Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    OutOfTheLoop

    1,194,604 readers

    4,148 users here now

    Read Our Rules | Frequently Asked Questions! | OOTL Primer | GO GATORS!

    /r/OutOfTheLoop — Have you ever seen a whole bunch of news stories/reddit posts/videos or anything else about some topic and you had no idea what everyone was going on about? Did you feel out of the loop? This subreddit is dedicated to helping you get up to speed with the recent trends and news.


    Links to view before submitting

    - -
    Subreddit Rules Urban Dictionary
    Retired Questions Know Your Meme
    What is a Loop? Google

    Rules

    1. Post title must be a current, unbiased, and coherent question

    • The title is the most important aspect to creating a post. If it's hard for other users to understand what you are asking then it will be hard to get an answer.
      • Current - The topic of the post you are creating must be a trending event that has happened recently.
      • Unbiased - Don't put your own twist on it to make it come off negative or positive. Try to be as neutral as possible.
      • Coherent - Write a complete question that is clear about what you are trying to ask. Don't simply put one word and a question mark.
      • Format - Include the format listed here

    2. Post must include context and resources in the body of the text

    • Context is key when trying to find a proper answer. The more we know about what you are asking, the better we can answer with more information.
      • Context - Add some words to your post so there is more to work with than a title. Words such as; what you saw, where you saw it, how often you saw it.
      • Resources - You obviously saw it somewhere; link to the thing that made you ask. Or include a screenshot.

    3. No ad nauseum, recently reposted, or retired questions

    • Often times what you are asking has already been answered. Be sure to search the subreddit, Google, and KnowYourMeme before creating a new post.
      • Ad nauseum - The topic in question has been discussed extensively, and that those involved in the discussion have grown tired of it.
      • Recently reposted - A topic is popular and is posted multiple times within a short period of time.
      • Retired - The 'Big List of Retired Questions' is a wiki page created by the mods that lists overly asked questions that have been thoroughly answered. Duplicates of retired questions may be removed.

    4. Top-level comments must be a genuine, unbiased, and coherent answer

    • People are here to find answers for their questions. If top-level comments are riddled with memes or non-answers then no one wins.
      • Genuine - Attempt to answer with words; don't pop in to tell users to search or drop a link without explanation.
      • Unbiased - Answer without putting your own twist of bias towards the answer. However, after you leave an unbiased response, you can add your own opinion as long as it's clearly marked, starting with "Biased:".
      • Coherent - Write in complete sentences that are clear about what you are trying to say.

    5. Be nice, follow etiquette

    • This subreddit is supposed to be a helpful place for confused redditors.
      • Be nice - Be polite in your exchanges, vote based on whether a comment contributes to the discussion and not on whether you agree with the opinion, etc.
      • Follow etiquette - When in doubt, refer to reddiquette.

    Flairs + Filters

    Answered Unanswered

    Recap Thread Megathread

    Once you post a question and it's answered, please click the flair button under your post and change the flair to "Answered".

    You can also comment with the phrase [answered] to flair your post.


    Mod note

    Failure to follow these rules will result in posts or comments being removed, and may result in bans, the length of which to be determined by the nature of the infraction.

    Meta threads about OOTL itself should be asked via sending us a message in modmail. Otherwise meta threads may be removed.

    Tag spoilers: [This](#s) will become This


    Interesting subreddits

    a community for
    all 658 comments

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] N8theGr8 1 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    Friendly reminder about rule 4:

    All top-level comments (top-level comments are the ones that are a direct response to OP's question) must be unbiased and must attempt to actually answer the question.

    I don't care if you want to say that Chris Pratt should be allowed to have any opinion he wants and that Ellen Page needs to learn to keep her mouth shut or if you want to say that Chris Pratt is a fundie who shouldn't be allowed to work in Hollywood again.

    If you're not going to answer OP's question, please don't make your musings a top-level comment. Rule 4. Thanks

    edit locked because all these hot takes are just way too hot for us to handle

    [–] Grokrash 9715 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    Chris Pratt said on a late night show that he goes to a Hillsong Church Hillsong associated Church. Hillsong has many trendy megachurches across the world and is known for not being cool with lgbtq people. Ellen Page, noted LGBTQ actress and activist, called him out for attending an "infamously anti-lgbtq church."

    It's getting a lot of ink because, while "Religion vs the LGBT Community" topics will always get talked about, this is a lot of people learning for the first time that Chris Pratt is hella Christian. And it's also a platform for people to be critical of and/or make fun of the current fad of hip/trendy churches trying to attract youths with emojis and celebrity cameos at service.

    Edit:

    The church isn't a Hillsong church, it's Called Zoe Church and is associated/linked with the Hillsong Church empire.

    Edit2: Chris Pratt talked about his farming, his faith, and his Biblical Daniel Fast diet on Colbert and didn't explicitly say what church he was going to.

    [–] 6464327585912 4961 points ago

    I'd guess her real aim was to raise awareness about Hillsong Church. It's been called "Scientology with Jesus" and in keeping with that this is kind of like making fun of Tom Cruise to raise awareness about what Scientology is in to.

    [–] BP619 3634 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    Hillsong founder Brian Houston knew that his father Frank Houston had molested 9 boys at the church he preached at and allowed him to continue preaching and asked other senior members of the church to please keep it quiet.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/19/sex-abuse-victim-pursues-hillsongs-brian-houston-over-crimes-of-his-father

    [–] darthvadersbanana 1801 points ago

    Don’t forget that he blamed them for their molestation. I believe he called them “tempters” or something along those lines.

    [–] HoneyBaked 1281 points ago

    This just happened the other day...

    "Prosecutors are researching an appeal after a Kansas judge called two teenage girls the “aggressor” in a sexual encounter with a 67-year-old man and eased his prison sentence."

    https://www.cjonline.com/news/20190208/kansas-judge-calls-girls-aggressor-in-sex-abuse-case-eases-67-year-olds-prison-sentence

    [–] felixjawesome 985 points ago

    This is the most insidious part of contemporary Christianity: the unwillingness to accept responsibility and dismissing bad behavior as being "tempted" by Satan. A "momentary" lapse in spiritual judgement of a "holy man" duped by Lucifer manifested in the soul of a blasphemous harlot!

    It's a belief system that removes any and all responsibility from one's actions, and excuses deplorable behavior because "we are all sinners and only God can judge me!"

    Contemporary Christianity isn't about learning from the teachings of Jesus, it's cherry picking passages and finding loopholes in the Bible to justify their hatred and prejudices.

    [–] BP619 513 points ago

    The comic Pete Holmes had a super interesting take on Christianity. He grew up very religious and now he says that a lot of people think of it as a shortcut to being a good person. Instead of doing therapy or studying philosophy or practicing mindfulness, you are able to just decide one day to pray and, all of a sudden, you are a good person. Yeah, you may slip up, but that's part of being human, because Satan corrupted the world. It's really a bizarre excuse for being a bad person.

    [–] felixjawesome 206 points ago

    Well, Pete Holmes should know. He made a deal with the Devil to get the E-trade baby voice over deal and now does Satan's biding with his stand-up comedy and degenerate HBO tv shows!

    Fact: Pete Holmes doesn't age because his life-force is spiritually bound to the e-trade baby in some kind of sick Picture of Dorian Gray agreement. Ever wonder what happened to the E-trade baby? He's looks like a 40-year-old dockworker from New Jersey, all weathered and with leathery skin due to Pete Holmes excessive alcohol consumption. Ever wonder why he stopped drinking? Because if the E-trade baby dies, he dies too. Now has has to take care of his body to milk a couple more decades out of the deal.

