Comments

As a Christian, during the whole campaign of 2008, I never believed Joe the Plumber, aka Samuel Wurzelbacher, was a Christian. I never heard him profess Christ. I'm not sure he was even political until the GOP made him a political person because he happened to be in the right place and the right time. Further, we know that he wasn't fully telling the truth. However, here in the interview we see that he has all the rhetoric down pat and has been well rehearsed by someone in the political arena.

I can't judge Mr. Wurzelbacher salvation as that is between him and God, but his actions don't seem to be there. Regardless of what side anyone is on politically, I don't see the relevance of this article in Christianity Today other than it bringing confusion, division and contention. I'm very sad about this. It sounds to me from what I've read here that CT is trying to justify their actions by interviewing this man. Further, COME ON, his use of queer is as derogatory as it was meant when I was in junior high in the 60s - queer means what it means - get real here. Oops - get honest!

I checked out your link, which relates to CT's coverage of same-sex marriage. As a gay man who is happily single and celibate (not everyone was intended to have a spouse, especially in light of the current divorce rate among heterosexual married couples), I haven't much interest in that particular subject. I am, however, extremely concerned that you printed, without comment, an assertion that somehow every heterosexual person should live in fear of gay and lesbian individuals, and "protect" their children from us. As a beloved uncle of adoring (and adorable) nieces, I consider that to be, at minimum, a deplorable calumny. It did, however, affirm my belief that leaving "the church" was the right decision, and I have absolutely no regrets.

I gave up on "evangelical Christianity" over 20 years ago as a college student in a prominent "evangelical Christian" college, so the bottom line is that I could truly care less about your publication's reputation. And if you continue to endanger my life and the lives of my fellow gay and lesbian citizens by irresponsibly fanning the flames of homophobia, you will not, ultimately, be accountable to me. But I respectfully request that in the future, you exercise greater editorial discretion and restraint when choosing to publish the words of someone who is hardly a credible spokesperson for anything (I mean, honestly: "Joe the Plumber" is not even a licensed plumber!). After all, words do have meaning and consequences.

If you disagree with Joe, you should have made a clarifying statement.

I grew up Pentecostal and now Catholic. And I strongly believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also grew up having an uncle who was gay. He never brought his boyfriends around as a kid, but I always suspected it was the case.

My Uncle was a very kind and generous man, who was never a danger to me or my brothers. He was always one of my favorite Uncles.

Yes, I disagree with his lifestyle. But if my father remarries for the third time (twice divorced) it will be just as wrong by my beliefs too. I'm not going to keep my children away from their grandfather. I won't keep them away from their Great Uncle too.

These kind of statements are horrible. We send a horrible message when we say that it's good to write people off just because we disagree with who they are sleeping with.

I think this explanation is worse than the original article. CT's readers are NOT too stupid to recognize the difference between an interview and an editorial endorsing a particular viewpoint. But, your explanation that somehow so-called Joe the Plumber was an appropriate interview subject because he is either "interesting" or "has influence in a cultural sphere" is just a stunning display of CT's lack of intellectual rigor or honesty. The vast majority of commenters to the original post found Joe to be neither interesting nor influential, so no one cares what he thinks, especially when he spouts such bigotry (described as such by many who actually agreed with the underlying point about homosexuality). I don't think you're going to successfully revitalize the church by interviewing a has-been.

Your interview with Joe the Plumber claims he is an Evangelical Christian. You'd have been better never seeking him out-- or at lease never publicizing his "Queer" remarks. In acting as you have you've sullied the name of Christ and the cause of Evangelicalism. As both a pastor and teacher for decades I've had to comfort gay youths who've been taunted and harassed by bullies calling them "queer." Common! You should have known the firestorm you'd create. As a former subscriber to CT I left you as you became more and more a Republican rag and less and less a thoughtful purveyor of Christian thought and experience. This interview, and its subsequent broadcast in secular media, convince me I made the right decision. Sadly!

Salon.com has an article about this interview on its page today.

Those readers will not come here and read your caveats. No, yet again, the evangelical church can be assumed to be synonymous with the political right. And I really can't blame anyone for thinking this.

