to you to decide whom you will follow – you will follow someone or something – my hope is that you will choose wisely and choose to follow Jesus.

MtSiParents said...

MSP – your mental help quip is absolutely childish.

You are delusional. You can be helped.

So everything in your Bible is the word of God eh?

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

Make ready to slaughter his sons for the guilt of their fathers; Lest they rise and posses the earth, and fill the breadth of the world with tyrants. (Isaiah 14:21 NAB)

Cursed be he who does the Lords work remissly, cursed he who holds back his sword from blood. (Jeremiah 48:10 NAB)

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

God says I can purchase Hutch! I can own him! God says so!

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

And I can beat the hell out of him without fear of punishment! BRING IT ON!


Oh wait, I sound like a crazy Christian, gotta lay off that kool-aid man!

It's all or nothing buddy! And I choose NOTHING!

Anonymous said...

MSP - a page straight out of "Potratz's Book of Stupid, Racist Comments"! WOW!!!

MtSiParents said...

MSP - a page straight out of "Potratz's Book of Stupid, Racist Comments"! WOW!!!

I had a feeling that one would fly right over that melon of yours.

You use the same book to condemn homosexuals.

But somehow, when it comes to slaves, oooooohhh taboo, that's not what God meant.

Like I said, it's all or nothing. Your cherry picking of the "Word of God" was the point!

Not only do you cherry pick, but you twist and crush the cherry in an effort to make it a rasberry.

Calling youself a christian is an insult to Jesus.

You just don't get what he preached, and I doubt you ever will.

BlackTsunami said...

anonymous,

you are making silly assumptions. might i suggest you go back and read your comments just to see how your credibility has trickled down to an ebb.

as it is, if jeff johnson had taken the time to try and reach people other than hutcherson for his "article," it certainly would have been a first time that one news now has actually tried to be fair and unbiased.

but i don't think he did try to reach others for the article. if he had, he would have stated so when he was defending his article.

Emproph said...

Someone who can’t pick a moniker said…

“You’re correct, Jesus didn’t advocate violence against homosexuals, but neither has Hutcherson. And more to the point, Jesus said to the woman caught in adultery, “Go and sin no more.”

Scott Lively? Whatever – I hope you take the same position when it comes to Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright because the connections and associations between Obama and Wright are far more significant than any tangential association between Lively and Hutcherson.”


‘Telling that you would not only dismiss Hutcherson’s direct association with Lively / Watchmen on the Walls, but also that you would then suggest that two wrongs make a right by redirecting focus onto Obama, especially when a simple Google search reveals that their connection is quite a bit more intimate than the characterization of “tangential association.”

Lively’s pronounced hatred is in league with the likes of R. J. Rushdoony, an open advocate for the execution of gays.

According to BoxTurtleBulletin:

“Lively’s book, The Pink Swastika, claims that Hitler was gay. He go further and claims that the Nazi Party, World War II and the Holocaust were the products of a vast gay conspiracy.”

To clarify, the purpose of the book was not to expose some hidden homosexuality on Hitler’s part, or to expose some vast gay conspiracy in regard to WWII and the Holocaust. The purpose is to ‘establish’ a link between same-gender attraction -- in and of itself -- and the desire to harm others. And your friend Ken Hutcherson is in bed with him. So we’re not talking about guilt by association, we’re talking about guilt by endorsement (Which, apparently, you defend).

Yet you claim that Hutcherson doesn‘t advocate violence against homosexuals. To incite hatred, is to incite violence. It’s simple math. That man is a walking sandwich sign that says: “Not only do I hate gays, but if you love Jesus, you should too!”

You can characterize this position as being Biblically based all you want, it doesn’t make the intention any less malicious.

To endorse Hutcherson, is to endorse Lively, is to endorse the promotion of the notion that gay people desire to harm others, simply and only, because they are gay.

It’s slander, and it’s sinful. So you may want to consider taking your own advice:

“And more to the point, Jesus said to the woman caught in adultery, “Go and sin no more.”