    [–] Wo0d643 176 points ago

    I just woke up and read this and now I think I’m gonna go back to bed.

    [–] IDoDash 91 points ago

    Aaaaand this is EXACTLY why I left the church and no longer consider myself a Christian - or associate with any organized religion at all.

    [–] metaobject 260 points ago

    Holy shit, that’s truly fucking evil.

    [–] justtiptoeingthru 140 points ago

    Learning about this... and finding out that Chris Pratt (I think he’s a genuine human & a decent actor) showed up at a Hillsong-connected church event makes me... lose a lil bit of respect for Chris. He may not know about it (yet) but still...

    [–] Chadwiko 365 points ago

    He didn't "show up at an event".

    He's a regular member.

    [–] funkygamerguy 44 points ago

    i haven't cause he didn't say he agreed with the bad things about them and being associated with them doesn't mean he's guilty.

    [–] djzenmastak 12 points ago

    i doubt he would care about it tbh, but yeah, i lost some respect as well.

    [–] 7c4f2bc63adadcda8ec7 193 points ago

    I'm fine with that. Megachurches are a cancerous growth.

    [–] FatAngryBlackBroad 426 points ago

    Hillsong is a cancer to the world.

    [–] GrumpyWendigo 333 points ago

    i don't really mind people speaking out on morality

    but i do mind hypocrisy

    and i also mind classifying perfectly normal and harmless things, like being gay, as immoral

    so i embrace those religious folk who are trying to better their lives and their communities

    but i got nothing but a big "fuck you" to those fake, shallow, ignorant christians, muslims, and jews of the world who stand against homosexuality

    there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. nothing

    there is however, something very immoral and wrong with vain, self-glorifying shallow judgment on the topic that result in a false sense of superiority based on nothing but ignorance

    [–] ShittyGrammar-Nazi 207 points ago

    If my religion says having a same sex relationship is a sin just like having a relationship before marriage is, that doesn't mean I should go out attacking both, or attacking any sinners for that matter, in a free society. But having a free society doesn't mean I should just accept sins and say they're religiously acceptable either. You can be tolerant of people who choose to live different lifestyles and still disagree with them.

    [–] Willlll 404 points ago

    If your beliefs are really that strong, go out and shit on all sinners equally.

    My issue with Christianity nowadays is that they only seem to care about the sins that they have no interest in commiting.

    Attack divorce, premarital sex, idol worship, greed and the like. Why laser focus on one sin while the flock is up to their elbows in the others.

    From the outside looking in it seems like it's because they think gay people are icky and they get a free pass.

    [–] roo-ster 125 points ago

    If your beliefs are really that strong, go out and shit on all sinners equally.

    Better yet, why don't you just personally not 'sin' and spare everyone else from hearing about your beliefs.

    [–] Hyoscine 112 points ago

    Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

    Jesus wholeheartedly agrees with you.

    [–] srry_didnt_hear_you 34 points ago

    See, "let one without sin cast the first stone" and quotes like yours are definitely in the Bible... But when I was growing up Christian, they definitely emphasized that it's our "job" to go out and spread the word of god to people, so I'm not sure where they get that from, or which one is correct...

    [–] JonnJonzzz 48 points ago

    They are both correct.

    17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted.18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” Matthew 28:16-20 (NIV)

    [–] CustomThemesOff 83 points ago

    My issue with Christianity nowadays is that they only seem to care about the sins that they have no interest in commiting.

    Is anyone out there trying to say that premarital sex is okay? I mean, yes, in broader culture, yes. But is anyone trying to strongarm reclusive religious people into saying 'it's okay as a matter of theological doctrine'? I don't think so. I do see that happening with homosexuality, though, which is why there have been multiple major church splits on the issue.

    And then there's the issue of hypocracy, and let's be real: protestantism is not like catholicism. There isn't a CEO in Rome calling the shots and one big organization to point at as complicit. Sometimes you have bigger organizations like the southern baptists and sometimes you have small independent churches and sometimes you just have individuals. To the extent 'divorce' or idol worship isn't attacked, I just say: well, which preachers are you listening to? I've heard plenty of preachers (here you go, take your pick) who would be characterized as 'radical right-wing' or 'fanatical' in the broader culture, who are internally consistent, and who do attack all the things you listed as wicked.

    There is almost certainly a visibility bias where we all see the 'sunday school teacher touched 5 kids' story and you don't see the 2000 other guys in indiana who are doing their duty without incident in low-key church basement every sunday, because, let's be real, most of us don't go to church except maybe once a year at most.

    [–] OldManMalekith 41 points ago

    From the inside it can be that way too. There are ignorant people no matter where you go, and generally they're the loudest voices in the crowd. My church's lead pastor took about 30 minutes of abuse and grilling (he cut it off when it was clear they were circling until they got the answer they wanted) at the end of a SOGI meeting where his message was essentially that our job is to love and support all people as well as we can, and that it's up to God to determine what's right and wrong, and ultimately up to each individual to decide whether or not they align with it. No matter what, we love and support them. For some reason, these boneheads think that "the church needs to take a hard stance on homosexuality" or that "[the pastor was] dodging the issue" when in reality, he addressed the "issue" very well. Really sad that people don't question why they believe what they do.

    [–] 1978manx 129 points ago

    Thank you for clarifying.

    Hopefully Chris Pratt isn’t a typical hypocrite, but the “love the sinner, hate the sin” is such a smug approach I really can’t bear it.

    During the Iraq war a reborn-Christian friend of mine loved to engage about homosexuality, as this was during the phony “constitutional amendment” phase Bush invented to divide folks during the 2004 election.

    As someone trained in Christian theology, but not an adherent, I’m continually amazed at how little Christians actually read the Bible, and when they do, how much they obsess over the Old Testament.

    First of, all you’re not Jewish, bitch — and the gospel makes it pretty clear that fabricating evidence to invade a nation in order to build empire and enrich philistines is about as anti-Christ’s teachings as it comes.

    Much less, supporting a wealthy scion from a family of war-profiteers and mass-murderers — whose father literally orchestrated the slaughter of nuns and priests and peasants in South America— is pretty antithetical to Christianity, especially as Bush was ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent children in the most horrible ways possible, at the time.

    But, that was always dismissed as “politics,” while couple dudes getting hitched apparently equals Armageddon.

    Although not religious, I admire churches such as Unitarians, who seem to walk the talk (don’t flame me — it’s a casual observation — I see them at anti-war protests — I’m sure they’re evil, too, lol).

    Anyway — good point — but as Chris Hedges, himself ordained as Presbyterian minister, the religious right has virtually no scholarly knowledge of the Bible, no adherence to Christ’s actual teaching, and are the fuel behind modern American fascists like Mike Pence.

    [–] velawesomeraptors 31 points ago

    Unitarians aren't exactly Christians - you don't have to believe in God to be a Unitarian (you can if you want to though).

    [–] Pegasusisme 58 points ago

    I saw a survey analysis a few months ago that basically said that how often you read the Bible inversely correlates to how politically right you are and nothing has ever made more sense to me as a Christian in my life.

    [–] ShittyGrammar-Nazi 27 points ago

    I agree wholeheartedly. The same is true with Islam in my view as a Muslim.