As to his being "interesting" and "having influence in the cultural sphere," --this is circular reasoning. He has influence because you and the conservative media keep giving him a forum. Why don't we hear about those at Obama rallies who spoke of lost jobs and health care? Because the media turned away soon after their tears dried.

Count me as someone who can't imagine why you would give this fellow another 15 minutes of fame. I'm so disappointed in CT.

I commend CT for publishing the interview. I did not get the impression that you were endorsing Joe's views. I thought the article was journalism, not editorial.

I am an evangelical. I don't personally agree with Joe on much of anything. But I do recognize Joe's status within conservative politics and the fact that a large majority of evangelicals vote exclusively for conservatives. So, I think he is a person that many of your readers know and would be interested in reading about.

Though I don't agree with Joe's views, my experience is that Joe's comments are not out the mainstream of evangelical thought on these issues (particular as compared to the folks in the pews). So, I don't think CT needs to apologize for what he said.

I think it is good that people inside and outside of the evangelical spectrum have commented on the article.

For anyone who doesn't want to give CT a chance to further propagandize their brains with more lies at the link offered above, here it is in short, condensed from many vehemently anti-gay articles: Does Christianity Today Agree with Joe the Plumber? YES!

I don't necessarily agree with "Joe the Plumber" comments but his views about same sex marriage are right on target. The Bible is clear about this subject but some people don't want to accept it. We have "no choice" - God made the choice when He created us either a woman or a man. We may get angry at God for making us someone we don't want to be but the fact is, He is the Creator, we are not. I personally don't have any hatrem against gay people (or any other group as God asks us to love our enemies) but I dislike their way of living. I mostly dislike how they deal with this basic Christian principle and the hatrem they portrait towards us when they are told their lifestyle is sinful. Immediately they call us ugly names and try to disnohor us as the Miss America pageant judge did with Miss California. I don't insult gays but I tell them they are sinners (like most of us) and they need to repent from their sinful ways. Many have and now feel forgiven and redeemed by the blood of Jesus, their Savior.

The devil is deceaving and we have to open our eyes to the TRUTH and not be afraid to speak it. Blessings to all!

I'm not at all surprised by ANYTHING "Joe the Plumber" (sic) revealed in this interview. But really, CT, when your interview subject confessed that he considers JAMES DOBSON to be an EMERGING (!) CHRISTIAN LEADER, did that not give you sufficient reason to withhold it from publication? This man has ZERO credibility. James Dobson was born in 1936 and has recently retired/resigned from his leadership responsibilities at Focus on the Family. He is "emerging" into retirement, but certainly not a new capacity of national leadership. Unbelievable!

Rather than sharing my reactions to the many flawed and frightening statements made by "Joe the Plumber," let me just say that if he hears God calling him into the political arena, he's listening not to God but to the "tormentors" of the faithful, and others who are profoundly grateful to live in a pluralistic democractic society.

This is too disingenuous. Choosing Joe the Plumber as an interview subject confers legitimacy on his neanderthal views. I hope it was worth losing the last shred of your respectability.

When I first read the interview, I interpreted it as providing enough rope for Joe to hang himself. From what I know of the CT editors' personal politics, I never for a moment imagined that they agreed with him about ... well, much of anything that he said. I suspect--though I don't know--that publishing this interview online was an attempt to demonstrate political balance since the same author has a major piece in the May print edition profiling Joshua DuBois. I further suspect that the sympathies of the CT editors lie with DuBois, not Joe.

I think there were two grave editorial miscalculations: first, that Joe the Plumber was a worthy interview subject. He has written nothing, been elected to no office, leads no religious movement, and is riding the fame train for as long as it will pay his bills. That's fine--but CT doesn't need to help him along that path. Second, I think CT assumed that putting the interview as "web only" would downplay the interview (as opposed to the printed DuBois piece)--and that was a tremendous misunderstanding of the way that information works.

This is a charitable interpretation of why this interview was conducted and published. Because I just cannot fathom an alternative reason--that CT editors would value and support the person and views of Joe in any way.

