A kind woman, who would never intentionally offend another person, writes: “I love gay people, I 
just cannot support their gay lifestyle.”
A pastor stands holding an electric cord as a prop and warns the congregation, “Don’t mess with God’s original design. Gay sex is not natural, the parts don’t fit.”
A man thinks he needs to “protect” his family from his Christian gay brother. He says to his brother, “Homosexuality is a perversion and, until you change, I cannot allow you in my home with my children.”
Parents send their lesbian daughter to a program that they heard about at church. The visiting speaker says he is no longer gay. The encouraged parents say, “We want what is best for our daughter and we know she can change her preferences.”
About their fellow Americans, some will say: “I don’t mind gay people having civil unions, I just do not want to redefine marriage. Marriage is not a civil right and they want special rights.”
Thinking they are pleasing and even defending God, moderate Christians assert: “I’m fine with gay people getting together, it’s God and the Bible that are clearly against homosexuality. We love gay people and need to tell them the truth.”
I would have made every one of these statements a decade ago.
For the most part, people that make these comments believe themselves to be considerate and sincere and would not intentionally participate in “hate talk”. Yet, each comments is unkind, flawed, ill-informed or ignorant.
Well-meaning, reasonable people repeat phrases like these again and again not understanding the offense and discrimination they are causing. Many of the statements are rooted in ignorance and based on gay stereotypes. As an advocate for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) community, in particular the Christian GLBT community, here are some insights for those that no longer want to participate in the unjust treatment of GLBT people.
The “gay lifestyle”
When communicating, it would be a major improvement to not use the term “the gay lifestyle”.
What is a “gay lifestyle”? The manner in which GLBT people live their lives is as varied as the manner in which heterosexual people live theirs.
The gay and transgender people I know have “lives”, not “lifestyles”. Stop using silly clichés and be honest if you feel compelled to condemn the way others express their sexuality. What many people really want to say is “I do not like same-sex sex.” Simple, then do not participate in it. And, if it bothers you to think about people having same-sex sex, easy, then do not think about it.
My “heterosexual lifestyle” is not the same as other heterosexual women. I have a life and I conduct it according to my faith, values and ethics, and, so it is true with gay and transgender people. Grouping 5% of the population together under one umbrella of how they all live is foolish.
It would not be appropriate to reduce me to a sex act, and likewise for it is true for my gay friends. We are humans with beautiful diversity, including the way we express ourselves sexually, romantically and emotionally.
“Gay sex is not natural, the parts don’t fit.”
The follow-up to the “gay lifestyle” comment is often, “Gay sex is not natural, the parts don’t fit.” If the parts “did not fit”, then gay people would not be having “gay sex”; so clearly, the parts do fit.
Warning. warning.
If you are bothered by imagining or thinking about “gay sex”, skip the next six paragraphs. However, if you bypass them, you may miss a primer on human sexuality that can be applied to your own “heterosexual lifestyle” for added enjoyment.
In males, not just gay males, the prostate gland is adjacent to the anus and, upon stimulation, can
cause an orgasm. So, evidently penile anal penetration can cause an orgasm for both participants in “gay sex”. And, for the record, there are plenty of heterosexual women stimulating their heterosexual partner’s prostate gland too.
Most people that are “offended by gay sex” have no problem thinking about, or rather fantasizing about, women having sex with women. (Just being honest here, folks.) And how “successful” is the Part A into Slot B for women in heterosexual relationships? Interestingly, facts reveal that 75-80% of women are not having orgasms by inserting Part A into Slot B. However, with other types of clitoral stimulation, that women can participate in with women partners, the numbers flip, and almost 70% of women reach orgasm with external stimulation.
Putting it plainly, the “natural way” of having sex is highly satisfying for heterosexual men and less so for women. Clearly, Part A into Slot B is not the only way that brings enjoyment to the parties in the sexual union.
God, the Designer of Human Sexuality, sure did leave provision for lesbian sex and gay male sex to be satisfying. How clever of Him to create the human body so that women had a fun center on the outside and men had one on the inside! The male plug and female adaptor electric cord analogy just has to go. It describes one type of sexual interaction; human sexuality is far more complex and beautiful than electricity.
Gay sex not only fits, it works.
“Homosexuality is a perversion”
A perversion is something that is unnatural or abnormal. Sex between two people of the same
sex may trip your “ick factor” switch, but it is not unnatural (see above). Although it is not the norm, it is not abnormal.
Forty years ago, it was medically determined that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexuality. Unfortunately, the indoctrination of the 50’s to the 70’s had people fearing the “perverted homosexual”. The American Psychological Association (APA) declassified “homosexuality” as a mental disorder in the 1973 Diagnostics and Statistical Manual (DSM) used in the mental health professionals’ field.
Still-popular urban, mostly Christian fundamentalist, myth is a story of “radical homosexual activists” storming and pressuring the APA to declassify homosexuality as a mental disorder. On the face of it, that is a mostly correct statement.
Out of frustration and the need to be heard and understood, gay activists did break into conference sessions during 1970-1972 and demanded to tell their stories. Finally, in 1973, before a packed room of his peers, a masked colleague answered questions and told his story.
It took almost three years of pressure to be heard; the eventual declassification was the result of personal relationship and dialogue. The head of the Nomenclature Committee, Robert Spitzer, witnessed the “normal behavior” of his colleagues in a gay bar one night after the convention. In a moment of beautiful humanity, Spitzer’s ugly biases were shattered and he went directly back to his hotel room to rewrite the classification. In the next few months of 1973, homosexuality was deleted from the DSM.
Homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexuality. Using the words “perversion”, “sickness” and “abnormality” is not only medically incorrect, it is very hurtful to those targeted. GLBT people are expressing sexuality that is normal and natural to them. For them, to express sexuality in an opposite sex relationship is unnatural and abnormal.
Can gay people be sexual with members of the opposite sex? Of course they can. In the wise words of one of my closest friends, Michael, ex-husband of a woman and father of two, who was also a leader of a you-too-can-be-heterosexual program says “With a whole bunch of fantasizing, you can do anything.”
Which leads into the next ill-informed statement.
“People can change their orientation”
No, they can’t.
Sexual expression, whether it be heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual, is an orientation, not a behavior, not a preference, not an addiction or a lust. Sexual orientation defines the consistent emotional, romantic and sexual attraction a person has for the opposite sex, same sex or both sexes.
A simple way of looking at the complexities of human sexuality is the Kinsey Scale. It classifies exclusively opposite-sex attracted individuals to strongly same-sex attracted individuals on a scale ranging “0” to “6”. Can a “6” become a “0”? No. Certainly, Christian circles have been lead to believe this is possible, probable or beneficial for almost forty years.
Exodus International is the largest Christian ministry in the world dealing with those with “unwanted same sex attractions”. For almost all of its 37 years, minus one month, Exodus has been assuring “motivated” Christian people who “struggle with homosexuality” that prayer, finding the root of the dysfunction and denial of natural sexual expression would create a new creature and new sexual identity in Jesus Christ.
Exodus International has only recently admitted publicly that sexual orientation does not change. President Alan Chambers, who also admitted he is still same sex attracted 20 years into the Exodus program, stated in January:
The majority of people that I have met, and I would say the majority meaning 99.9% of them have not experienced a change in their orientation or have gotten to a place where they could say that they could never be tempted or are not tempted in some way or experience some level of same-sex attraction. I think there is a gender issue there, there are some women who have challenged me and said that my orientation or my attractions have changed completely. Those have been few and far between. The vast majority of people that I know will experience some level of same-sex attraction.
I applaud Exodus for getting more honest about truth and expectations, but I am afraid 
tremendous damage has been done. As they strive to be truthful about four decades of experience and poor results, others in the fix-me-I-am-gay world are staunchly defending their ministries and professions.