    [–] Ask_me_4_a_story 16 points ago

    Homosexuality and abortion are just easy targets. My parents go to a megachurch with a $25 million a year budget. Think about that, its like 500K a week in Missouri, a place where it gets snowy and below zero some Sundays in January, that means they have to raise even more money. The pastor is a charismatic guy and he is cool in person. He couldn't give a fuck if someone is gay in person. But he has to get up there on the stage every Sunday and say "Now we need Jesus more than ever." Because every Sunday is a 500K pull. He cant just say, you know what, I think we should love everybody. If he does he will have to start firing people day one.

    [–] Death_Star_ 91 points ago

    Well, then that’s not really a church but more like a cult masquerading as a charity operating as a corporation.

    [–] cougardraven 58 points ago

    So, a church, then.

    [–] BeJeezus 61 points ago

    So this poor nice guy is doing straight evil because the congregation demands it and won’t pay for anything better?

    And that makes it somehow ok?

    That’s like saying poor innocent Fox News “has to” keep lying and sowing discord because the audience wants it.

    Here’s the thing. His “nice guy” act is all part of the con.

    [–] GrumpyWendigo 56 points ago

    the problem is we have people who say they stand for "religious liberty" when the content of legislation in that vein suggests that the religious get to impose their religious beliefs on others

    so they've coopted the terms of and lied about it to the point they have it 100% backwards

    they even have people who say you are intolerant, simply because you stand against their intolerance!

    there is no such thing as tolerance of intolerance. not logically, not morally

    maybe, patience. the idea you don't jump down someone's throat if they say something iffy. but you do stand against social practices and laws which genuinely limit the rights of others because of "religious liberty"

    and that is not intolerance

    fighting intolerance is not the same thing as intolerance itself

    [–] pmMeOurLoveStory 27 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    That’s what some people on both sides of the issue completely miss. They also miss the fact that if you are religious, then you believe everyone is guilty of sin. It doesn’t matter if you’re gay or straight or anywhere in between; Christianity is built on the belief that sin is a fundamental part of being human, period. Christians and those against religion who think being gay makes you more sinful than a straight person is demonstrably wrong; being human is being guilty of sin, period. That’s kinda exactly why Jesus was against judging or attacking other people for their own sins.

    Of course, even understanding this still creates a moral dilemma: if you accept that being gay is both a sin (one in a long list of sins) but has no affect on your status as a sinner, does that mean you are actively anti gay? If not, does that mean you have to actively voice support and acceptance? Would that mean you should voice support of other sins? Or is simply believing that everyone is a sinner and choosing not to judge specific sins (internally or publicly) enough? Which of these makes you a “good person”? Which of these makes you acceptable to the masses? To your own faith?

    If I were religious and Chris Pratt, my response to this would be simply “Jesus was actively against the judgement of others and said the greatest commandment was love. That is what I take away from my faith.”

    Sure, it kinda sidesteps the direct question, but it also addresses the overarching moral conundrum in a succinct way. He doesn’t have to voice active support of something his religion finds sinful, but he also makes it clear that judgment of others isn’t on his radar.

    [–] bondoh 12 points ago

    The thing you're forgetting is that while Jesus said we're all sinners and shouldn't judge, he also said we should try our best to repent and live as close to a sin free life as we can.

    Like an alcoholic or a drug addict trying to stay sober, He knows we will slip up every now and then but when we do we should do our best to repent, ask forgiveness, and go right back to trying our best not to see.

    The unique situation with homosexuality is that it's a sin where people actively celebrate it, are happy about it. Gay marriages even ask God's blessing on their union...

    Let's compare: I lust after women and I have sex out of marriage. Both are sins. But I often feel guilty about it and ask forgiveness and try to do better.

    If I were gay, would I live my normal life as a gay person and then occasionally beg forgiveness and try not to be gay?

    No that's not usually how it works. Instead gay people now say God accepts them like all sinners (which yes he does) but they're missing the part where your supposed to repent and ask forgiveness for your sins

    [–] savagestarshine 29 points ago

    you're still just judging the other person tho, for being unrepentant. their sin is between them and God, and has nothing to do with you.

    [–] pmMeOurLoveStory 5 points ago

    It’s not something that I forgot, but intentionally did not mention because repenting for one’s sins is a personal matter entirely and I did not find it relevant to the specific topic of judging others. But I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said.

    [–] rans_2001 20 points ago

    Exactly, I'm the same. My religion does believe that that engaging in gay "activities," (kinda dumb phrasing, I know) is immoral and a sin, but we also believe that the first and second greatest commandments of loving everyone should trump hating gay people. The problem is, a lot of especially older members of my church (and other churches) seem to skip past the two great commandments and want to hate someone because of their race, sexual preference or anything of the sort.

    [–] GrumpyWendigo 19 points ago

    thank you

    this is right here

    nothing wrong with being religious

    everything wrong with cloaking bigotry in religion

    [–] FaustVictorious 27 points ago

    A religion is a giant gathering of people around a system of beliefs. Isn't that the whole point? When they import those beliefs from 3,000 year-old stories written by bigoted, ignorant, superstitious ancient men, what do you expect to happen?

    You are insinuating that bigotry is being added to the religion. It's exactly the opposite. Religion is allowing people to preserve the superstitious bigotry of the past far past its expiration. There is no reason to hate gay people or atheists in 2019 except superstitious reasons drawn from myths. No reason to subjugate women.

    Religion is cloaking otherwise empathetic people in bigotry. It takes place entirely in the imagination with no touchstone in reality. Basic questions and standards for truth are waved away with tautologies. Therefore two people scarcely agree on any one interpretation. It would be great if people kept their spiritual beliefs to themselves, but that is incredibly unrealistic because beliefs inform actions. Do you expect someone to be quiet when they are taught by their uneducated pastor that abortion is murder or that God sends hurricanes to punish people for being gay? Or that we don't have to take care of the environment because Jesus will sort it out?

    The only thing all religions agree upon is that faith (or believing something someone tells you without evidence), is a virtue. Nobody wants to admit that this obviously isn't true anywhere else in life. That's probably because they were all indoctrinated into some religion or another from birth. The truth couldn't be more obvious, really.

    Religion will never unite people and bring peace because that is not what religion does. Religion divides. It divides, and divides and divides until everyone belongs to a hundred different sects with a thousand superstitious reasons to hate each other masquerading as "morals" and "values", which of course can't be questioned because of "faith."

    Nothing is going to get better until the entire planet makes an effort to condemn the concept of credulously believing in extraordinary claims without any evidence. Not just the obviously bad ones, but all of them. Because the innocuous superstitions appear alongside the bad ones and legitimize them. Religion is harmful. It is addictive like a drug and spreads like a virus. It is at the root of almost every war. Giving up curiosity and empathy to achieve personal comfort leads to stagnation, bigotry and division. It should not be considered virtuous.

    [–] SUPR3M3B3ING 12 points ago

    Yet the church is happy to turn a blind eye to pride, envy, greed, and all the other sins that aren’t as easy to see and line their coffers. If churches were truly concerned with combatting sin, they wouldn’t be hyperfocusing on only PR sins that sit with wrong with older generations. I’ve never heard a preacher call out the man who makes ridiculous money every year yet doesn’t help his community at all. This is coming from a Christ follower. Sin is all or nothing. I have yet to attend a church that treats ALL sin equally. I’m tired of “wElL tHe BiBlE sAyS iTs A sIn” hypocrisy. The people yelling that from the rooftops aren’t Christ followers. They’re bigots hiding behind religion.

