Nebraska coach Ron Brown certainly didn't open the gay-rights debate in the nation, and he wasn't the one to even bring up the topic most recently—Americans can thank President Obama for that, but in a Fox Sports exclusive article, one writer attacked the football coach anyway today.
Jen Floyd Engel says she is a Christian but that she takes issue with Brown because he seems to be willing to verbalize what the Bible says about the faith more readily than she does, especially when it comes to gay rights—or the lack thereof, she bemoans.
"Coach your own team," Engel tells Brown, referring to her wish that he would focus on his own sins in life and not talk so openly about the sin of homosexuality.
Obviously Engel thinks nothing of pointing the finger at the speck in what she perceives to be Brown's eye, while forgetting about the log in her own, so she just manages to sound like yet another tolerance-preaching person who isn't, well, tolerant.
But she isn't even making sense, as Brown isn't bashing homosexuals, as she alludes.
To clarify how out of proportion Engel's anger is at Brown for the words he shared back in March—that riled the feathers of Engel two months afterthefact, it might be noted—it's helpful to look at exactly what he said.
"The question I have for you all is, like Pontius Pilate, what are you going to do with Jesus?" Brown asked.
"Ultimately, if you don't have a relationship with Him, and you don't have a Bible-believing mentality, really anything goes...At the end of the day, it matters what God thinks most."
Did any of that sound like he was attacking homosexuals? Not in the least. So what's got Engel's knickers in a wad?
Apparently the journalist thinks that because Ron Brown has influence over a sector of young men in Nebraska who look up to the esteemed Nebraska football coach that this makes him a danger to people who want to live a homosexual lifestyle freely—and without the guilt she thinks he will heap upon them.
Couple that thought with the fact she also takes issue that he said in his March statement that he opposed an ordinance that would have given the homosexual community a job security guarantee that no one else enjoyed, and you have the makings of an angry woman.
Never mind the fact that no one on Brown's team took offense to what he said—or even claims to be a discriminated homosexual.
Isn't this kind of gay-rights whining the reason so many in the country avoid the subject altogether? And must those who champion "gay rights" over human rights also claim the name of Christ, like Engel, but prove by their words and actions that they appear to hardly know him?
Engel attacked another believer when she took on Ron Brown, which God's Word expressly forbids. So who is the one poking the plank out of who's eye?
Nebraska's coach Ron Brown is attempting to live a Tim Tebow kind of Christian life, and he wants to be faithful to properly mentor those playing the game of football for Nebraska as he does it. To that end, he encourages them to pray and follow Jesus. What in the heck is wrong with either of those things?
And why should anyone anywhere in America receive more rights as a group than another, as the gay-rights cause seems to want to demand?
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 14 ( 1 removed by Hillary Hill )
Pot, meet kettle.
Given the propensity of churches to recommend lifestyles which lead to disease (inappropriate emphasis on abstinence), unwanted children (opposition to birth control), family instability (opposition to abortion, even in cases involving the health of the mother or her unborn child), bigotry (homophobia), and widespread misery (poverty resulting from the births of economically-unsustainable numbers of children, both at the level of the individual family and at the societal level), I don't really think your preachy judgment on human rights is persuasive.
And while a heterosexual woman can get AIDS due to contracting the HIV virus after sex with an infected man who may be bisexual, if the male is white it is much less likely than if the male were black, which is making the news this week, in fact.
Here's the link:http://www.11alive.com/news/article/240913/40/HIV-crisis-facing-black-women-in-metro-Atlanta
And contrary to what you may think, those who get the HIV virus due to drug use or contaminated blood is miniscule compared to those who, like black males in 2009, get it through man-on-man contact.
Black males in the neighborhood of 20,000 to the white males of 11,000 contracted this deadly disease in 2009. And the rates are going up per the CDC...not down.
It shows that of the 47,130 cases of HIV reported in 2010, black people infected with the virus numbered 21,854 compared to 13,878 white people and 9,653 Hispanics. Native American infection was 225 cases in comparison and Asians had 814 infection cases.
Male on male sexual activity accounted for the highest infection incidence with 28,782 cases being attributed to that factor, where only 2,373 drug users contracted the virus, and slightly more than 4,000 heterosexuals.
However, you also can't disregard the governmental agencies insistence that males having sex with other males can lead to the greatest number of those who become infected with HIV. The statistical data from the CDC is unquestioned, Cookie, except by maybe you or those who realize it suggests homosexual acts can lead to HIV faster than being a drug user or in a heterosexual relationship.
I'm sorry you don't like that fact or the staggering statistics that support it, but calling me names can't help you change those facts.
its publicly incorrect to take the biblical stand on homosexuality in America today,
and he has stood up where no others will.
I applaud your courage, way to go Ron.