Please CT, don't apologize for any article you print. That's what all these homosexuals on this website want you to do. Their unrelentless hate of Joe and CT is so obvious and in your face, it's a sin they're committing. It's a free country but instead of getting the populace to approve the change in definition of marriage, they wait until the election is over and than have their sin legislated by legislators because they know the populace is wise to them. The politicians are buying their votes. Homosexuals are obviously a bunch of hateful, spiteful,unhappy people. Read their hateful responces to an interview where one person is expressing their opinion. Like, we can't express our opinion and beliefs because it doesn't agree with homosexuals. Do not back down, CT, that's how they destroyed the women's and civil rights movements. It's a technique of theirs, very organized, to get control over the rest of us. While it's still a free country, we can express our opinion, print articles and vote, not legistate, whether they like it or not. Homosexuals aren't Christians, period, and they know it, that's why they are so hateful and in so much pain. That's what living in sin does to one.

As a lesbian and a progressive (raised in the Jewish faith) I am saddened and disheartened by a. CT's uncritical interview of Samuel Wurzelbacher and b. the disingenuous non-response of CT to its critics. I am one of "those Salon/Huffpo readers that will not be reading this." I wanted to read the comments made here to see if there was a redemptive nature to those who call themselves "evangelical Christians." I have met people from all walks of life and faiths and do not discriminate against them for holding differing beliefs from me. I do not expect everyone to embrace my pro-gay/pro-civil gay marriage stance. I do, however, expect to be treated with respect, worth and dignity as I treat others--aka "The Golden Rule." I am sad that I have to agree with many posters here that the right-wing Christian agenda has hijacked the Republican party and given a platform to those such as Sam. W to promote not supposedly "Christian" teachings of tolerance and respect(or Jewish for that matter, or any other so-called G-d based faith) but of hatred and divisiveness. It also saddens me to read that a person in this day and age would equate homosexuality with pedophilia. As we speak, my brother, by blood, whom I love, sits in prison, accused of pedophilia. He was a self-identified *heterosexual* male, married with 2 sons, and an *Orthodox Jew.* Can you honestly believe that I (a social worker, progressive rights advocate, working with the poor and mentally ill, but a *lesbian*) am a danger to children more than my straight, Republican, Rush-Limbaugh/right-wing-radio-listening, Orthodox religious, heterosexual pedophile brother? Please. This is why I have had a crisis of faith for most of my years on this earth.

I'm getting tired of being called names and being insulted by you homosexuals. For your information, you name callers, I have eight years of college and am certainly not unintelligent. You name callers/hate filled hearts on the other hand are showing your true selfs. Get off this Christian site and take your hate mongering to your pro-homosexual sites. If you can't argue in an intelligent decent way with manners, get an education or Grow up, whichever. I don't care how you do sex, just don't demand I accept it and call me names because I don't. We all have to answer to God in our own time. Personally I don't care what God does or doesn't do to you guys, because I have faith that because I try hard not to sin, that I'll get to heaven. You getting to heaven is your problem not mine, so don't blame me for what you're doing and put the onus on me that I'm the one sinning because I don't agree with you. Blame yourselves for your "life style". Enjoying sin is great until you gotta pay for it.

Anna, I think you just demonstrated what beatrice81 was observing above. You might see that as rude, but I hope the editors of CT have learned something valuable from this incident. Reaching upward with thoughtful, intelligent content will improve the current quality of CT. Dumbing down and highlighting the voice of the ignorant will only be defended by the same.

With regard to the "comments" section over at the interview: I find it instructive that those who commend the views expressed by "Joe the Plumber" (sic) do so on free speech grounds, as if somehow the highest aim of Evangelical Christianity is to allow EVERYONE to say ANYTHING at ANY TIME. They conveniently ignore the message of the gospel, which is to love one another. I wouldn't want to come within MILES of any "church" that claims "Joe the Plumber" (sic) as a member.