Families have been destroyed and gay people have completely walked away from faith communities. Exodus has not yet publicly apologized for the damage done and the wrong message effectively sent throughout the Southern Baptist and Evangelical world. Sadly, until they become more repentant and vocal about the lies, Southern Baptists and Evangelicals will conveniently believe and propogate the tales of “conversions”.
Gay Christians and their allies have certainly heard this monumental news, but the church, in general, will sadly not hear it for quite some time. The church will believe and advocate for the “you can change” message because it supports the prevailing dogma about gay people. The messages of: “try harder”, “pray more”, and the worst one, marry a member of the opposite sex to “fix” their “sexual brokenness” will be sustained as the conservative churches exist in a black hole of ignorance on this issue.
And, gay people will continue to walk away from God because churches lay unacheivable expectations upon them.
Producing children does not mean one is straight. Living in a heterosexual relationship does not
mean one is straight. People who declare themselves as “ex-gay” have their own list of why they not longer identify as gay. Including, but not limited to: the desire to have a family, the weight of familial, religious, social and professional pressures, their own fear of being themselves, their own non-acceptance of their orientation or loss of God’s love and acceptance.
I know, I know, some of you are thinking of Former Gay Slut Alcohol Zombie Drug-Using Joe who is now a “new creature” and maybe even married. Lumping cessation of personally destructive behaviors in with apparent sexual orientation modification blurs the lines of what actually has changed. The whoring, drugs and alcohol are gone; there is a temptation to also announce that sexual orientation has shifted. We can each choose what we do with our sexual desires, but we cannot change sexual orientation.
In Christian-lingo, this paraded-about “ex-gay” got saved and God made him/her into a “new creature in Christ.” Unfortunately, this “new creature” is probably still gay and, in the “honeymoon” phase, we see a behavior change and mistake it as orientation change.
You will only hear praise and gratitude from this former miserable heterosexual screw-up for the great possibility of transformation in a person following Jesus. That Jesus-make-over, however, does not include sexual orientation.
Michael Bussee, former founder of Exodus Int’l & now on the Board of Canyonwalker
For every rising star and “ex-gay” poster child you cite me that is “no longer gay”, I offer hundreds of stories of my friends, most of them Christians, who tried to conform, hide, deny or live as a heterosexual until they ultimately chose truth and authenticity. Families, relationships, and people have been destroyed and forced into shame because they bought into the “change is possible” lie.
Conveniently ignoring the existence of bisexuals who are in the 2 to 5 range on the Kinsey Scale inflates the “success” stories of conversion as well.
John Smid, author of “Ex’ed Out”
Former leaders of Exodus and other “help-fix-me-I-am-gay” programs are now admitting they NEVER saw one change in the orientation of clients in decades of work. Although well-intended, ex-gay programs have been ineffective and in fact, destructive. But still, pastors, families and shamed gay Christians are believing the long-held lies.
People that are strictly gay do not become straight. This coercion and expectation to change sexual orientation has to stop.
“I don’t mind gay people having civil unions, but marriage is not a civil right.”
Married couples enjoy over 1000 civil, medical and tax benefits which exclude non-married 
couples. Saying “I have no objection to civil unions, just don’t touch marriage” may work nicely for those who enjoy the benefits of marriage for themselves and their families, but is not just or fair for same-sex couples.
Marriage might be a “sacrament” in your economy, but it is a legal contract which provides protections for individuals, couples and families.
As the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) progresses through the Federal Court system, it will surely be defeated. And it should. The unfair burdens that have been placed on partnered same-sex couples may not be on the radar of the average heterosexual. If it does not impact “us”, then the injustice of DOMA also escapes “us”.
Further, there is a strong misconception among heterosexuals that marriage itself is not a civil right. Well, it is.
Marriage has already been designated as “one of the basic civil rights of man” by the Supreme Court of the US. In the 1967 Loving vs. Virginia case that invalidated the miscegenation laws prohibiting black/white marriage, marriage was deemed to be a basic right for all people. The decision states, “The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.”
Marriage as a fundamental right under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment was again reaffirmed in the 1978 Zablocki vs. Redhail decision. That decision states “ the right to marry as of fundamental importance for all.”
Civil rights should not be subjected to a popular vote; rights are evaluated and extended by close examination under the Constitution. The Constitution interprets for American citizens what is fair and just. Clearly, marriage is a basic right within our Constitution. Inclusion of gay and lesbian people in the right to marry has been and is currently being examined by several states.
Undoubtedly, DOMA will be struck down and a case testing federal marriage equality will be heard at the Federal level in the Supreme Court within the decade. This is the logical progression of interpreting Constitutional law as it applies to the right to marry a same sex partner.
“The Bible is against homosexuality.”
It is quite common for people to use God and “His views” to justify their own moral, cultural and religious biases. Millions of words have been written on this issue. I have written many of those words on my blog.
With extensive experience in this conversation, it is clear to me that people do not shift their dogma in a battle over verses. All of us, all of us, approach verses in the Bible with the filters created by our: experiences, the teachings we have heard and read, interpretations, cultural influences and doctrinal and denominational stances.
I rarely do the “verse by verse” duel with anyone. Certainly, not because I am unable, but it is rarely productive in conversation. (I point to what I have written.)
I do ask people to temporarily lay aside the “Golden Calves” of what they are sure of and step away and risk getting in relationships with gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Christians. Hearing professions of faith, testimonies of changed lives and seeing the fruits of the Holy Spirit in gay and transgender Christians should challenge you.
Then go back and look at that Golden Calf you have held onto so tightly, and ask with honesty, “Does what I see in the lives of GLBT Christians line up with what I have held as a Biblical truth about them?” If you do not know any gay Christians (I did not until seven years ago!), look at my resources page and view or attend some affirming congregation services.
Relationship matters. When I went to a Gay Christian Network Conference in 2006, standing amongst over 300 GLBT Christians convinced me of my own wrong judgments. I knew I had held wrong beliefs about an entire group of God’s other children.
Concerning the verses you confidently know you know, my challenge is quite simple. Look at all (5 to 7, depending on your count) of the references to same sex behavior in the Bible. In every instance, the behavior is bundled together with rape, prostitution, abuse or worship of a god other than God. The combination of the purpose and the resultant action created something that did not please God.
Consider this: is it the combined wrong purpose and behavior being condemned or is it all same-sex relationships being condemned?
If every time the Bible mentioned the exchange of money and that exchange were bundled with
violence, prostitution, or manipulation, we might think the giving of money is evil and unacceptable. But we know that is not true. We know how to separate immoral purposes in some couplings and have missed it on the issue of same-sex relationships.
The only examples the Old and New Testament writers knew of same-sex behavior were associated with immoral purposes: rape, prostitution,abuse and manipulation in idol worship. That was their culture, their time. The bundled purpose and the resultant same-sex behaviors were immoral.
Of the thousands of relationships I have with GLBT people, I do not know one based in rape, prostitution, abuse or manipulation of idols. The Bible is not referring to loving, same-sex, monogamous relationships. We have wrongly applied Bible verses to fit our biases about gay people.
Most Evangelical and Southern Baptist Christians do not have intimate friendships with gay people; they have gay stereotypes. We tend to believe dogma that reinforces our stereotypes. This is lazy and dehumanizing.
I am entrenched in the gay and transgender Christian community. Without the permission of the “you cannot be gay and Christian” segment, there is indeed a revival going on that may not line up with the traditional non-affirming interpretations. Oh well.
There is a growing number of us Christians, that, at the onset of our journey of shifting, had been confounded by the witness of gay Christians in our lives. We have arrived at different interpretations of the Bible on this issue than we once held.
It is interesting to listen to and read the so-called “Christian experts” on homosexuality who have no personal extensive experiences with the gay community, especially the gay Christian community. They have truly let their biases support their dogma of disgust and ideology of ick; they continue to poison the church and conservative community with their lies and half truths.