P.S. Hope you’re not remarried.

Gary said...

The Bible is the infallible word of our Lord.
If you are a TRUE Christian, you follow these these commands and NO You're not allowed to cherrypick the ones which are inconvenient:

Who You Should Kill

–Unruly or rebellious child. Deut 21:20-21
–Those who curse or hit their parents. Lev 20:9, Ex 21:15
–Worshipers of other gods. Deut 13:6-11
–Psychics, witches. Lev 20:27, Deut 13:6-11, Ex 22:18.
–Those who do not believe in Jesus (parable). Luke 19:27.
–Those who work on the Sabbath. Ex 35:2 (Moses kills a gentile for this. Num 15:32-36.)
–Those who are accused by at least two people of wickedness. Deut 17:6.
–The children and babies of enemies. Num 31:17, Deut 20:13, Psalm 137:9, Lev 26:29.
–Adulterers. Lev 20:10.
–Homosexuals. Lev 20:13.
–A woman who is not a virgin when married. Deut 22:13-21.
–Those who are careless with murderous livestock. Exodus 21:29.

Who You Should Hate

–Those who eat crab or shrimp. Lev 11:10.
–Those who sacrifice an animal to God that has a blemish. Deut 17:1.
–Those who remarry the same person after divorce. Deut 24:4.
–Homosexuals. Lev 18:22.
–Those who are proud. Prov 16:5.
–A woman who wears pants. Deut 22:5.
–A man with long hair (Jesus?). 1Cor 11:14
–Those who call others fools Mat 5:22

Should we still do this stuff?

–All OT laws still apply in NT. Matt 5:17-19

Anonymous said...

It is important to understand the context of the passages you cite from the Septuagint and integrate them with the New Testament. Thus, from the Book of Hebrews, Chapter 7:

11If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come—one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? 12For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law. 13He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. 14For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, 16one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. 17For it is declared:

“You are a priest forever,

in the order of Melchizedek.ӣ


18The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19(for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

20And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, 21but he became a priest with an oath when God said to him:

“The Lord has sworn

and will not change his mind:

‘You are a priest forever.’ “£


22Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.


23Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; 24but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25Therefore he is able to save completely£ those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.

26Such a high priest meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. 27Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. 28For the law appoints as high priests men who are weak; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.

Anonymous said...

emproph - I truly don’t understand what point you’re trying to make in your PS. I'm not sure whether you made that statement because divorce is a sin or to marry a divorced person is also a sin or to remarry is a sin (short death of spouse or spouse remarried already), but just to cover all of them, yup, you're right, it is a sin, but it's not an ongoing sin and if you remarry, then there is a "new" covenant between the spouses which makes all older covenants cease to exist. So, what is your point? It doesn't make it justified and whomever sins will ultimately have to give an account before the Lord. God is full of grace, but it takes just as much faith NOT to sin as it does TO sin and take for granted God's long-suffering with each of us. How do we know that this one more sin will not be the end of His "patience" with us? As Paul reminds us in the Book of Romans - shall we sin more so that God's grace can abound? God forbid!

Anonymous said...

the last anonymous posting says,

"but it's not an ongoing sin and if you remarry, then there is a "new" covenant between the spouses which makes all older covenants cease to exist."

Just out of curiosity, could you give me the Biblical reference for this understanding? I don't necessarily disagree with you, but what I can't understand is this: How can you reinterpret some scriptures that seem extremely clear, (divorce is a sin) and yet unable to reinterpreted other scriptures that are less clear(homosexuality is a sin).

When you use the Bible to back up your prejudice, you open yourself up to this type of questioning.

I believe the Bible is the living, breathing word of God and was written to last throught the ages, and speaks in parables and in allegories so that it will last generations. I have found that if someone's interpretation hurts or brings down a group of people or an individual, then it is a false interpretation; if it lifts up a person and inspires them to make the world a better place, then that person has heard the word of God.