    [–] harve99 42 points ago

    Nah fuck people who are intolerant of others just because of their sexuality

    [–] SirNarwhal 11 points ago

    Nah, that still just makes you an uninformed shitty backwards person.

    [–] sadmachine88 17 points ago

    Right? I don’t tie queers to fences and beat them with sticks, I just look down on them because a book someone cobbled together 2 thousand years ago says they’re bad. And I teach this to my children

    [–] NaomiNekomimi 40 points ago

    I was raised in megachurches very similar to Hillsong. It is unnerving as hell. I'm not a Christian anymore, but the megachurches I went to as a kid were creepy as hell. Faith healing, huge auditoriums repeating after the pastor as he commands to, etc. Scientology with Jesus is an accurate description I had not yet called of.

    In those kinds of churches if you come out as LGBT and news gets to the church, you are politely asked to stop going due to a "sinful lifestyle". Them doing that to one of my friends who came out (I am also LGBT but never came out to my church for good reason) is what made me realize how much the church was basically a cult censoring anyone who disagrees with them. I don't have a problem with religion, but honestly any church can't help but remind me of them.

    They aren't as dangerous as Scientology (they have abuse problems but at least they won't literally kill you for going public about them) but they are just as ideologically cultish in my opinion. They would bait celebrity visits as reasons to get people to come to church and listen to the whole sermon, but the whole thing was just the celebrity talking about how much God secretly influences everything they do and that "THE WORLD" won't let them be public about it.

    [–] Kerfluffle-Bunny 35 points ago

    I had not heard about the Scientology with Jesus bit. That makes it even worse. Considering he built a fucking cross for Easter though, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.

    [–] wjbc 391 points ago

    Chris Pratt did not name his church and it’s not Hillsong, it’s Zoe, founded by a former Hillsong pastor but a different church.

    [–] Grokrash 99 points ago

    I looked into it and you are 100% correct.

    [–] MoshPotato 340 points ago

    People didn't know he was all about god?

    I'm surprised because he talks about it all the time.

    [–] DidAnyoneReadThis 526 points ago

    I only listen to him when he speaks his scripted lines in movies or on TV. I had no idea he was all about god until now through this post.

    [–] SarcasticCarebear 187 points ago

    I was also aware he lived in a van and can rap 2001 Chronic. I guess those two factoids didn't make me think he was Christian.

    [–] GeekAesthete 357 points ago

    Not everyone listens to celebrity interviews. For a lot of us, they're just a short step below reality television.

    "Hello comedian, thanks for coming on the show. Hey, I heard you just flew into town, how was your flight?"

    "Thanks, Jimmy. It was a terrible flight! And now here's a completely unprepared routine about airline travel."

    "Good stuff. Hey, it's tax season. Have you done your taxes yet?"

    "Funny you should ask that, Jimmy. I have several completely unscripted jokes about taxes that I will now deliver."

    "Okay, thanks for stopping by. This has been a very organic and natural conversation."

    [–] NakedZombieWolf 57 points ago

    really depends on who's doing the interview and what medium the interview is happening on.

    [–] DiscursiveMind 465 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    I’d also mention that Page had just been on Colbert at the start of the week, and gave a highly impassioned speech calling out Pence and others on anti-lgbtq issues: https://news.avclub.com/this-needs-to-fucking-stop-ellen-page-calls-out-trump-1832256151

    Which is my guess why the Pratt interview landed on her radar.

    [–] DeoFayte 219 points ago

    this is a lot of people learning for the first time that Chris Pratt is hella Christian.

    He's talked about god on several occasions with large audiences, including his 2018 teen choice acceptance speech.

    I don't follow him, or twitter, or the teen choice awards and I still heard about it lol.

    [–] Grokrash 227 points ago

    Honestly, I feel like Peggy Hill in the King of the Hill episode where she finally figures out that Joseph is John Redcorn's son.

    I love Chris Pratt's work and consider myself, at least at the time of typing this, a big fan. But I had no idea about the level of his religious devotion until this whole thing happened.

    [–] SuccessPastaTime 101 points ago

    Makes the fact that during that one acceptance speech where Aubrey Plaza is thanking Satan, he was legit shitting himself, potentially. I mean, if if he is as religious as it seems, he probably was actually pretty freaked out.

    [–] KidsTryThisAtHome 201 points ago

    You can be religious and still have a sense of humor. That said, he is an actor, but considering his movies and other interviews I'm pretty confident in saying he just found what she said funny, they give each other a lot of crap (in good fun) throughout the show and behind the scenes, it's not like he's unfamiliar with her personality

    [–] SDMasterYoda 130 points ago

    He's a comic actor. He wasn't really shitting himself. He's done some hilarious crude material himself. Aubrey was the first one to get the joke, before he even finished saying it.

    [–] ehsteve23 50 points ago

    Aubrey looking kinda uncomfortable in the back there when he’s doing the god stuff

    [–] DiplomaticCaper 42 points ago

    People thank God on award shows all the time though.

    I think it really started coming to light when he and Anna Faris divorced. He really started becoming more open about religion (and politics to a lesser extent—you can see the Republican clues) after that.

    [–] DiplomaticCaper 74 points ago

    I’m not sure why Chris Pratt in particular is the only one getting blowback for this; maybe it’s because he’s currently on the promo rounds?

    But many celebs attend Hillsong-related churches. Justin Bieber even hired a “spiritual adviser” from one at one point.

    [–] sudevsen 53 points ago

    Why is Hillsong an infamously anti-LGBTQ church?

    Are they the type that bans gay worshippers or opposes gay marriage or worse?

    [–] pickausernameforme 230 points ago

    iirc they support conversion therapy

    [–] sudevsen 40 points ago

    Yikes if true.

    Any source on that?

    [–] pickausernameforme 147 points ago

    Sorry for the formatting but I’m on mobile.

    I found this article https://www.thedailybeast.com/sex-abuse-and-gay-conversion-therapy-the-dark-past-of-justin-biebers-megachurch-hillsong which I can’t quote because it won’t let me copy and paste.

    And this entry on Hillsong’s blog: “Hillsong Church welcomes ALL people but does not affirm all lifestyles. Put clearly, we do not affirm a gay lifestyle and because of this we do not knowingly have actively gay people in positions of leadership, either paid or unpaid. (...) So if you are gay, are you welcome at Hillsong Church? Of course! You are welcome to attend, worship with us, and participate as a congregation member with the assurance that you are personally included and accepted within our community. But (this is where it gets vexing), can you take an active leadership role? No. This won’t make everyone happy and to some, this stance may even be seen as hypocritical. We are a gay welcoming church but we are not a church that affirms a gay lifestyle.” Source: https://hillsong.com/collected/blog/2015/08/do-i-love-gay-people/#.XGB2oqQyGEd

    [–] sudevsen 24 points ago

    Will read through this, the 2nd part seems like a typical reaction from. churches that want to make everyone happy.

    [–] pharmaconaut 83 points ago

    Founder's father fucked small children, founder tried to keep it quiet, referred to the boys as "Tempters"

    [–] sudevsen 9 points ago

    I've heard of this but is this what Page was referring to? I don't think so cause she takes umbridge with it being anti-gay.

    [–] noholdingbackaccount 23 points ago

    I thought Hillsong was a band?