_______________
Each of the above statements is offensive, ill-informed or a lie. Again, I said every one of these
things a decade ago. Until. Until I met gay and transgender people, and decided to get to know them as people. Until I laid aside my stereotypes, biases and wrong information. Until I studied the Bible verses for myself.
You can choose to continue oppressing fellow citizens, offend gay friends and family members, and push people away from the benefits of faith communities by repeating the above statements OR you can get informed and and stop saying ignorant, hurtful things.
Remember:
-
Gay people have lives, not “lifestyles”.
-
God is a clever designer; the parts do fit and work quite well for same-sex loving couples.
Homosexuality is a natural expression of human sexuality.
-
People do not change sexual orientation.
-
Marriage is a civil right in the US.
- The Bible is being wrongly used to discriminate against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.
We are guilty in families, society, workplaces and churches of oppressing a class of people because of our own ignorance and isolation. Be better than that. Get into relationships with gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people and get informed.
And stop saying stupid stuff.
I have to admit this is a lovely set of arguments and it has impressed the impressionable no end however these arguments can be used just as strongly in favour of pedophilia and beastiality – after all the parts fit and God is no fool. Indeed! I would suggest a re-read of the bible without skipping the unfavourable bits. Oh I do love a good debate – all will be accepted in the end, it is human nature after all and all the bits do fit!
[Reply]
And from the start . . . ditto dear, ditto.
[Reply]
[Reply]
I do know what the Gospel is. I do not believe that ANYTHING I answer would satisfy you that what I believe could possibly be Christian principles. We differ in what “all” means. I do not believe a homosexual orientation is a disqualifier to Christianity.
And since MY calling is education, encouragement and engagement between LGBT Christians and the church, THIS is what I will be faithful to.
Check out congregations there in Halifax. The way the majority of people will come to some level of understanding and compassion on this issue is RELATIONSHIP.
A back and forth is rarely productive. Go invest YOURSELF and invest in people that you clearly discount. I am VERY comfortable in my beliefs. Do some reading to understand what I believe if that is your goal.
I can probably write the script for the next dozen exchanges if I were to enter into the stream, but I won’t. I do not perceive that you seek understanding, but rather desire to “tell”.
I am beyond those types of engagements. There are productive ways to use my time and I sense this will not be one such productive investment. Thank you for reading and I hope you will continue.
There are a dozen churches on that list — go meet people and then go to God.
[Reply]
Kathy Reply:
May 7th, 2013 at 11:33 pm
you see that is disappointing because you have already put limits and restrictions on our relationship and you don’t even know me yet.
[Reply]
You didn’t directly answer my question. So are you saying the Gospel is equality and justice? just wondering.
[Reply]
The centerpiece of your viewpoint seems to be the LGBT cause and not Jesus so I have been reading with interest and wondering what you think the Gospel is and why you never talk about it ?
[Reply]
Kathy | Canyonwalker Reply:
May 7th, 2013 at 9:09 pm
Your reading on my site must be quite limited. I care about equality and justice BECAUSE I am a follower of Jesus. It is interesting that in your viewpoint you do not notice my centering on Christ; it seems to me that you do not want to see that. It is quite evident to most who visit here. I imagine you do not want to see that a devout believer can hold these views.
I know who I am and Who it is that called me and Whom I serve. I encourage you to read more if you do care to see what motivates me.
I would encourage you to visit an affirming community of believers and ask them if they think equality in Christ and in society is a Christian issue. http://www.gaychurch.org/Find_a_Church/foriegn_nations/Canada/canada_Nova_Scotia_NS.htm
[Reply]
I think I have to disagree. Show me a heterosexual equavalant to the gay street parties in San Francisco?
And even if you could find one….. show me one that is put into a law as an exception to that law, to specifically accommidate heterosexuals.
San Fransciso just passed a law on public nudity, but then exempted gay street fairs.
Why is it one particular sexual preference needs an examption to a public nudity law……….?
[Reply]
Kathy | Canyonwalker Reply:
May 1st, 2013 at 8:27 am
Disagree with what specifically? All six points? One point? I did not mention anything about public nudity, so your point is unclear.
Public nudity laws are not just for people of one particular sexual orientation, you know that right? And “sexual orientation” is the correct term, not sexual “preference”. If you can recall when you choose to be heterosexual, you might be tempted to call it a preference however.
ALL the laws, marriage included, accommodate heterosexuals, and THAT is the point– time to share.
Have you been to San Francisco during Gay Pride? I have– seven times perhaps. I would think that might make my opinion on this subject a fairly good one. Gay Pride is about 30% heterosexual now, most pried events are. The largest BDSM festival in the US is also in SF–the Folsom Street Fair and I would estimate that at about 40% heterosexual. The ONLY sex I have seen in the streets there is heterosexual sex.
Surely you have heard of Mardi Gras in Brazil–heterosexual or Spring Break in FLA–heterosexual. Even in my college days, the bar scenes then were pretty raunchy.
It might benefit you to investigate why YOU hold a bias against a class of people and deal with the reasons why. Get to know LGBT people on a personal level and listen to them.
Here is a list of welcoming churches where you might pick one and go be brave and confront your prejudices. The world is changing around you; most of us are learning that a homosexual orientation is a normal variation of human sexuality.
http://www.gaychurch.org/Find_a_Church/united_states/us_massachusetts.htm
[Reply]
I have NO ability to say the Bible affirms directly same sex marriage. It is IMPOSSIBLE for any Bible author to have understood same sex relationships as we do today. All we can do it apply principles and arcs towards justice, fairness and the value of relationship.
The Bible is not a treatise on human sexuality. We did not start understanding sexual orientation until the 1970′s, so it is ABSURD to think Paul commented on it, at all.
I would like for LGBT people to be able to commit in the confines of marriage but MAN has stopped that. I admire those that do in absence of the legal ability.
And you are right, it is not up to humans to condemn, so try and resist. Do give this video a watch, listen and consideration. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezQjNJUSraY&feature=share
[Reply]
When it comes to marriage, the bible clearly states in every scripture Regarding marriage beginning in Genesis when God saw that Adam was Lonely, he put him to sleep, and out of his own rib he created WOMAN for him and God wanted them to be fruitful and companions for the rest of their lives. Paul gives specific instructions how husbands (male) and wives(female) are to treat each other. Attraction to the same or opposite sex is lust. It should be contained until marriage because pre marital sex is sin. Please provide 1 scripture in the Bible that allows for homosexual marriage or companionship to be blessed be God or Jesus Christ while on earth? It is not up to Christians to condemn or act hateful as that too is sinful. But just as Jesus became angry at the merchants who were defiling His Fathers house and stood up for what is righteous in Gods Eyes, Christians will fight to preserve the sanctity of marriage just as Jesus did for his Father God.
[Reply]
Stuart Reply:
April 24th, 2013 at 3:49 pm
Monique, consider a few points here:
“When it comes to marriage, the bible clearly states…”
OK, since when is the Bible the principal authority on marriage? Recall, this is a secular society with careful Constitutional controls on the influence of religion.
- – - – - – - – -
“…when God saw that Adam was Lonely, he put him to sleep, and out of his own rib he created WOMAN for him and God wanted them to be fruitful and companions for the rest of their lives.”
Now recall that this was written in a time and place where life (human life, at least) was generally short and difficult. It was very important to be able to have children so as to maintain the population in such circumstances. So, various sexual behaviors that could not produce children (masturbation, onanism, homosex, etc.) was condemned in strong terms.
Well, times have changed. There is no longer such a pressing need for children, considering the current world population.
Also, consider that homosexuality is quite natural — it occurs in many other species as well. (Do you condemn it in other animals too? Why, or why not?) “Unusual” does not automatically mean “wrong”. Consider that, in the USA, it is unusual (well less than the majority) to have dark-brown skin and curly black hair. But you don’t say that THAT naturally-occurring situation is wrong, do you? Think about it.
- – - – - – - – -
“Paul gives specific instructions how husbands (male) and wives (female) are to treat each other.”
Paul also misogynistically instructs women to be silent and meek, obediently following men’s will. Do you, as a woman, think that that is how you and your sisters should act?
- – - – - – - – -
“[lust] should be contained until marriage because pre marital sex is sin.”
According to some holy books, or interpretations thereof. Not all. Which should be preeminent? (I know that you would say “the Bible”, but why? Support your position, in other words.)
- – - – - – - – -
“It is not up to Christians to condemn or act hateful as that too is sinful.”
But you are appearing to be condemnatory nonetheless. (“First remove the plank from your own eye….”)
- – - – - – - – -
“Christians will fight to preserve the sanctity of marriage just as Jesus did for his Father God.”
The sanctity of marriages such as Britney Spears’s first effort, maybe? (That one lasted all of 55 hours.)
Why are you opposed to two loving, consenting adults establishing a committed relationship and having that relationship treated fairly and equally (the way you would want YOUR relationships treated)? “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you….”
[Reply]
atill….i dont have to like gays, no matter how you spin it webjockey
[Reply]
Stuart Reply:
April 2nd, 2013 at 4:56 pm
No one says you *have* to like any particular group.
Decent society, however, says you have to be mature about tolerating difference. Those who are different from you are not “more” than you nor “less” than you — they’re just…different.
But so is someone with a different hair color, or eye color, or [gasp!] skin color, and you don’t say “I don’t have to like [blondes], [green-eyed people], [insert ethnicity here] people.”
(At least I presume that you don’t say such things.) So what’s up with you and other people’s sexuality?!
[Reply]
Don’t bother Stuart, Waranger/Phill is now going to spam.
[Reply]
The argument about gay rights is just another attack on the creation of god and his order of things. Simple as that. Being gay is a person choosing to live opposite from what god created them to be. Who would want to live as a pig when they’re obviously designed to live as a bird? Homosexuality is NOT a birth defect, fact is it’s a condition of 2 things. 1. the thought of being gay first (the bible “King James 1611″ says we “ALL” are controlled by THOUGHTS of good and evil). 2. Realize that in this world, there are spirits of good and evil. Now lets put it together to give you the answer for why we behave the way we do. Let’s breakdown the human body and name the makeup of the total human being. First the human body has to have the following in order to live. 1. flesh, 2. blood, 3. Able to breath in air and breath out air. 4. food STOP THERE! At this point, the human body doesn’t need anything else to live (vegetable state). Next in order for the human body to perform functions such as, walk, talk, run, jump to name a few, the human body will need a SOUL (which would come from god). The human soul consists of the mind, will and emotions Next, the human body will need a driver to operate these body functions and this is called a SPIRIT (which also came from god). Our natural spirit is unreliable, wandering in this or that direction, thirsting for some satisfaction that will last, but finding that “all is vanities”. So the direction and values of the soul are determined by the spirit within us which brings the question as to what spirit we as humans allow in us and we do have a choice as to what spirit we host inside of us will determind our behavior towards other. To sum it up, there are really evil spirits of every kind, including the popular homosexual spirit. A clean spirit from god will operate as god tells it to. God says homosexuality (gay and lesbian) is an abomination. We all know what the word ABOMINATION means right? Keep in mind an evil spirit cannot function without entering a fleshly living body specially a human one.
These are things straight people should tell gay people…the truth. The truth cannot be a lie and a lie cannot be the truth.
[Reply]
Kathy | Canyonwalker Reply:
March 28th, 2013 at 2:11 pm
Phill Comeaux–please do cite the verse in the Bible where this dreaded “popular homosexual spirit” might be listed or named. There are EIGhT forms of marriage ordained by God in the Bible, are the other seven okay? And finally, WHY to you even care what I say? You have decided that women leaders are evil and a sign that “satan has entered the church”. Start with the 51% of the population that you hold in distain. It does not matter WHAT I respond to you, I, being a woman, will be wrong anyway. No more posts from you will be allow. Your input is not constructive to a dialogue of reconciliation or understanding.
[Reply]
Stuart Reply:
March 28th, 2013 at 10:41 pm
This is wrong in SO many ways…I can give a point-by-point rebuttal/elucidation if anyone would like me to, but I fear that it would be as effective as trying to educate a brick wall.
(“My mind is made up; don’t confuse me with facts.”)
[Reply]
in response to various bits of Wendy’s missives…
“Oh dear, I’ve met people like you before who can’t analogize. Shall we make it more simple then?”
And I’ve met people like *you* who stoop to disingenuousness and condescension instead of rational argument. Do you, perhaps, need this point to be made more simple?
- – - – - – - – - – - – - -
“If gay marriage is okay – then so is adult consensual incest and adult consensual polygamy.”
This is an example of the logical fallacy of “Accident” (where “a generalization is applied when circumstances suggest that there should be an exception”). See this website for a very good treatment of many of the classic logical fallacies: http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/toc.htm
1) Incestuous relationships are frowned upon in most societies. Not because they are inherently “unnatural”, but because of genetic reasons that should be obvious. Biologists have observed that there is a strong preference for exogamy in various animal species, because diversity of genetic information has shown itself to be quite successful overall.
If not for the genetic risks, there would not need to be an instilled aversion to incestuous sex.
2) Adult consensual polygamy has been practiced in various times and places. Society did not descend into chaos because of it.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - -
“The line has to be drawn somewhere and that line is called “normal”.”
Ah, but “normal” is not an unalterable thing. To use a political analogy, it was once “normal” for American women to be forbidden to vote. This condition was eventually, and much too late, recognized as foolish and unacceptable; the 19th Amendment was the result. “Normal” got redefined to better reflect the complexities of modern social life.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - -
“Normal is what is needed to maintain society because without adherence to “normal” we get chaos.”
This is the fallacy of the Slippery Slope (“a series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn”).
- – - – - – - – - – - – - -
“I guess everything that happens on earth is “natural” because if it wasn’t “natural” then we wouldn’t be doing it and animals certainly wouldn’t be doing it….”
This much is true. A hydroelectric dam is just as natural as a beaver dam, because humans (and therefore their activities) are just as much a part of nature as are beavers (and their activities).
- – - – - – - – - – - – - -
“So raping must be “natural” as it occurs in ever[y] culture and yes, it even occurs among the animal kingdom….”
Unfortunately, it is indeed natural…but the crucial difference is that humans are able to realize that such behavior goes against the grain of a stable, peaceful society — as do various other crimes — and can take steps to curb it.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - -
“As long as it is consensual and natural – then [incest] must be “okay”.
Humans do find it okay, at least when manipulating animal and plant breeds. See above about possible different attitudes about it in humans, if genetic risk is avoided via contraception. (NOTE: by this I am not advocating the relaxation of the general human-incest taboo. I just want to broaden your thinking a bit.)
- – - – - – - – - – - – - -
“Every single time any of you call me, or people like me, who have an opinion that differs than yours – we are labeled hateful and stupid, etc…”
Not every single time, no. For instance, I’m not labeling you hateful, just intolerant. I’m not labeling you stupid — which means truly uneducable — because I believe that you can (as can most people) be educated. This is not a personal attack, of which you have accused some of us; it’s just an observation that your data set is incomplete, and that you have the power to expand it.
You could start by addressing certain conflicting statements you have made here, such as “I don’t hate gay people, I don’t fight gay people, I don’t make fun of gay people…” vs. “Your next argument stating that gay sex is not a perversion is also wrong.”
- – - – - – - – - – - – - -
“I also disagree with your statement that people cannot change their orientation. There are some people who cannot change their orientation and there are others who can.”
