Piers Morgan: If You Don't Like the Answer, Don't Ask.

Me: Do you think pepperoni or hawaiian pizza is better?

You: I have to say Hawaiian.

Me: WHY?!?!?!

You: I just read a study linking greasy pork products with heart disease. And I also hear that tropical fruits, like the pineapple in Hawaiian pizza, have many benefits. So, I conclude that Hawaiian is a better choice.

Me: Are you saying people who eat pepperoni are unhealthy?

You: Uh.....I suppose that follows. If I must give a short answer, then, yes, I'll side with the experts who found pepperoni-eaters to be unhealthy.

Me: Don't you think that's a little judgemental of pepperoni-lovers?

You: How did this become personal? I'm not waving a banner that says, "Ye who eat pepperoni shall be punished!" But, if someone asks, then I tell them my source doesn't support pepperoni.

Me: You can't just abrogate your responsibility by blaming the word of experts. When you say someone is unhealthy, it's a big statement! You ARE being a judge! So, please excuse me while I go tell any who will listen that you are an intolerant, pathetic, pepperoni-hater.

-----
You: What the heck was that about, Amanda?

Well, read this story about an interview between CNN's Piers Morgan and televangelist Joel Osteen, and you'll recognize a true pepperoni-pineapple debate. (And do watch the clip, too, for the whole irksome effect!)

At some point during their discussion, Morgan asked Osteen point-blank: Do you think homosexuality is a sin? Then, in typical ratings-boosting, bait-and-trap fashion, Morgan criticized the preacher for his answer.

Now, don't get the wrong idea here. I'm not Joel Osteen's biggest fan. He, like many megachurch leaders, subscribes to a Gospel of Health and Wealth with which I strongly disagree. And, as this person points out, he rarely takes a stand on anything controversial, since the notion of sin puts a damper on his depictions of the euphoric, problem-free Christian life. In short, he has earned a reputation for being spineless.

But, apparently, Osteen will give a straight answer when backed into a corner. And--in response to the question about homosexuality--he states the Bible calls it a sin.

Unfortunately, Morgan controls the "interview." Morgan asks the questions, and he decides how long to spend on each answer. But, instead of admitting the topic can't be covered in a 5-minute segment (and while ignoring Osteen's assertion that it's "complicated") Morgan makes a wormy move. He sets an emotional trap, brings up Elton John, and demands a short, on-the-spot answer to the now-personal question: why would you say Elton John is a sinner?

For a second time, Osteen delivers the shortest answer possible, pointing to the Scripture. He tries to remind Morgan it was HIM who wanted to talk about it. He tries saying it's not the Christian's job to condemn people or judge sinners. (Osteen doesn't hold up banners saying, "Ye homosexuals will be punished.") But, Morgan interrupts with:

"I think you ARE a kind of judge. And I don't think you can abrogate that kind of responsibility. When you say to 7 million people, 'homosexuality is a sin,' it's a big statement. You are a judge."

Oh, Silent Joel Osteen, you aren't used to the hotseat, are you? More than one angry blogger tore into him. Check out this guy, who actually praises Morgan for not letting that "closet case" get away with a "Holier than Thou answer." (Thanks, Mr. Blogger, for exposing the world's judgemental people....)

There is plenty more to dissect from the interview, but I can't allow Morgan's biggest mistake to go unmentioned any longer. No one can argue with a messenger without refuting the place he got the message. It's not "abrogating responsibility" to give a source for our beliefs. Certainly, offering a reason such as "this or that tells me so" is better than Morgan's own vague, unsupported statement, "I don't think you can help being gay." Providing proofs through back-and-forth dialog was the gentleman's way to debate, back before you could trump reason with the phrase, "Don't judge!!!"

If you don't like my stance on pineapples, you need to prove my research is a sham. But don't bring up a friend of yours with a pepperoni-affinity. Your point remains unsupported, even if you paint a cute, mental-picture baby. Don't spring into personal attack--calling me a "judge" and questioning my intent. A mean offense cannot substitute for some kind of defense. (Plus, calling me a "judge" makes you one.) And don't ask your question a hundred different ways, to see if it changes my answer. Only a two-way, logic-based discussion will further my thinking; not several attempts to make my viewpoint sound inhumane.
-----
Just as the interview spirals to a painful close, Morgan asks Osteen's wife "what she would say to Elton John" if he were there. And, unfortunately, she doesn't handle the grilling much better than her husband.

But, Mr. Morgan, I have an answer to that question. I'd say, "It's an honor to meet you, Sir Elton John. You're a legend!"

See, unlike the Atheist television hosts bent on defaming evangelical pastors, I don't obsess over homosexuality. Since I don't have the burden to entertain an audience and keep my viewers, I don't have to gravitate toward the most controversial topic. And since Christians should see the whole person and love them despite their sin, it wouldn't be my place to bring up homosexuality with the singer at all.

But, if Elton John asked me, point blank, what I believed about his homosexuality, the situation changes, and I hope he has time to listen. It's a complicated, but well-researched answer that I would love to share if he really wants to hear it. If either of them asks, Elton John and Mr. Morgan should prepare for a long, source-sited answer they won't like.