Unfortunately, there are many churches around today that use the scriptures to control a person's behaviour and thinking not inorder to make the world a better place, but to make themselves more powerful.
Signed, anonymous #692, who is
just another person fearful of retribution by the CODE

Anonymous said...

And some people actually wonder why there is a separation of church and state in the great nation.

The anonymous bigots here demonstrate why the founding fathers went to such great lengths to create this separation. They knew that tyrranical religious bigots would try to sieze control over liberty, equality and justice for all.

If the Bible is your only argument for hurting your fellow man, then you have nothing!

"The study of theology, as it stands in the Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authority; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion."

~ Thomas Paine


"That God cannot lie, is no advantage to your argument, because it is no proof that priests can not, or that the Bible does not."

~Thomas Paine


How would CoDE and Hutch react to teaching this blasphemy in the classroom.

Most kids leaving our public schools have no idea of the importance of Thomas Paine not only to this country, but to the world as a whole.

Why, because his philosophy is counter to the well established cristian culture we must all suffer and endure.

Why is it that the greatest minds Earth has ever set forth were progressive and beholden to a greater power than religion, REASON.

When will this mythology be recognized as akin to Norse and Greek mythology?

Perhaps when we insist on studying the Bible, the Torah/Talmud, Koran, Book of Mormon and Dianetics in a classic mythology class, where they all belong.

-William Wainright III

May said...

Anonymous #692
Thank you for your post.

Another comment.

In reviewing posts, there are many passionate exchanges dealing with exegesis and hermeneutics.

One's religion guides how one lives, yet in the academic and public school environment, it is not appropriate for one's religion to allow one to guide (and judge) how others live their lives.

The controversy about the GSA and the Day of Silence arises out of some people's religion based views.

I was raised a fundamentalist, evangelical Christian. I accepted Christ as my Savior and was baptized when I joined the church (you guessed it, Baptist). My parents and siblings and their families are all good Christian folks. So much for background. I left the church in my twenties. I won't claim to be a Buddhist, though I have an active meditation and study practice. I find much common ground with the teachings on compassion, happiness and caring for others, in general, how to be a good person, in the teachings of Jesus and the teachings of the Buddha.

When my brother, who is an intelligent fellow, biochemistry PhD, environmental fate chemist for Dow, and was in the Million Man March, had problems with the local public schools, rather than impose his agenda on the schools, chose to put his two kids in a Christian high school. I respected him for this.

The law of the land, both Federal and state, is fairly clear on non-discrimination, anti-harassment, freedom of speech and separation of church and state. Religious beliefs are not the bellwether.

There's lots of room.

It is a shame when the room and energy is diverted to arguing and controversy about what the Biblical take is on issues.

All are welcome. Does your presence and your argument and the energy you bring add or detract to the things that will make Mount Si a strong high school academically, a safe place for all students and an atmosphere of open-minded inquiry and tolerance.

I am not going to frame my argument on what the Buddha said. I will let that inform me and I will be who I am.

It would be so much less tiresome and so much more interesting to engage on how to improve academics and inquiry rather than enduring all these iterations on "the Bible tells me so."

There are so many things, especially beliefs, that we will never agree on. The point is to present information non-judgmentally while living one's own life as the manifestation of the beliefs that inform and empower us personally.

When I worked for Weyerhaueser doing environmental education, the issue of spraying 2-4-D on young Douglas fir plantings came up. Doug fir is somewhat shade intolerant and red alder overtops it in early years and the fir doesn't grow as rapidly as the timber market would like. 2-4-D defoliates the alder, and without the food-factory leaves, the alder roots aren't nourished and the alder, and other broadleaf species, die. Weyco gave me the official line. They were less than thrilled when I also presented the info on 2-4-D from the Washington Toxics Coalition, which followed the herbicide into the food chain and examined is persistance and bio-accummulative qualities, effect on fish and wildlife, humans and also the ramifications of the huge monocultures we call tree farms. Weyco also had the good sense to trust my presentation, not harass or censure me for presenting all the information.

