Or at least the type of Christians who conform to his indisputable, singular moral system. Savage is, of course, a bit like Fred Phelps for the pro-gay left.. Like a caricature of the Left, he advocates sexual deviancy and debauchery in all its heathen orgy glory. Like the emergent left, he advocates more hatred and vitriol against those who don't conform to a singular ethical stance than many fundamentalist tent revival preachers could ever imagine.
And he's not alone. In my transition time between Protestant and Catholic, some of my more moderate colleagues offered me work in their denominations. Welcoming and affirming they called themselves. Though I learned quickly that they were neither welcoming nor affirming for those who didn't conform to their rather progressive world views. On the contrary, the derision, contempt and outright loathing they sometimes cast at those who didn't hold to their ideals often surpassed the worst that I heard in my own rather conservative, Evangelical denomination.
Since our academic, media and cultural venues all sympathize with the Savage moral framework, however, there is no backlash. There is no shame. There is no attempt to apologize for his over the top hatred aimed at non-progressive non-conformists (see the difference in how the media treats Limbaugh vs. how it treats Bill Maher for an example). On the contrary, they seem rather taken by his various missions. Including this one, in which he gathers Christians who are there to remind the post-Christian progressive world that not all Christians are the pits. Some, like them, have seen the light and are prepared to embrace what is demanded by the emerging new world order. Just as there always have been some willing to do the same.
Of course as is usual in our war torn, crumbling world, the only issue discussed is the issue of gayness. It is the divide of the post-Christian left, the issue that progressive finally found to effectively separate the sheep fro the goats, and many young people, no matter where they stand on other issues, see this as defining the age of right and wrong. To stand on the wrong side of the issue? Why, that's to embrace Communism in the 1950s. So you can bet your bottom that no matter where they come from, they'll be quick to fit the latest the world has to offer.
How do I resist the call to embrace the new order? Easy. I remember that the same side pushing for gay this and gay that as the source and summit of all morality, is the same side strangely quiet, if not in outright denial, about the increasing number of things like this. Offering me drugs and sex, in return for a rehash of early 20th century Darwinian inspired redefining of humanity in order to terminate the unwanted ones, is not a price I'm willing to pay. And I can't convince myself that the allegiance, however unintentional, between these two emerging phenomena is not merely a coincidence.