As a linebacker for the Dallas Cowboys, Hutcherson wanted to “hurt whites”: his race-based payback for growing up in the segregated South. Then he became a “Christian” and took pleasure in killing defenseless animals and mounting their heads on the wall in his office: “when I run into animals, I kill them.”
The pastor of the evangelical Antioch Bible megachurch in Redmond, Washington is again targeting his neighbor and aiming to hurt more people. Why? Because that corporate beast refuses to discriminate against its gay and lesbian employees:
“Gay rights foe Rev. Ken Hutcherson is calling on religious conservatives to buy stock in Microsoft so they can force a shareholders vote on the company’s policy that provides equality for gay workers.”
For his report in the British paper The Daily Telegraph, Toby Harnden spoke with the rabid reverend in Redmond. His article is a most telling intra-view of Hutcherson, who
told Microsoft executives at a shareholders’ meeting last week that he would be their “worst nightmare” if they continued to defy him. …
An advocate of a “biblical stance” against divorce and homosexuality, Mr. Hutcherson, 55, is asking millions of evangelical activists, as well as Orthodox Jewish and other allies, to buy up Microsoft shares and demand a return to traditional values. Microsoft, he declares, will be just the first company targeted in an escalation of the culture wars between evangelicals and corporate America. “There are 256 Fortune 500 companies alone pouring millions upon millions of dollars into pushing the homosexual agenda,” he told The Daily Telegraph.
“I consider myself a warrior for Christ. Microsoft don’t scare me. I got God with me.
“I told them that you need to work with me or we will put a firestorm on you like you have never seen in you life because I am your worst nightmare. I am a black man with a righteous cause with a whole host of powerful white people behind me…
“I don’t care how big Microsoft is,” he said. “They are nothing but a
feather in the wind of God. America basically got started with a tea
party and Goliath, if I’m not mistaken, got taken down by David, who believed in the same cause I believe in.” [italics added]
A closer look at Hutcherson’s statements not only confirms but extends the pathologies so clear in his motivation on the gridiron and current murderous hobby, but also helps define his “ministry’s” latest pro-discrimination campaign designed to hurt people as much as possible: “when I run into animals, I kill them.” Gay and lesbian Americans are those “animals.” Clearly Mr. Hutcherson wants to “kill” them economically and bury their civil rights in the dung heap of his sanctimonious rhetoric.
“If they continued to defy him.” Has Hutcherson declared himself divine? If Microsoft defies “him” then he’ll call down “a firestorm on you like you have never seen in you life because I am your worst nightmare.” The only thing for certain is the Hutcherson and his perverted use of the Bible to foster discrimination and hate are indeed “nightmares” of the worst kind.
The reverend believes in a “biblical stance” against divorce and homosexuality. Is he also threatening to bring down a firestorm if Microsoft hires and treats divorcees equally? Or are Hutcherson and his comrades just using gays as convenient scapegoats?
Daniel Karslake explores that and related questions in his new documentary film For the Bible Tells Me So. In an article about the film, Bill Friskics-Warren poses the fundamental question:
The Bible says that eating shrimp is an abomination and that working on the Sabbath is punishable by death. Not even the most devout Christian, though, thinks twice about ordering the shrimp scampi or checking their office e-mail from home on a Sunday afternoon.
Biblical literalists know that the customs and circumstances that gave rise to such injunctions were rooted in historical and cultural contexts very different from our own.
So why do so many Christians cling to the handful of Scriptures that cast aspersions on sexual relationships between people of the same gender? Why, when scholars tell us that these passages have nothing to do with sexual orientation as we’ve come to understand it, do some people continue to use Scripture as a club to judge and condemn?
Karslake’s answer is straight to the point:
“We have a long history of looking to the Bible to confirm our prejudices.”
In the documentary Karslake addresses two others tactics Hutcherson and those like him use: “proof-texting” and the “loving the sinner and hating the sin” mantra.
Similar to “cherry-picking,” proof-texting is the practice of taking Biblical verses out of context and using them to frame and defend preexisting prejudices in order to justify a social, political and/or economic agenda:
Unlike biblical exegesis, which involves the careful examination of Scripture in its historical context to understand what it means and how it might speak to us today, proof-texting manipulates what Christians believe to be God’s word by allowing preconceived notions to color it. When done from the pulpit, it can amount to theological malpractice, depriving lay people of the chance to engage the Scriptures at a deeper, more informed level.
Karslake and Friskics-Warren explain that “theological malpractice” in relation to an often heard mantra:
One peculiar form of theological harm is the distinction
that some heterosexuals make between “loving the sinner and hating the
sin.”
