It's not exactly clear why Buzzfeed chose to publicly shame Fixer Upper hosts Chip and Joanna Gaines. Nor do we know why the online publication attacked the Christian couple's church.
Maybe author Kate Aurthur got a speeding ticket while driving through Waco, Texas? Or maybe she dislikes shiplap? Or perhaps Buzzfeed simply employs virulent, anti-Christian bigots?
We may never know. Regardless, their ugly attack on the Gaines family and Antioch Community Church in Waco cannot be undone.
"The real shame is not on the Gaines family, but on this media inquisition of Christianity," National Religious Broadcasters president Jerry A. Johnson told me.
Earlier this week, Buzzfeed raised questions about the Gaines' family church and its position on same-sex marriage.
So let's cut to the chase is Antioch Community Church anti-gay?
"Absolutely not, Pastor Siebert told me in an exclusive interview. "We are not only not anti-gay, but we are pro-helping people in their journey to find out who God is and who He has made them to be."
The pastor told me he was surprised by the controversy surrounding a message he delivered more than a year ago pointing out that people from all different walks of life attend the church.
"For us our heart has always been to love Jesus, preach the word of God and help people in their journey," he said.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/12/01/fixer-upper-hosts-pastor-responds-to-buzzfeeds-public-shaming.html

As a hobby furniture maker, I'm offended by some of the shameful things they pass off as furniture on that show.

With Chip and Joanna being Baylor grads who are known to go to one of these churches, I always expected them to be kind of soft homophobes. I say "soft" because there's a very real, huge, and appreciable difference between the homophobe who will beat me up when he sees me doing something he thinks is too "gay," and the homophobe who is super nice to me and tells me how cool I am while opposing my rights, talking about how acceptance of people like me is a bad thing for society, and trying to come up with ways to "fix" me. I have no doubt that they're wonderful people and they seem really cool on their show, but if we were neighbors I personally wouldn't hang out with them much knowing that they agree with the things this church says about me. And maybe they don't agree.

What I don't understand is how talking about this church's beliefs is a "hit piece." If these are your cherished, deeply held beliefs, why is it a bad thing that people know about them? This reminds me of the debate we had a couple years ago where a Democrat in the Oklahoma legislature, during their "religious freedom" bill debate, put an amendment requiring any business that wanted to discriminate against gays to place a sign in their window stating as such. People here, and in the lege were upset by that, which I never got.

Or is the issue not that their views are being talked about, but that they're being labeled "anti-gay?" I say this around here a lot, but I seriously take it as a huge sign of progress that people saying anti-gay things by and large want to bend over backwards to prove they're not anti-gay while saying them. In the past that largely wasn't the case, and in many churches it still isn't today, so I do appreciate the nicer tone in the way that I'd prefer an open-faced slap from an old lady to a full-on conference with Lucille and Negan. You know, not ideal or great, but better than other things.

The thing is, even if you think you have good intentions somehow, saying you can "fix" this "problem" with gay people IS anti-gay. By its own terms, your proposition is that this thing about them is bad and needs to be altered. I get that some of you think this is loving, or really want us to think it is, but it does not at all come across that way. Again, this is way better than "the gays caused that hurricane!" or "Gays are perverts who want to molest your kids and also they're causing the downfall of this country," and if it's the closest some of you can get to actual acceptance I'll take it I guess. Just know that the people you're trying to convince aren't going to buy it when you say you're not "anti" or "against" them. You are, even if it's to a lesser degree than other people.

Translation: acceptance isn't good enough I also demand approval and agreement.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

What did buzzfeed say specifically?

---

Nothing earth shattering that people familiar with Baylor, Waco, Texas, or church in general didn't already know. Homosexuality is a sin, it's a "lifestyle choice" most gay people make because they were molested (90% of them, to be exact), Jesus can make me crazy for boobies, yadda yadda.