It will take a bit for this community to untwist. We can do it.












There are trade-offs.

One doesn't figure things out by yelling and posturing. Or by trading Bible quotes.

Let's not destroy the village in order to save it.

Habitat for Humanity begins in one's heart right here at home.

MtSiParents said...

It would be so much less tiresome and so much more interesting to engage on how to improve academics and inquiry rather than enduring all these iterations on "the Bible tells me so."

Amen! (pun intended)

Anonymous said...

MSP - in light of may's long and well thought out post, how about you start by making this blog out to be what you claim it is, "An open forum for parents and students of Mt Si high school to discuss academic issues." If this is what you would focus on, then myself and others wouldn't reply to these posts.

MtSiParents said...

Anonymous said...
MSP - in light of may's long and well thought out post, how about you start by making this blog out to be what you claim it is, "An open forum for parents and students of Mt Si high school to discuss academic issues." If this is what you would focus on, then myself and others wouldn't reply to these posts.

Well I thought attacks on the students of Mount Si and the teachers of Mount Si was germaine to the academic environment at Mount Si.

Are you saying that it is not?

Do you know any of the students in the GSA? Are you aware of the emotional stress Ken Hutcherson and CoDE have placed on these kids?

One parent went as far as to get legal assistance to combat these forces.

To my knowledge, there has not been any single event that has threatened the academic environment at Mount Si more than the attacks by Hutch and CoDE.

Not only the environment at Mount Si, but the careers of fine educators that are dedicated to our kids.

We will continue to fight these forces so long as they attack our students and our teachers, which they continue to do.

When CoDE is disolved and Hutcherson becomes a real christian and ceases his attacks, then I'm sure we will be discussing the finer points of WASL preparation or teaching ID in the science classes, or whatever.

For now, Hutch and CoDE are a threat to our kids and Mount Si and we will not yield in our defense of our kids, their teachers and our community.

If you do not like it, I strongly urge you to find some other past time than bible thumping here.

Anonymous said...

msp - then myself and others will continue to counter the claims that you make on this blog.

by the way, how do you know what a "real Christian" even looks like? Are you a believer? Have you studied the Word and become a follower of Jesus Christ? I find it difficult, if not impossible, to be told how it is that Christ has taught me to live from someone who doesn't recognize Him as Savior and Lord.

MtSiParents said...

by the way, how do you know what a "real Christian" even looks like? Are you a believer? Have you studied the Word and become a follower of Jesus Christ? I find it difficult, if not impossible, to be told how it is that Christ has taught me to live from someone who doesn't recognize Him as Savior and Lord.

I have read every word of the OT as well as the NT. In addition to numerous scriptures never included in the bible.

Tell me, have YOU read the Book of Jubilees? The gospel of Mary Magdalene? The Talmud? and countless other scriptures that contradict the "accepted" scriptures?

I have a different interpretation as to the meaning of being a christian. To many it is following outdated and fallible dogma perpetrated by the bible.

To others, like myself, it is ascribing to the same philosophy that Jesus taught, just like Confucius before him.

It is man who declared Jesus was God. I can find no evidence that he claimed it himself. The bible was written by men, not God.

Jesus taught love, not hate. The bible does not teach love, but justifies hate. It has been wielded in countless injustices against humanity to this day.

Just as Confucius stated, Jesus reiterated the fundamental law of humanity. Love thy neighbor as thyself. Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.

ANY teachings that contradict this simple philosophy are false and NOT what Jesus taught.

Thomas Jefferson took the time to disassemble the bible into teachings consistent with Jesus and those that contradict the same. He published the Jefferson Bible which does not ascribe divinity to the man, but more importantly, the infallible truths that he taught.

Your problem is that the bible is more important to you, than the teachings of the man known as Jesus.