Then let those who can (and wish to), do so — but also let those who cannot, pursue their own natures with the consenting adults of their choice* — just as YOU feel you have a right, and societal approval, to do.
*incest possibly excluded
- – - – - – - – - – - – - -
“Marriage is a sacred (not in a religious sense) union between a man and woman – no matter how society defines marriage, the only true marriages are between men and women.”
Ah, but how many men, and how many women? Remember Jacob, for instance, with his wives Leah and Rachel? Are you willing to be a “co-wife” with some man and woman?
What about Islamic marriage, with its allowance of up to four wives per man?
What about the tradition-sanctioned practice of buying a bride (in exchange for money, livestock, etc.)? (Never mind, of course, that SHE might not want to participate in the arrangement.)
Why do you say that one-man-one-woman marriages are the only true kind? By whose criteria? (Support your claim, in other words.)
- – - – - – - – - – - – - -
“To me, being offensive means that you intentionally are trying to hurt someone’s feelings through aggression, insult, abuse, verbal attack and verbal assault. If I have the personal opinion that gay sex is unnatural – and I state that opinion – then I’m not being offensive to anyone.”
Perhaps not by intent — but remember the concept of “sins of omission” in contrast to “sins of commission”. You could easily give *unintended* offense by thoughtless action, even if you think that you are being accepting/tolerant/virtuous. Go get a (figurative) mirror and do some more self-examination.
[Reply]
Warangel Reply:
March 28th, 2013 at 1:37 pm
That was in the old testament. We live in the NEW TESTAMENT! One man, one woman equals one marriage in the eyes of god!
The word of god tells us to lean not unto OUR own UNDERSTANDING (of this world system of things) but god’s word. For god’s word is holy and just. God is NOT the AUTHOR OF CONFUSION.
[Reply]
Im Gay and a bishop Reply:
April 2nd, 2013 at 10:36 am
All forms of sexual action is incest my son. How do you expect the world to be what it is without adam and eves children populating our world. We are all gods children.
[Reply]
For the Christians keep saying,” I will pray for you”. Fine, so be it. But, if you pray for me, be prepared for me to pray for you, that your eyes and hearts and souls be open. You Christans think you have all the answers, and that your path is the only one that matters.Sigh, sad really. Do you not understand, that when Christ was at his last supper, and supper was ended, he (Jesus) took the cup, again he gave thanks, and said,”this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant, it will be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven.” Guess it means nothing. So, aside from some stories, what good is the old testament? Jesus’s law was to love thy brother, not spew hatred. And, Jesus himself never said anything that is recorded in the bible in regards to homosexuality. Now, if I understand correctly, all the others were “Prophets”, not the “Son of God”. In my mind, Jesus’s words are the only ones that matter. Oh, and since they were not written by the man himself, how can you say he truly said those things. And, how many of you can translate the original writings from Aramaic, Greek, or Latin? It has been over 2000 years since a lot of those stories were written. What, you don’t thing that stories were “Mistranslated”, or twisted to fit the moral ideology of the time. I know King James had some work done to rewrite the bible to fit his beliefs, therefore, was not an “original” author of the original stories. I don’t hate christians, in fact, many of my good friends are christian. I just do not care for the lifestyles the live! Maybe when the tides have changed, and the churches actually start accepting LGBT people, then, maybe will I come back to the church. Until then, I will gladly dance and sing, and worship whom I chose, for they have accepted me for who I am.
[Reply]
MY COMMENTS IN ()
I have to disagree with your opinions. And they are just that – opinions (just like mine are). Just because someone feels attracted to members of the same sex doesn’t mean they have to act upon it.
(Sexual orientation is a normal variation of human sexuality, just like heterosexuality)
Just like an adult who is attracted to animals or prepubescent children doesn’t have to act on it. This is what the gay “lifestyle” denotes – that someone is attracted to the same sex AND they are acting on that through sex and/or relationships. ( Lifestyle is a VERY badly used term — gay people haves LIVES not lifestyles) So, there is no variation in a heterosexual or homosexual “lifestyle” – either you are actively participating in it or you are not. Of course, this is not “reducing” your whole person to a “sex act” – it’s more of like stating that someone is either “male” or “female”. I am a female and that doesn’t “define” me, just like someone else can be participating in the “heterosexual lifestyle” and that doesn’t define them as a whole person either…but either the moniker applies or it doesn’t. As far as gay sex not being natural, the par
ts don’t fit… your argument against that also doesn’t appear to be valid. (Honey, the parts DO fit, read the post) Humans can have orgasms with animals, but that’s not natural. It is obvious from biology/procreation that men were naturally meant to have sex with women and that anything else would be unnatural even if they can have orgasms in other ways. Your next argument stating that gay sex is not a perversion is also wrong. You write that a perversion is something that is “unnatural or abnormal” – and you state in your first paragraph that homosexual sex “although it is not the norm, it is not abnormal”. Isn’t “not the norm” the very definition of “ABNORMAL”? ( No, not the norm means not the average on a bell curve.) I also disagree with your statement that people cannot change their orientation. There are some people who cannot change their orientation and there are others who can. Sexual orientation can be fluid among a lot of people depending on their personal circumstances. Science also validates this.(No, even Exodus, the number one “reparative therapy Christian org. in the world admits, after 35 years in the biz, 99.9% never change, Read the links.) As for marriage, the US doesn’t have a consensus
on whether gay marriage is a civil right yet.(58% approval of Same sex marriage as a civil right IS consensus and DOMA WILL be stricken) Personally, I believe that no matter what the government says and no matter what laws are passed, marriage can never truly exist for gays. (Marriage is a civil right in the US Constitution, Loving v VA and Zablocki v Redhail) Marriage is a sacred (not in a religious sense) union between a man and woman – no matter how society defines marriage, the only true marriages are between men and women. As far as the bible being against homosexuality – I don’t believe in the “bible”, it is a self-conflicting book that was written by man – and the bible’s words can be altered to fit one’s agenda. I don’t see any purpose in bringing the bible into the “mix” when it comes to accepting homosexuality on the terms you would like us to accept it in. I’ve known gay and transgendered people myself. And the ones I’ve known have been really nice and are normal everyday people living their normal everyday lives. I don’t respect them for their choices; but I do respect them as human beings. What I don’t have to agree with is the
ir choice to live a gay “lifestyle”. I don’t have to pretend that it’s “normal” to live a gay “lifestyle”. I don’t have to support same-sex marriage laws. I don’t have to believe that it’s “good” for society as a whole to support the gay lifestyle. I don’t have to believe it’s “good” for the family unit to support the gay lifestyle. I don’t hate gay people, I don’t fight gay people, I don’t make fun of gay people, I don’t encourage others to to alienate gay people…. I think your blog article is very biased and slanted and unrealistic ( I would assume that I have far greater wisdom and experience in this arena than do you, so it is pretty realistic, you might want to learn from my insights?) – especially since your arguments fall apart once they are analyzed (by you). I think your blog comes across as insulting and offensive to others who believe like me. I think you might want to reexamine the word “offensive”. To me, being offensive means that you intentionally are trying to hurt someone’s feelings through aggression, insult, abuse, verbal attack and verbal assault.(I am not intenting to OFFEND– just giving my insights which clearly you do not agree with and that is okay) If I have the personal opinion that gay sex is unnatural – and
I state that opinion – then I’m not being offensive to anyone. You may disagree with me, but that doesn’t mean I’m being offensive.(agreed and your lack of education on the issue is a deterrant to equal rights for other humans and THAT IS offensive.) Just because you disagree with someone’s opinion doesn’t make that other person “offensive”. That’s the problem with being politically correct – the definition of offensive has been obliterated by the PC movement.
(THANK YOU FOR THE EXCHANGE, I hope this satisfies you. I will not be answering any more of your posts. I guard my time carefully.)
[Reply]
I have to disagree with your opinions. And they are just that – opinions (just like mine are). Just because someone feels attracted to members of the same sex doesn’t mean they have to act upon it. Just like an adult who is attracted to animals or prepubescent children doesn’t have to act on it. This is what the gay “lifestyle” denotes – that someone is attracted to the same sex AND they are acting on that (through sex and/or relationships). So, there is no variation in a heterosexual or homosexual “lifestyle” – either you are actively participating in it or you are not. Of course, this is not “reducing” your whole person to a “sex act” – it’s more of like stating that someone is either “male” or “female”. I am a female and that doesn’t “define” me, just like someone else can be participating in the “heterosexual lifestyle” and that doesn’t define them as a whole person either…but either the moniker applies or it doesn’t. As far as gay sex not being natural, the parts don’t fit… your argument against that also doesn’t appear to be valid. Humans can have orgasms with animals, but that’s not natural. It is obvious from biology/procreation that men were naturally meant to have sex with women and that anything else would be unnatural (even if they can have orgasms in other ways). Your next argument stating that gay sex is not a perversion is also wrong. You write that a perversion is something that is “unnatural or abnormal” – and you state in your first paragraph that homosexual sex “although it is not the norm, it is not abnormal”. Isn’t “not the norm” the very definition of “ABNORMAL”? I also disagree with your statement that people cannot change their orientation. There are some people who cannot change their orientation and there are others who can. Sexual orientation can be fluid among a lot of people depending on their personal circumstances. Science also validates this. As for marriage, the US doesn’t have a consensus on whether gay marriage is a civil right yet. Personally, I believe that no matter what the government says and no matter what laws are passed, marriage can never truly exist for gays. Marriage is a sacred (not in a religious sense) union between a man and woman – no matter how society defines marriage, the only true marriages are between men and women. As far as the bible being against homosexuality – I don’t believe in the “bible”, it is a self-conflicting book that was written by man – and the bible’s words can be altered to fit one’s agenda. I don’t see any purpose in bringing the bible into the “mix” when it comes to accepting homosexuality on the terms you would like us to accept it in. I’ve known gay and transgendered people myself. And the ones I’ve known have been really nice and are normal everyday people living their normal everyday lives. I don’t respect them for their choices; but I do respect them as human beings. What I don’t have to agree with is their choice to live a gay “lifestyle”. I don’t have to pretend that it’s “normal” to live a gay “lifestyle”. I don’t have to support same-sex marriage laws. I don’t have to believe that it’s “good” for society as a whole to support the gay lifestyle. I don’t have to believe it’s “good” for the family unit to support the gay lifestyle. I don’t hate gay people, I don’t fight gay people, I don’t make fun of gay people, I don’t encourage others to to alienate gay people…. I think your blog article is very biased and slanted and unrealistic – especially since your arguments fall apart once they are analyzed. I think your blog comes across as insulting and offensive to others who believe like me. I think you might want to reexamine the word “offensive”. To me, being offensive means that you intentionally are trying to hurt someone’s feelings through aggression, insult, abuse, verbal attack and verbal assault. If I have the personal opinion that gay sex is unnatural – and I state that opinion – then I’m not being offensive to anyone. You may disagree with me, but that doesn’t mean I’m being offensive. Just because you disagree with someone’s opinion doesn’t make that other person “offensive”. That’s the problem with being politically correct – the definition of offensive has been obliterated by the PC movement.
[Reply]
KATHY BALDOCK Reply:
March 21st, 2013 at 11:54 am
“Wendy” I tried to email you back and your email is not a valid one. It concerns me when people do not use a true identity to communicate. I will not answer any more comments. Integrity is a currency in which I deal.
[Reply]
Darr Sandberg Reply:
March 21st, 2013 at 10:51 pm
Wendy
What an arrogant, vicious and depraved post.
“Just because someone feels attracted to members of the same sex doesn’t mean they have to act upon it. ”
And just because someone feels attracted to the opposite sex doesn’t mean they have to act upon it either. But the fact that people can survive without sex does not give you the right to malign and slander millions of people.
“. Just like an adult who is attracted to animals or prepubescent children doesn’t have to act on it. ”
Let’s start with some facts – most pedophiles and zoophiles self-identify as heterosexual, so your comparison of homosexuality to raping children and animals, works even more strongly against heterosexuals.
More importantly though, it proves to everyone one else that you have absolutely no moral foundation whatsoever.
See, pedophilia and bestiality are intrinsically acts of rape, and yet you compare consensual intimacy between two people of the same gender to rape. That shows all of us that you either do not understand consent, or worse, consider it irrelevant. And it shows that you do not understand the concept of harm.
What you have actually taught us here is that you, Wendy, cannot ever, ever, be trusted alone with any other living thing – for you cannot distinguish between rape and consent.
” This is what the gay “lifestyle” denotes”
No, it does not, but then, you’ve already proven yourself to be completely without moral compass, so of course, you lie.
“As far as gay sex not being natural, the parts don’t fit… ”
Again, you’ve already proven yourself to be a liar, and now you lie about something millions of people know from direct experience to be false. The parts fit, Wendy. Your lies do not change reality. Homosexuality occurs in nature, in thousands of species. It is natural. But the computer you used to slander us is not natural. Neither is written language.
“Humans can have orgasms with animals, but that’s not natural. ”
Are you posting from personal experience, or just demonstrating again your inability to recognize consent?
“There are some people who cannot change their orientation and there are others who can. ”
No, Wendy, there are no people who can change their sexual orientation. You are more than just confused, you are asserting lies about the lives of millions of people.
“Marriage is a sacred (not in a religious sense) union between a man and woman ”
Your sick fantasy betrays a completely irrational mindset. Sacred is a religious concept, to begin with. And frankly, since you do not understand consent and harm, and are vicious enough to equate the loving relationships of same-sex couples to raping animals and children – you clearly do not understand the concept of marriage or sacred either.
” To me, being offensive means that you intentionally are trying to hurt someone’s feelings through aggression, insult, abuse, verbal attack and verbal assault.”
And that is exactly what you have done here. Your post is vicious, depraved, and endangers the lives of millions of humans beings for the sole, sadistic purpose of exalting your evil ego at the expense of human beings.
[Reply]
Desponyd Reply:
March 22nd, 2013 at 1:31 pm
Darr Sandberg, you said all of what I found wrong with ‘wendy’ and then some. Such a person has no business, ever, expressing such inherently hateful views. Wendy, you are not a Christian. Jesus said, “Judge not, lest ye also be judged.” You have proven yourself far from his Grace with the slanderous opinions you expressed here.
[Reply]
Kathy | Canyonwalker Reply:
March 24th, 2013 at 5:24 pm
Wendy, I did inform me that you would be banned and you write with a different fake email from the same IP– honey, you are banned. I am not interested in sparring with you.
[Reply]
Why would God make you gay and hate you for it? Don’t we all agree on an all-loving, forgiving, merciful God? Isn’t God perfect? Since when did God make mistakes? God NEVER makes a mistake.
Besides, what makes you homophobes think that you know God’s plan for OUR lives? You don’t. You also cannot speak on God’s behalf, you simply do not have the authority. Besides, you should butt out of OUR lives and take care of yours, just like how we don’t try to control every aspect of YOUR lives. I will deal with myself and I don’t want your “help”.
[Reply]
This is an excellent summary. I’ve been looking for this kind of thinking! Very well done website. Far too often Christians appear as angels of death to homosexuals. As a straight Christian “coming out” as a full gay rights pacifist, I say it is time to change that image.
