this comment is really baffling:
Dudley said her interpretation of Christianity believes God has "unconditional love for all people," while Feucht's controversial stances make the religion feel exclusive for those who agree with those beliefs.
i do not know what textual sources dudley would use to source her claim that god has "unconditional love for all people", given that the canonical christian texts contain things like god burning down cities because there's gay people in them, god flooding the earth because people are wicked, god sending his own people into slavery for worshiping a statue, etc. the jewish (christian, islamic, mormon) god is a vindictive, cruel, piece of shit. if the question is who is adhering to actual christian values, it would appear to be the goof with the acoustic guitar; god is pretty clear that the gays are going to hell.
but, regardless, that's what free speech is. who the fuck does this bitch think she is, defining a religion for everybody else? i mean, that's a pretty christian characteristic, certainly, trying to tell everybody else what to feel and think and believe. but why does she expect anybody to give a fuck?
in a free society, where we have freedom of conscience and belief and thought, you get to make those choices yourself, you're not forced to defer to some pastor somewhere that you may or may not give the slightest fuck about.
where did this intolerant mentality that rejects free thinking come from, all of a sudden? has this authoritarian radical centre been here the whole time? it's something that the southern poverty law centre or the rcmp ought to take a closer look at it, to try to understand where this radical hippie christian sect came from, out of nowhere, as it's firebombing christian churches out of nowhere.
as a transgendered woman, i'm far more frightened of ms. dudley's intolerance than i am of sean feucht's stupidity.