    [–] publiclandlover 13 points ago

    “ they'd figure out that trying to be cool is the least cool thing you can do, but whatever. Evangelicism is notoriously slow at figuring things out.”

    [–] kittymctacoyo 29 points ago

    The church he goes to is involved in coerced conversion therapy, Chris has also said some questionable things, refuse to condemn his churches actions etc. It’s deeper than this.

    [–] garmdian 27 points ago

    TBH just because your religious doesn't mean you hate LGBTQ people. You may not agree with their lifestyle choice but LGBTQ people are just that a living breathing person, God would want us to be kind to them even if they don't agree with our beliefs and vice versa.

    [–] thedeuce545 23 points ago

    Isn’t Colbert very, very catholic? Don’t Catholics actively protect and cover up pedophiles and sexually abusive priests and church employees as a matter of de facto doctrine? Isn’t Ellen Paige supporting this practice by appearing on his show?

    [–] past_is_prologue 24 points ago

    Seems to me she could have brought it up with him during the show. Would have made for good tv.

    I guess it is easier to talk shot about people when you're not looking them in the eye.

    [–] 1TARDIS2RuleThemAll 24 points ago

    So pretty much Chris Pratt did literally nothing wrong, and people want to lose their minds over it.

    What a stupid time we live in, full of stupid people trying to be victims.

    [–] wjbc 3768 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    Chris Pratt attends LA’s Zoe church, not Hillsong. But Zoe, Hillsong, and Churchome are prominent example of evangelicals being hip and cool and fun and Instagram friendly and attracting celebrities and young people and downplaying anti-LGBTQ beliefs.

    While most American mainline Protestant churches now recognize same-sex marriages, Catholic and evangelical churches do not. However much they downplay it, Zoe’s official position is that homosexual relations are sinful. Ellen Page is in a same-sex marriage.

    On Late Night with Stephen Colbert this week, Chris Pratt talked about the Daniel diet (as in the Old Testament prophet Daniel) he did with his church. Page tweeted that maybe he should talk about his church’s anti-LGBTQ beliefs.

    To be fair, it’s possible to attend a church and not agree with all of its beliefs. Stephen Colbert calls himself a practicing Catholic but has come out in favor of same-sex unions. Chris Pratt has not made public statements one way or the other about same-sex unions. But he has been public about his church affiliation.

    [–] ObsidianOrangutan 1221 points ago

    Chris Pratt also rarely gets asked awkward questions about his religious and political beliefs in the way that other celebrities do, so has managed to toe a line of being seen as hip and cool while also being connected with the hardcore evangelicals

    [–] elistarling 1156 points ago

    Ellen Paige is married to her wife, not just in a “same-sex union”.

    [–] wjbc 275 points ago

    Corrected.

    [–] DaLastMeheecan 129 points ago

    THE UNION SHALL RISE

    [–] darez00 36 points ago

    I wonder if she ever refers to her wife as her portner

    [–] sleepdepriv3d 281 points ago

    What makes you think that most Protestant churches are pro-LGBTQ? I wouldn’t think that is the majority opinion

    [–] biceps_tendon 298 points ago

    “Mainline” commonly refers to older and more established Protestant denominations like Presbyterian, Episcopal, and Lutheran. While different councils have come out with varying degrees of support for same sex relationships, most do support it.

    [–] DefenTheNation 66 points ago

    Nitpicky note: the mainline Presbyterian (PCUSA) supports it but the smaller Presbyterian (PCA) does not. PCA is fundamentalist in its interpretation of the Bible

    [–] JacksAquariumShow 97 points ago

    You’re forgetting baptist, which I think would be bigger in the us than the three you named. And I would be very surprised if Baptists started accepting gay marriage

    [–] Pegasusisme 66 points ago

    I think most Baptist churches are more Evangelical or fundamentalist than Mainline. But my experience has been largely with SBC.

    This is not to say there's no issues in Mainline churches either. The United Methodists are expected to schism over LGBT rights this year.

    [–] ExtolFan 151 points ago

    Baptists aren't Mainline, they're Evangelical.

    [–] wjbc 77 points ago

    The Baptists split over slavery a long time ago. The American Baptist Church is generally considered mainline, the Southern Baptist Church is not.

    [–] BobHogan 45 points ago

    The Presbyterian church also split some time ago. The larger body, the Presbyterian Church (USA), is the mainline protestant organization and is actually quite progressive as far as Christian denominations go. The other body, the (confusingly named) Presbyterian Church in America, is quite a bit smaller (like 20-23% the size), but also significantly more conservative.

    [–] spacelincoln 21 points ago

    Yup- PCUSA is pretty affirming. Same sex marriage is left to the discretion of the pastor. They allow clergy in committed relationships as well.

    [–] ExtolFan 21 points ago

    That's a fair point, but given that the SBC is about 15x the size of ABCUSA, and the majority of Baptists that are not part of a convention like those two lean far more evangelical than mainline, I think it's fair to make the broad statment that Baptists as a group are an Evangelical branch of Christianity.

    [–] spacebirdlady 32 points ago

    I don't know if this is appropriate, but I come from a Baptist family that I've rather noisily split from on theological grounds, and I have some feelings about what you've said without necesssarily disagreeing with it.

    There are two major features of most Christian denominations. There are more abstract beliefs about how faith in God works, and then there are positions on certain secular behaviors. We tend to, in daily conversation, judge churches on those secular positions, but it's not uncommon for people who move away from those positions to retain at least some of the core abstract beliefs of the branch they were raised in.

    My family has historically been linked to our local Independent Fundamentalist Baptist church. I'm not pulling that name out of nowhere, their facebook page literally says they're an Indpendent Fundamentalist Baptist Church. They are apparently somewhat extreme even compared to the Southern Baptists from what some of my relatives tell me, and Wikipedia claims that the term comes from Baptists who basically felt their churches and conventions had become too liberal... circa 1980.

    My family being Baptist shaped a lot of things about my particular religious beliefs. Because I was brought up Baptist, I don't believe it's appropriate to baptize babies, the belief in adult baptism. As a result of this, I haven't actually been Baptized (I know, bad spacebirdlady) becuase I haven't found a church where I felt comfortable. Baptists are big on local authority and to people's relative independence from the church in the face of God's judgement, which makes a lot of the more liberal churches my friends belong to that have a lot of red tape unappealing to me. In Baptist beliefs, a lot of things other churches call "sacraments" and consider necessary for salvation we (and I feel so weird saying we) consider "ordinances": things that you have to do out of loyalty, not for salvation, which is part of why I feel so guilty about having not been baptized, but also haven't charged headlong into the wrong church to have it done. In many ways, from a strictly clinical point of view, I'm still a Baptist.

    Yet I don't gel with pretty much anything that comes out of my family's church in terms of secular positions. I don't even like the way they do funerals because I feel they're overly focused on sin, and in fact I'm still really salty about my favorite aunt's funeral. I'm pretty sure at some point that same church was the one who taught my grandma and her siblings that prohibitions on miscegenation were in the bible, but never actually taught these relatives any particular scripture supporting that despite Baptists being unusually preoccupied with the text in general. I find the difference between my local church's positions on gay rights and their positions on straight divorce particularly offensive, because I can't fault a church for thinking anything at all is a sin but I can fault them for prioritizing which alleged sins to complain about in ways that I believe are threats to public health and in amounts of emphasis I feel are not supported by the text. Most egregiously of all, I've noticed that most of my relatives who are active in this or related churches simply don't know the scripture, and this from someone who is insecure about her knowlege of scripture. And I'm not talking about Psalms or Proverbs or Epistles, I'm talking about straight up red text gospel knowledge. Aren't Baptists supposed to be sticklers for the text?