Jesus is not God, just a very enlightened soul whose message has been twisted, distorted and poisoned by men who would seek to attain power by wielding it as a sword of righteousness. Ken Hutcherson is a prime example of this.

So you may call christianity some "truth" that unless you accept a man as a God, you are screwed.

Many of us cannot, and will not succumb to such blatent fallacies.

My upbringing as a "Hard Core Catholic" was challenged when I began to open my eyes to the natural truths evident in this great universe. That if their is a creator, it established certain natural laws that connot be broken, no matter how much you fantasize that they could be broken to justify supernatural claims that are the bedrock of your false beliefs.

The church needed a Man-God with an alternative of eternal damnation to control the masses. And it is still working today.

How vain you are to believe your religion is the one "true" religion.

There is only one true religion, love. And I fear it escapes you as it does so many others.

May said...

Point being, Hutcherson and CoDE do not further academic excellence at Mt. Si.

Discussion of god, God, Jesus, the Bible when it relates to academic excellence at Mt Si is off point.

Hutcherson, his minions and CoDE have damaged the reputation of Mount Si and disrupted education, which is disastrous. We have work to do to repair and rebuild that reputation.

Discussion of Jesus said this and you do that has nothing to do with pursuing academic excellence at Mt. Si.

Hutcherson and CoDE must not be allowed to harass and intimidate excellent educators like Kit McCormick and Elaine Harger and George Potratz. They must not be allowed to ban books and malign teachers for presenting multiple side of issues and events.

Discussions of the old and new testament may be germane to history or world religion classes. The Bible doesn't determine the curriculum and the clubs and activities at our public high school.

Attempts to cloud the issue with regard to one's rights as a parent, concern about controversial issues, or hounding a teacher for allegedly presenting a personal opinion in class (which may have been just another perspective)....when these people and groups compromise real education, they must be called what they are: bullies for an agenda that has marginal relevance to academic excellence.

We, as a community, cannot allow our schools to fall prey to the inimical agendas and bullying of Hutcherson and CoDE. We have no business trying to get them to alter their personal beliefs by belittling them or attacking them - though some of the great photos and quotes from Monty Python have been on point and very funny!! - on their own ground, the authority they claim from the Bible.

There is no authority granted to the Bible for running our public schools. We are governed by the laws and regulations of the State of Washington and the US federal government. Let's talk about how we follow the law and implement the rights as we discuss how to make Mount Si a place where creative thought, insight, learning, tolerance and the pursuit of knowledge thrives. It is our responsibility to see that this is nurtured, not throttled.

MtSiParents said...

May, who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?

May said...

MSP - just a life-long learner and curious being, living lightly on the planet, though beginning to consider drastic means to fight the invasion of morning glories, buttercup, exotic blackberries.

contact me at newmoondarkstar@gmail.com if you ever want to chat off the blog.. you are truly heroic!

Anonymous said...

"I do make mistakes in my reporting and, when they happen and are brought to my attention, I will gladly correct them. That's what journalists do."

So has he corrected his story now that the "mistake" has been brought to his attention?

Anonymous said...

Whoa! Did ONN expand the story after this post?

I don't remember THIS part in their "Reporting";

Hutcherson is beginning to believe that Jenkins just is not hearing his complaint against the teacher. "Well, what about the statement that the teacher made in the public meeting that if I don't stop going down this road fighting on this fight about homosexuality, maybe they should think about reinstating slavery? She said, 'He was making a comparison, just letting you know how important and what's going on with the homosexuals in this day. And you need to drop that statement and forget it.' Now this is coming from an African American woman," Hutcherson recounts.

OMG! That's not just a distortion. that is absolute LIBEL!

Hutch is really pushing the limits of the law here. That is an absolute fabrication!

I wonder if ONN can be named in the libel suit? I bet they have some cash they don'y need...

Anonymous said...

FYI

KOMO was there during the school board meeting and were filming at the time of Dr. Potratz' comments.

