E3 Keynote Speaker Backed Controversial Pastor’s Claim that non-Christians Condemned to Hell

When the Entertainment Software Association announced on May 19th that Texas Governor Rick Perry would deliver the keynote address at E3 2008, GamePolitics was one of the few news outlets to publicly question the ESA’s decision.

We expect more raised eyebrows over Perry’s selection given yesterday’s reports on Wired and The Escapist that in November, 2006 Perry affirmed the comments of controversial minister John Hagee that non-Christians are condemned to Hell.

In the photo at left, Perry is seen covering his face while Hagee preaches.

Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential candidate, recently rejected Hagee’s endorsement over, as CNN reported, "Hagee’s comments that Adolf Hitler had been fulfilling God’s will by hastening the desire of Jews to return to Israel in accordance with biblical prophecy."

As the Dallas Morning News reported on November 6, 2006:

Gov. Rick Perry, after a God and country sermon attended by dozens of political candidates Sunday, said that he agreed with the minister that non-Christians will be condemned to hell.


"In my faith, that’s what it says, and I’m a believer of that," the governor said.


…Asked afterward at a political rally whether he agreed with Mr. Hagee, the governor said he didn’t hear anything that he would take exception to. He said that he believes in the inerrancy of the Bible and that those who don’t accept Jesus as their savior will go to hell.
GP: While there are surely many Christians among E3 attendess, there are just as surely many who aren’t. Aside from the fact that Perry was a bizarre keynote choice from the get-go, his divisive comments indicate that the ESA should rescind the offer.
We have to ask again: why is E3 2008 being politicized? The answer, we suspect, has much to do with embattled ESA boss Michael Gallagher.
UPDATE: The ESA went ballistic over this story and called GP’s objectivity into question, given the ECA’s ownership of the site. Here’s part of what the ESA had to say:
If the ESA posted a blog and called it a news site, journalists would rightfully balk and it wouldn’t pass a smell test. Remarkably, GamePolitics doesn’t face the same scrutiny even though it’s funded by the ECA and tainted with anti-ESA vitriol. At the end of the day, calling GamePolitics a news site is as laughable as saying there’s a Cuban free press.


Despite the ESA’s reaction, I stand by what I wrote regarding the appropriateness – or lack thereof – of having Gov. Perry deliver the E3 keynote. However, I am making one edit to the headline. While Gov. Perry agreed with Rev. Hagee’s contention that non-Christians would be condemned to Hell, it does not appear to be a direct quote. That error has been fixed.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. Phinehas says:

    "Only a primitive and barbaric religion would say everybody ELSE is wrong, and WE are right."

    I’m assuming that in making this statement, you believe that YOU are right and ANYONE who disagrees with you is wrong.

    How narcissistic/sociopathic/primitive/barbaric of you.


  2. Anonymous says:

    blah, blah, blah. The point being that he can say what he wants, but its a bad business descision to let him do it at e3. As can plainly be seen by this flamefest he will not have a receptive audience among gamers. Most are rage against the machine types and dont like politicians to begin with. Video games give you the medium to go willy-nilly-killing-spree if you want. It makes a hell(pun intended) of a lot of sense to NOT have him speak for an audience that enjoys absolute freedoms….such as paying a hooker to give them a bj in a car and afterwards running them over with said car, rinse and repeat ad nauseam

  3. Anonymous says:

    Actually, yes, most Christians are exactly like this. The belief that non-Christians go to hell is a fundamental part of Christianity. Most Christians, INCLUDING PERRY, do NOT believe that non-Christians "deserve" this; they just think that it’s what will happen.

    Almost everyone who is commenting on this article is acting like he said that he wants non-Christians to go to hell, which isn’t what he said.

  4. Anonymous says:

    "It is that he is in a position that governs a great many individuals who do not share his belief. "

    You can’t put someone in that position without having them govern many people who do not share their beliefs. If you pick a Christian, he doesn’t share the beliefs of Muslims and Atheists. If you pick an Atheist, he doesn’t share the beliefs of Muslims and Christians.

    "And that such a comment would imply that he will violate the Consititutional Rights of citizens who do not share his religious beliefs."

    Where on earth are you getting that from?

    "It’s something else to announce to a diverse group of individuals who you have charge over, which leads to those questions of bias and incapability to work with a diverse group of individuals."

    You weren’t paying attention! Someone SPECIFICALLY ASKED him about his beliefs, and all he did was answer them. You can’t blame him for speaking his beliefs in public when a reporter asks him about them point blank.

  5. Anonymous says:

    "You could say the same about Hitler, one of Perry’s minister’s heroes."

    Let me guess, your blood was boiling and you saw the word "Hitler" somewhere in a sentence. Go back and read the article again.

    The minister said that Hitler fulfilled a prophecy because his actions caused the Jews to return to Israel. That does NOT imply anything heroic. According to Christian belief, Judas helped fulfil a prophecy by betraying Jesus.

  6. RIckRussellTX says:

    "Attilla the Hun wanted to rule over China"

    Although his empire stretched into Russia, and historically his people were known to tangle with the Chinese, I don’t know that there is any evidence that he actually wanted to rule over China. His conquests were all in Europe.

  7. Anonymous says:

    For some privileged reason by way of delusion, your Christian religion DOES condemn to hell anyone who disagrees with them.  How’s THAT for juvenile – even infantile – behavior?

    There’s no Golden Rule embodied in your Christian belief that of everyone on Earth you are the only people who know what’s right.  Totally narcissistic, and sociopathic, your religion is.  It’s a barbaric and even primitive way of seeing the world and shows a total lack of moral decency or sophistication.

    It’s no wonder Christianity has always been a religion of conquest and domination.  It’s your hyperaggressive underlying belief system.  Take a look in your religious mirror.  Evolve for a change.  You are not chosen or superior or by any means correct.  You’re living in a mentally inbred fantasy world.  No offense intended or implied.

    Only a primitive and barbaric religion would say everybody ELSE is wrong, and WE are right.  Christianity fits that description; not the only one, but the only one that is the topic here in this thread, and the only one beating up a good part of the world militarily at the moment.

    So, still curious as to why the controversy?  Then, you are too blinded by your own religion to see the odious false sanctimony of your own faith.  Not that there’s anything wrong with that!

  8. Wearyman says:

    Thomad Jefferson was no fan of organized religion.  Indeed, of all the founders, it may be most truthfully said that he was a "Deist".   However, as a Deist he innately respected the rights of all people to believe what they wished.  It was his pluralistic vision which we now celebrate in America.

    However, it is this very pluralism that is threatened when we accuse someone of bigotry and xenophibia simply for expressing thier religion publically.  Part of a pluralistic society is agreeing to disagree.  We all must realize that other people will have beleif systems which conflict with our own.  As long as those beleifs to not impinge on our Constitutionally protected rights, then we DO NOT have the right to stop those people from practicing (and espousing, if it is religiously required) thier religion.

    In other words, Christians have a constitutionally protected right to practice Christianity.  Part of Christianity is the commandment from God to preach the gospel and convert others to Christianity.  (also known as The great Commision)  So Christians have the right to speak on their beliefs.  This is, of course, also backed up by the right to Free Speech.

    However, while people are guaranteed the right to speak, they are not goaranteed the right to an audience.  In other words, you don’t have to listen if you disagree.

  9. Questionmark says:

    "There is no right or wrong belief, it’s more based in what you yourself believe to be true."

    Someone had asked for info on the Wiccan belief system, Iw asn’t referring to the man’s comments anymore. Wiccan is not a defined belief system, it’s different things to different people, but can be identified by certain MOSTLY universal things, such as the Wiccan Rede or the rule of 3.


    I know you seem to be just playing devil’s advocate just saying what you read wasn’t what I meant.

  10. MrFalcon ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    So your saying that the only kind of person who could handle the FLDS ranch situation is someone who believed the same things as them?  Of course then, that person wouldn’t be able to handle any situation regarding groups that the FLDS disagree with…

    Yes, bias is a huge problem in politics.  Its also an unavoidable one.  Even if you could find people who somehow don’t believe anything that isn’t enshrined in American law (and that would disclude Atheists, who often believe the world would be a better place without religion), you wouldn’t be able to elect them on that basis because the US Constitution forbids electing officials based on their religious beliefs.  That’s one of those religious freedoms you’re so keen on protecting, and one that is constantly being flagrantly violated by the American people.

    Since everyone is biased, the only way to counter bias is through governmental transparency.  In this sense, Perry has done us a huge favor.  He has given full disclosure about his religious beliefs.  I fail to see how keeping these things a secret would help protect people from having their rights violated.  Nor do I see how simply believing that certain people will go to hell someday would make someone more likely to infringe on their rights.

  11. Loudspeaker says:

    Why not?

    "Volume helps to get a point across but sharp teeth are better."

  12. MrFalcon ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Yes, but that’s just it.  The fact that this blog can post several stories per day about the intersection of videogames and politics shows that videogames are highly political.  So why should politics be barred from a videogame convention?

  13. Phinehas says:

    "There is no right or wrong belief, it’s more based in what you yourself believe to be true."

    I’m confused.  If there is no right or wrong belief, then Perry’s belief that non-Christians are going to hell couldn’t be a wrong belief could it?  Of course, it couldn’t be a right belief either. 

    Yet, somehow, it is a stupid and insulting belief? 

    We’ve established that it isn’t stupid and insulting because it is wrong, so I’m confused as to what else would make it stupid and insulting.  Because it is intolerant?  But that would assume that intolerance was wrong wouldn’t it?  And even if I believed that intolerance was wrong, obviously my belief (in addition to possibly being intolerant) couldn’t be right…or wrong.  Right?  (Well, obviously not, but…???)

  14. Anonymous ( User Karma: -12 ) says:

    How about the crusades?

    altho removing the malcontent masses for a war effort was more likly the real reason for it.

  15. Adamas Draconis says:

    Best way to learn about Wicca is simply to ask Zippy.

    Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

  16. Questionmark says:

    Info… well depends. Wiccan is kind of not like most other religions. It’s a very free form religion. There is no right or wrong belief, it’s more based in what you yourself believe to be true. Some follow monotheistic views, others polytheistic.

    Pretty much the only thing that is usually believed by all is the Wiccan Rede, google that and you should get something along the lines of:

    An it harm none, do what ye will.

    Basically, as long as it hurts no one and nothing (all life is sacred) do whatever you like. This includes harming yourself or others, though often exceptions can be made if it’s done for good reason (hurting one person who is trying to kill another in order to stop them would be an example).

    People often confuse it with the belief of 3, whatever you do comes back to you times three. While they are two different beliefs the reasoning is the same. You’re actions ultimatly come back to you, doing good will bring good to you, doing bad will bring bad. Karma, she’s a cruel and sometimes mysterious mistress.

  17. E. Zachary Knight says:

    Sorry bud, You need to pay better attention to history.

    The cause of most wars are power and land. Very few if any can be solely linked to religion. Hitler wanted power through selective breeding and wanted to rule the world. Attilla the Hun wanted to rule over China, the Civil wars in Africa are over who will rule their respective countries. The US Civil War was over the right of states to rule themselves without federal intervention. Etc.

    Show me a war that can be solely linked to religion.

    E. Zachary Knight


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  18. the1jeffy says:

    Why would gamers be welcome at an industry tradeshow?  Oh wait, you think E3 was supposed to be a big Con for you to lust for, and forgot it was supposed to be about business interests.

    ~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

  19. the1jeffy says:

    "Maybe he’s crafting a system of tax breaks for game companies in Texas as we speak?"

    Bingo.  Hence the E3 Keynote choice. 

    ~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

  20. Anonymous ( User Karma: -12 ) says:

    Tis the zippy once again


    GP likes his scandalous type articles now and then 😛


    But it  is quite silly to dis the man for stating the norm of his religion, I mean “hell” is for the “believers” after all (heheeh read into that all you can, but it really means non believers do not believe thus hell to them is nothing) , I been wanting to read more on the wiccan religion know any good info sites? ^^

  21. Anonymous ( User Karma: -12 ) says:

     Religion is already “regulated” in government, buniessmen and corporate types need to be “watched” as well, both have interests that can supersede the needs of the people.

     I have more issues with the PC nature of the anti religion movement than I do with religious people in office, PCisims just tend to nurture zero thought and sheeple are witless enough as is, we are a nation founded on Christian themes and have a huge Christian population to try and avoid, ignore dismiss it is silly it just means we need to work harder at making sure things are balanced and PCISIm is not something that balances ANYTHING.


    If anything government needs a oversight and the enforcement there of.

  22. Anonymous ( User Karma: -12 ) says:

    gaaa Iam forgetign to psot mew name


    tis zippy of corse 😛


    Who like bush are fair weather Christians(cheery pickers).



    The problem with religion or business in governments its interests can be prioritized over the peoples interest, of course what’s needed in government more than odd rules and regulations is a strong oversight system, something with legal teeth to go after corruption not just petty “oversights” like discrimination there’s enough watchdog groups to raise a fuss over that but not much to actively balance government.


  23. Ares Draxus says:

    Every religion, particularly the Abrahamic religions, have their share of nutjobs.  Christians have Hagee, Thompson, and Phelps.  Muslims have Osama Bin Ladin, the Iranian Ayotallas, and Sadr.  The Jews…  Hmmm… I am sure they have thier sure but they aren’t as sensationalistic for the media to latch on to.

    My own personal beliefs is that there is no Heaven to strive for, there is no Hell to fear.  There is no God that commands us to follow, just humans trying to control others, explain the unexplainable, and belay their fears of death.