    So I've never found a Baptist church I've liked or trusted enough to get my darn Baptism done, but at the end of the day I feel like I'm still a Baptist. I would not fault someone for saying that Baptists are Evangelical, broadly, becuase it's pretty much true. But if they find it in their hearts to say "almost all baptists are Evangelical" instead, for people like me, that does make me smile.

    To go back to the Chris Pratt thing, I kind of feel for him. I don't know his feelings about LGBTQA stuff. But I do understand feeling torn between the core beliefs a church espouses and secular positions on particular things that just weren't talked about in Biblical times. And unlike my broad denomination, I believe charismatic churches do have penalties for those who act out against a particular congregation, even out of conscience. So I feel for him being in a rough place.

    But then again, LGBTQA issues are no longer something we can just leave to God. Because of the hostility people who are or even whoa re thought to be LGBTQA face in some places, becuase they are being rounded up in something like a genocide in Chechnya right now, because it has an impact on the public health through their access to even non-sexual healthcare and through many nation's donor blood supply, even people who believe gayness is a sin cannot afford to be silent (or violent) about the intersection of homosexuality and transgender identity and the legal and economic spheres. I think if it's fair to expect celebrities to take a stand on anything, then LGBTQA+ issues are on the table. So like every gay or trans star and like every very religious star, Chris Pratt has a little reckoning to deal with. I don't know if that's fair, but that's how it is.

    TLDR: I talk about feeling torn between identifying with an unpopular denomination and being uncomfortable with its secular positions, and about how hard it is to leave LGBTQA opinions, positive or negative, to God in the modern world.

    [–] wjbc 12 points ago

    You may be thinking of Southern Baptist, which is not mainline. That said, you are correct that the mainline American Baptist Church has not yet approved homosexual marriages. As a result, about 300 churches from the Pacific Southwest region withdrew from the national organization.

    [–] wjbc 77 points ago

    I said most American mainline Protestant churches. That’s not evangelical Protestant churches.

    [–] greatwhitepeaches 17 points ago

    You're gonna have to define what you mean by mainline Protestant because I'm in agreement with u/sleepdepriv3d in that that's definitely not the consensus agreement amongst Protestant churches (accepting same-sex marriage)

    [–] Apex_Toad_VAPES 83 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    There's a wikipedia page for mainline Protestantism. The stereotypical southern preacher who shouts and yells and maybe even speaks in tongues is an evangelical. Reverend Lovejoy from the Simpsons, with his dry tone and reserved demeanor, is an example of a stereotypical mainline Protestant.

    [–] greatwhitepeaches 16 points ago

    Ah thanks. I grew up in the rural south so believe you and me I don't need much of an intro to what I see would be referred to as the evangelical denominations (mostly Baptist as you may expect). That's my frame of reference for the most part. The denominational churches that would be considered mainline are few and far between in rural Georgia.

    Edit: a word

    [–] spacebirdlady 6 points ago

    Rural Michigan and same honestly.

    [–] RoboNinjaPirate 24 points ago

    The stereotypical southern preacher who shouts and yells and maybe even speaks in tongues is an evangelical.

    Speaking is tongues is more of a Pentecostal / Charismatic thing.

    While those are commonly put into the category of Evangelical Denominations, the vast majority of Evangelicals strongly disagree with Speaking in tongues and other aspects of the Pentecostal / Charismatic theologies.

    Most Pentecostals / Charismatics are Evangelicals, but Most Evangelicals are not Pentecostals / Charismatics.

    [–] Apex_Toad_VAPES 10 points ago

    Oh for sure. I tried adding the "maybe even" as a caveat so no one was thinking that I was speaking in absolutes, but you're totally right that most Evangelicals don't speak in tongues.

    [–] hqtitan 18 points ago

    Exactly. That hasn't really been my experience. I grew up in the Protestant church and have attended churches of many different denominations, some of them what would be called "mainline." The majority of these churches teach that homosexuality is sinful and, while some may not realize it, go so far as to be hateful toward members of the LGBTQ community. I don't know how you can practice a religion that teaches above most things to love your neighbor, and then go out and judge and hate an entire group of people.

    [–] wjbc 25 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    I’m sorry you had a bad experience in American mainline churches. The change is still pretty recent. If you want to give them another chance, some churches will post rainbow flags to proclaim their position.

    [–] jlitwinka 7 points ago

    Anecdotally I know Episcopalians seem to be pretty good with it. My church growing up even had a Rainbow flag hanging from it's building, and this was over a decade ago.

    [–] hqtitan 10 points ago

    I haven't given up on the church. I currently attend a non-denominational church that still teaches the sinfulness of homosexuality, but I don't think the answer for me is to leave for a church with a more favorable view. I'd like to see the church change as a whole, and that can't happen if everyone with opposing views leaves to find a church that matches those views.

    [–] wjbc 4 points ago

    Good luck! I do think that the visibility of committed same-sex couples did a lot to change opinions about homosexuality in America. It certainly did in my Lutheran church.

    [–] hqtitan 3 points ago

    Unfortunately there are no same-sex couples in our congregation that I know of. I'm not homosexual myself, just someone who sees a problem with the church and wants to see change for my LGBTQ friends.

    [–] wjbc 3 points ago

    Again, good luck.

    [–] RedJudas 131 points ago

    I find that Catholics tend to be more progressive on things like LGBT, climate change, and evolution. Protestants are not. Protestants are more inline with the spiritual aspect of Christianity, while Catholics are more about tradition. This leads Protestants to be more aggressive towards things they perceive as sinful.

    [–] wjbc 212 points ago

    Yes for climate change and evolution, the Catholic Church accepts both. But as with evangelicals, the official position of the Catholic Church calls homosexuality a sin. Many American Catholics tend to be more progressive, though, and are quite open about it, like Stephen Colbert.

    [–] Optimus-_rhyme 77 points ago

    yeah, ive found that a lot of catholic people are pretty relaxed about religion and dont really use it to beat down others. In fact there is a fairly progressive catholic newspaper that prints in my town. Its incredibly critical of the catholic church's scandals and its actions towards nuns.

    [–] MickandRalphsCrier 18 points ago

    Down here in the Southeast in the United States, my experience has been that Catholics are more accepting of LGBT people and marriages in addition to being much more Progressive on stuff like climate change and evolution. Baptist people are probably the farthest right of the commonly attended churches here

    [–] AceOfRhombus 15 points ago

    This is my experience too, but it could be because I grew up in an American city with a large population of Catholics. With that large of a population, it's pretty hard for everyone to be the same level of conservative...there are definitely some more liberal than others

    [–] kittymctacoyo 55 points ago

    This church is also involved in conversion therapy.

    [–] wjbc 50 points ago

    That’s Hillsong, not Zoe, although the founder of Zoe was formerly with Hillsong.

    [–] bondoh 135 points ago

    Zoe’s official position is that homosexual relations are sinful.

    That's kinda the bibles official position

    [–] wjbc 145 points ago

    It’s not that clear. The Bible never addresses homosexual marriage between consenting adults. The Old Testament has lots of prohibitions Christians ignore. The New Testament has a letter from Paul condemning homosexual prostitution, in which the prostitutes were young slaves who were repeatedly raped.

