Benham Brothers Speak Out on HGTV Show Being Canned: We're Committed to Biblical Principles


David and Jason Benham issued a statement early Thursday in response to HGTV’s decision to cancel their upcoming show, “Flip It Forward,” after reports came to light of the brothers’ past anti-LGBT ministry and political efforts.

“We were saddened to hear HGTV’s decision,” the brothers wrote. “With all of the grotesque things that can be seen and heard on television today you would think there would be room for two twin brothers who are faithful to our families, committed to biblical principles, and dedicated professionals.”

“If our faith costs us a television show then so be it,” they added.


One has to admire them for sticking to their beliefs and not selling out. :slight_smile:


David Benham has more than once compared gay people to Nazis and said gay people were “demonic forces” in society…and he thought he could have a show on HGTV?

I can’t figure out for the life of me how he ever landed the gig in the first place.


Can you provide the actual comments in context? I find it odd that someone would just say gays are nazis or demonic forces, I mean that doesn’t even make sense. If he said something like “there is a measure of fascism in how many people have been enforcing politically correctness lately”, then that is a LOT different.


I think what he said was:

We don’t realize that, okay, if 87 percent of Americans are Christians and yet we have abortion on demand; we have no-fault divorce; we have pornography and perversion; we have a homosexuality and its agenda that is attacking the nation; we have adultery; we have all of the things; we even have allowed demonic ideologies to take our universities and our public school systems while the church sits silent and just builds big churches. We are so complacent, we are so apathetic and we are very hypocritical in the church, that’s why the Bible says judgment begins in the house of God. So when we prayed at 714 we asked God and our city to forgive us for allowing these things in the house of God.


Of course,he couches it in “love” language but “I love you and demons from hell are behind you” is hard enough to sell if done with someone you actually know and love, and not just tossed out on some radio program about people in general.

‘Our struggle is not against flesh and blood but against the principalities, rulers and authorities of darkness.’ We love these people and so we are not going to allow the demonic forces and agendas behind them to destroy life.

A gay person who wants to get married is working toward a movement equivalent to Nazis that must be killed and destroyed:

if evil is being accepted and appreciated at the national level, aggressive Christian men must lead the charge against it. In the late 1940′s England realized this truth with Neville Chamberlain’s Policy of Appeasement and the Nazi regime. Chamberlain thought he could somehow “appease” the fuehrer, yet Winston Churchill aggressively stood against this policy and proclaimed that they must kill Hitler and destroy the regime in its entirety. It wasn’t long before Chamberlain’s “politically correct” policy fell flat on its face, and Churchill – the more aggressive man – took the reins and joined America in defeating the beast called, Naziism [sic].


You know, this is part of what I find so dang frustrating about arguing with people like you. You hear analogies and immediately assign equivalency to them. The analogy was not saying that gay are nazis, or evil like nazis. What it’s saying is that they represent an ideology which is fundamentally harmful to the basic understanding of human nature, and as such should be combated, not acquiesced to.

Good for them for standing up for the Truth. I’ll miss their shows.


I was going to make the point that the analysis of the statement was flawed, but I think you’ve done that and more, in… Colorful fashion. Haha


Thank you for those quotations. I have no problem with the first quotation per se, but as you point out, you don’t just go up to a person and start telling them what’s wrong with them. So yes, context matters.

As for the second, I found this, which was the intro to the part you posted:

“I read an excellent article this morning by a former NFL player, Ken Hutcherson, on the political correctness of many evangelical organizations in America today. I share his same sentiment when it comes to Christian organizations appeasing evil instead of resisting it. In a desperate attempt to appear attractive and not “offensive”, an overwhelming number of Christian organizations in America have adopted a politically correct policy of appeasement in the face of evil instead of standing at the mid-point of biblical tension on the social issues of our day.”

You can read the whole post here:

Nowhere does he “compare gay people to nazis”. Gay people =/= the enforcers of political correctness. Being straight or gay is about sexuality and has no bearing on wanting to push your ideas on other people.


Mr. Benham is the one who decided things Nazis did and demonic possession were great bases of comparison for whatever it is (some?) gay people have done that upsets him so much.