Concerning the now infamous Joe the plummer one of the commentators speaking about his lack of verbal profession of the name of Christ as possibly be an indicator of his non faith who was simply a spur of the moment convenience for the political moment alluded to the fact that JTP was not telling "the truth" about himself. How does the commentator know that? Does he really believe that the vile Obama worshiping media is going to speak truth about one they had so much contempt for? Or perhaps he is unaware of just what these devils did to him after his public exposure by invading his privacy as they proceeded to slander and discredit him? I doubt it! But as Jesus said "wisdom is justified of its children"

I truly beleive that GOD does not make mistakes and that GOD makes gay people too. I beleive in acceptance and love. It is incomprehensible to me why so many christians are so closed minded and simply stated dogmatic.... Joe the Plummer and the Republican Party DOES NOT represent Christians today!

Joe the plumber is absolutely the cutest conservative to come along in a long time. Believe me, if he were available, it's not his children I would be pursueing.

Joe the Plumber [sic] "is influential as a speaker and author"? Do these speeches and books (these books must be VERY insightful--I'm so surprised I've never run across them....) shed new light or perspective on the human condition or on Jesus? Or just the sad lack of intelligence of Republico-Christians? Have they been influential in your life, Mr. Olsen? Maybe you should write an article on THAT.

Joe the Plumber was the Party mascot for an election. He was not politically very useful--you might even say the strategy failed miserably. So this "talent" of his deserves the spotlight of the Christian media? Maybe you can interview Britney Spears next--she's famous and has claimed to be an evangelical. I'm sure she'll even say something outrageous.

CT just needs to decide if they want to do serious journalism or be the Parade Magazine of the fawning party faithful. If you have to explain "what your articles mean" there's a huge problem with your approach.

Okay, James Dobson is an EMERGING CHRISTIAN LEADER? And CT actually PUBLISHES this nonsense? Have you been lobotomized? Get with the program! Americans REJECTED fundamentalists/pentacostalists in the Sarah Palin mode last November. Just because you're nostalgic for your dream of Christian domination which was destroyed on Election Day doesn't mean you need to subject the majority of SANE AMERICANS to this bulls**t. I have encouraged both of my alma maters, Christian colleges, to dispense with their subscriptions to your shoddy publication. What a bunch of right-wing, reactionary prigs you are. Take your homophobia with you to your graves -- and I'm certain that you will -- but leave the rest of us alone, free to live our lives and govern ourselves according to reason, not superstition. You are one pathetic publication!

Rick, it's called debating, and there are rules in debating which has been done on this site for as long as I can remember until all of a sudden all these name callers showed up spewing hate because Joe Plumber got interviewed and used a word that homosexuals have used themselves and is also in the dictionary. Oh I apologize if I don't agree with you homosexuals being on this site and using language not used before and saying we Christians are doing the crass talking and hating. Your demands that CT do only interviews you want isn't in the debating rules or what this site is all about.It seems like all you people want to do is change everything to agree with you. I believe that's called a dictatorship controlling media and we aren't there yet in this country even though homosexuals and their worshipers want it that way. Learn the debating rules, I mean educate yourself.

So now that Joe has left the Republican party, does that mean that Joe is still interesting and worth covering in the future - if not I guess you only covered him because he was a loud mouthed 'controversial' Republican.




I guess we will miss out on future additions to his quotes such as:

“All this love and everything in the room - I’m horny.”

“I think media should be abolished from, uh, you know, reporting.”

“Back in the day, really, when people would talk about our military in a poor way, somebody would shoot ‘em. And there’d be nothing said about that,”

I have been an ordained minister of Jesus Christ for 20 years and I am openly gay. I have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ which is just that--personal, and not subject to your conservative dogma and religious judgmentalism. Over the course of my ministry in the United Church of Christ, I have counseled tens of thousands of victims of Evangelical brainwashing, spiritual violence, and idol worship of the Bible--not just gays but racial minorities, educated women and free-thinking men--who have since seen the light of the Gospel, which has saved them from pharisaical Evangelicalism by the grace of God freely offered to ALL through Jesus Christ. Thank you, CT, for promoting "Joe the Plumber" and his/your sin against the Holy Spirit--you have made the ignorance, bigotry and hate at the core of Evangelicalism and your magazine clear to all. "Those who say, 'I love God,' and hate their brothers and sisters are liars" - 1 John 4:20.