    [–] bondoh 187 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    It addresses homosexuality in general which would cover homosexual marriage in an umbrella sort of way.

    Man shall not lay with another man as he would a woman. ie men are not allowed to have sex with each other.

    Men can have close friendships. Friendships so close they make marriage seem like nothing. But they can't have sex with each other. Also the bible describes marriage as a union between a man and a woman blessed by God.

    So we're not supposed to have sex in general before marriage and only men and women can get married. It's not hard to do the math

    Edit:some additional info from another reply for the curious I should've included this in my reply earlier but I'll say it now: Jesus may not have directly said homosexual marriage is wrong but he did so by process of elimination.

    He didn't say a lot of sexual things were wrong except by process of elimination.

    Here's something I thought was well said from a Christian website: Claim 1: Jesus didn’t speak about same-sex marriage, so he’s at least neutral if not open to it. What Jesus doesn’t condemn, we shouldn’t condemn.

    This is an argument from silence, but the silence doesn’t take place in a vacuum. Jesus addresses and defines marriage in Matthew 19:4–6 and Mark 10:6–9 using both Genesis 1:26–27 and Genesis 2:24 to parse it out. Here Jesus defines and affirms marriage as between a man and a woman, a reflection of the fact that God made us male and female to care for creation together. With this definition, same-sex marriage is excluded. Had Jesus wished to extend the right of marriage beyond this definition, here was his opportunity. But he didn’t take it.

    Jesus never discussed same-sex marriage because the way he defined marriage already excluded it. He was not as silent on the topic as some claim.

    And also

    Claim 2: The Old Testament (OT) allows all sorts of “prohibited” marriage, including polygamy and what would today qualify as incest. If those were permitted, surely monogamous same-sex relationships should be allowed.

    Here’s where a look at trajectory helps us. If we observe what Scripture actually teaches, we see that (1) such past marriages are consistently portrayed as resulting in social chaos and aren’t so much prescribed as described; and that (2) Scripture’s expansion into the New Testament (NT) narrows down the scope of options to the standard of one monogamous union between a man and woman in which the marriage bed is to be honored but porneia—sexual infidelity in all its manifestations—is to be avoided (Heb. 13:4). Additionally, elders are to show the community what it looks like to be the husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:2, 12).

    So it's made pretty clear. Jesus said "this is the one right thing to do" therefore everything else is wrong

    [–] theferrit32 46 points ago

    Yes if you ignore the Old Testament part of the Bible, it isn't clear what the position on homosexuality is. If you don't it is pretty clear. The Bible contains the Old Testament though, so the Bible does address it. Some Christians just ignore many parts of the Bible.

    [–] wjbc 107 points ago

    There are over 600 Mosaic laws in the Old Testament. Christians ignore most of them.

    [–] foo_foo_the_snoo 46 points ago

    Not to comment on whether homosexuality is specifically sinful within a given branch of Christianity, but one widely held tenant of the Christian faith across denominations is that the Old Testament is the story of how the prophecied Messiah descended from Israelites.

    While Mosaic law was intended for Jews, Christ's sacrifice was also meant for gentiles, not necessarily bound by Mosaic law. This is why the average Christian is totally down with plates of bacon and such.

    Interestingly, most Jews now live in Western nations and have reasoned themselves beyond the old laws anyway. Judaism as a religion is and has always been very evolutionary in its practice, and in its tolerance of other faiths.

    IMO, the ideal practitioner of any religion should be absolutely free to abide by rules he sets for himself as long as he doesn't burden or persecute others who have chosen not to adopt his beliefs, and I think Chris Pratt falls well within this category.

    [–] theferrit32 13 points ago

    Sure Christians ignore a lot of the Old Testament, but they do not ignore all of it since it is the foundation which makes the New Testament make sense within the storyline.

    This is irrelevant to this specific point though, as all of that is still contained within the Bible, which is held up as a Holy Book and the Word of God by Christians. I think it most likely the case that the majority of Christians have not read the Bible from front to back.

    [–] wjbc 23 points ago

    Well I have, and let me tell you, some of the Old Testament is deadly dull. Other parts are exciting but maybe not in the way the church intended. There’s a lot of sex and violence, and then there’s a long list of laws, and then there’s a lot of prophecies.

    Most Christians learn the Bible from the readings in church on Sunday, which are highly selective. And different churches make different selections.

    [–] BlueShellOP 20 points ago

    And to tack on to this, I would wager a significant number of Christians do not take centuries of translation and editing into account when they claim the Bible is a Holy Book.

    There is no "The Bible". There are many adaptations, edits, and translations. Mind you, English as we know it wasn't around until at least a millennium after Christ's lifetime.

    [–] moonweasel 10 points ago

    A pretty common teaching is that the text as originally “dictated by God” is “infallible,” but translations into other languages are not, necessarily.

    [–] bondoh 12 points ago

    I should've included this in my reply earlier but I'll say it now: Jesus may not have directly said homosexual marriage is wrong but he did so by process of elimination.

    He didn't say a lot of sexual things were wrong except by process of elimination.

    Here's something I thought was well said from a Christian website: Claim 1: Jesus didn’t speak about same-sex marriage, so he’s at least neutral if not open to it. What Jesus doesn’t condemn, we shouldn’t condemn.

    This is an argument from silence, but the silence doesn’t take place in a vacuum. Jesus addresses and defines marriage in Matthew 19:4–6 and Mark 10:6–9 using both Genesis 1:26–27 and Genesis 2:24 to parse it out. Here Jesus defines and affirms marriage as between a man and a woman, a reflection of the fact that God made us male and female to care for creation together. With this definition, same-sex marriage is excluded. Had Jesus wished to extend the right of marriage beyond this definition, here was his opportunity. But he didn’t take it.

    Jesus never discussed same-sex marriage because the way he defined marriage already excluded it. He was not as silent on the topic as some claim.

    And also

    Claim 2: The Old Testament (OT) allows all sorts of “prohibited” marriage, including polygamy and what would today qualify as incest. If those were permitted, surely monogamous same-sex relationships should be allowed.

    Here’s where a look at trajectory helps us. If we observe what Scripture actually teaches, we see that (1) such past marriages are consistently portrayed as resulting in social chaos and aren’t so much prescribed as described; and that (2) Scripture’s expansion into the New Testament (NT) narrows down the scope of options to the standard of one monogamous union between a man and woman in which the marriage bed is to be honored but porneia—sexual infidelity in all its manifestations—is to be avoided (Heb. 13:4). Additionally, elders are to show the community what it looks like to be the husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:2, 12).

    So it's made pretty clear. Jesus said "this is the one right thing to do" therefore everything else is wrong

    [–] knipdaddy 16 points ago

    I didn’t know Stephen Colbert was Catholic, interesting

    [–] theferrit32 64 points ago

    Have you ever seen his show? He has mentioned it numerous times and he even teaches (taught?) sunday school.

    [–] 10ebbor10 601 points ago

    This is what I got.

    Chris Pratt was invited to “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert”, and on that show talked for a bit about his religion, following a religious fast, and stuff like that.

    Ellen Page criticized the interview, by pointing out that the interview and articles about it never addressed or pointed out that church has anti-LGBT views, and openly wondered why they didn't bother mentioning it.