  24. JackDon'tKnowJack says:

    Seems like a fitting note for E3 and the ESA to go out on. Ain’t they pretty much over and done because they didn’t have and couldn’t get a clue? Why quit being clueless in their death-throes?

  25. Anonymous ( User Karma: -12 ) says:


    As I stated its hard not to lump all religion together, mob mentalities however are more of the issue than simply religion itself, it’s the old saying people suck a person not so much, this can be applied to religion.


    Iam starting to form a strong opinion that god is what you make of it, for me remove all the petty humanisims of it and boil it down to light, love, hope and kindness.

    Religion itself tries to build around that but when they forget kindness and love to separate people into labels to raise their noses on I can’t help but let the vitriol lose.

      And just to be clear it’s not the person to be hated the some groupings thereof, Christianity is not a whole group persay but a mass of groups like most enormous organizations.


  26. JackDon'tKnowJack says:

    Pure genius, that one. It even beats the "what goes up, must come down" Law. And it’s something I became aware of only by virtue of my time spent on GamePolitics. Who said blogging was a waste of time?

  27. Chuma ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Clearly the ESA has lost touch with gaming in general.  It’s little wonder so many companies are leaving them if this is their idea of a well oiled E3.  What, they get rid of the smaller booths and models because they want to focus on gaming, but bringing in a politician who will no doubt to weighed down by religious baggage is fine?

    As for the slur against Athiest and Agnostics, if there is a God, and he is as pure and righteous as these fundementalists would have us believe, I think they have more to fear from their actions and hate-mongering than someone who simply does not worship.

    Ofcourse my other stock response to this is to say given the choice between sitting on a cloud and playing a harp or being chained up and whipped, I know which I would prefer

  28. T5 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    "I don’t know that there’s any human being that has the ability to interpret what God and his final decision-making is going to be," Mr. Perry said. "That’s what the faith says. I understand, and my caveat there is that an all-knowing God certainly transcends my personal ability to make that judgment black and white."

    He added: "Before we get into Buddha and all the others, I get a little confused there. But the fact is that we live in a pluralistic world but our faith is real personal. And my Christian faith teaches that the way is through Jesus Christ." http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/110606dnTSWperry.351c57c.html


    Questioning these belifes is appropriate, public officals  need to be held to the highest levels of scrutiny  be it Perry and his views here or even (do I dare say it?) Barack Obama and the whole Trinity mess. 

  29. Evilbaby ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I don’t really understand you guys.  This comment is not one made in the spirit of hate or division.  It is simply a statement of belief.  Its what the protestant bible instructs as the truth.  Honestly I don’t know what’s there to get so worked up about. 

    I mean if the guy had said "All these people going to hell should be speeded on their way with a bullet in the head" would have illicited the comments about hate that I see.

    Or if he had said "People that don’t believe should be rounded up and put into camps so they can’t infect our children with their sin" would be divisive.

    All he’s saying is the basis of belief that Christianity is based on.  I mean if non-Christians weren’t going to hell then what would be the point of being a Christian.  Its kind of a pain in the ass following all these rules and being a nice person and spreading the word, if there’s no reward at the end of the tunnel.  I mean if we all go to the same place and its not hell then what’s the point of being a christian.  I’m sure all you athiests out there are nodding your head in agreement that there is no point, but then that’s what seperates you nihilistic folks from the rest of us. 

    What would be intersting would be to see the response to a politician who said "I believ that when we die we all cease to exist and our bodies rot in the ground to no purpose!"  Oh man that would make my day.

  30. Christophe Janson ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Religious people should not be allowed to become politicians. They should serve the people of their land, and not some old book written by "the dead madman of your choice". Just because someone believes in another +100 year old dead guys book you should not treat them badly. Faith in religion is the worst kind of ignorance, no god would sentence half the world to an eternity of suffering on the notion that they are born in say Asia or the middle east. Anyone who sincerly believe in a religion is more likely to go to hell than someone who is not, simply because atheists are the only ones with a fair shoot at understanding that a human is a human and should be treated as such.

  31. Anonymous says:

    Good job McCloud, make us normal Christians look bad.  Seriously, I don’t believe this crap at all.  Ugh, this seems like something that Jack Thompson would say.

  32. Anonymous says:

    Maybe he is coming from the "Play video games or you will burn in Hell, cause da’Jesus says so!" angle.

  33. Dark Sovereign says:

    Perry had little to do with the FLDS compound fiasco. Child Protective Services saw a real threat, acted to quickly, and, in doing so, overstepped its boundaries. Perry is a figure head. The Texas legislature makes all the laws, and the lieutenant governor is granted the true executive power. Perry serves to distract the populace of Texas and, apparently, everyone else from the actual government, which is run by Texas businessmen.


  34. Dark Sovereign says:

    Hell is different things to different people. Some believe that it is a separation from God. Others believe that it is eternal torture. Do not group us all into one homogenous group. To do so is to be just as much of a bigot as those you decry.


  35. Steve says:

    Well, E3 died in 2007 anyway when gamers were no longer welcome.  Who really cares what self righteous loser and scumbag politician speaks to the self-congratulatory photo op that is E3?

  36. Adamas Draconis says:

    While I know that most Christans are not like this, unfortunately my personal experiences with this particular strip of Christanity can make it hard to remember when one of these starts garnering attention from politicans or others in power over their respective spheres of influence.

    As for my personal belief. There are many paths to the same destination, but I admit I do not understand those that think they have only one life on earth.


    Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

  37. nightwng2000 says:

    My problem with him isn’t because he holds a particular religious belief.

    It is that he is in a position that governs a great many individuals who do not share his belief.  And that such a comment would imply that he will violate the Consititutional Rights of citizens who do not share his religious beliefs.  That he will, in fact, make decisions that are based on his personal religious beliefs in the process of performing his duties as a state governor.  The recent violation of religious Rights by the removal of over 400 children from a FLDS ranch.  While one might argue non-religious reasons, the governor’s comments can now be used to imply that he refuses to act on judicial reasoning basis because his religious beliefs are different than those of the FLDS, thereby making his actions, or inactions, questionable.

    Another similar case, though not as high up in government terms, was the resignation of a principal from an Irmo, SC school because he opposed the creation of a homosexual "club" (support group) because of his personal religious objections.  Opening the door to the question whether prior decisions and treatment of homosexual students may have also been biased, discriminatory, or even abusive in nature. 

    It is one thing to have a personal or religious belief and follow it in regards to one’s self.  It’s something else to announce to a diverse group of individuals who you have charge over, which leads to those questions of bias and incapability to work with a diverse group of individuals.


    NW2K Software

    Nightwng2000 has also updated his MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  38. Thomas Riordan ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Oh good I’m gonna burn in hell.  I hope they have marshmallows.

  39. Questionmark says:

    Funny thing about beliefs, you can believe whatever you want.

    If you’re right you know what to expect after death.

    If you’re wrong sucks to be you because you most likely don’t fit into any other religion’s version of what must be done to attain heaven/nirvana/etc.

    If there is no heaven/hell/god etc. and no afterlife it doesn’t really matter anyway now does it.

    Kind of kills the drive to argue about religion and beliefs.


  40. Gaffit says:

    This is going to get interesting very fast.

    And I love that epic facepalm in the background of that picture.

  41. Anonymous ( User Karma: -12 ) says:

    Tis Zippy Again


    Without hell and damnation religion would not work, you can’t run a modern “organization” on love, peace and kindness, sorry these are just the facts “separation” and “belittling” is the main way to gain donations through guilt.

    Not saying all religion or Christianity is bad just most of it *lick*


    But really tho it’s more the human mob mentality that makes things appear worse than they are but sometimes you have to wonder about these “organizations”….

    In specific to hell is not a misconstruction of the waste area around one of the biblical cities and not a “place” , you had burning waste and bodies ect,ect, there again without HELL Christianity could not frighten the public into place, fear is still the cheapest form of populace control available to thos who rule over them.

     And another side note if I am going to hell so are you because your god is just that fickle, either we all are lost children who have been forgiven by god or we are all lost souls damn to the void there is lil to no in between IMO, we are either forgiven by birth by creation or damn by it, religion is meant to be used as a way to understand the things that are beyond our understanding not raise our nose and become petty divisive demons over.

  42. Anonymous says:

    Agreed, even though that one radical individual may seem to condemn anyone not of his religion.

    But I, at least, am consitant. I react with distaste when, ANY religion gets to big for it’s britches. In my opinion religion is an individual thing, it should have no place in politics or industry, none. Nor should it be the source of conflicts. I have no problem with the fact that he’s christian. I have a problem when he tries to get other people to become christians.

    The arguement is also rather silly. God will damn you to hell if you don’t worship him and follow his rules, and yet he still loves you always? Huh?

  43. Salen says:

    So yeah, who is this guy supposed to be speaking to and about at E3 now? Seriously, W.T.F.

  44. Why GP? says:

    GP, I’m a little shocked at you.

    If you don’t like him, you should be condemning him for other reasons than he subscribes to a faith shared by a third of the world. Yes, he said he believes that the book that faith was based on is true, and in it is a punishment for non-believers. So do a great many other religions. But if you do not believe in Christianity, if you don’t believe in hell, then you’ve got nothing to worry about, right? What he is saying is meaningless words to you; it shouldn’t be the seed of persecution or you become no better. Bias is taking over mainstream news, don’t fall into that trap too. People shouldn’t start bashing someone just because they don’t share the same faith or belief, and unless he has been asked to publicly pray or preach at E3, this is really a non-issue.

    You can’t uphold the First Amendment for game companies and not for individuals, even politicians.

  45. Godmil says:

    To be fair though, he’s unlikely to bring up religion in his E3 keynote.  I’m sorry to say it looks like GP is just trying to drum up controversy.

  46. Twin-Skies ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    It will amusing to see what happens when some smartass reporter decides to question the guv regarding his connections to Hagee during the E3. That’ll make more waves than some game announcement,  I imagine.


  47. Ack says:

    I love generalizations.  Obviously all Christians, regardless of denomination, fall into this category, be they Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Calvinist, Methodist, Baptist, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Adventist, Anabaptist, Presbyterian, Quaker, Pentacostal, Unitarian, or any other organization.  Do you even know the differences between them?

    No, instead you wish to make a general statement about a group you have a problem with based on the comments of one person who believes something you don’t like, so you respond by insulting the group and asking for his censorship.  So our public and political officials can no longer express religious views, is that it?  But they have the freedom too, just like the rest of us.  Would it have made any difference if he’d been a hardcore Satanist?  What about if he’d been Hassidic Jewish?  Mahayana Buddhist?  Would you have the same problem if he’d professed a belief that is controversial in these other religions?

    Honestly, I think we should look more into this guy’s record outside of what he personally believes.  How has he voted?  Has he been a big supporter of technology?  Perhaps there’s something here we’re missing.  Maybe he’s crafting a system of tax breaks for game companies in Texas as we speak?  Maybe he just likes video games.  Then we might get a better view of why the ESA had him in mind.

    Now yes, we should keep in mind his connection to Hagee.  Much like Senator Obama’s connections to Rev. Wright or Father Pfleger, Governor Perry’s connection to Hagee does need to be explored.  But the question asked was about religion, not politics, and from that quote all we can gather is that Gov. Perry agrees with Hagee on a religious scale.  If he begins making anti-semitic comments, then we’ll know.  But we should not condemn someone based solely on one idea in his faith, and we certainly shouldn’t condemn an entire religion based on one radical individual.

  48. TempestFirestorm says:

    I’m christian, and I don’t practice that often. We’re not all like that. Any religion will have people like this. I agree, this man is a fool. He follows the book too literally. The ten commandments are the source of some of this problem. “Honor no other god but me.” And all that. Who’s to say that our religion is the only one that’s right? An ancient book and some circumstantial evidence? Foolish. Guess what buddy? Religion has been the cause of more wars that anyone could possibly count. Don’t try to shove your religion down other people’s throats, it works better that way. Don’t let this fool represent us badly, we’re not all like that.


  49. Anonymous says:

    "In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own".

    -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814



  50. David D. ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Brokenscope: "He is honest with his beliefs and hasn’t compromised them to be popular.

    You could say the same about Hitler, one of Perry’s minister’s heroes. What a great role model he turned out to be. (And, from what we’ve seen in the archival footage, he no doubt would have made a captivating keynote speaker.)



  51. InsidiousMrMoo says:

    Umm just so you know you are at a website called Gamepolitics which reports on politics that affect… games *facepalm*


  52. Anonymous says:

    Gamepolitics has been politicizing aspects of the gaming industry for months, if not years. Why should E3 be any different?

  53. Questionmark says:


    Ok I just have to say I’m a little dissapointed to find this story here. Yes I see the connection to videogames, but it is a fairly flimsy connection (the guy that the ESA is having do keynote at E3 agreed with a guy who said…).

    If the comment had been about gaming, gamers etc. it would ahve made more sense for me to see this here. But the beliefs of the keynote speaker at E3 really have nothing to do with E3 unless that’s what he’s talking about there.

    And please take note, I myself am insulted by the statement since I am not Christian, technically i was raised Mormon but I chose to stop identifying with that religion once I got older and actually learned what they were trying to preach. I am now Wiccan and thus fall in the "going to hell" catagorey.

    Yes it’s a stupid statement, I just don’t think it really fits into videogame news.

    At any rate not my site, and I love the site so thank you for reporting it anyway.

  54. Anonymous ( User Karma: -12 ) says:

    I(zippy) thinks Heaven is an abstract plane where souls rest on their journey through creation, hell would be the darker edges around it where darker things linger because they fear and loath the light, so in a scene if you are vile and corrupt you will go to hell because you hate the light, while any sane person with a few good qualities will most likely pass the murky pits of hades for some time on the beach’o’light…mmm yyeeesssss.

    Creation is beyond man but the light never will be out of reach.

    One could say “god” is merely the highest form of being/sentience and being thus is fickle and out of reach for all practical purposes, everything else can merely be different forms of “life” beyond that it makes the world far more interesting than what science alone can comprehend.


    Believe what you will go where you will for in the end… we are not longer “here”.

  55. Anonymous says:

    Anyone remember when computer games used to be about shooting stuff on a TV screen?

    I miss those days.

  56. oto kirlama says:

    Gallagher can araç kiralama say all he wants, but I strongly rent a car believe it’s due to his crappy leadership and E3 being a joke. ESA’s Board of Directors need to find a way to get out rent a car of this horrid contract with this Bush cronie before there’s no one left on the Board.

    Btw, I think Atari and Midway will drop out too, but mostly travesti because  these guys have done nothing ttnet vitamin or little and need to start saving costs.


  57. Anonymous says:

    So the context is "we’re talking about someone with Christian beliefs, so feel free to bash Christianity"?

    In that case, you’re a total douchebag who should embrace my differing opinion and include it in your bottomless agenda of digusting liberal "tolerance".

  58. Anonymous says:

    The "rants and jeers" your refer to are in context – your diatrube wasn’t. Please go away.

  59. DeusPayne ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Just another failure in management from the ESA. And people are still confused as to why all these companies are leaving…

  60. Father Time says:

    Intolerant is not the right word.

    Disgusted and sickened would be more accurate. I’m not intolerant of Christians or their belief system, and I’m not saying that those who follow Christianity are by default bigots.

    When I said who cares if it’s religious doctrine I’m saying that the fact that it’s religious doctrine (even a popular one) does not automatically make it non bigoted.

    "you have no choice but to say that people who don’t believe the same as you do are incorrect.  There’s certainly a hint of intolerance in saying this."

    I think you’re getting disagreement and intolerance mixed up. Under that definition rival sports fans are automatically intolerant of each other. Right now the celtics are playing the lakers and the respective fans only think their side is better are they now intolerant of each other?

    "Atheists believe that Christians will rot in their graves. "

    Yeah but they believe EVERYONE will rot (or burn if they decide to get cremated), not just christians.

    It’s my opinion that the ‘if you don’t believe you WILL go to eternal suffering zone’ is inherently holier than though. Preaching it to everyone (regardless of if they want to listen) borders on bigoted.

    Edit: I think the ‘vote for religious people’ bit that Hagee said clinches it as being bigoted oh and my foot only aches when I run on it but thanks for your concern.

  61. Phinehas says:

    So then, are you saying that you are utterly intolerant of Hagee’s opinion that all nonbelievers will go to hell?

    Before you answer, perhaps you’ll want to take a look at the definition below.

    Bigot – "a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion."

    "…who cares if it’s religious doctrine…"

    If it is religious doctrine and you say it should not be tolerated (not that you’ve said that), then you’ve become what you decry.

    By their very nature, belief systems are contradictory.  Unless you believe that two contradictory statements can somehow both be true (a logical fallacy), you have no choice but to say that people who don’t believe the same as you do are incorrect.  There’s certainly a hint of intolerance in saying this.

    Christians believe that Atheists will be eternally damned to a place isolated from God and his benefits, while Atheists believe that Christians will rot in their graves.  Atheists snatch heaven away from Christians just as surely as Christians consign Atheists to hell.  This is just inherent in holding a view about spiritual things that differs from someone elses.  For these beliefs alone, neither are bigots by any but the loosest interpretation of the word, under which interpretation we’re all pretty much bigots.

    The fact of the matter is that what an Atheist believes cannot take heaven away from a Christian and what a Christian believes cannot send an Atheist to hell.  Since each rejects the others beliefs, knowing that what another believes cannot define my reality, there is no harm in each of us being free to believe what we will.  This is what the whole notion of Freedom of Religion is based upon.

    Once Christians start talking about hurrying an Atheist to hell, or Atheists start talking about hastening Christians to the grave, then we have a different matter.

    BTW, you should get that foot looked at by a doctor.  Just saying.

  62. Father Time says:

    "In his sermon, Mr. Hagee exhorted the congregation to fight moral weakness, to vote for religious people and oppose same-sex marriage."

    Sounds bigoted to me, and who cares if it’s religious doctrine if it really says ALL nonbelievers will go to hell then it’s biggoted.

    If you don’t believe in Jesus Christ than our all-loving God will send you to hell where you’ll suffer and burn for all eternity with all the other murderers and scum of the earth.

    Not bigoted my aching foot.

  63. GhaleonQ says:

    You have to forgive the theologically illiterate, Anonymous, even if they are jerks about it. You can’t expect everyone to exceed the religious sophistication of a 12-year old.

  64. Anonymous (but not like *chan) says:

    "You say tack and respect to others should be applied universally. Shouldn’t that apply to respect for people’s beliefs too, at least to an extent? The ironic thing is, it’s often Christians who are criticised for being intolerant and disrespectful of other beliefs."

    Firstly, that’s not irony – it’s hypocrisy.

    Secondly, my point is that these things should be kept personal, IMHO. Why do we even need to know about people’s personal religious beliefs? Does Perry really feel all that comfortable about sharing such personal beliefs? When asked the question, shouldn’t he have just said something along the lines of, "that’s my personal life about which you’re inquiring and with respect I would prefer it to remain private, as it has no bearing on my public policies"??

    The fact is, if you’re in a minorty religion/creed then it behooves you to not make a fuss, but if you subscribe to a majority one then it’s okay to be proud about it. Such double-standards are the real irony (historically speaking).


  65. Mad_Scientist says:

    Oh, I’m not saying that Rick Perry is a smart choice, I really don’t know that much about him. Given how often politics and games tend to get mixed together, it’s possible that a politician may actually have something useful to say, but so far I’m not sure if even the subject of Perry’s speech is known.

    But that’s beside the point. In your example, would Jerry Rice’s religious views matter to you?

  66. thefremen says:

    Maybe not, but it’s stupid. If you’re going to have a Basketball Convention, would you invite Jerry Rice as a keynote speaker to talk about the years accomplishments in the NBA? No. So why invite a Politician with no programming or entertainment industry experience to speak at a conference for video game makers?

    Because the Governor in question supports the political views of the person currently in charge of the ESA.

  67. Anonymous says:

    I’ll admit I made many bigoted statements in that third paragraph, and I appologize for that.

    It’s just that I’m sick and tired of the opinion I’ve seen among many christians I know that they are a minority and that by being a minority they somehow are immune from criticism.

  68. Phinehas says:

    Hagee may or may not be a moron (I don’t really know the guy), but you have certainly missed his point.  He is not speaking to Hitler’s intentions, but rather to God’s ability to use for good what man has intended for evil.  This is a recurring theme in the Bible.

    Joseph was sold by his brothers into slavery, but God is able to turn things around so that Joseph arises to a position of power where he is able to save his people and even his brothers from famine.  In Joseph’s confrontation with his brothers, he specifically calls out this fact saying, "You meant it for harm, but God meant it for good."

    Jesus was betrayed by Judas, sentenced by Pilate, and crucified by Roman soldiers, but God is able to turn things around so that what looks like a failure is the world’s greatest spiritual triumph, purchasing salvation for all who believe.

    In his letter to the Romans, Paul writes about how God can work everything out to good for those that love Him and are called according to His purposes.

    Along the same lines, Hagee is saying that though Hitler intended to wipe the jews off the face of the earth, God is able to turn around even that tragedy to lead His people back to their homeland.

    Hagee may very well be a hate-mongering bigot.  As I said, I don’t really know the guy or what he stands for.  But I have certainly not read anything here that would indicate he is to anyone who has not already judged him so.

  69. Mad_Scientist says:

    Sigh… he’s not a bigoted hate mongering politician. Or at least, I have seen no evidence of it so far. I wish more people were like MrFalcon, and understand that there wasn’t (necessarily) any ill intent here.

  70. Mad_Scientist says:

    "However legitimate people feel their metaphysical beliefs to be, is it not best that they’re kept personal when in public office, simply for fear of alienating people? Tact and respect for others ought to be applied universally."

    That’s kind of impossible. In this case, it’s not like Rick Perry was going around preaching on the street. A reporter asked him a question, and he answered. I mean, I suppose he could have said ignored the question, but why should he have to?

    You say tack and respect to others should be applied universally. Shouldn’t that apply to respect for people’s beliefs too, at least to an extent? The ironic thing is, it’s often Christians who are criticised for being intolerant and disrespectful of other beliefs.

  71. Ace ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    (Years of Chan’ing have regretfully made my "sarcasm" meter go off all the time, but I’ll repress it =D)

    I notice alot of people going on about how him being christian does not matter at all, and that we should not evaluate if he’s fit for something based on it. And just so we’re clear I agree. I don’t really mind if a politician is a muslim, hindu, jew, christian, atheist, agnostic etc. as long as he seems to be able to seperate his faith from his function in an official capacity, so to speak. That would mean doing possibly unchristian things in an official capacity because they are the "right" things. Am I making any sense? Being guided by ones faith is fundementally discriminant against those that do not hold that faith, and this applies to atheists as well. If, say, a politician makes a decision BECAUSE he’s an atheist, then I think the reasoning for it is wrong or flawed.

    An example: "Lets send aid to a nation in distress" This is a noble cause, but if you add "because they are gods children and must be saved from the lake of fire" I find it perverts the whole deal. Sure, they still get their aid but to me it’s the right thing for the wrong reason (again, the same goes for atheists). Officials should operate with the best interests of "humankind" in mind. Not just their race, party or church.

    This is an example to try to explain my position on Perry’s open christian ideals. It’s not that those ideals are neccessarily destructive or anything it’s just that I think that operating politically with religious motivation is a perversion of function, no matter your views.

    That being said, whether it makes him an unfit keynote speaker is ambiguous. I’d want to know his motivation for being there. Is it to save us from the fire? Is it to promote the industry? Is it to advertise his personalized brand of dental floss?

    We just don’t know (so lets wait until, eh?)

  72. Mad_Scientist says:

    You’re at least the second person to say something like that, but honestly, it wouldn’t affect me at all. I can’t speak for others, but if something similar was said by a Muslim politican, I wouldn’t be offended.

  73. Phinehas says:

    Now *that’s* some serious, intolerant hate-mongering. 

    If you had stuck with getting people with whom you disagree on religious issues out of political office, we might have been able to give you the benefit of doubt and suppose you were talking about using your right to vote.  But your "forcibly" at the end makes that difficult. 

    So please clarify for me:

    – Do you really have it in for freedom of religion?

    – Do you really believe that someone who believes that God created the universe should be automatically precluded from holding public office?

    And just so you know, there is actually quite a wide range of belief among Christians regarding evolution.  (Incidentally, there is also a wide range of belief among Evolutionists regarding evolution.)  Some Christians hold to a six-day creation period.  Some believe that God used evolution to create life.  Some believe that God front-loaded the first life forms so that they would diversify through random change and natural selection.  Some even hold to common descent.  Many believe in micro-evolutionary processes while rejecting macro-evolution.

    Is it really not plainly obvious who the uninformed and intolerant party is here?

  74. Phinehas says:

    I too am a Christian, and I also agree with the self-described staunch atheist.  I’m not the least bit offended that he thinks my beliefs are absurd, and I bet he isn’t particulary offended that I think his beliefs are absurd.  I’m quite sure that neither of us are hatemongers for supporting our own particular belief systems.

    See how that works?

  75. Anonymous says:

    As a Texan, I’m pretty sure Perry’s religious beliefs do, in fact, have an effect on his politics, and therefore do affect me and my family. I don’t consider myself an athiest, and I think this scrutiny is absolutely warranted. If he’s there for a political reason, his politics- and religious views, when they affect his politics- matter.

  76. Anonymous says:

    In the absence of an obvious o rstated good reason, it isn’t unreasonable to assume political motivation. His beliefs are quite relevant in the political context.

  77. Anonymous (but not like *chan) ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @GP + GP commenters:

    I adore you – the above records an excellent discussion with fantastic points on both sides. Well-written arguments like some of the above make me proud to be an informed gamer.

    Also, this:

    "I’m sure that to a Christian, atheist beliefs appear weird/evil. While certainly loads of people may hold a view, it doesn’t make it any less extreme. It makes me wonder when a Christian looks at me, does he think, "ah yes, an eternity of suffering and fire awaits him." I don’t really care what faith you claim to profess, that sort of thinking is just plain rude"

    However legitimate people feel their metaphysical beliefs to be, is it not best that they’re kept personal when in public office, simply for fear of alienating people? Tact and respect for others ought to be applied universally.

    As has been said above, if Perry’s sentiment had been expressed by a Muslim speaker, I doubt there would be quite so many impartial defendents of their position.

    Plus, last time I checked, this is still Dennis’ blog so he can post whatever the hell he likes, as far as I’m concerned.

  78. Anonymous says:

    Christians of America –

    We have tolerated this atheist blasphemy too long.

    It is time we rise up and kill these heathens with the merciful wrath of Jesus.


    Oh, thank you Lord!

    Lock & Load!


  79. black manta says:

    I commented only one other time on this, but in light of recent developments, I felt I should comment once more.

    I hate to say it, but this story does give a bit of a black eye to the site, if only because the headline was initially inaccurate.  The ESA’s jabs don’t help much either, and in fact gives this site’s other leading critic, namely Jack Thompson, more ammuntion in furthering the perception that this site is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the ECA – which it isn’t, really.  But still, that perception is there.  And perception, as they say, is reality.

    When Jack Thompson and the ESA can agree on something, it’s a bad day indeed.

    However, JT maintains that the ECA is somehow affiliated with the industry, which it isn’t.  In truth, that’s what the ESA is, really.

    And really, what’s here does reinforce this site’s impartiality, at least as far as its allegiances are concerned (The religious aspect in this has been beaten to death.  The only thing further I’ll say on that is that we’ve been so used to relgious-types bashing video games at this point – again, no thanks to JT – that we can’t help but assume that any other high-profile person who has ties to right-wing Christianity will automatically be anti-gaming).  To paraphrase what Dennis had said with regards to an earlier story, when you’ve managed to anger both Jack Thompson and the ESA, you know you’re playing it straight down the middle.

  80. Anonymous says:

    Take Perry’s and Hagee’s remarks. Replace all occurrences of the word "Christian" with "Muslim" and see how offensive they are–mostly to exactly the same people who currently excuse them as inoffensive.

  81. Anonymous says:

    Why is it that you can generally tell if someone is a Christian just by looking at them?  How do they do that shiny thing with their eyes? 

  82. Ace ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Since there’s been no mention of what he’s going to say and since his background seems to indicate he won’t have anything to say I think it’s natural that eyes start to wander to his background and personal life. I expect that if he had several DUI’s and had been arrested at a male strip club trying to solicit illegal services, then that would have been brought up.

    I think it might also be a reactionary report since lately anything that combines religion with computer games will be to slam the games industry.

    I agree that a persons personal views on the universe may have no impact on their ability to give a proper keynote speech in any given event. However it is becoming less and less accepted for someone to profess their belief of anything and if one does it is easy for someone to consider it to be extreme. I suppose this is mainly directed at the christian posters, but some find Rick Perry’s views to be very extreme in comparison to their own. His world view, to an atheist, may appear truly twisted as I’m sure that to a christian, atheist beliefs appear weird/evil. While certainly loads of people may hold a view it doesn’t make it any less extreme. It makes me wonder when a christian looks at me, does he think "Ah yes, an eternity of suffering and fire awaits him". I don’t really care what faith you claim to profess, that sort of thinking is just plain rude, and abit demented (flame on!)

    Lets imagine someone like Richard Dawkins giving the keynote speech at E3, and him being there not in his capacity as a scholar but "apparently" there as an Atheist (capital A intended). It would certainly raise a few eyebrows among christians and atheists alike.

    All that aside, I myself give praise to the Norse Gods of the frozen north and laugh at your silly monotheistic and atheistic beliefs. I shall go to the halls of Valhalla, feast, drink and fight and be reborn each day my wounds healed. When Ragnarök (end of days) comes I’ll be there with the other Einherjar and Gods of legend battling trolls and Titans ’till the fate of the universe is decided. Hands down just the best sounding afterlife of them all. =D

  83. Anonymous says:

     Yes, that’ll teach those people. Act just like them! That’ll show ’em!

    Also, let’s generalize and assume every Christian is the same! That’s enlightenment.

  84. Anonymous says:

     So you’re basically saying that a person shouldn’t keynote E3… because of their religious beliefs.

    Ah, yes, tolerance at work.

  85. thefremen says:

    I agree, I have no idea why it is such a problem that an Org. which is supposed to represent game companies would invite a bigoted hate mongering politician as a keynote speaker. I mean, that’s like getting upset over inviting the puppet head of Iran as a speaker in a College and saying that it is evidence of how schools are liberally biased. As we know, no God Fearing Christian Republicans ever said anything like that.

    And what’s so wrong with Politicians endorsing a specific religion and painting any other faith in a bad light? I mean, look at Theodore Roosevelt, he loved God so much….he wanted to remove “in God we trust” from currency because he supported the seperation of church and state. Waitaminute, bad example.

    Personally I have no problem with Republicans manipulating religious zealots in order to gain power, the fact of the matter is we would be done in Iraq by now if they had whipped the soldiers into suicidal berserkers with religious fervor on day one, but they really should be more honest about such tactics. The keynote at E3 has always been about the state of the Game Industry by an insider, this is a huge break with tradition to invite an ill-informed politician.

    It’s like salsa made in New York City.

  86. smurfbob says:

    CougMerrik i see were you are coming from ( i voted for this d-bag) but his religion should be irrelavant because of the seperation of church and state ( the reason why we settled in america)

    … and he should not associate with such a right wing bigot…… and don’t forget it is not for humans to say who will and

    will not go to heaven.


  87. Anonymous says:

    Dennis, you need to learn the difference between "How you see FIT" and "How you see IT".

  88. Anonymous says:

    Rick Perry is a proven tool.

    I, for one, am willing to ‘march into hell for a heavenly cause’ (from Man of La Mancha), such as getting all these fundamentally flawed, evolution-denying idiots out of political office and back on their knees praying in their closets where they belong.


  89. Anonymous says:

     Given that in Cuba the press is *not* owned by giant for-profit conglomerates, there might actually be some "freedom" in it, just not the kind those conglomerates appreciate. Just thought I’d point that out, and too bad I won’t be at E3, I could have thrown a few nice fluffy vegan cream pies otherwise…

  90. the conspiracy says:

     If  they had made a similar comment (e.g. All non- muslims will go to hell, All believers are idiots ) then absoulutly the n shouldn’t speak. Regarding wether or not it is relevant, well, would you be comfortable with Fred Phelps speaking at your high school graduation? Even if he stayed ”on message” , and didn’t say anything offensive?Didn’t think so. 

  91. Mad_Scientist says:

    Hmm, there is a pretty strong debate going on here, that is true. But from my experience, people who post on internet sites tend to love to debate things quite often. And the whole subject of the article is the supposedly divisive nature of Perry’s views, so it’s no surprise that there is division over it here. But I think it may be a bit of a stretch to say that Perry’s views will affect his reception at E3, since we have no idea what he is even going to be talking about. Yah, the fact that the ESA hasn’t really said much about why Perry is giving the keynote isn’t the best move on their part, in my view.

    But consider the possibilities. Let’s say he actually does have a good reason, and we just don’t know it. In that case, his religious views shouldn’t really be much of an issue, you agree with that it seems. The real issue would be the fact that the ESA hasn’t really elaborated on the good reason Perry has to be speaking.

    So let’s say he doesn’t have a good reason to attend. Well, in that case, he is already unqualified. His religious views don’t change that. The issue is that the ESA chose someone who was completely unqualified to speak at E3, not that he also happened to be Christian who follows at least a semi-literal intepertation of the Bible.

    That’s why I don’t understand why his beliefs are even being brought up. I see him as either qualified or unqualifed, regardless of his beliefs. Unless he makes them the subject of his speech, but I highly doubt that will be the case.

    When Perry is done with his speech at E3, I expect that people will either be pleasantly surprised that he had some interesting things to say, or shaking their heads at yet another example of bland political nonsense. I doubt they will be thinking about his beliefs regarding heaven and hell.

  92. CougMerrik says:

    His religion or religious views have nothing to do with him being a keynote speaker at E3.  A lot of Christians believe Jesus is the only way to salvation, probably because of John 14:6 in which Jesus says,"I am the way, the truth, and the life.  No one can come to the father except through me." 

    But that doesn’t matter.  Rick Perry is the governor of a state that’s home to a lot of game companies, and has been pro-video games for years.  He is at least as qualified as any other governor to speak at E3. He’s not coming there to preach.

    The fact that Athiests believe that when my family and friends die there will be nothing and they will cease to exist is a concept I disagree with.  I don’t dislike them for their belief, however, because it doesn’t affect me or how I live my life.  By the same token, Athiests and other religions shouldn’t let Christian beliefs about heaven and hell distress them because of two things…1) Christians also want to save everyone they can from such a fate, and wish it on no one, and 2) You don’t believe in it, so it doesn’t matter to you. 

    It’s ridiculous that we’ve become so "politically correct" that we can’t even have beliefs we disagree with anymore.  I defend his right to believe wherever he wants as long as it doesn’t result in harm or discrimination against others.


  93. Motivated says:

    Hmm, let me see if I can clarify why I think that you demonstrated how Perry is unsuitable as a speaker.

    You have leapt to the defense of a fellow Christian, and half the rest of the posters have attacked him for being the same (half being a generic statement – I haven’t actually counted). The biggest argument between posters is as to the merits, or otherwise, of religious tolerance and doctrine. Feel free to defend, or attack him, I don’t care – but this demonstrates Perry as a figure who creates division. He creates it here, and he will create it amongst the audience of game industry professionials. In the absence of any strong, industry related reason for his appearance at E3, his publicly stated religious opinions and his history as Govenor of Texas are all we have to go on. And they are divisive. People are divided over them.

    Let me say that again – if he had a strong, game industry related reason to speak at the keynote, then his religious views become less of an issue. If he is pro the games industry and wants to encourage it in his state, that’s great! But does that support come with strings attached, for example would he not provide state support to a game he finds morally offensive? If he is critical of the industry, fine. Id rather see Senator Yee give that sort of keynote, as it’s always useful to understand what the critics of the industry are saying, but it might still be interesting given that so many developers are in Texas.

    But in the absence of the ESA giving any real detail about the nature of the keynote, it looks a lot like cronyism between Mike Gallagher and the Govenor of Texas. And that is bad for the ESA, and bad for the wider game industry. It might be even bad for the game consumer too, because while the needs of the consumers and the industry don’t always align, a healthy games industry probably gives more choice & high quality content to the average customer.


  94. Anonymous says:

    IF the ESA doesn’t want criticism, then stop siding with the RIAA, AND stop treating the people who keep your pockets full, IE customers, like shit!!!

    Seriously, the ESA doesn’t protect their members, shows how much they care by adhering to draconian copyright laws,  allow the  use of computer destroying DRM, punish those who just wish to play legally purchased  foreign  games on their systems, which is generally impossible without modding the system. Oh, I"m sorry, if you own a mod chip, you’re a pirate, no exceptions.

    And despite all this, they don’t expect critcism?



  95. Jim d. says:

    While I think it’s fair and relevant to question Rick Perry’s qualifications to speak at a game-industr event, but it’s just not right to call him out on his religious beliefs. 

    What if the keynote speaker was islamic, or atheist?  Should that be an issue in deciding whether he should speak at E3?

    The game industry’s relationship with most politicians has been contentious, at best.  Having a Governer speak at E3 presents an opportunity to legitimize the industry in the eyes of other politicians.  I think this was a bold choice (or gamble, perhaps) for the ESA.  It could go horribly wrong, but it’s still an intriguing choice.




  96. yowzers says:

    Dennis, this has so little to do with politics, it’s disgusting.

    I suppose that since Rick Perry is a keynote speaker at E3, that means we can talk about what he eats for breakfast, where his kids go to school, how loud he snores, etc.

    Come on.

  97. stroup says:

    So are gluttons….back away from the table once in a while Hagee for crying out loud…

    Titus 1:12-16

  98. ecco6t9 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Seriously we do not need the ESA anymore it’s about as useless as the UN.

  99. Mad_Scientist says:

    Normally I find Dennis and Gamepolitics.com to be pretty balanced as well, which is why I was surprised by Dennis’s statement. Perhaps I went too far in my opening paragraph, but I don’t like the assertion that the ESA should rescind their offer to Perry simply because of his religious beliefs. Unless Dennis clarifies that comment, or I learn something else about Rick Perry’s views that Dennis was actually referring to, that will not change.

    You said a lot about how Perry doesn’t seem like a guy who would have anything to say to a developer, and that is a valid point. I have no problem with that, and I agree that he seems like a weird choice to give the keynote, based on what we know about him. But that’s not the statement I had a problem with.

    Now, perhaps you can help me out here. The part of the article that I objected to is quoted below.

    "…[Perry’s] divisive comments indicate that the ESA should rescind the offer [for him to give the keynote.]"

    He’s not referring to Perry’s lack of qualifications when he says the ESA should rescind the offer. He’s referring to Perry’s comments on his religious views. And as far as I can tell from this article, the only "divisive" thing Perry said essentially comes down to the fact that he believes the Bible when Jesus says "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father except by me."

    That is what caused Dennis come out and say that Perry shouldn’t speak at E3? It’s not the massive list of Perry’s lack of qualifications that does it, it is his religious beliefs?

    Is there something I am missing? Or do you just have no problem with that, and not feel it is bigoted?

    By the way, I don’t think of myself a a matyr, nor was I trying to act like I was one in my post. Sorry if came off that way to you. And maybe I am just being dense here, but how exactly did my post show how Rick Perry is an unsuitable speaker?

    EDIT: On a side note, I think MrFalcon’s comment a bit below mine put things into better words than I did.

  100. MrFalcon ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Well, I’m a little late to the party, and everything I want to say has been said, but I’ll put my 2 cents just to show how dissapointed I am in this article:

    Saying that certain people will go to hell is no more hateful than saying "Smokers will get lung cancer" or "People who cheat on their taxes will end up in jail".  From the perspective of someone who believes in the literal truth of the Bible it is a simple statement of fact.  Its not a radical fringe belief.  Its what countless (even if not all) Christians have helf true for hundreds of years.  Rather, the belief that you can change the way the universe works just by choosing to believe something different is a fairly new, and somewhat bizarre, development in religion.

    Even the stuff about the Holocaust is an unavoidable conclusion from the perspective of most religions.  If you believe in an all-powerful god, then you must believe that he could have the stopped the holocaust.  If you believe in a wise, all-knowing god, then you must beleive that he had a good reason for not stopping it.  Once you’ve gone that far, any reason that doesn’t involve God hating the Jews is pretty charitable, really.

    As a staunch atheist, I think these all these beliefs are absurd.  However, I fully support anyone’s right to believe them and profess those beliefs as it is gauranteed in the our Canadian Bill of Rights and your US Constitution.

    However, like many others here, I fail to see the connection this has with videogames or Perry’s qualification to speak about them.  The suggestion that Perry’s religion is more important to this issue than his stance on videogames is easily the most bigotted thing about this whole story.  You wonder why the ECA is politicizing E3, and yet you offer no concrete reason why you are "religionizing" their decision.  You are supposed to cover the intersection of games and politics but you seem to be standing on the corner of politics and religion with games nowhere in sight.


  101. Chuma ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    You know what?  If the Keynote speech doesn’t focus on gaming now, the ESA are going to look pretty bloody stupid, doubly so for trying to call out the ECA for complaining about Perry’s relevence.

    I for one shall be listening for soundbites and quotes with interest.  Were all ears Perry.  Tell us about gaming.

  102. Motivated says:

    First of all, I can’t let the claim that Dennis and this site is bigoted pass unchallenged. Of all the pages I read, gamepolitics remains one of the least ‘spun’ news sites out there. My only problem is that I can’t find enough other sites that share Dennis’ determination to report on his subject with the level of unpartisan dignity that he displays on a daily basis. It remains a must read for me as a consumer and an industry professional.

    As for your rant, Mad_Scientist, you might try looking up irony sometime, as you’ve just provided a perfect example of why Rick Perry is an unsuitable E3 speaker. I don’t believe that he has anything relevant to say to me as a developer. I also don’t give two cents about your ethical, religious or political beliefs, or how much of a matyr you think you are for having them.

    I don’t believe that the ESA’s purpose, to lobby for and represent the games industry as a professional body, is served by the ESA becoming more partisan. Individual political and religous belief varies massively accross the games industry (as it does anywhere else). Selecting Gov Perry to speak is divisive, and if you don’t think so then you’ve completely missed the coverage of industry dissastisfaction over the new ESA, of which E3 and its speaker is a part. It doesn’t matter to me what political or religous belief’s Rick Perry has per se; but the fact that he is readily identified as having them, and not as a champion of the games industry, makes me wonder why he was chosen at all. A quick search of recent news shows nothing that relates the Govenor of Texas to any part of the games industry (no news other than his keynote appearance at E3 that is); his skills and education platforms are all about "skills training for good-paying jobs in the following areas: oil and gas exploration and production, power generation, mining, power transmission, and renewable energy sources, such as wind, bio-fuel, solar and geothermal energy" – no mention of the high tech sector, despite the fact that Austin is a development hub. The ESA has done nothing to illuminate us on the reason for the choice, other then to say that there is a lot of developers in Texas.

    I thought Gore Verbinski was a strange choice to keynote DICE. I think Gov Perry is an abysmal choice for E3.


  103. Mad_Scientist says:

    I agree with your last statement. I myself would vote for an Atheist if I believed he/she was the best person for the job, but I’m not terribly surprised to hear that many people won’t. And yes, that must be extremely frustrating for an Atheist trying to run for public office. (Actually, now that I think about it, I cannot recall an incident where I have even had the opportunity to vote for an openly Atheistic candidate, though I haven’t voted in many elections yet.)

    But I can’t agree with your middle paragraph. I don’t believe that bad behavior by people who belong to (or claim they belong to) a particular group justifies bad behavior against that group. I don’t believe discrimination or bigotry is ok, as long as it’s directed against a group that is majority. Also, I wouldn’t really call Christians the "lucky majority of the world". We do have things fairly nice in the US at least, but there are plenty of places where Christians suffer horrible persecution.

    But as I said, I believe that is besides the point. I’m not one to see what I believe to be an example of bigoted or discriminatory behavior and think to myself, "Oh, it’s against Christians, or it’s against white people, or it’s against Americans, or it’s against (insert group that is a majority or has a fair amount of power), so that makes it ok."

  104. Anonymous says:

     So we need to start checking everyone’s religious backgrounds at the door then, right?

    America… quickly becoming a safe haven for everyone but who it was originally intended to be a safe haven for.

  105. Anonymous ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    that guy’s a moron, Hitler was trying to wipe the jews off the face of the earth, not get them to flee back to Israel.

  106. Anonymous says:

    I pretty much agree that this article is biased, and that there are a lot of bigoted posts here.

    But you know what, I don’t think you christians have a right to be angry about this, or anything for that matter. You are the lucky majority of the world, and I have had enough of christians attacking my beliefs ( or lack of beliefs) then cowering behind the " We’re the victims here" excuse when I critcize them for it.

    There was survey in the united states, and 52% of america wouldn’t vote even a well qualified Atheist for government office, that’s descrimination if I’ve ever seen it.

  107. GRIZZAM PRIME says:

    It’s funny that the ESA is calling Gamepolitics biased against them. Have they forgotten that the ESA and the ECA are on the same side?

    -GRIZZAM PRIME(c)is property of the U.S. Marine Corp. Wetworks Dept., and also The Incredible Hulk-GRIZZAM PRIME is not to be associated with GRIZZAM 512 or any other GRIZZAM entity under penalty of law, so sayith ZARATHOS.

  108. Phinehas says:

    Great post MS.  You hit the nail on the head.

    As a small note of encouragement to a brother, I was exactly where you are about three years ago and I now work in the industry as a designer in Austin, TX.  Breaking into the industry isn’t easy, but it is possible. 

    I like your confidence.  Don’t ever aim low.

    I’m open to helping you reach your dreams in any way I can.  If you want to get in touch, we can figure out some way to swap email addresses.


  109. Mad_Scientist says:

    I’m kind of late making this comment, so I’m afraid that it will just get buried in the flood. But I certainly hope not. Quite simply put, I am annoyed: annoyed at Gamepolitics and a large section of its commenters, not the ESA or Rick Perry. In fact, I find the tone of parts of this article, and a good number of comments, to be extremely bigoted. That’s right. I’m calling the people bashing Rick Perry bigots. You are the ones showing hate here.

    But I expect things like that from internet posters. What disappoints me is that I expected better from Dennis. Let me tell you a few things about me, so you can better understand where I am coming from. I am a gamer, and someone who would really love to work in the industry as well. If things go well for me, I’ll break into the industry and get to work on the stuff I love. And if things go really well, I might become a big enough name to be asked to speak at future gaming related events, like E3. (Assuming it even exists at that time.)

    I also am I Christian. I believe in Heaven… and Hell. And I believe that the way to Heaven is through Christ. While I would never claim to know the ultimate fate of any person, and I believe that God works in interesting ways to save people we might not expect, when it comes down to it, I don’t have any particular objections to Rick Perry’s views, at least as they are described in brief in this article. Yes, I believe in hell. And I believe that those who reject God go there.

    Apparently, that makes me a nutjub, a fanatic, and a hateful fiend who gives all Christians a bad name. At least according to the majority of posts here. But as I said previously, I expect stuff like that from internet posters. Simply stating that I am a Christian is going to earn me a lot of hate, and I am used to it.

    What I did not expect was to hear Dennis state that I would be unqualified to speak at an event like E3 because of my "divisive" views. Or at least I would be if I ever made my views public, even if it occured at a place where that topic of discussion was appropiate. If I’m invited to be a keynote speaker at E3 in the future, and it’s discovered that I made this post, will Dennis post an article stating that the ESA should rescind their offer to me?

    I mean, is the mere concept of Hell such a taboo nowadays that anyone who believes in it, and suggests that anyone other than guys like Hitler will end up there, is lumped in with lunatics like the "Westboro Baptist Church"? Are my beliefs so horrible that my mere presence would be offensive to non-Christians, and make me unqualifed to speak to them on matters completely unrelated to religion?

    That is what you are essentially saying, Dennis. Rick Perry may be utterly unqualifed to speak at E3 for other reasons, I don’t know for sure. But his religious beliefs, at least as they are shown in this article, should be irrelevant. They should not bar him from speaking at E3. To suggest otherwise would be as absurd as me suggesting that we shouldn’t let atheists speak at E3, because they might offend the Christians in the audience. I wonder what people would say about me if I suggested that.

    A couple of final things. The article mentions that Hagee made some rather interesting Hitler comments that caused McCain to reject his endorsement. But did Rick Perry ever show any support for those comments? If not, why does it matter? Just because Rick Perry may have agreed with one thing Hagee said, doesn’t mean he’ll agree with everything Hagee will ever say.

    And finally, I understand that a blanket statement like "non-Christians are condemned to hell" sounds pretty harsh, but it’s not a statement you can properly consider by itself. You have to put it into the full context of Christian beliefs, and have to understand why hell would exist in the first place, and why anyone would deserve to go there, etc. It’s a statement that doesn’t really mean much by itself.

    It would be me saying that a particular person believes that "innocent children who are murdered and tortured to death never get to go to Heaven, and instead simply cease to exist after death." Yet that is something that the majority of atheists probably believe. Of course, when put into the full context of their beliefs, it’s not a cruel or hateful statement at all.


  110. Ben K says:

    I love this site so much. I don’t care how big the outlet is, anyone with the balls to report their opinion as objectively as possible is as good as news to me these days. 

  111. Saladin ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I gotta say, there are days when blind faith makes me laugh, and blind faith makes me cry.

    You know, in all seriousness, I don’t have a problem with him speaking about his religious beliefs. It certainly doesn’t mean that I don’t think he’s a bigot and an ass. Although I REALLY wonder just what the hell is the ESA is doing these days?

    This whole Rick Perry business just reeks of other intentions…………

  112. Phinehas says:

    GP: "While there are surely many Christians among E3 attendess [sic], there are just as surely many who aren’t. Aside from the fact that Perry was a bizarre keynote choice from the get-go, his divisive comments indicate that the ESA should rescind the offer."

    Does this mean Richard Bartle can never be a keynote speaker either?  After all, Richard Bartle is an atheist, and as you’ve pointed out, surely many Christians will be among the E3 attendees.

    Atheism snatches heaven from Christians just as surely as Christianity consigns atheists to hell.

    You know, I saw Richard Bartle’s keynote at the Austin Game Conference a few years back.  As always, he was brilliant, insightful, and funny. 

    And I somehow managed to come away from the experience with my hope for heaven intact.

    Imagine that.

  113. Anonymous says:

    "It certainly does not impede the individual’s morals, abilities, or judgments"

    That’s a pretty bold claim, and hardly an objective one. How on earth can you back that up?

  114. Wag says:

    I have to admit that I am shocked by all of this hoopla.  I think the entire discussion is appalling and without merit.

    The idea that Christians believe that non-believers and those who have not embraced Jesus Christ as their savior will be condemned to eternal punishment is certainly not a new concept.  Most Christian denominations believe this in one way shape or form.  It’s also a primary motivating factor for mission work and spreading the "faith" to all corners.  No one likes the idea of anyone going to hell.  Certainly not Christians.

    But the issue is that its not just Christians who believe things like this.  Most religions hold certain teachings true that would certainly offend others.  This has been repeated time and time again over the course of this long discussion thread here on this website.  The fact of the matter is that this is nothing new.

    To reiterate, THIS IS NOTHING NEW.

    It certainly does not impede the individual’s morals, abilities, or judgments.  It certainly does shape the personality and character of the individual.  But if the man is an elected official, than it appears that it has affected him positively or he would likely not be in his position.  All of this is basically sensationalism aimed at creating prejudice against the said individual.  This would be true regardless of what religion he would be referring to.

    I’m also very appalled that GP would buy into this sensationalism.  I understand that its Dennis’s blog, but I really thought that he was above this kind of pettiness.  I have regarded him as a very rational and impartial person up to this point, but the tone of this particular article calls that into question for me.

    Again, I am shocked and appalled that this discussion is even taking place.  One of the values that we hold true as Americans is religious freedom.  That alone should make this whole argument a waste of time.

  115. Diane ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    So…ESA’s defense of their keynote speaker choice was…an attack on your credibility?

    Well I’m convinced!

    (off-topic: Plenty of Christians would be offended by the whole "non-Christians go to hell" comment. As it turns out, there are multiple sects of Christianity, each with its own teachings; some even teach that no human knows the afterlife status of another human being! I imagine Perry does not belong to such a sect, but you never know–most people know jack all about their religion.)

  116. Phinehas says:

    The Bible does not say that all atheists will go to hell.  The language is much more universal than that. 

    First, there is the idea that the sin problem is universal.  All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.  There is none righteous, no not one.  All are without excuse.  (These concepts are clear in Romans chapters 1-3.) 

    It is important to note that "sin" here isn’t so much a religious word as it is a relationship word.  Jesus says that all of the law and prophets (spiritual writings) can be summed up in the following:  Love the Lord your God with all you heart, soul, mind, and strength and love your neighbor (others) as you love yourself.  Love is a relationship word, not a religious one, and "sin" actually comes from an archery term that means to fall short of a target.  In other words, sin is falling short of the target of loving God and others.

    At one point or another in our lives, all of us has been unloving toward another.  Sometimes this is in what we do or say.  Sometimes it is in what we don’t do or say.  Because He is just, God confronts us on this point.  It is human nature for use to make excuses for ourselves or to otherwise gloss over or minimize what we’ve done.  It is human nature for us to compare ourselves to others and tell ourselves that we’re not so bad.  But God holds us to a higher standard, His own.

    God cannot simply ignore what we’ve done, but He loves us and doesn’t want to see us suffer the natural spiritual consequences (eternal isolation from God and others) of our deeds.  Because God is merciful, He provides a solution in the form of Jesus Christ.  Jesus came to earth and met God’s standard for love.  Even when subjected to hate, torture, and death, Jesus treated everyone around him with love.  So God poured out all of his justice for the wrong that we’ve done on an innocent Jesus.  Jesus bears our guilt and pays the death penalty for what we’ve done.  In exchange, all who by faith place their trust in Him are seen by God as bearing His perfect righteousness, not because we deserve it, but because of God’s grace.

    After Jesus died for us, God raised Him from the dead as a sign that the debt for everyone’s unloving deeds was fully paid. 

    John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son."

    This is not about punishment.  It is about providing a way for everyone to escape a condemnation that they are already under because of their own deeds and the consequences to those deeds.

  117. Father Time says:

    I hope I’m not too late but where exactly in the Bible does it say that all atheists shall go to hell?


    The commandment says though shall have no god before me and if we treat all gods on the same level we treat the tooth fairy I don’t think that qualifys.

  118. Phinehas says:

    I think you missed his point.  I don’t think he’s claiming that real laws and spiritual laws are the same.

    I personally think of spiritual laws as more like the law of gravity.  Choosing to isolate yourself from God and to act in unloving ways toward others (Jesus said that all spiritual laws could be summed up in loving God with your whole heart, mind, soul, and strength and loving others as you love yourself) has consequences.

    It isn’t about punishment at this point.  It is more like we’ve all already jumped off a skyscraper and are speeding toward the ground below.  To the Christian, saying that you are going to hell is akin to pointing out the fact that you are on your way to a painful meeting with the ground below.  The reason they point this out is that they want to extend Jesus to you as a parachute.  For the Christian, this isn’t about intolerance, but about proclaiming what they believe to be true for the benefit of any who wish to listen.  If they did not sincerely believe it, they would not risk opening themselves up to the inevitable criticism and charges of bigotry.  (What?!?  How dare you imply that I’m going to hit the ground and that it will be painful?  What are you?  Some kind of sicko?!?)  But since they do believe it, they are willing to risk hazzards in order to present what they believe will be salvation to others. 

    As to the silliness of judgement and God knowing exactly what you will and will not do with your life before you are even born, free will or not…have you considered that your life might not be so much about revealing you to God (as you said, He already knows), but more about reavealing you to yourself, and then revealing God to you? 

  119. Anonymous says:

    "It’s like breaking the law and then claiming that you’re only being punished because you disagreed with something. It’s an arguement that doesn’t follow."

    I’m sorry but it absolutely nothing like that.  I know of no "real" law that says I must remember the Sabbath and keep it holy or that a child must honor an abusive parent, so I’ll never "repent" for either of those "sins"…

    And don’t get me started and the just plain silliness of judgement…  If "God" is omnipotent, omniscient, the creator of the whole get-go then surely he knows exactly what I will and will not do with my life before I’m even born, free will or not.  God couldn’t be timebound, he created time.  Which also begs the question of "end times and the battle of good and evil". Why?  God’s version of reality TV.  He created evil, if he wants he can just uncreate it…

    I’m beginning to babble so I’ll stop.  The whole problem with religion, any religion, is that it requires one to quit using rational thought and accept ridiculous inconsistencies…


  120. Mad_Scientist says:

    "Only a primitive and barbaric religion would say everybody ELSE is wrong, and WE are right."

    I just had to laugh at this comment. It’s quite hilarious, in an absurd way.

    Religions deal with matters that involve facts and absolute truths. I know people act like this isn’t the case, but think about it logicially for a second. If God exists, he exists. If God doesn’t exist, he doesn’t. A person’s own particular beliefs will not change that, will not alter reality.

    Bob is an atheist, and he says God does not exist.

    Jim is a Christian, and he says God does exist. He also says Jesus is the son of God.

    Jill is a Muslim, and she says God exists. She says that Jesus was not the son of God, but a prophet who was misunderstood by Christians.

    Explain to me how it is possible for all 3 views to be right. It’s not. Obviously, either they are all wrong, or only one of them is right.

    It’s only natural that people think that beliefs that directly contradict their own are wrong. Because it’s kind of impossible for them to both be true. I’ll say it again: two contradictory statements cannot both be true.

  121. jkdjr25 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    The punishment of Hell isn’t about something as banal as a disagreement. That’s a massive misunderstanding of the situation.

    (For those of you who don’t know me, yes I am a Christian. Fairly fundamentalist in that I do believe the Bible to be true, I don’t want to force you into anything so please no accusations on that front)

    Christianity teaches that God, being Holy and Just, sent Christ to die in place our place, effectively taking judgement on Himself so we wouldn’t have to face it. The only proviso here is that you have to repent of your sins and accept Christ as Lord and Saviour. We’re taught that if a person refuses this choice, or chooses not to accept Christ. Then God’s judgement will fall upon them and the Bible is very clear about where one’s soul will end up as punishment for disobedience.

    It’s like breaking the law and then claiming that you’re only being punished because you disagreed with something. It’s an arguement that doesn’t follow.

    *Sorry Dennis, I probably shouldn’t have said anything but I needed to set the record straight here*

  122. Anonymous says:

    Well the second half – "God judges each person individually and belief in and acceptance of Jesus is not a prerequisite for entry to heaven" is accepted doctrine in much of the mainstream church.  

    The bible often says things like ‘he that believes in me will live forever’ it never says the negative interpretation of that (that you seem to be implying it says).. and never once mentions following organised religion either (except to slag the concept off relentlessly, even to the point of saying at one point "Why are you following rules?  They’re all man made anyway.").


  123. Phinehas says:

    "well now im confused.. do i read the bible literally or not, and if its different in different places, who decides?"

    Suppose a science teacher holds up a basketball in a class and declares, "This is the sun."  She then holds up a marble and states, "This is the earth," moving the marble slowly around the basketball.  Later, she tells you that the students all need to complete certain projects to get a good grade in class.

    Does one take the teacher literally or not, and if its different in different places, who decides?

    If a student doesn’t complete the projects claiming he didn’t know whether or not to take the teacher literally, do you think his excuse would fly?

    The truth is that the context of statements help us understand what the statements are intended to convey.  It is only when we don’t want to hear something that we start getting "confused" about what is meant.

  124. NovaBlack. ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    well now im confused.. do i read the bible literally or not, and if its different in different places, who decides?


    I was replying right from the start to Kaylel’s comment:

    Wait? Just because the Christian bible said so makes it solid fact? What if the Christian view of the afterlife is completely wrong, and the Greek afterlife is the real afterlife. Greek mythology is much older, so it should be more accurate right? The problem is, what is the right religion? There are tons of much older religions. If someone says "I am the son of god, I have a book about what the afterlife is really like, and I am going to heaven while everyone else is going to hell". You would attack that person. People like you are applying the same thing to us.”

    He was talking about the ‘bible says literally that non believers go to hell argument’.  I was merely SUPPORTING his case that the bible isnt supposed to be read literally (for the incorrect facts ive pointed out, and the Tower of Babel facts you just pointed out).

    All im saying is that i dont agree with the ‘bible condemns non christians to hell’. I believe if you live your life correctly, and it turns out there is a heaven, that your a good person, that you’ll be let in anyway. Forgiven for not strictly believing. Thats MY belief system and im entitled to it as an agnostic. I just find it very confusig when certain bits are read literally and some bits arent, yet it is the reader deciding, which will always be subjective, so nobody can claim to be truly right including the original pastor who made the comment.




  125. Anonymous says:

    The Bible also tells of the story of the Tower of Babel.  Those builders though they could build a tower to reach the heavens.  We now know that they wouldn’t have reached anything but empty space.  It still doesn’t change the fact that they though the heavens were just beyond the sky.

    Also, give it up on the sun thing.  Weathermen call it "sunrise" and "sunset" for one common sense reason.  Standing on the earth, it looks like the sun rises and sets.  The early Catholic church may have been wrong in their condemnatin of Galileo but that doesn’t suddenly endoctrinate the Bible as establishing the Earth as the center of the Universe.


  126. Novablack. ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    "SO to be called ‘hateful’ .. wow.. if that isn’t judging somebody i dont know what is."

    you misinterpreted what i meant there, i wasnt saying the word hateful means judging somebody. I was talking about hypocracy. saying its unfair that you call me hateful when you dont know me. i wasn’t defining the word.

    Apologies if i do sound ‘hateful’ but i have re read my comments, and i really cant see when i show HATRED (and hatred is NOT disagreement) toward anyone. Clearly that wasnt my intent as i dont HATE any religion.


  127. Anonymous says:

    Yes, after reading several of your comments, you _do_ sound hateful. Go read through them yourself, and maybe you’ll see.

    "I try and live my life every day thinking about others and helping others above myself, and live my life by a strong moral code. Havent ever been in trouble with police or authority figures."

    Irrelevant. "Hateful" doesn’t mean or imply "criminal".

    "SO to be called ‘hateful’ .. wow.. if that isn’t judging somebody i dont know what is."

    1. No, saying that someone can be "hateful" is not judging them. It’s judging their words and actions.

    2. You’re assuming that the person that called you hateful was a Christian.

  128. Anonymous says:

    Here here to the learned!

    …Oh but really theory of relativity makes it possible that the earth is stationary and all of existence rotates around it, so it just looks like its moving, but really its the power of god that keeps it anchored. ;P

  129. NovaBlack. ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    ”…Yeah, you can stop talking now. Thanks for showing everyone that atheists can be ignorant and blindly hateful, too"


    again, apologies if you think i am ignorant and ‘hateful’. I merely have questions, and actually i am an agnostic, not an atheist. Its these kind of issues/questions that have always confused me when it comes to learning about religion and having faith. So i ask them (im not going to apologise for asking questions ever) , and i get abuse. Hardly seems fair.

    I do strongly take issue with being called ‘hateful’ too. I try and live my life every day thinking about others and helping others above myself, and live my life by a strong moral code. Havent ever been in trouble with police or authority figures. I try and do everything i can to live my life as a good role model for others. SO to be called ‘hateful’ .. wow.. if that isn’t judging somebody i dont know what is.

    I guess the hypocracy of how one second people preach that you shouldn’t judge others, and then do the complete opposite just baffles me and gives me more questions. But i wont ask them because ill get verbal abuse for it. *sigh*

  130. Anonymous Physicist says:

    It’s quite telling that in order to criticize the Bible for supposed "contradictions", some people will stop at Galileo and ignore the discoveries of later physicists. A better interpretation of these Biblical verses is that the authors understood the concept of relative velocity. The sun, in fact, does move around the earth — relative to the earth.

  131. NovaBlack. ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    wow… damned if i do damned if i dont…


    as Wearyman said earlier to me when i talked very generally:

    "What the heck are you talking about?

    NOWHERE in the Bible does it say the Earth is the center of the Solar System.  In fact, the Bible makes no mention of the "Solar System" at all.  Or any planetary system beyond general references to "Heavenly Bodies" and the stars in the sky.

    what the heck are you smokin?"

    so i talk in detail and get slated for being an ‘extreme biblical literalist’.. wow.. nice open discussion we are having here.

    Strange how im not the one coming across as agressive :). Guess im just happy to ask questions about things.  

  132. Anonymous says:

    Extreme biblical literalists like you harm christianity and honest, open understanding of the bible.

    Try to read it in context instead of pretending it’s an astrophysics textbook.

  133. NovaBlack. ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    The Bible DOES Says the Sun Revolves Around the Earth

    (in error i did mean solar system not universe as such)

    Perhaps the most famous passage in the Bible regarding the sun’s movement around the earth is where Joshua causes the sun to stand still in the sky. Bold emphasis added:

    Joshua 10:12-13 Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

    Modern Christian apologists will try to dismiss this passage as “metaphor” but it clearly says “the sun stood still” and stopped in “the midst of heaven”, indicating that the authors mistakenly believed the sun revolves around the earth.

    There are other passages that support this idea that the sun revolves around the earth (bold emphasis added):

    Ecclesiastes 1:5 The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.

    “Hasteth to his place where he arose” is a telling phrase. After the sun finishes going down, it runs back (under the earth presumably) to the place where it started the previous morning.

    Psalms 19:4-6 In them hath he (Yahweh) set a tabernacle for the sun, Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

    “Tabernacle (or tent) for the sun” is an interesting metaphor. It implies that the sun rests for the night (this is what tents are for). The authors didn’t realize that the sun doesn’t (even metaphorically speaking) rest under the earth. It’s still active on the other side of the planet. This passage in Psalms also seems reminiscent of the Greek myths of Apollo who took the sun on its daily “circuit” across the sky.

    The Bible says the Earth is fixed in place, too.

    Many Christians today will claim that these biblical references of the sun’s movements around the earth are just “metaphors” (a view not shared by the Christians who lived at the time of Galileo). However, other passages in the Bible specifically state that the earth is fixed in place instead of revolving around the sun:

    1st Chronicles 16:30 …the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
    Psalms 93:1 … the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.
    Psalms 96:10 … the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved….

    These verses explicitly claim that the earth is fixed in place. There’s no room for interpretation. What other understanding of the phrase, “it shall not be moved” can we have


    and in particular relation to THESE last 3 quotes  (1st Chronicles 16:30,Psalms 93:1,Psalms 96:10)  regarding the earth being firmly fixed and immovable, It was this THESE EXACT VERSES that were used as evidence against Galileo, who argued for the theory of Copernicus, that the earth is not immovable, but rotates around the sun.  It was for teaching this that he was called to Rome in 1633, and tried for the crime of heresy.  The aged Galileo, in his 70’s, was taken down into the dungeons of the church and shown the instruments of torture that were going to be used on him if he did not recant.  Fearing the torture, and fearing that he might share the fate of Giordano Bruno, whom the church burned at the stake a generation earlier for the same crime, Galileo recanted the truth.  He was confined to his home under house arrest, neither allowed to leave or to receive visitors, for the last seven years of his life.

    there you go. happy now?


  134. Anonymous says:

    "The bible also says that the earth is the centre of our solar system."

    …Yeah, you can stop talking now. Thanks for showing everyone that atheists can be ignorant and blindly hateful, too.

  135. Wearyman says:

    What the heck are you talking about?

    NOWHERE in the Bible does it say the Earth is the center of the Solar System.  In fact, the Bible makes no mention of the "Solar System" at all.  Or any planetary system beyond general references to "Heavenly Bodies" and the stars in the sky.

    what the heck are you smokin?


  136. Stoli ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I think the point isn’t whether it’s true or not, but it’s what these people believe. While a person can believe I’m going to hell, I don’t particularly care until it starts to become personal (such as being harrassed for being non-Christian or the like).

  137. NovaBlack. ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    The bible also says that the earth is the centre of our solar system. OOPS that wasnt too correct was it. The church wasnt too happy about it when Gallileo tried to prove the true facts. Oh well not everything in the bible is true. proved.


  138. KayleL says:

    Wait? Just because the Christian bible said so makes it solid fact? What if the Christian view of the afterlife is completely wrong, and the Greek afterlife is the real afterlife. Greek mythology is much older, so it should be more accurate right?

    The problem is, what is the right religion? There are tons of much older religions.

    If someone says “I am the son of god, I have a book about what the afterlife is really like, and I am going to heaven while everyone else is going to hell”. You would attack that person. People like you are applying the same thing to us.

  139. Anonymous says:

    If anyone on this board can point me to the spot of any Chrisitan denomination that says the following, "Anyone, regardless of beliefs, can get in to heaven as long as they are a good person.  God judges each person individually and belief in and acceptance of Jesus is not a prerequisite for entry to heaven." than I will rescind my argument.  It’s all well and good to say I know nothing of Chrisitanity when you can’t point to a single thing that I said as wrong. 

    Also, just because you believe someone will burn in hell does not make you hateful.  Wishing someone to burn in hell makes you hateful.  Most christians believe that non-believers are damned to hell for all eternity, that’s why they are so intent on converting those who don’t believe as they do.  They honestly don’t want to have people burning in hell.  I do not believe that holding this belief makes a person a bigot or hate filled, it’s simply xenophobic and wrong. 


  140. Father Time says:

    "Because I believe in the Bible, I believe Hell exists. Because I believe in God’s mercy, I believe it is empty."

    Purgatory must be very crowded then.

    Although I wonder where Satan lives if hell is empty. Last I heard he was in Georgia.

  141. Anonymous says:

    You just go straight to hell where you belong you antisemetic bitch. That wanst inflammatory was it. how about Es ist Zeit für Rache! Wir müssen die Juden ausrotten!

    Okay okay, thats just a troll. Personally I have a hard time not accepting anyone as long as they leave everyone else alone about it. The problem is that so, so many people behave that they are better, even slightly, than anyone that is different. I am bitterly devote to the idea that everyone and everything is the same in value (without context) and thus I refuse to even be around anyone that is regularly part of any church. After all if they even want to change what you religiously believe, ignoring what you want or need, they think their way is better uniformly. Bah I say! Bah!

  142. Anonymous says:

    No, they just place bombs in government buildings like in Oklahoma City or Planned Parenthood clinics or gay bars. They also have no bid contracts for mercenary work that is outside the laws of the US and the countries they "work in" such as Iraq and will shoot at anyone who dresses or speaks "funny". Yup, that’s what good Christian fundies do (the owner of Blackwater USA is a "devout Biible-Believing Christian".

  143. Anonymous says:

    Wrong.  Neither is hurtful until you start giving what others believe the ability to define your own reality.

  144. Anonymous says:

    FYI Although there are some exceptions, last I checked there are almost no Christian fundamentalists who advocate strapping bombs to yourself and blowing up random people.  All are the same eh?  Go read wikipedia!

  145. Superficially Anonymous says:

    The big deal is that it’s a lot more hurtful to tell someone that they should/will suffer horribly for the way they lead their life than telling someone that they won’t get a cookie for behaving as they were told.

  146. Korrd says:

    This may be an off-topic comment, but I find that to be a beautiful and inspiring quote. Could you tell me who it’s attributed to? A Google search turns up only this page. 😉

  147. Ihtarlik says:

    Please do not ad-lib with the Bible.  It’s bad enough when Hagee and his troupe do so.

    The NIV translation of Matthew 21:12 states, "Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves."

    No matter which translation you rely upon, it will not mention Jesus using a rope as a flail.  And while many biblical artists have used this imagery, to my knowledge there are no primary sources for this anecdote.  So they were ad-libbing as well, as many artists are wont to do.

  148. Ernest Adams says:


    One famously said, "Because I believe in the Bible, I believe Hell exists. Because I believe in God’s mercy, I believe it is empty."

    The monophysite branches of Christianity don’t believe Jesus was human at all; that he was an entirely divine being with no human part. They deny the Trinity. Unitarians also deny the Trinity; they believe God has only a singular nature, and some believe that Jesus was purely human and not the Son of God. Both are Christians, yet they have completel opposite beliefs concerning the nature of Jesus.

    You sound like one of those people who believes a lot of garbage about Islam because a bunch of terrorists keep spouting it as gospel.

    Not all Christians are Bible-bashers; not all Christians believe in the literal truth of the Bible (the pope certainly doesn’t) and not all Christians believe that non-Christians are going to Hell — no matter what the Bible may say.

  149. Arad ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Wow, I didn’t expect this to balloon the way it did.

    I’m not a member of any brick-and-mortar church or sect, but I keep my Bible close and read from it when I can.  As for the black-and-white "Worship or Burn" philosophy that has been described, the first time I heard of this was when the pope apparently drudged up an ancient declaration that said anyone who isn’t Catholic will burn.  But that’s beside the point.

    What do I believe, you ask?  "Before one judges others, one’s self must be judged."  Simply put, unless you’re perfect, you have no right to judge other people on their eligibility for heaven.  I am far from perfect, and I remind myself of that every time I would find fault in someone else.

    Does that satisfy your curiousity concerning my religious beliefs?

  150. Phinehas says:

    I’m curious now as to what your particular belief system is and how you propose to avoid coming off as "holier than thou" in sharing it.  Or perhaps you are too "holier than thou" to share it in the first place?

    If you espouse complete tolerance, won’t that make it difficult to confront any perceived narrow-mindedness in others since such will inevitably be seen as intolerant?

    How do you avoid the self-referential incoherence in:

    – Everyone’s belief system is right except for those who don’t agree that everyone’s belief system is right.

    – Most belief systems are xenophobic because their intolerance is foreign and strange.

    The whole "bliss in the afterlife" thing is a red herring.  Belief systems who don’t have afterlife concepts are just as dogmatic as those that do.  For instance, the atheist’s beliefs snatch heaven away from Christians just as surely as the Christian’s beliefs consign atheists to hell.

    But if you are a Christian, you don’t really believe that atheists can prevent you from getting to heaven.  And if you are an atheist, you don’t really believe that Christians can consign you to hell.  So, what’s the big deal?  People believe differently than you do.  It’s not offensive, it is just the logical outworkings of how belief systems work. 

    Get over it.

  151. Adamas Draconis says:

    Personally I’d like to see him use a rope as a flail as when he drove the moneylenders from the temple.


    Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

  152. Anonymous says:

    I would say that you are the one who does not know what being Christian entails. Being a Christian means subscribing to a system of beliefs called Christianity.  There are many flavors, but all follow either the New Testament gospels, or a preacher who follows these gospels.  And I would say that your beliefs were prescribed to you, either by your parent or by someone around you who indoctrinated you to the core system.   No one has ever woken up one morning of their own accord and said, "Today I am going to start believing in Christ." without having someone clue them in to the doctrine. 

    It’s fine to say that you don’t believe that someone who doesn’t follow chrisitanity will burn in hell.  Perhaps you believe that God, as you see it, will judge each person of their own good and evil, but that is not what your belief system says.  If you don’t hold this core view, then you are not from any branch of Christianity that I have ever heard of, and I used to be a devout Catholic who tried to learn as much as possible about every denomination of Chrisitanity.  


  153. black manta says:

    And people wonder why I turned away in large part from Christianity and became an Agnostic.  Everything you said there were the reasons why I couldn’t stand being part of that religion any longer and ultimately decided to follow my own path.  Religions that essentially say, "Worship or burn in Hell," "Do as we say or burn in Hell," or "Convert or die," make you feel guilty about yourself and say whatever you like is wrong are not religions I care to follow.  And to this day I am extremely suspicious of most organized religions.

  154. Pixelantes Anonymous says:

    This sort of stuff is exactly why blind faith in everything that’s said in the bible does more harm than good.

    This is nothing but Christian fundamentalism, which is just as bad as any other religious fundamentalism.

    I sometimes entertain myself by thinking about what Jesus would do and say in reaction to bulls*** like this. From what I remember from when I was taught about him (I went to school in a country that does NOT separate church and state) he had a very common sense type of an approach to many things. I have a feeling he’d march down to wherever this dude has his office, knock politely on the door, and then continue to smack him down (verbally) for better part of the day until the dude was weeping under his desk begging for forgiveness.


  155. Dark Sovereign says:

    You have no idea what it means to be Christian. Each person holds their own beliefs. They are not perscribed to us.

  156. Anonymous says:



    Do you believe that if someone doesn’t accept Jesus as their personal lord and savior that they cannot get to heaven?  This is the belief espoused by your theocracy.  Unless someone follows the teachings that Chrisitanity put forth, there is no possiblity of that person acheiving total bliss in the afterlife.  If you can’t achieve bliss, then you burn in hell. 

    Either you believe this, or you aren’t a Chrisitian.  Being a Christian means following the doctrine set forth by either

    A.) The New Testament, "No one goes to the father except through me."


    B.) The religious institution that interprets the Bible for you, all of which say either follow us or go to hell.


    Simply put, you either believe these things and are Christian, or you do not and are something else.  You can’t cherry pick what you want to believe and still expect to be taken seriously.  And I’m sorry, but having a belief that says only the people who agree with you will be okay in the afterlife is one of the highest forms of xenophobia.  Either be just like us, or risk eternal damnation.  That is Christianity, and that is Christians.  If you believe, on any level, that only those following your belief system will achieve bliss in some far off place, than you are "holier than thou".  Also, notice how I am not grouping, "All with faith…"  though most belief systems are as xenophobic as Christianity if not more so. 

  157. RealDB says:

    Greetings all,

    I, myself, am a Christian and a gamer.  I believe in Christ our Savior and the salvation through his blood.  I believe that only through acceptance of His sacrifice and welcoming Him into my life is the only way into heaven. 

    What should be noted is that it is not living "righteously" or being baptized, or participating in communion that will make you saved.  Christians are those who have accepted Jesus as their Savior and thus, been forgiven of sins through his sacrifice.  Thus, those that have not done so are non-Christians and therefore not sactified by the blood of Christ.

    Christianity is not about being Catholic or Protestant or Adventist, or even being a Baptist.  It is about the relationship with Christ. 

    Forgive the rant above, please.  I feel it is best to get that out in the open, and if it has already been mentioned by other posters I was too lazy to read, I apologize. 

    And by the way, if you disagree with me, fine, that is your choice.  God gave us free will, and we should be free to exercise it to find answers on our own.

    Please understand that this view is not about condemnation, but acknowledgement that there are people out who have not accepted Christ.  However, it doesn’t mean we want them to go to hell.  If that were the case, the quote would say something like "Non-Christians will go to hell, AND GOOD RIDDANCE!"  Instead I bet it was used as a call to go out and witness to those who may not be saved.

  158. SomeChristianKid says:

    Assuming that anyone really does give a rats ass about or know who the speaker is, I have no idea why they would pick him, he would obviously be a bad choice if there were non Christains such as Hindus, Jews, or Bhuddists( and others) in the audience although I really don’t think anyone would remember what he said years ago and plus it does say in the bible that shit does happen, even to good people, the whole debate over mentally handicapped kids is quite a sensitive subject, sorrry for going off topic there.

    I really don’t see why they’re at a outrage over this, its true that he said that shit out loud but the Bible does says it happens, they should just kick all religious folks if they find that shocking, just bring in the atheists or something.

  159. Anonymous says:

    Pushing through the smokescreen, what this is really about is that Gallagher has found a nice fat pocketbook that he can bleed dry of cash (note the ESA’s recent past: closing their most effective legal office, then doubling the lobbying budget while at the same time halving their lobbying efforts), and in the meantime also funnel some money to another political parasite.  Too bad the game companies don’t want to go on the record about what they’ve seen.

  160. Anonymous says:

    I rarely comment on this site … maybe never … but what the heck does it matter if the governer believes the strict interruptation of the bible?

    If he believe non-christians are going to hell, what of it? If you believe differently that’s your right. 

    What erks me is the hypocrisy of the entire PC / Liberal Left gang.  They preach (yes preach) that everyone needs to accept / tolerate everyone else … yet they are the most unaccepting group of people out there. They simply will not accept anybody who doesn’t believe / behave / act like they do … all in the name of tolerance.  As I said … hyprocrites the entire lot of them.

    It’s time for the PC group to stop QQ’ing and start being "tolerant" of other peoples views / beliefs / behaviors … even if that means accepting somebody that doesn’t accept your views.  After all, isn’t that what tolerance / acceptance is all about? Since when did it have to be quid-pro-quo?

  161. Anonymous says:

    Christianity-bashing is the latest juvenile fad in attention whoring.

    Funny, though, how sensitive everyone is to being called a fag, dyke, homo, queer, faggot, nigger, wetback, redskin, slant-eye, honky, cracker, dot-head, chink, frog, muffin eater, jigaboo, porch monkey, or beaner.

  162. Phinehas says:

    That’s a pretty blithe comment coming from someone who hasn’t shared his own beliefs at all.  I suppose that’s one way to ensure your beliefs never become a target of close scrutiny at all, let alone a moving target.

  163. Trent ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    These comments really make me laugh. I love how convienient it is for christianity to be a moving target. It really solidifies for me how much BS it really is.

    Lately christianity seems to mean "we subscribe to whatever makes the non-theist wrong" doctrine. Comical.

  164. Rabid Cheese Monkey says:

    I have to say this – This really is not as big of deal as either side makes it out to be. To be honest, I find this not interesting at all. First and formost – E3 has been off the radar of most gamers and even industry members since they did that idiotic move to kill the shows, exibits, etc. and go just with a private expo. With that, it really doesn’t matter if E3 is "politicized" or not.

    As for the speaker and who he backs – woop-de-fucking-do. If anybody has read the King James Bible, it pretty much says in no unclear terms that is the Terms of Service and EULA of the game of Life. Granted, it is the same morons that believe that the Earth is 5,000 years old, dinos coexisted with people, and that science is wrong by their interpretations of said book. Still, the whole uproar about the pastor I think is totally uncalled for and is more of a publicity stunt than anything else. I think the ESA needs to get its head out of its ass and get its act strait.

    For this site, sorry but right now gamepolitics doesn’t hold as much punch or weight as other sites like 1-up or slashdot. However, I am confident that is only temporary and in time will gain credibility. Still, while the oppinions are held with some merrit, I think this is really just not noteworthy since:


    1) E3 isn’t the powerhouse once was.

    2) The ESA is falling apart from the inside out.

    3) The controvercy over this whole debacle is noteworthy over what the pastor said. The fact the Governor agreed to ONE statement the pastor said and it wasn’t even the controvercial statement is not. Period.

    4) A person’s belief system should be respected, not ridiculed. Doesn’t matter what you believe in.


    To conclude, I feel this is a laugh since I can’t see what the big deal is. Now if the ESA said they were getting Jack Thompson as the keynote speaker for E3, then yes definitely that would be cause for a ruckus… either that or proof somebody lost their marbles.

  165. Anonymous says:

    The funny thing about this is that even among "Christians", there is disagreement about who is "reallY" a Christian. The Catholic Church used to say that "Outside the Church there is no salvation" (Vatican II and its tendency toward ecumenism has de-emphasized this dictum). And we all know that Fundies say that anyone who is not a "Bible-Believing Christian" (meaning anyone else who does not agree with them) is NOT a Christian (including Catholics and most other Protestants) are going to hell. So you actually get into another fight if you bring up the subject of who is "Christian". It really depends on who you are asking.

  166. Gray-17 says:

    Actually I’d imagine that GP isn’t reporting on that because it’s speculation on Joystiq’s part that those are the ESA’s reasons. That’s not the same thing as them actually being ESA’s reasons.


  167. Anonymous says:

    Explain why he’s a bigot in your eyes. Perry didn’t say anything that isn’t commonly accepted Christian doctrine.

    If he had said "non-Christians are awful and I want them to go to hell" or "non-Christians are inferior and deserve to go to hell", that would be bigotry.

  168. Anonymous says:

    "That said, I don’t want to hear this fanatic at E3"

    Believing the fundamental tenets of your religion doesn’t make you a fanatic. Neither does stating them when you’re asked about them by a reporter.

  169. Blake Snow says:

    "While there are surely many Christians among E3 attendess, there are just as surely many who aren’t."

    Yeah, that was a sloppy generalization, Dennis (assuming you authored the article and assuming you were suggesting that other Christians would condone Perry attendance). Every belief-system has nutty radicals, Christianity included.

    That said, I don’t want to hear this fanatic at E3, or any politician for that matter as the keynote speaker. Talk about a downward spiral.

  170. Anonymous says:

    Hmmm, you’re curious as to why Goobernor Perry’s comment causes controversy?

    Do you not know that the various Eastern religions such as Buddhism, Shintoism, Hinduism, Confucianism, et cetera, as well as Native American religions and many other religions do NOT condemn people to a hell if they don’t believe as they believe?

    However, for some privileged reason by way of delusion, your own religion DOES condemn to hell anyone who disagrees with them.  How’s THAT for juvenile – even infantile – behavior?

    There’s no Golden Rule embodied in your belief that of everyone on Earth you are the only people who know what’s right.  Totally narcissistic, and sociopathic, your religion is.  It’s a barbaric and even primitive way of seeing the world and shows a total lack of moral decency or sophistication.

    It’s no wonder Christianity has always been a religion of conquest and domination.  It’s your hyperaggressive underlying belief system.  Take a look in your religious mirror.  Evolve for a change.  You are not chosen or superior or by any means correct.  You’re living in a mentally inbred fantasy world.  No offense intended or implied.

    Only a primitive and barbaric religion would say everybody ELSE is wrong, and WE are right.  Christianity fits that description; not the only one, but the only one that is the topic here in this thread, and the only one beating up a good part of the world militarily at the moment.

    So, still curious as to why the controversy?  Then, you are too blinded by your own religion to see the odious false sanctimony of your own faith.  Not that there’s anything wrong with that!

  171. jkdjr25 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Speaking, again, as a Christian I’m curious as to the controversy over the statement that non-Christians will be sent to Hell. Pretty much EVERY world religion has similair mandates yet those are all accepted as being ok.

    Reincarnation teaches that if you’re a jerk you get punished by coming back as something lower on the food chain.

    Islam, Buddhism, Shinto, and many other eastern faiths have any number of hells where a sinful person is punished.

    Why is it that Christianity gets the onus for this? Maybe those of us believe it are a tad more vocal than others but at least we’re honest about it. The Bible says, very clearly mind you, what the punishment is for turing one’s back on God. So, again, where’s the controversy here?

    Maybe it’s divisive but would you rather Christians lie about what they believe? At least in talking about it a dialogue is opened. You might not like what they have to say, but they have right to both say it and believe it.

    That being said, maybe E3 isn’t the place for someone to make that speach, maybe it is. It’s up to those who invited Gov. Perry to decide. At the very least it’ll be interesting to see what happens.

  172. Phinehas says:

    According to Joystiq:

    "Texas actually has a large development community (particularly in the MMO space) and even supports the industry with financial incentives."


    "Perry…defeated an anti-gaming gubernatorial candidate during the last election who sought to place a 50% tax on violent video games."

    GP is not likely to clarify this, since they are owned by the ECA, a direct competitor to the ESA.

    I, for one, am happy to see a mainstream figure that the media will take seriously as the keynote speaker.  I think the industry has tended to be a bit too insular in the past, and we are paying for it in the legislative attempts that keep popping up. 

    Politicians propose legislation because they believe it will help them with their constituents.  That these constituents still see gaming as the domain of prepubescent boys with violent wish fulfillment fantasies speaks to the failure of the gaming industry to connect with the mainstream in the past.  I see keynotes like this one as attempting to address this shortcoming.

  173. jkjdr25 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Actually it’s a common misconception that Christians want people to go to Hell. The vast majority just want people to be aware of what the Bible teaces on this subject. Most Christians actually want people to go to Heaven, hence the warnings of what’s to come and all.

    I can only speak for myself and my experiences on this matter but the above has been my experience for the most part.



  174. Keith K ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Okay, so he’s a christian and thinks I should burn in hell. I can accept that. Frankly, I wish him the same pleasure.

    What I simply fail to understand, is this man’s relevance to gaming, gaming media or their proponents. I would be happy if GP could clarify, though the onus is not on them. I expect fair reasoning from the ESA as to why they feel we should be subjected to this man at E3. 

  175. Anonymous says:

    Everyone’s all for free speech in the good ol’ US of A… except when it comes to matters of religion. Seriously, if you don’t agree with him then don’t listen to him. How come if someone goes on an anti-religious tirade it’s ok, but if it’s the other way around it’s not? 

    Down with censorship.

  176. Kadamon says:

    Agh. Sorry about the complete lack of spacing, do I need to use HTML now? I haven’t commented since the face-lift.

  177. Kadamon says:

    On a side topic, whatever happened to the Old Testament believers? I’m curious when it comes to that aspect, why most of Christianity follows are re-print and change from the original context.

    I’m also curious why they’re not Jewish, you know, like Christ was.

    Oh, well, as one of blasphemous heathens that post here, I just like to understand and study these things more and I’ve never gotten a proper answer from anyone. Yes, I have been called that by more than a few religions, usually the door-to-door ones.

    Now. Outside of the religion thing, I’ll post what I said on Joystiq.

    “…They’re pretty bi-partisan there, if I’ve got my terminology correct, they’re always pretty straightforward in calling out on the mistakes and stupid things that people do when it comes to gaming.

    The ESA is part of the gaming community, if they do something stupid, which they have, GP and co. are gonna call them out, and that’s what they did.

    Maybe if more details came out in the open, they wouldn’t be trashed on.”

  178. sqlrob says:

    Your premise is incorrect. Texas is the Bible Belt, this statement makes him popular, not unpopular.



  179. Brokenscope says:

    He is honest with his beliefs and hasn’t compromised them to be popular.

    edit::This is a neutral statement meant as a comment, not as a complement towards the subject, there might have even been an attempt at humor. Also, it seems people still love going @XXXXXXX as opposed to the neat reply function that makes awsome little threads

  180. Anonymous says:

    My favorite comment here is Thompson’s, in which he states that Zelnick is going to hell. Jack, what gives you such a holier than thou attitude? What makes you for some reason think that you’ve already bought your ticket into the pearly gates? I’m sure if you do give me an answer, it won’t be a logical one.

  181. Anonymous says:

    Well, since my comment was eaten, I’ll repeat myself

    Honestly, I don’t care where my afterlife is as long as I’m with those I care about in this life. To me, that’s my personal heaven.

    And I personally don’t believe I need to swear allegiance or worship anyone to get there


  182. Anonymous says:

    So… if I don’t believe in this imaginary god, I get sent to an imaginary place that I don’t think exists?

    As threats go, this isn’t really the scariest. Next they’ll be telling me the monster under my bed will eat me if I don’t finish my vegetables…. 🙂

    Seriously. I love America, you’re great people, but some of your guys are just kind of nuts on this whole blind faith/religion thing.

  183. thefremen says:

    So this really doesn’t come as a suprise. With the head being a GOP mouthpiece the ECA will eventually be damned close to the orgs it used to oppose.

  184. TheEdge says:

    First of all,not every Christian is some hateful bigot(I would know,since I am one).

    Second of all,you shouldn’t talk about a religion you have quite obviously demonstrated you know nothing about.

    Lastly,you shouldn’t base a religion sorley on nutjobs like Jack Thompson and this guy,because it makes you look like an idiot.

  185. Arad ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Sweeping generalizations FTL.

    You have every right to believe that, and it makes me sad that the most vocal (or most publicized) members of Christianity are like this.  However, not all Christians act ‘holier than thou’ like this person.  Please don’t group all people who have faith with these doomsayers.

  186. Brokenscope says:

    You mean why the loud, holier than thou, televangelist Christians are hostile towards everyone.

  187. SounDemon says:


    His beliefs are hateful and demonstrates why Christianity and Christians in general are hostile to everyone else.

    "Everyone else will burn in Hell!" is a hateful and deeply divisive remark, and I find it repugnant that a governor would affirm the remarks of a televangelist hatemonger.

  188. Azhrarn ( User Karma: 0 ) says:
    We have to ask again: why is E3 2008 being politicized? The answer, we suspect, has much to do with embattled ESA boss Michael Gallagher.
    I couldn’t agree more GP, i just hope that mr Gallagher doesn’t ruin the ESA even more. With several large developers already stepping out, its future isn’t the brightest and it really could do without even more controversy.


  189. Wyvern says:

    …You have GOT to be kidding me. Who hired this man to give a speech at E3? What the hell were they thinking?

    Oh wait. Maybe they’re taking a leaf out of GTA’s book and trying to drum up as much controversy as possible to get people to show up

  190. NovaBlack. ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Gee i wonder why companies could possibly be leaving. Maybe its because a body who thinks this is a good choice for keynote speaker is obviously not on the same planet as the rest of us.

Comments are closed.