“You can’t hate such a complete part of me and still love me,” Karslake
said. “Straight people can’t imagine not being straight, but they can't
accept that the same thing could be true of gay people. They think that
it’s different with gay people, like it’s somehow a choice."
Henry Blaze, pastor of Progressive Baptist Church in Nashville, tends
to agree. “I don’t think you can truly embrace the other and be able to
recognize God in the other without seeking to understand them,” he said.
Preventing – or at least discouraging – people from getting to know and
understand gays is precisely what the leaders of the Christian Right do
through their predatory campaigns that rely solely on stereotypes and
sanctimonious rhetoric.
Rev. Hutcherson wants to use his
proof-texted, misdirected, misconceived, erroneous “biblical stance” to
force “a return to traditional values.” Clearly, his conception of
“traditional values” is as perverted as his “biblical stance,” and his
“traditional values” are the same as those who once used the Bible to
advocate slavery and, later, justify segregation and discrimination.
Ellen Armour, professor of theology at Vanderbilt Divinity School, is one of those biblical scholars cast doubt on scriptural anti-gay bias:
“Stronger texts [than those used against gays] in Scripture were used
to justify slavery… in the case of same-sex sex, especially among men –
and I think it’s worth noting that that seems to be the focal point of
the controversy – we’re talking about just a few small verses.”
“Paul never contemplated the monogamous, long-term sexual
relationships that take place among people today,” explained Jack
Rogers, former moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian
Church (U.S.A.).
“There is no analogue for our contemporary understanding of sexual
identity in the Bible, neither for heterosexuals nor homosexuals,”
added Armour. “It’s simply not there.”
Hutcherson is irate that “there are 256 Fortune 500 companies alone
pouring millions upon millions of dollars into pushing the homosexual
agenda.” It seems the reverend’s numbers are as misinformed – and out
of touch with reality – as his “biblical stance”:
Equality Forum, a Philadelphia-based GLBT rights organization, has
announced that more than 92% (463) of the 2007 Fortune 500 companies
include sexual orientation in their employment nondiscrimination
policies.
According to the press release, when Equality Forum began contacting
Fortune 500 companies in the fall of 2003, only 323 companies – or
about 65% – provided sexual orientation protections. Equality Forum,
along with professors Louis Thomas of University of Pennsylvania and
Ian Ayres of Yale Law School, contacted 177 CEOs and human
resources directors of companies that didn't offer nondiscrimination
policies. By the fall of 2004, 405 (81%) had adopted protections. …
A Gallup poll in May [2007] found that 89% of U.S. citizens believe
that gays and lesbians should have protection against workplace
discrimination.
The “homosexual agenda” is a favorite cliché of the Christian Right. Rep. Barney Frank summarized what that “agenda” really is:
I want to apologize to the various self-proclaimed divine
messengers who appear deeply troubled by a dark plot they label the
“gay agenda.”
Troubled as I am by the prospect of these pious men denied a good
night’s sleep by their need to be eternally vigilant against us, I have
decided to break the silence, decode the cryptogram, unravel the
mystery and tip our hand.
We have an agenda…
Specifically, we want all people in the United States to enjoy the same
legal rights as everyone else, unless they have forfeited them by
violating the rights of others. We believe this should include some
things that are, apparently, very controversial.
They include the right to serve, fight and even die on behalf of our
country in the military; the right to earn a living by working hard and
being judged wholly on the quality of our work; the right for teenagers
to attend high school without being shoved, punched or otherwise
attacked; and yes, the right to express not only love for another
person, but a willingness to be legally as well as morally responsible
for his or her well-being.
We also believe that we – and all Americans – should enjoy full access
to health care; that strong environmental protection is fully
compatible with economic prosperity. We know that the free market is
the best way to generate our national wealth; and that we need
cooperation between the private and public sectors to be sure that we
as a society and as individuals get the maximum benefit from the wealth
by the quality of all our lives...
Microsoft initiated its diversity and non-discrimination policies for
the same reasons the other Fortune 500 companies and many other did:
it’s good for business. As Steve Falk, chief executive of the San
Francisco Chamber of Commerce, said in a recent statement:
“Support of [equal] rights for gays and lesbians is
‘consistent with our organization's advocacy of policies that are
inclusive and contribute to business' ability to attract and retain a
diverse, talented workforce.’”
But Hutcherson isn’t concerned with social or economic realities, only
his own jaundiced agenda and vendetta against Microsoft. Some
background from 365Gay.com:
Hutcherson has been battling Microsoft and the state of Washington over LGBT rights for two years.
When a gay rights bill was before the [Washington state] legislature in
2005 Hutcherson met with [Microsoft] executives and threatened a
national boycott of the computer giant if it did not disavow itself
from the gay rights bill.
Microsoft earlier had announced its support for the legislation saying it would help attract talented workers to the state. …
The measure was reintroduced in 2006 and passed.
Hutcherson then began a petition drive to force a statewide vote on
repealing the rights law but failed to get enough signatures to put the
issue on the ballot.
So now Rev. Hutcherson is trying another tactic and claiming he’s “a
warrior for Christ. … I got God with me.” How much more pathological
can one man get?
Hutcherson seems blinded by his own bigotry
and pathological desire to hurt others. Had he bothered to think, he
would have realized Jesus was an advocate for the disenfranchised.
While no one knows what Jesus would do or think now, given what’s known
of his activities 2000 years ago it seems likely he’d be standing
shoulder-to-shoulder, hand-in-hand with those Hutcherson and his
minions want to further disenfranchise and discriminate against.
As for Hutcherson’s claim that he has “a righteous cause” and has “God with me,” that’s exactly what the 9/11 terrorists claimed.
William James was fond of quoting Professor James H. Leuba of Bryn Mawr College: “God
is not known. He is not understood. He is used.” It seems likely that
were Professor Leuba alive today and heard the anti-Christian message
of Hutcherson and other self-proclaimed “warriors for Christ,” he’d add
two words to that last sentence: “He is used and abused.”
To what extent self-serving dogmatists such as Hutcherson misuse and
abuse Biblical texts they don’t really understand but have proof-texted
to support their personal agendas is made clear in the reverend’s
statement that “I don’t care how big Microsoft is … They are nothing
but a feather in the wind of God. America basically got started with a
tea party and Goliath, if I’m not mistaken, got taken down by David,
who believed in the same cause I believe in.”
Hutcherson’s
bumper-sticker reference to the Boston Tea Party is as misinformed as
his likening himself to David: an identification that does more than
backfire.
David was “involved” with Jonathan. There are numerous passages
in the Bible alluding to a passionate, physically intimate relationship
between David and Jonathan, including Jonathan’s erotic disrobing for
David, his “delighting much” in David, and their passionate kissing.
Had Hutcherson read more than his own self-serving words he might have discovered the fourteenth century Life ofEdward II
– “Indeed I do remember to have heard that one man so loved another.
Jonathan cherished David, Achilles loved Patroclus” – and that King
Edward II wept for his dead lover Piers Gaveston as “David had mourned
for Jonathan.”
Whether the David-Jonathan relationship was
Platonic, intimate but non-sexual, or homoerotic, it’s crystal clear
that David and Hutcherson do not “believed in the same cause.”
Rev. Hutcherson’s proclaiming himself to be the new “David”
demonstrates the shallowness of this theology and his hypocrisy as a
pastor. It also strongly suggests he’s doing battle with Microsoft only
to enhance his own socio-political clout. In that he has lots of
company. Collectively, they’re called the “Christian Right,” and they
are anything but “Christian” or “right.”
I have a hard time working up all teary for Microsoft. They're nothing but "intellectual property" (i.e. state-backed information monopoly) rent-seeking leeches. I don't care if Hutcheson is putting muscle on them for supporting puppies, kittens and babies with Downs syndrome. Anything that eats into their state-violence-extracted bottom line is good with me.
1
November 25, 2007
Mr. Cat: Way to miss the point...
Slaney: Uh, except that this isn't about eating into their bottom line. It's about a benefit they provide, and the threat to take over the company. In fact, providing benefits to homosexuals would eat into their bottom line, in a sense. (Though the argument could be made it helps attract gay talent which helps the bottom line.)
What would come out of Microsoft if Hutcherson ended up getting his way would be an even more monolithic organisation, with single minded economic (im)moral ideals.
2
November 25, 2007
Randi Reitan: I feel sad for the followers of Hutcheson
People who attend Hutcherson's church are the real victims not Microsoft. He is a charismatic preacher who is leading a flock of followers not in the teachings of Christ but in his own warped views of Christianity. He has not left behind his old football days when he went on the field to "hurt whites" ... he has just changed who he is targeting. The gay community is now the target. The only thing worse than a bigot is a bigot who rallies others to follow him in the name of Scripture. Christ came to bring love, to reach out to the outcasts and to teach us how to love one another. I pray one day that Hutcherson finds Christ.
3
November 25, 2007
A follower of the faith: KEN Hutcherson aka servant of god? LOL
Ken, you are the Black Lucifer....minion of lies. The devil in disguise. How dare you even walk among us. I cast thee Satan back to the bowls of HELL. Your'e just a idiot!!!!
