True colours? The Rev Al Miller speaks his mind

In an article in the Jamaica Gleaner Saturday edition, Rev. Al Miller "indicated that he would not be opposed to the idea of having dialogue about the issues of bigotry and intolerance within the society", it went on to say that  Rev. Miller "would have to be satisfied with the principles that would guide those discussions", the entire article may be read here: Church Head Says He Is Open To Talks On Bigotry, Intolerance

After reading the article, and seeing Rev. Miller's specific demands for such dialogue to take place I commented saying: ‎"As far as I see Al Miller will have this discussion when he will have his way. When will these people realise that Jamaica is a secular democratic society? That church and state are separate. And that you cannot dictate who and how other persons should love and tolerate based only on your religious views?"

Now, less than one month after that article, my fellow blogger at Gay Lesbian Bisexual Trans-gender & Queer Jamaica, brings to our attention Rev. Miller's remarks on his television program Word Power, that the, "gay lobby is using the guise of tolerance to get the nation to accept the “gay lifestyle”".

“Nothing is wrong with loving someone but disagreeing or disliking their lifestyle and the issue is the lifestyle we are not against...but we must recognize sin as sin,...what the gay agenda is about is wanting the society to accept the lifestyle as being right but they are using the guise of tolerance, of course we can be tolerant with the individual but we must have the right to be intolerant to a practice that is not right it is in the same vein as anyone who practices a lifestyle that is inconsistent with correct behaviour or good for a society". 

To read the entire post, and the entirety of the remarks, please visit: Rev Al Miller says gay lobby is using the guise of tolerance to get the nation to accept the “gay lifestyle”

Dear reader, I ask you to draw your own conclusion; what do you think the Rev wants? An open dialogue in which both parties can come to a consensus as to how to move forward, while respecting the rights of all? Or a dialogue in which all parties will agree that GLBTQ persons ought not to have access to their basic rights and freedoms, since it is not in accordance with traditional Christian belief?