[Reply]
The articles’ report that the GLBT community is having a revival of sorts gives me hope. Of course the Holy Spirit can change lives in this community, and individuals can be saved and enjoy the new life that Jesus has to offer. That is separate from the question of whether the act of homosexual sex is a sin. The Bible is clear on this. However, it is also clear that God hates divorce, yet, many divorced people can be and are Christian. Jesus says having impure thoughts and lust is a sin. Something I am guilty of, yet still claim to be a Christian. We all sin. We seek forgiveness, we get up, we walk with God, we fall, we confess, we get up, etc. There is no requirement to be a heterosexual to receive the forgiveness and grace of God, through faith in Jesus Christ. I agree that you cannot change your orientation. You can control how you act on that orientation. Just because you are gay, doesn’t mean you HAVE to have gay sex. The same is true of heterosexuals. This is a thorny issue, especially now that it has taken on Civil Rights aspects. You may have a right to do something, but that doesn’t make it right. I think it would be great if churches stopped fixating on homosexuals in their diatribes and give them about as much attention as they give to the issue of divorce and remarriage.
[Reply]
Stuart Reply:
August 19th, 2012 at 1:01 pm
@Michael Faber
“…the question of whether the act of homosexual sex is a sin. The Bible is clear on this.”
—-It is clear, as I have said, that *certain kinds* of homosexual sex were declared sinful. Not all kinds; not even most kinds.
Also, so what if *your* holy book disapproves? There are other books, with other viewpoints — and NONE of them should be used as components of civil law!
“Just because you are gay, doesn’t mean you HAVE to have gay sex. The same is true of heterosexuals. … You may have a right to do something, but that doesn’t make it right.”
—-Translation: “I am one of those who finds the thought of gay sex icky, so I’ll be most comfortable if you eliminate that behavior and I don’t have to think about it. This is regardless of the fact that humans are very strongly sexual beings, so much so that to deny or repress our sexual nature is the true perversion.”
Now, speaking of rights: what other civil rights would you say that people have, but that it’s inherently still not right to exercise them? Can you defend such a notion (with logic, not simply with emotion)?
[Reply]
Kathy | Canyonwalker Reply:
August 19th, 2012 at 2:26 pm
I could only hope that I will one day see the kind of revival in the non-gay community. NO, I DO NOT believe being homosexual or having committed, monogamous, long term homosexual relationship is sin. The Bible is clear on this, to me. You are using your experience and relationships this far in life along with YOUR interpretation of a translation to arrive at YOUR conclusion. I have arrived elsewhere.
I wish churches would appropriately focus on this issue with serious scholarship and relationship and resolve the mess, which in them they will. And in the meantime, lives and families, more and more of them , will be destroyed.
I would challenge you to go visit my dear friends at Freedom in Christ Evangelical Church on Ellis and Franklin at 4:30 on Sundays. Lay your golden calf at the door and see what the Holy Spirit says to you. I would encourage you to dig a bit deeper and experience compassion as you enter relationship with your gay and transgender Christian brothers and sisters. You may be surprised as I was 7 years ago. Be brave and confront your own bias, you could actually be very wrong on this. The Bible is NOT clear.
[Reply]
@Colin Simpson: I do recommend that if you’re going to be patronizing about people’s approach to biblical scholarship and act as if your examination of the Bible is so much more detailed and knowledgeable (“When I hear people trying to debate and be scholarly, I think it’s nice and I like the effort”), you should at least make sure your writing is devoid of typos and grammatical errors. It kind of undermines your implied claims to superiority in the close reading of a text when you can’t even be bothered to make sure your own writing is carefully presented.
[Reply]
Re: the parts don’t fit. While it might seem to play into those who refuse to hear the truth, there is a way to see how well and beautifully the parts DO fit. Watch some gay porn. I know. Bad advice. But, 2 males REALLY fit well together!
[Reply]
I have read most of this article; enough to say ‘KUDOS’ to YOU Kathy. I am simply amazed @ your insight into this crucial part of our world’s population! I will direct others to this article.
To the Bible quoting Christians: I have just one question, it is a question I ask EVERY person, who insists on quoting Biblical rhetoric to me; most especially on this subject: do YOU LIVE the Bible, and God’s edicts, in your personal lives, DAILY? Think, before you answer this, because, you MUST take EVERYTHING into account!
Shopping on Sundays; lying; cheating; the wife being submissive to her husband; children being raised by the rod; reading your Bible, daily; treating your body as a temple; giving @ least 10%;
helping the less fortunate, with your money, deeds, etc; get it now? Because, you see, if YOU do NOT live exclusively by those rules, then, how can YOU spout out certain ones for the rest of us to live by? That’s NOT REALLY FAIR, is it? I am happily a heterosexual woman; but, I am a proud cousin to one of the sweetest, most loving and compassionate women, I have ever met; and an aunt to one very loving and caring young man; both of these are homosexuals. If I had to choose with whom to spend any time with, I would pick either of them, over some ‘mighty fine Christians’ that I have had the displeasure of sharing a pew with!
With much love and many blessings, to one and all here; and may you, that need it, be granted God’s wisdom & compassionate hearts!
[Reply]
One of the dumbest is “It was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve”. I used to laugh at its cleverness, but upon further reflection, maybe a Steve would not have fallen for the snake’s deception.
[Reply]
Kathy, I thank you from the bottom of my heart. This is a peace-giving truthful… well, ‘healing’ piece of work. I am one of your readers who is very grateful, and I admire your understanding and your giving of it.
Sincerely!
[Reply]
The only issue I have with this piece is the part about the APA, and understanding it requires some thought to the DSM and its role in psychiatry. The DSM is a billing tool. Psychiatrists use it to code their billing. Seriously. Practitioners were getting patients in the 50′s who were having some pretty serious issues with being gay, and they required, well, a therapist to talk to. There’s nothing inherently judgmental in that. The decision to include ‘gayness’ in the DSM was an avenue for psychiatrists to take these patients. It doesn’t have to be any more sinister than that.
[Reply]
May I suggest you continue reading Romans. Romans 2:1 “Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.”
Taking a look at the cultural and historical background the Bible was written in, one cannot justify condemnation of homosexuality et al.
[Reply]
Interesting essay. Humanistic, Christian only as it applies the name to it, but I have two theology degrees and to say the Bible does not condemn same-sex unions is sheer ignorance or willful blindness.
You wrote, “I know from experience that a verse battle DOES NOT WORK.” You’re right because if you know the cultural and historical background in which the Bible was written, you can’t justify your arguments.
What you need to say in order to retain any intellectual integrity is something along these lines:
“Yes, the Old and New Testaments condemn homosexual activity, but the Bible no longer carries any weight with me at all. I am reinventing my own type of Christianity, creating my own church with rules that make me comfortable, and I willingly accept the consequences.”
THAT I can respect even though I disagree with it.
Now admittedly at that point I would encourage you to join the Unitarian/Universalist Church because they already have said the same thing and there’s really no sense in reinventing the wheel.
Good luck with it all and remember that if someday you discover Romans 1:32 wasn’t written in a vacuum, take responsibility for your actions and comments.
[Reply]
“No matter what someone’s own interpretation of it is, it doesn’t take away from the fact that it was said to be shameful.”
Said by some, yes. Said by some others, no. “One Size Fits All” … doesn’t fit.
————-
“I believe God does have a plan for [infertile couples], but does NOT justify homosexuality because of one couple’s infertility.”
You weren’t being asked to justify homosexuality based on this, but you were being asked if “non-procreatability” were, by itself, a valid reason to condemn homosexuality. Do you think that it is? If so, please support your notion.
————-
“I saw the whole ‘lifestyle’ thing, but I ignored it.”
Ignoring a difficulty does not make it go away.
————-
“I do not think people are born homosexual.”
Then you haven’t talked, in depth, with homosexuals. They’ll tell you that they *discovered* their orientation; they didn’t *choose* it. (Besides, why would anyone choose a sexual mode, in an enduring way, that could get them ostracized, denigrated, outlawed, judged insane, beaten, tortured, or murdered?!)