Much tamer stuff than many other churches would say about the topic, for sure. Before reading the article I was expecting all the classics like "evil," "pedophile/predator," "downfall of society," "collapse of the Roman Empire," "Sodomites," "worthy of death" and "AIDS is God's punishment" to come up, so I was pleasantly surprised that it was the newer, gentler "we just want to fix you because you're a sinner and that makes us sad" thing.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Translation: acceptance isn't good enough I also demand approval and agreement.

---

Wanting to change me is the opposite of acceptance. Also, I'm not demanding anything. You can believe whatever you want and I can determine whether I want to be around you or patronize your business based on those beliefs. And vice versa.

Even liberals know this hit piece is ridiculous.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/12/01/buzzfeeds-hit-piece-on-the-gaines-family-is-dangerous/?client=safari

Fortunately we have texags to stick up for persecuted rich white Christians.

Marco Esquandolas said:

---

Fortunately we have texags to stick up for persecuted rich white Christians.

---

Every time you post this drivel another person votes for trump.

It was a hit piece because it equates silence or no comment with hate and she was clearly digging for it given that the sermon was a year old.

I didn't hear BB denounce whatever gay drunk driver wherever that killed someone some night, he must hate the people that died. Is that really journalism in your eyes?

Marco Esquandolas said:

---

Baylor trash. That couple is effing annoying as hell. Hate that show.

---

Meh. I like them, especially Chip. He's a dork, and so am I. Before we moved from Waco, our next door neighbors also went to Antioch (as do quite a lot of folks in Waco). They indicate that with the Gaines', what you see is what you get.

I found the buzzfeed article and read it. I have my issues with the original article, but what I don't get about the fox response is this?

If the criteria for calling someone an anti Christian bigot is that they publish an article which criticizes a church's view on homosexuality and gay marriage, why is it not okay to call someone anti-gay for holding a belief which is critical of gays?

There are those that complain that by opposing BLM or Obama that they get called racists. And there are also those that would complain that by being critical of a Christian value they are labeled anti-Christian bigots. It seems that if we are to recognize a problem with jumping to label someone a bigot for holding a philosophical or theological belief, we must also not be so quick to jump to label someone a bigot for criticizing our own.

I disagree with the church's stance on homosexuality. Does that make me anti Christian or a bigot? Maybe you disagree with what BLM is saying, does that make you a racist? Of course not.

Both the Buzzfeed and the Fox articles are garbage.

This whole thing is just dumb. It's a non-story.

Beer Baron said:

---

I tend to agree. If they themselves had made it an issue by going around talking about it and protesting things like the Duck Dynasty guys or those twins who had their show pulled before it started, it would be different.

---

It's okay for someone to agree with the orthodox teachings of the major world religions, but I'll be damned if we can allow them to say it out loud.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Translation: acceptance isn't good enough I also demand approval and agreement.

---

It isn't acceptance if you believe they must change.

So I can't accept anyone as they are without believing they can change for the better? Ok.

Let's put an easy religious spin on this. God accepts us as we are. He also expects that we change. The two are not linked.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

I found the buzzfeed article and read it. I have my issues with the original article, but what I don't get about the fox response is this?

If the criteria for calling someone an anti Christian bigot is that they publish an article which criticizes a church's view on homosexuality and gay marriage, why is it not okay to call someone anti-gay for holding a belief which is critical of gays?

There are those that complain that by opposing BLM or Obama that they get called racists. And there are also those that would complain that by being critical of a Christian value they are labeled anti-Christian bigots. It seems that if we are to recognize a problem with jumping to label someone a bigot for holding a philosophical or theological belief, we must also not be so quick to jump to label someone a bigot for criticizing our own.

I disagree with the church's stance on homosexuality. Does that make me anti Christian or a bigot? Maybe you disagree with what BLM is saying, does that make you a racist? Of course not.

Both the Buzzfeed and the Fox articles are garbage.