Do you ever find it fruitful when someone starts a conversation with you about Catholicism to compare Church actions to people who mass-murdered and actual demons? I didn’t think so. If you don’t want people to start drawing “equivalency” don’t start and end your comparisons there.


You are drawing the wrong conclusion from the analogy. You’re focusing on the wrong thing. HE wasn’t comparing gays to Nazis, he was comparing his actions to those of Churchill’s, namely, refusing to allow political correctness to overshadow or modify his beliefs.

Do you ever find it fruitful when someone starts a conversation with you about Catholicism to compare Church actions to people who mass-murdered and actual demons? I didn’t think so.

How nice of you to assume what my answer would be. If you want to have an intelligent conversation, how about you let me answer instead of answering in my stead. To actually answer your question, yes, I have found it to be beneficial when people do this becuase it provides a base point from which I can gauge their understanding of Church teaching and history.

If you don’t want people to start drawing “equivalency” don’t start and end your comparisons there.

…Again, he didn’t, and if you’d stop and actually read what he was saying, you’d know that.

I like colors, they make things more interesting :stuck_out_tongue:


Nobody can beat the Media Inquisition.


(see further below)

And would you conclude that said people probably have a pretty incendiary, skewed view of Church history?

His analogy to fighting gay marriage (in a particular state) was being like Churchill fighting against and refusing to appease the Nazis. So in this comparison, Mr. Benham is Mr. Churchill and…who are the people who wanted gay marriage? Are they not Nazis in this analogy? Who are they if not the Nazis?

If you’re telling me he ended up with some half-formed poorly thought through analogy on his part, I’ll agree.


He’s clearly talking about the subset people who are using underhanded PC tactics. That is, people pushing the notion that not agreeing with them = hate, bigotry, etc.

Clearly there are gay people who don’t feel that way.


No, the people who are using underhanded PC (appeasement?) tactics are Neville Chamberlain in his scenario. Those who want gay marriage would still be the actual Nazis. After all, Mr. Benham’s real beef is with actual gay marriage - not just the tone of the conversation.

Either that, or he constructed an analogy involving Chamberlain, Churchill, with precisely no one being the Nazis. That makes no sense? :confused:


Wrong. Chamberlain would be Christian people who bend their beliefs in the face of social pressure (Nazis). That pressure is the inflammatory language used to attack Christian belief by branding it as hateful - NOT the LGBT community.

I am sorry you want to win this argument so badly, but please don’t be foolish just to accomplish your goal.


Social pressure? Social pressure is a neutral concept. Are you seriously suggesting Mr. Benham really was saying gays getting married was just hunky dory as long as it didn’t involve too much social pressure? Does not pass the smell test. Where do the gay people wanting to get married fall in the analogy?

And Nazis have been reduced to the role of some vague, impersonal, neutral notion called social pressure. The history books weep.

Nice apologetics though in a word-twisting attempt to try to demonstrate Mr. Benham did not really mean what he so clearly did when he thought his only audience was his dad’s preach-to-the-choir web site.


I have never watched the network and from what I heard, just for me, I don’t think I would enjoy HGTV. Sounds like it’s not really about home improvement but reality types of shows. HGTV I heard is also located in Nashville but Scripps owns HGTV. I’m just reeling off some facts I heard without really checking it.


Social pressure is not a neutral concept when it comes in the form of belligerent statements, such as calling people bigoted and closed minded regardless of how much study, prayer, and reflection they’ve put into these matters. In fact, the pressure you are exerting is a perfect example of something that is anything but neutral.

Any person who understands language understands that the tone of someone’s words carry incredible weight in their meaning. Words can be neutral, yes. They can also be loving, hateful, jealous, etc.

Having had people get in my face and start asking my opinion on the topics after finding out I’m Catholic, I will also attest from personal experience that their tone is anything but neutral. And yes, I was tempted to be a Chamberlain to avoid the level of hate being thrown at me. I’m glad I chose to stand by my faith in those cases.


Yeah, that sounds just like what the Nazis did. They just got people riled up and upset with their harsh language. Sure. So then you have no answer to this very simple question then?

[quote=mjwise]Where do the gay people wanting to get married fall in the analogy?

They have to be in there somewhere.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit