Two Christian preachers brutally beaten at Seattle Gay Pride Festival

Warning: the video above has extremely coarse language and violence.

Fox News reports.


Two street preachers were brutally beaten — punched and kicked — by a crowd at a gay pride festival in Seattle and the entire melee was captured on video.

The preachers were holding signs reading “Repent or Else” and “Jesus Saves From Sin.” The video shows a group of people initially screaming and threatening the men during Pridefest at the Seattle Space Needle.

Television station KOMO reported that some of the attackers belonged to a group called NOH8

A group of women tried to steal their signs but were unsuccessful. The video then shows a group of men grabbing onto one of the preacher’s signs and dragging him to the ground. At some point he was punched in the back of the head a number of times while others can be seen kicking the man.

Another preacher was sucker punched in the back of the head.

Police arrested two suspects – one of whom has a long rap sheet.

Now the first thing to say, obviously, is that the two Christians are going about their opposition to homosexuality in a wrong way. I don’t think that it is a Biblical approach to expect non-Christians to accept Christian morality because of what Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 5:9-12. If you want to disagree about homosexuality or same-sex marriage with a non-Christian, then you’ll have to go outside the Bible and use evidence that is compelling to a non-Christian. And that’s what I always do in my blog posts because my audience is non-Christians. So that’s the first thing that needs to be said. There is a right way to argue against homosexuality with non-Christians, and these Christians were not doing it. The right way to discuss homosexuality is by using data found in books like “Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth” and “A Parent’s Guide to Preventing Homosexuality“. And the right context for presenting this data is probably in written work or in the context of a relationship with the other person. Not holding up signs with flames on it to strangers.

My sexual orientation

Now the point I want to make about this is that I have a sexual orientation, too. My sexual orientation is pre-marital virginity, pre-marital chastity and lifelong faithful married love (if I get married). Now I don’t need to have a parade or get all kinds of government recognition and financial benefits in order to make me feel good about what I’m doing. In fact, even if someone puts down my virginity and chastity, I wouldn’t really care. In fact, the number one place where my sexual orientation is looked down on is in the church. In church, there is a whole group of people who are enamored of compassion and they are opposed to having any boundaries on sex at all, regardless of the harm it causes with things like abortion, divorce, fatherlessness and so on. Their idea is that people should be able to have sex if they are in love, and that they shouldn’t be “shamed” or “judged” for doing so. However, I don’t attack them and violently beat them up just because they disagree with me on my sexual orientation. I just let them say what they are going to say and mind my own business. I don’t need anyone to tell me that what I am doing is right. I have reasons and evidence showing me that my view is right, like the peer-reviewed papers that show that premarital sex causes lower quality and stability in marriage. I know what I’m doing, and disagreement doesn’t bother me.

Anti-chastity people could even hold up signs in front of my house saying “Repent of your chastity, evil virgin, or burn in Hell!” and it still wouldn’t bother me. And that’s because I know that what I believe causes no harm to anyone. It doesn’t impose social costs on others because I need special drugs or health care for my chastity. It doesn’t cause me to make other people sick. It doesn’t break up marriages so I can go off with someone else. It doesn’t leave children fatherless or motherless. It doesn’t expose born or unborn children to harm from strangers. It doesn’t require public schools to teach young people how great my virginity and chastity is. It doesn’t require new school lessons telling everyone the contributions that virgins have made in history. It doesn’t require the Supreme Court to force people to affirm chastity. It doesn’t require anyone to be fired because they disagree with me on premarital sex. It doesn’t require other people to have their freedom of speech or freedom of religion limited so that I can avoid feeling “offended” by what they say and do.

So in conclusion then, I don’t respond with anger, vandalism, coercion or violence when people disagree with me about being a virgin and embracing chastity before marriage.

Related posts

20 thoughts on “Two Christian preachers brutally beaten at Seattle Gay Pride Festival”

  1. Excellent defense of how your position (which is also mine) requires none of the society-dumping changes that the gay position does. It kind of makes one wonder why they get so vitriolic in defense. Perhaps it is the truth in scripture, that the laws of God are written in all men’s hearts (conscience, if you will) and deep in a buried place they know what they are doing is wrong. Shakespeare comes to mind: Methinks they doth protest too much.


  2. Wow, sea-bass and julio looked like real threats . . . if their opponent was a house fly.

    The preachers were doing nothing of a threatening nature.

    The mindset of those at the parade was ridiculous. Low info citizens. expect to see more of the same soon.


  3. Once again, it should be noted that Satan is not against good morals – he is just as happy with good morals or bad morals from any unsaved human being – he is against the Person of Jesus Christ. The thugs who beat these preachers up were NOT incensed because the preachers disagreed with them on their behavior. They did so, because they saw the Name of Jesus paraded before them and were convicted of their sins, even though they chose to not act on their convictions – at least not in a productive manner. They chose to curse the messengers, assault them, and then lie about what they had done.

    I do agree that your way can be very effective, and might not get you beat up. But, anti-intellectualism is not proprietary to the Christian community – as this video clearly shows. And while I do not care for many street preaching tactics, these looked quite benign and even somewhat graceful, as compared to the approach of some street preachers who use a “shotgun” approach and often hit their fellow brethren.

    But, I do think that there is room for both and that a graceful, truthful Biblical perspective works for many people, including myself at one time. There was nothing untruthful on those signs. The Name of Jesus inflamed the thugs – and they went after the messenger, just like in Acts, and just like happens on a daily basis in the unreached countries of the world. At some point, the Gospel must be preached too, and if not, we may successfully convince someone of our intellectual position without the unbeliever even considering repentance.

    So, I am just saying “let’s do both.” Let’s address the apologetics first, but not leave the Gospel out. Otherwise, we may end up turning the intellect, but not the heart. If that is where we end up, Satan is just as happy as if we don’t turn the intellect at all.


  4. They don’t seem very gay to me. Rather surly, actually.

    While I might agree that what the preachers did wasn’t the best idea, I don’t disagree with their feeling moved to act as they did. I favor an “all fronts attack” on these types of issues.

    Let the non-believers hear the Word. It might be what God had in mind for some of them.

    Be ready to defend the position on a non-religious ground, though I believe they will reject this just as quickly and easily as they reject Christian arguments. This is because their sexuality is their religion and they are firmly given over to it.

    Whatever the situation, speak out if so compelled, in whatever manner feels right at the time. Learn from the experience in order to be better prepared should another opportunity present itself. While it may be more practical to act in one way rather than another, one cannot NOT speak out just because one isn’t equipped in the ideal manner for the opportunity presented. I don’t think a bad technique leads to defeat because it is still another person speaking out against the behavior, and that sort of societal pressure is what is most lacking today.


  5. This is an excellent and well-written article, but I must respectfully argue that chastity is not an orientation. Chastity is a lifestyle choice, just as being promiscuous, because being chaste (or promiscuous) does not affect who you are actually attracted to. You have chaste straight people, chaste gay people, promiscuous people of either orientation, etc. How one chooses to conduct themselves sexually is their choice and is a lifestyle, not a orientation – something people are born with and can not change. You can decide when you want to stop being chaste, or maintain that lifestyle.


      1. I never said there was a gay gene. Some people are simply born the way they are – just as some people are born with artistic ability, or mathematical aptitude, or a bright personality, etc, from parents who have no such inclination, such and such. Doesn’t mean there is some sort of ‘inheritance’ for being gay. I personally don’t believe that there ever was a gay gene, but I do believe that one can’t change their sexual orientation.


  6. Re: “sexual orientation”

    I’m reminded of the movie Princess Bride, where one of the characters keeps saying, “Inconceivable!” And then another character, Inigo Montoya, says, “You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.”

    Same here. I understand your point about your views on premarital chastity, premarital virginity, and lifelong marriage. But I don’t think those views are what other English speakers have in mind when then talk about “sexual orientation.” As I understand it, “sexual orientation” refers to the gender(s) a person is sexually attracted to. A man who is attracted to other men but not women would have a “homosexual orientation.” That same man could share your views about premarital chastity, premarital virginity, and lifelong marriage. But they would be just that — views, beliefs — not a “sexual orientation.”


  7. So what would you say about Exodus International shutting down and its president Alan Chambers saying homosexuality cannot be “cured”?


    1. I don’t think that Chambers has a doctorate in a relevant area. I also don’t think that religion is necessarily the correct way to approach these issues. That’s why I linked to Jeffrey Satinover and Joseph Nicolosi. They are professionals with the relevant degrees and publications.


  8. Great post WK. As I was reading it, the thought occurred to me that the preachers’ objective may not have been to win over the wayward sinners in the homosexual lifestyle choice festival–but rather to bait them into responding with violence as lefties are wont to do, and capture it on video. A bit of PR warfare, to take some of the wind out of the Rainbow Warrior’s sails, as it were.

    If that was their objective, i’d say they were successful.

    That and some folks just enjoy being martyrs. I wonder if there’s a bit of that at play here as well.


    1. That’s true. But when I compare them with someone like Ryan Anderson or Robert George, then I just think that they haven’t put the effort into being persuasive. What good is it to quote Bible verses to people who don’t accept the Bible? The verse I quoted from in 1 Corinthians seems to indicate that Paul was not willing to condemn non-Christians since they were not expected to follow the law. But Paul did engage in reasoned debate with non-Christians. That’s why I back Ryan T. Anderson over the flamey-sign guys. I think Ryan is more like Paul.


  9. You criticize the approach of these Christians, but what is it you object to? The way they retreat from confrontation and remain silent when being cursed at and threatened? You assume that they were speaking against homosexuality and perhaps they were, but that is not shown on the video. Perhaps the sign seems confrontational, but is it not biblical to call sinners to repent? They may have simply been preaching the gospel of salvation by repentance and faith in Christ. Why assume something negative about these brothers in Christ?


    1. I don’t think that holding up a sign with Bible verses and flames on it helps, though. I think a better idea would be to read scholarly work like Robert P. George, Ryan T. Anderson, Sherif Girgis, Jeffrey Satinover, Joseph Nicolosi, etc. and then deploy arguments and the evidence from those books in reasoned debates. I don’t think that threatening non-Christians with Hell makes sense, since they don’t believe there is such a place. It doesn’t work.

      The alternative to that would be to make a case for the Christian worldview, like what you see William Lane Craig doing in university debates or in academic publications. I don’t think that the flamey-sign people are willing and/or able to do that, though. I think that they should be able to do that, and then maybe change their signs to say “I have reasons and evidence to think that God exists and that Jesus rose from the dead” and then engage people who come up to them in reasoned debate, like Paul and Jesus did in their day.


  10. When a preacher engages in what is known as “confrontational” evangelism, and in a hostile environment, they can expect to get a slug or two. I would not consider him “brutally beaten.” I was initially nervous about even watching the video because I was anticipating genuine brutality. I have personally preached in various open air places, including the Taste of Chicago. You know when you have worn out your welcome and you have to make a choice, will it be a battle of wills or the battle of wits? Even so, backing down doesn’t always guarantee safety. Preaching the Gospel brings out the demonic. I’ve witnessed it plenty. I’ve also heard about some pretty serious beatings and serious life and death situations. I’ve taken a few slugs myself, just for passing out tracts to some kids that were hanging out and cruising the strip in my home town. But once you’re in that sort of thing, it feels like compromising for safety is being a chocolate soldier and thus it often continues to heat up on account of these evangelists pledging their self to the Gospel. It’s easy to criticize, unless you have felt that fire shut up in your bones it is difficult to understand what drives such men and women.


  11. Jason Queree, the man suspected of punching the protester multiple times, has been arrested 29 times since 1995. He has been convicted or otherwise found against for nine felonies, including forgery, stolen property, unlawful firearm possession and theft, and 12 misdemeanors, including driving with a suspended license, vehicle prowl, domestic violence, assault, DUI and criminal trespass.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s