---

She and her editor were making fun of trump supporters (on Twitter) and throwing out shows they probably watched, and the hit piece author said...you guessed it! Fixer Upper!

Two days later the piece comes out. She then starts taking shots at Waco on twitter too, simply because the Gaines live there.

It's pretty clear she hates Christians and trump supporters. Buzzfeed is garbage but they give her a voice and it gets picked up by other fake news organizations and trumpeted across the internet.

Is there really some overarching public good to be gained by demanding a stance from them or any other public figure over this? If it matters that much to you, you can look it up on your own. This is just petty and vindictive, an attempt to get someone fired for their beliefs. It's a huge stretch to try to relate yourself to her at all.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/12/01/buzzfeeds-hit-piece-on-the-gaines-family-is-dangerous/?postshare=5661480594988477&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.c811c009daa6

k2aggie07 said:

---

So I can't accept anyone as they are without believing they can change for the better? Ok.

Let's put an easy religious spin on this. God accepts us as we are. He also expects that we change. The two are not linked.

---

That's called a logical absurdity.

If you accept someone as they are, why do they need to change? You're saying they aren't suitable as they are, thus, you are by definition not accepting them.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

If the criteria for calling someone an anti Christian bigot is that they publish an article which criticizes a church's view on homosexuality and gay marriage, why is it not okay to call someone anti-gay for holding a belief which is critical of gays?

---

The problem is not the word "anti-gay". The problem is that people on the Left are hell-bent on destroying other people's livelihoods because they're not adequately accepting of homosexuality.

I accept and love my family as they are and require nothing of them for that love and acceptance, but I have family members who could take great strides in improving their lives, and I do hope for their change.

It's only a logical absurdity because you want it to be.

k2aggie07 said:

---

I accept and love my family as they are and require nothing of them for that love and acceptance, but I have family members who could take great strides in improving their lives, and I do hope for their change.

It's only a logical absurdity because you want it to be.

---

Ok, but that's not what we're talking about with acceptance here. The pastor is saying gay people must change in order to be saved. That's not acceptance. You can love them, but that's still not acceptance.

What do they care if a religion they don't agree with doesn't think they're saved? I'm sure Islam teaches I am bound straight for the bad place. Should I demand they "accept" me? That's ridiculous.

So like I said. Accept now means we have to change our faith to match your personal proclivities.

Dr. Watson said:

---

The pastor is saying gay people must change in order to be saved.

---

This is a nuanced important conversation, but that's not what orthodox Christianity says. Orthodox Christianity says that it is sinful (wrong, harmful) for a person to have sex with someone of the same gender. Orthodox Christianity also says that it is sinful (wrong, harmful) for a person to have sex with someone to whom they are not married. I agree with Orthodox Christianity. I could be wrong. I also desire good things for you and your's.

commando2004 said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

If the criteria for calling someone an anti Christian bigot is that they publish an article which criticizes a church's view on homosexuality and gay marriage, why is it not okay to call someone anti-gay for holding a belief which is critical of gays?

---

The problem is not the word "anti-gay". The problem is that people on the Left are hell-bent on destroying other people's livelihoods because they're not adequately accepting of homosexuality.

---

I don't think this is any more true than the statement "People on the right are hell bent on forcing their specific religion and morality down everyone's throats upon threat of prosecution."

I worry that you may be judging half of the country based on its extremes or its loudest voices.

Marco Esquandolas said:

---

Everyone here is aware that BuzzFeed is crap and should never be taken seriously, right?

---

Yes, absolutely.

But they do have a MASSIVE following and if they were to call for Chip and Joanna Gaines to be blocked from HGTV, there is a chance it might happen.

I was responding to the silly suggestion that acceptance and approval were somehow inextricably linked.

I don't know you or anything about you other than the limited information you've shared here, so I can't imagine why I would have the hubris to give you advice or why you would think I should. I can genuinely say that I imagine whatever your sins might be, mine are worse. So please pray for me.