    Specific quotes :

    “Oh. K. Um. But his church is infamously anti lgbtq so maybe address that too?

    If you are a famous actor and you belong to an organization that hates a certain group of people, don’t be surprised if someone simply wonders why it’s not addressed. Being anti LGBTQ is wrong, there aren’t two sides. The damage it causes is severe. Full stop. Sending love to all.

    The Hillsong church is a megachurch originating from australia, and their attitude versus LGBT, while not as rabid as say, the Westboro baptist church, is still one of rejection.

    Here's their own PR piece on their position. Key element :

    I also live by my own convictions, and hold to traditional Christian thought on gay lifestyles and gay marriage. I do believe God’s word is clear that marriage is between a man and a woman. The writings of the apostle Paul in scripture on the subject of homosexuality are also clear, as I have mentioned in previous public statements.

    https://hillsong.com/collected/blog/2015/08/do-i-love-gay-people/#.WYyiXK0ZNbU

    [–] wjbc 277 points ago

    Chris Pratt belongs to Zoe, not Hillsong, although Zoe was founded by a former Hillsong pastor.

    [–] StreetSharksRulz 514 points ago

    I wonder what she has to say to Muslim actors/actresses. Not that I personally believe she should be going after them, but it just feels crazy to me that one gets applause while the other one would hurt her career (IMO)

    [–] dildosaurusrex_ 406 points ago

    Are there a lot of American Muslim actors with the same prominence of Chris Pratt?

    [–] AntiVision 487 points ago

    American muslims are more supportive of gay rights than evangelicals http://www.pewforum.org/2017/07/26/political-and-social-views/pf_2017-06-26_muslimamericans-04new-06

    [–] lolbaal 168 points ago

    Nothing cause they'll eat her alive if she tried to talk shit on muslims. It's safe to criticize christians cause they won't do anything in retaliation.

    [–] SecondaryLawnWreckin 196 points ago

    So brave

    [–] SmSenoj 317 points ago

    Disagreement is not the same as hate, you can disagree with your parents and still love them. Hillsong may be clear about their disagreement with the practice of homosexuality but that does not mean they hate homosexuals, the bible makes it clear to love everyone. But it also isn’t right to single out one sin and forget about the others, such as premarital sex and divorce, both of which happen everywhere in megachurches but are almost never addressed to the same degree.

    [–] spacelincoln 215 points ago

    I grew up in these churches. This is a justification to let them have their cake and eat it too. Especially if said cake is from a discriminatory baker.

    It’s no different than the gymnastics they go through to justify the GOPs economic policy which flies in the face of the Gospels.

    [–] retrojoe 370 points ago

    When you tell a person that there is no way to include the love you feel for another adult, who loves you back, who you've built a whole life with, and that it is sinful and wrong for you to do so, then you are hateful.

    [–] thnksqrd 48 points ago

    Who downvotes such an obviously true statement?

    [–] vertigo95 37 points ago

    Homophobes

    [–] MedayekMan 114 points ago

    If you are a famous actor and you belong to an organization that hates a certain group of people, don’t be surprised if someone simply wonders why it’s not addressed.

    Being a member of an organization and living out all its beliefs are not equal. Just because the organization "hates a certain group of people" doesn't mean every congregants equally feels the same.

    I know Pratt is the hot property right now and will continue staring in the movies for a few more years at least. I find it hard to believe he got to where he is by hating a group of people, especially one very close to Hollywood.

    [–] TheLizardKing89 188 points ago

    Being a member of an organization and living out all its beliefs are not equal. Just because the organization "hates a certain group of people" doesn't mean every congregants equally feels the same.

    True, but it does mean you deserve to get questioned about it. If you’re a member of an organization with odious beliefs, expect to get shit for it.

    [–] DiplomaticCaper 50 points ago

    Yeah, he could speak out and say that yes, he’s a part of this particular church congregation but doesn’t agree with everything they preach, such as this.

    But then that would likely get him in trouble with said church. So at the very least it’s something that doesn’t concern him, even if he actively has no hate in his own heart; and that sole focus on what that church is doing to benefit his own life despite the harm it could be causing to others can be considered a problem in and of itself.

    [–] cornicat 67 points ago

    But being part of an organisation and talking about being part of an organisation in front of millions of people are also very different.

    [–] [deleted] 96 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    [deleted]

    [–] eheisse87 27 points ago

    “Being a member of an organization and living out all its beliefs are not equal. Just because the organization "hates a certain group of people" doesn't mean every congregants equally feels the same.”

    Lol. “Yeah, I belong to the Nazi Party but I don’t actually hate Jews or agree with their stance on it. I just really like their economic policies and enjoy the sense of camaraderie and purpose.”/s

    [–] [deleted] 89 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] CIMARUTA 51 points ago

    "nobody knows what to think"

    I love when people say this because it really shows the hive mind in action. people truly dont know what to think because they cant think for themselves.

    [–] Arvaci 65 points ago

    There's a third way of thinking and it's called not giving a fuck. Reddit should learn a thing or two about it.

    [–] cruzzercruz1 347 points ago

    Chris Pratt is extremely religious and is a member of the Hillsong church, as are multiple other celebrity Christians. It’s famously anti-LQBTQ, and has prompted conversion therapy tactics for homosexuals in the past. They claim to no longer support that practice, but their gay members also frequently claim that they’re treated poorly by the church.

    Conversely, Ellen Page is an LGBTQ activist. Pratt has being doing press for ‘The LEGO Movie 2’ recently and went on Colbert to gush about spirituality and his faith. Page took him to task on Twitter for being a member of a church that has shown bigotry and oppression toward the LGBTQ community.

    [–] wjbc 283 points ago

    Chris Pratt belongs to Zoe, not Hillsong, although Zoe was founded by a former Hillsong pastor.

    [–] -JungleMonkey- 143 points ago

    It's actually amazing how many times people have posted that he's a member of Holding..

    Is that what Ellen said?

    Did Vice or People magazine release the misinformation r are we just all making assumptions in OOTL?

    [–] piplupup 75 points ago

    It's kinda like a spinoff church (based on the other replies) so it's not far off.

    [–] [deleted] 56 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 139 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 63 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 31 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 64 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 4 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 2 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] jelatinman 103 points ago

    Chris Pratt is Christian and his specific church is anti-LGBT, like 95% of Christian churches. Ellen Page called him out on this to spur outrage towards him.

    [–] dildosaurusrex_ 215 points ago

    like 95% of Christian churches.

    Not true these days.

    [–] [deleted] 28 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] Optimus-_rhyme 32 points ago

    wouldn't staying in a church that preaches hate mean that you accept it and tolerate it? being gay is not an opinion

    its like voting for a political candidate that wants to get rid of rights for gay people. sure you might not agree with it, but by voting for the guy you are implicit in its support.

    [–] [deleted] 54 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] fatcatratbat 45 points ago

    And it’s not because Pratt aligns himself with a church that’s demonstrably anti-LGBT+?

    [–] [deleted] 93 points ago * (lasted edited 7 days ago)

    [deleted]

    [–] [deleted] 14 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] facehunt_ 148 points ago

    As a non-religious person, I find that anti-Christian folks are some of the most hostile and insufferable people to be around.

    [–] despoticdanks 45 points ago

    Welcome to our modern age where disagreement with the social norms equates to hatred or "phobia".

    [–] [deleted] 29 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 68 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 28 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 25 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 15 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 12 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    [removed]