I've got no problem with people and the religion they want to follow....but I have a problem with money going to churches. Nothing better than seeing new, elaborate churches getting built when the economy was bad (like a $40mil church that was built near me back in 2010 - just after the housing crash and economy tanked) or existing churches getting elaborate add-ons to their buildings (not too far from the new big church being built in 2010, another church a few miles away was having a big steeple and giant bell added to it). Also nothing better than seeing high priced cars parked in the parking lots for the priests that drive them......
But I digress.
This was my exact thought, too. Why does someone that's a successful writer need a kickstarter? Wouldn't he have publishers that he's writing for or has he burned his bridges?
Or does he simply want to publish his own book? According to a quick search his net worth is $6mil. He's not super rich by any means, but he certainly is well off.
Oh well, I guess folks can do what they want with their money, be it backing a well established author or their church.....I just find the way people justify their reasons to be interesting and/or sad.
Well, from a scientific perspective, people's lives are often much happier and more fulfilling when they have a purpose. And if that means sending money to their church...
I'll probably do something similar for my church, but we aren't a megachurch though. I mean, we live in Salinas, California so it isn't a really wealthy one.
Plus my old church Salinas Chinese Christian Church is basically dying out at this points, perhaps absorbed but unlikely as they are quite traditional and quite Baptist but don't declare that because this is California.
Misuse of the word lifestyle doesn't make bigotry fairness.
Lifestyles are irrelevant to the central subject — sexual orientation.
A nun in a convent has the same lifestyle as another nun, even though one of them is heterosexual and the other is homosexual.
The best advice I can give you is to place yourself in the shoes of a gay person before making a claim about how society should treat them. Think about how you would like, for instance, going to tech forums and seeing people make claims that you're subhuman — which is exactly what all the claims against equal rights for gay people mean. They are about trying to justify gay people not being fully human and the end game is extermination. That's not overly dramatic. It is the logic that's used. Invisible people (I.e. 'don't throw it in our face' and the 1001 varieties of that) don't have rights. Invisible people disappear and no one notices.
Hooker's research from the 50s, the first to not use a polluted sample to reach an illusory correlation, is definitive. It proves that homosexuality is not a problem in need of a solution. That means the only objections to homosexuality are religious (I.e. fantasy-based). Taking away the civil rights of various people on the basis of fantasy tales is unjust.