In response to:

Why Bill O'Reilly is Wrong About The Bible

LesFalin Wrote: Apr 07, 2013 1:43 PM
O'Reilly seems to say we cannot use Scripture to defend what might be considered a religious or even a Judeo-Christian view. . . But why? Are there not Christians and other people of faith who need the moral reinforcement? Do Secular Progressives leave their ideology out of their arguments? Do they seek to convert people of faith or solidify their relativist base? Did Obama seek to appeal only to conservatives during the debates? Or Romney only liberals? Can't one put forth different views for different audiences? O'Reilly was not only petulant, his argument is flawed.
Tommy_Maq Wrote: Apr 07, 2013 3:02 PM
"O'Reilly seems to say we cannot use Scripture to defend what might be considered a religious or even a Judeo-Christian view. . . But why?"

Because we aren't a theocracy, and the disagreement is over public policy.

Do you consider the Veda's apt when discussing low? Gilgamesh? Stories of Zeus and Io?

If so, they are all older and more entrenched than your mythical text, so you lose.

If not, then you also lose, because NO mythical text is apt.

See how in either case, you lose? Accept that your mythical text isn't a valid basis for making judgements about secular public policy...or keep whining, thumping the bible, and losing the argument, as you deserve.

For the last two weeks Bill O'Reilly has committed multiple journalistic mis-steps.

As long as he is allowed to define the terms of the narrative of what happened they will not be corrected. His failure to do so is a massive public relations problem and a mis-step in itself.

He owes a significant demo of his viewership an apology. He owes them one quickly so that his previously demonstrable prejudice against people of faith does not cause unintended long term effects.

"The compelling argument is on the side of homosexuals,” O’Reilly said on his evening broadcast March 26, 2013. “The...