I'm curious: after this MASTERPIECE Q&A with "Joe the Plumber" (sic), will you next be featuring an in-depth interview with ANN COULTER, who also claims to be an Evangelical Christian? Perhaps you could follow up with her on this statement about the 9/11 terrorists:

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

Yes, you've got to love those EVANGELICALS - advocating forced conversion to Christianity. Truly in keeping with the THEOCRACY they'd love to impose upon the United States of America.

Please, Americans: wake up to the reality and do EVERYTHING in your power to KEEP CHURCH AND STATE SEPARATE, because these people are truly frightening and a genuine threat to democracy.

Anna, I was specifically responding after a comment that has apparently been deleted above. It referenced the writing and reasoning skills of those who defended Joe the Plumber. Your response to that had some glaring writing errors (e.g. 'selfs') and that struck me as ironic. Honestly, the greater issue here is that you and others accuse persons of name-calling and not following basic etiquette for debate while doing exactly the same. It's hard not to reach that conclusion when reading your posts. The sweeping judgments, the belief that you can read others' hearts, and the haste to assign persons to hell are all a little hard to swallow. It doesn't make for civilized discourse, and it certainly doesn't help the cause of CT and its deplorable piece on JTP.

I think I would feel better if CT would address the fact that Joe insinuated that gays need to be kept away from children. Why, are they dangerous? A bad influence? What? How does CT feel about that specific statement? As a Christian I do not understand why other Christians feel the need to stand in judgement of the sins of others. We all sin! Also, gay marriage is affording the same civil rights to homosexual couples. If you do not like that then move out of the US. Remember ALL men are created equal. I would perfer civil unions with full rights like they have in England. Marriage is a religious instition and should be protected. But we can't deny people of their rights simply becaause we do not agree about homosexuality being a sin.

Isn't it interesting that we find ourselves polarized by an issue (homosexuality) that Christ never talked about. I wonder how he would respond to Joe and to Gay people? He would probably have dinner with both.

Isn't interesting what we get so polarized about. I wonder what Christ would think about the responses on this blog. He really didn't think it necessary to wast much time on issues of politics or homosexuality. I think he would have wanted to share a meal with both Joe and straight and gay alike.

I'm tempted to appeal CT to change its name to something other than "Christianity" today. Your disingenuous, back door support of the views of Joe the Plumber by giving him a voice on this site is deplorable. Joe the Plumber does not meet any of the definitions that you use to justify the publication of this interview. Cultural artifact? Influential? If we begin to associate Christ with the unenlightened views of prehistory, the church is in danger. CT is promoting a culture of fear, prejudice, hate and white supremacy (Read the tacit approval of "paleo-confederacy" [or whatever you want to call it] in the article "The Controversialist"). CT has become a corrupt and distinctly non-Christian organization. I take heart knowing that you too will be judged. When you cry "Lord, Lord" will you hear the response, "I do not know you. Get away from me!"?

I'm extremely disappointed that CT left unchallenged Joe's comments and his use of the word "queer". As if that were the technical term for homosexual and by looking in the dictionary we would see what "they" really are. "Queer" is derogatory and always has been. It doesn't matter if "they" (as one commenter put it) use the word. Some black people use the "N" word, too. But that doesn't mean it isn't derogatory and inflammatory. CT would never have published that word.

As Christians, we must always ask ourselves this: Am I communicating the love of Christ to my neighbors or am I more concerned about judging their sins? Only God can judge because only God knows how we are made and what we face in life. Did this article communicate the love of Christ or the judgment of a man? I think the latter and CT gave him a platform to do it. We Christians must ask if our words and actions attract people to Christ or if they repel people. That is the bottom line. CT should ask the same thing.

Just a brief "follow-up" to a comment posted at the main "Joe the Plumber" Q&A:

"Dave Posted: May 11, 2009 12:45 PM

I wonder if Joe would allow his children around Sarah Palins daughter, who had sex outside of marriage?"

Yes, indeed, Dave. That's the problem when one begins to "throw stones," as it were.

P.S. Dave, just to be absolutely clear on your point: Sarah Palin and her husband also "had sex outside of marriage" -- their first child was born less than 8 months after the wedding date. "Joe the Plumber" should probably keep his children away from Sarah, too.