4
November 25, 2007
Anitra Freeman: Randi is right
The followers of Hutcheson certainly are bing victimized. I've seen the man speak to a (mostly white) crowd at a Union Gospel Mission convention. He praised them, then insulted them, built them up, tore them down, bounced them all around and gloried in it. My husband spotted it as the behavior of an abuser, emotionally manipulating the abused, workomg them to the point where their self-esteem totally depends on you, their self-image is totally defined by you.
But no matter who is selling what, the buyer has to have a motive for buying it. Hutcheson could not manipulate his crowd unless they themselves get something out of the deal. All too often, it is the appeal of being one of the "Elect" -- the holy remnant that is so much better than all the heathen, beloved of God while everyone else is damned. It is the most basic appeal to the worst of our inherited humanity -- our willingness to divide up into monkey-tribes.
We all have to watch out for that weakness. It is as tempting to hate Hutcheson and his Holy Tribe; that makes US the Righteous Remnant, standing up for Humanist Values against the Evil Ones. And that's a crock, too.
We are all fragile little humans, Homo Wannabe Sapiens, one step above (or possibly below) the rest of the apes, our newborn cognitive circuits easily overwhelmed by the ancient emotive ones. We are all kin. Ken Hutcheson is a mirror for the worst in all of us. If we want to Ken Hutcherson and his ilk to understand, identify with, and embrace homosexuals -- we have to understand, identify with, and embrace Ken Hutcherson first.
It ain't easy. Neither is what we are asking him to do.
5
November 25, 2007
SteveMD2: Str8 gay rights activist
Hutcherson reminds me of another man of the God of Hate, Minister Ted Haggard of the megachurch in Colorado. I've seen movie clips of him prancing back and forth condemning gays. Of course we all know what that is about - Psychologists call it "projection". When someone truly hates themselves because of biblical misunderstandings and exploitation, they try to salve their conscience by projecting their internal hatred upon others who are similar to them. Hutcherson is not just a misled individual. He perfectly fits the same characteristics as Haggard. He hates himself because he secretly is gay, and / or possibly a child or wife abuser. He is just like the freak Fred Phelps, whose estranged son says is a wife and childbeater, and probably was beaten himself by his father. And if I've ever seen a 'gay face' you can guess who I am talking about. So come clean Mr. Hutcherson..................
Now, I've wondered why a lot of black folks don't support gay equality. They are not like Hutcherson, full of hatred, but don't seem to see the similarities with how they were disenfranchised socially, politically, and economically via segregation for a 100 years after the end of the civil war, and how it is similar to how this has been done to gays by terrorizing them into the closet, just a variant of segregation targetted at people who were not readily identifiable. Here is my thesis........ I think I'm onto something, so talk it up in various forums.
1. Blacks may see Gay equality as competition for the unfinished work of ending America's greatest crime, of which they were the victims, and you can bet that their imposed misery was all done 'in the name of God' and the bible.
2. The church is very strong within the black community, for it was the only hope and comfort they had. So they are just bound to be bible literalists.
3. Recent public crimes - eg. the Jena situation, and other symbolic bigot attacks on blacks featuring 'the noose' in place of a burning cross. This terrorization, brought out something I didn't realize - that many lynched blacks were also castrated. Why - to deny their manhood, to make them into "boys", less then true men. Point of fact - before the civil war slaves were counted as 3/5ths of a person for census data. Now, Gays are often perceived as being, in the words of that jerk Governor Schwartznegger last year, as "girlie Boys". With this underlying idea of wierd feminity within society, one can understand why blacks, who historically were denied their manhood, would have a hard time associating with gays or gay rights, even though there are many gay black men and women also.
So in summary, Hutcherson is running away from himself in his hatred and freaking out over gays. And lets not let him claim he was a big strong boy who played pro football, and can't be gay, because I think there are several ex pro football players who came out after their career ended. Regarding the general black population, roughly split 50-50 re gay rights, all gay people need to work with those in the black community they know, because it is hard to hate people one knows and respects. And I attended the sold out Jazz brunch in Baltimore put on by the state's gay political rights group, and the featured speaker was a str8 black politician.
6
November 26, 2007
Write comment
Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:
Writings 
As a linebacker for the Dallas Cowboys, Hutcherson wanted to “hurt whites”: his race-based payback for growing up in the segregated South. Then he became a “Christian” and took pleasure in killing defenseless animals and mounting their heads on the wall in his office: “when I run into animals, I kill them.” 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