They may still have that file footage. Would be great evidence for that lawsuit that should be pursued against Mr. Hutcherson and now ONN.

May said...

Dear Anonymous Troll:

Please don't be so lazy. Check it out for yourself to see whether Jeff Johnson has changed anything.

I'm not holding my breath.

It would be nice to see the bias fade.

One can hope.

On the bright side, Jeff Johnson and ONN don't have anything more to do with what happens at MSHS than the Weekly or RealChange or the Stranger or the PI.

And Hutcherson has no more rights or privileges than any other parent. When he or others exact undue influence, they must be taken to task, so as not to subvert efforts of others toward academic excellence and an open and tolerant atmosphere at our high school.

In Peace.

May said...

One other point to consider:

Dr. Potratz is a very learned and intelligent man. Perhaps some of the things he says, especially with a certain amount of irony, are just lost on the intellects of Hutcherson and his supporters.

Maybe Hutcherson will just blunder and bluster himself into a hole so deep that he will eventually look silly to even his followers. Probably not.

Good idea to inquire as to whether the tape is still around.

MSP! Keep putting the facts out and keep exposing the lies and fallacies.

I think we should talk some more about the writings of Tom Paine and the Jefferson Bible and how things like this need to be included in the history curriculum.

Just remember: free speech is relative and you can't go yelling FIRE in a crowded theatre just to create a melee.

MtSiParents said...

Rev. John Mason, a conservative preacher from New York, accused Jefferson (Thats Thomas Jefferson) of being an infidel “who writes against the truths of God’s word; who makes not even a profession of Christianity; who is without Sabbaths; without the sanctuary, without so much as a decent external respect for the faith and worship of Christians.”

Who does THAT sound like?

JC said...

This article is a prime example of type of "reporting" done by Jeff Johnson over at ONN (http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=179446).

Johnson writes an entire piece on the MA vote to repeal the 1913 law, which prevents out of state same sex couples from getting married there, with the ONLY source being the leader of a known hate group, namely Brian Camenker of MassResistence. Not only does Johnson fail to identify MassResistence as a hate cite, he labels them as a "pro-family group". Apparently in Johnson's warped worldview hate is a family value.

In this Johnson quotes Camenker sluring the MA Senate in vicious terms ("It was cowardly.It was undemocratic.", "sleazy doesn't even do it justice.") even letting him make unsubstaniated claims of a gay conspiracy "This was completely choreographed by the gay movement" without asking a single follow-up question (e.g. "What evidence do you have to support the claim that this was coreographed by the gay movement?" or maybe "Explain exactly how a an open democratic vote in the MA Senate, which was elected by the poeple by popular vote is "undemocratic"?")

In short, if anyone had any doubts that Johnson is no more than a credulous right-wing hack, they should be put to rest. He is many things, but a reporter is simply not one of those.

Anonymous said...

I had some teachers in high school and college who had very different views than my family. It did not lessen my education but improved it because it allowed me a chance to share my beliefs and look at things from different perspectives.

I am troubled that CODE and Hutcherson and others feel the need to shut down teachers with opposing views. If you have raised strong thoughtful children in a loving and healthy environment then they should be able to think for themselves. If your viewpoint is correct your children will know it.

All this need to silence people and shut down the Day of Silence etc makes me wonder if these parents are afraid that if their children are exposed to opposing views they may jump ship.

I am confident enough in our faith and the values I have raised my children with to allow them to be exposed to others. I trust my children have good enough judgment to do the right thing without me their to control their thoughts and puppet strings.

May said...

anonymous above:

what a refreshing and encouraging and realistic outlook!! good to hear about common sense in the midst of all the histrionics and attacks on MSHS. thank you for trusting your kids, your self as a parent and for encouraging you kids to think!

Gary said...

Anonymous/July 18, 2008 11:21 PM:

WOW. That is one of the most fair minded and thoughtful comments I've seen on this subject.

Ever.

Thanks.