————-
“Yes, training a child to not lie about stealing a gummy bear is different than homosexuality, but you understand the principle I’m trying to present.”
The principle you’re trying to present (IMHO) is one that you were taught, at a young and uncritical age, to believe: that homosexuality is icky. This principle was passed down by various others who thought it icky, and made sure that their followers and children thought so too. I was taught the same thing — but I got over it as I matured and developed my critical-thinking faculties. I learned, rather than just dogmatically clinging to someone else’s under-informed ideology.
Have you seen this statement by Galileo?
“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them.”
————-
“I also believe that God would not let the bible be written against his will, but with his grace. That’s part of my faith for me.”
God evidently let King James order the modification of bits and pieces of the Bible to suit himself. Many other editors and translators (such as Martin Luther, and others) have left their personal marks on the Bible too. Were all of these changes to the original sense of God’s Word done in accordance with God’s will and grace?
[Reply]
What if gay christians offered to send pastors to the gcn conference?
http://www.gaychristian.net/conference/
[Reply]
I knew my son was MAYBE gay early on in his life, so when he finally “came out” it made no difference to me. I love him as he is and proud he is not living a lie. Also, as you said he does not have a “gay lifestyle”. He and his partner enjoy their own activities that include most things I would do, and I am hetrosexual.
[Reply]
I was in a ten year on and off relationship with the father of my two beautiful kids. In those years when ever i went to pray I felt convicted of my sin, because living unmarried with a man you are not prepared to marry for whatever reason is a sin. I dont know how people can be Christians when they are not dying to themselves. If Christ has called you then he has called you away from yourself and away from the things that tempt you. We all have our weak spots. No one weak spot is greater than the other, we all have to deny ourselves things we desire. Its not easy. When I finaly over come one thorn God shows me another and he begins to deal with it, and he expects me to let him, not to explain my sin away and justify it. He cant work with that.
As a mother i have to give my kids rules and boundries. They not only need them they want them. God has done the same for us; certain things that are bad for us, whether we understand them or like them or not is irrelevant. (because my kids sure dont understand or like some of my rules) but they are there for our protection and safty.
The world has a belief that it is okay, even good, to do whatever feels good. Christians are not guided by that belief and if Christians are promoting it i am going to be bold enough to say they are following a different Jesus. We are to take the narrow road. I say this with love, I am still learning to deny myself certain things every day but i am not giving into them and I am not fighting them alone.
[Reply]
I stopped believing in God when I realized all the things I would have to give up to be accepted into “Heaven” after I died. Then, I realized that life is much more important than what happens after, to me, because I’m living it right now.
So, I gave up religion because I think it’s all make-believe and stupid. If it turns out I’m wrong, who cares? But don’t think you are superior – you believe in a man who lives on clouds who is able to have sex with his own mother in order to be born, then tell stories about himself, get killed by people who know he’s full of crap, only to come back as a Zombie and tell more stories. But don’t worry, you have millions and millions of other idiots who believe you.
Scientology makes more sense than Christianity, and it makes for a decent sci-fi movie.
[Reply]
I suspect the acronym DOMA doesn’t stand for ‘defense of marriage act’
It stands for, “DENIAL of marriage act.”
[Reply]
I will not deny that you have talent when writing, especially considering your obvious ability to sway readers in your direction of thinking. That being said, what you’re saying is simply not biblically based. I realize you used scripture… In a way. I find it funny that you have to acknowledge that you read scripture, because it certainly wasn’t integrated into your essay. And to the person that said “homosexuality” was a word invented in the 19th century”, so it’s condoned by the bible because scripture is somehow out-of-touch:
Romans 1:26-27: “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”
Notice that “homosexuality” is not used once, it’s about reading in context. It’s also not “grouping with other sins”. You ignored this, plain and simple.
Your mention of knowing many homosexuals is a gripping way of getting people to follow you. Sure, when you make it sound like gays and lesbians are simply looked on the wrong way when they are really beautiful people, you create a bandwagon for people to jump on where what we really start to ignore is the bible itself. It sure is harder to speak of the sinful nature of a homosexual person when looking straight into their eyes, but this is all about emotion, it should not decide your religion. And yes, they are great people, but Satan still has a purpose.
God said we had to go THROUGH the valley of death, not over it. Preaching to our friends and neighbors about issues that hit home is hard, but it’s the call we have. And no one said it would be easy.
As for the “Parts A and B” argument, I see where you come from. But at the end I see you desperately clinging to your own understanding, while never proving that it was right by the biblical standards.
Genesis 1:27-28 says “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
Yes, God made our bodies so that sex among homosexuals would “feel good”, but procreation, and maintaining man-and-woman relationships in his image are his call for us.
I understand that when we disagree with other’s views on this, it’s easy to say that we’re not interpreting issues or that we’re reading out of context or that such-and-such phrase wasn’t created until such-and-such a time that clearly was way AFTER the bible’s initial creation. I think you’ll find that if you read the scriptures for what they are instead of trying to read through the lines that you yourself provide, it gets clearer to see the vision God has called us to share.
Don’t take me to say that I’m condemning homosexuals, I am not. Many of my peers are gay and bisexual and I would say hello and be friendly to them just as I would to everyone else, but just because they are nice people I am not to pretend that they are living by the light of God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10: “Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” Still not using the word “homosexual”.
Your obvious denial of deliverance from the sin is based, again, on the fact that many have been unsuccessful with their plight with perversion and idolatry. It can not be ignored as you have ignored it, because the bible says in 1 Corinthians 6:11: “And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God”. God tells us there is deliverance, and I firmly believe this to be true, as it is clearly laid out in scripture.
To the person that wondered someone-like-me’s view on divorce and interracial marriage in the bible if I am such a “religious bigot” in this area, here it is.
Divorce: “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
The bible tells us that a marriage should be sacred. Not fleeting, not transient.
Even though this is not a topic addressed in the essay, it speaks to the arguments one may have when reading my response to it.
Interracial marriage: God did condemn marriages/covenants among the members of other nations who worshiped idols and supported unholy lifestyles. He knew that if his people were to intermingle, they would begin to do the same things. The bible often reminds us of the importance of marrying those who can keep us on the right track with God.
The world around us is diverse, and it’s ever-changing. It causes us to move forward into the less-than-biblical, yet highly-supported lifestyles of those around us. But let us not forget the call God gave us, which is laid out very simply for you in scripture. I fear people become to accepting, and forget that even great people deal with sin. I have heard many stories of the deliverance that can occur when we turn to God and lay our lives down for him, and many have been delivered from perversion. It’s also important to remember that the bible is not out of touch with today, God is all-knowing, fully aware that the world would be changing and evolving at a rapid pace, but certainly not always for the best. Put faith in God, not your own understanding. And remember, I’m teaching redemption, not condemnation.
[Reply]
Kathy | Canyonwalker Reply:
July 23rd, 2012 at 10:49 pm
I am not sure you REALLY read this or at least you went into this wanting NOT to understand. I specifically linked the VERSES I use and am not ignorant or them, at all. On the verses alone, I have written about 50K words. I know from experience that a verse battle DOES NOT WORK.
Phrases like “Your obvious denial of deliverance from the sin” intrigue me. What did I write that caused you to assume that? At the ROOT, I DO NOT believe sexual orientation, any, is sinful.
We do not agree, and that is very okay. I was not affirming AT ALL a decade ago either.
Thank you for reading and thank you for your comments.
[Reply]
Stuart Reply:
July 23rd, 2012 at 11:59 pm
(reply to Colin Simpson)
You said, when discussing interracial marriage, “He knew that if his people were to intermingle, they would begin to do the same things. The bible often reminds us of the importance of marrying those who can keep us on the right track with God.”
So, by this, you are saying that loving and marrying someone of the “wrong” color will put one off the “right track with God”? The mildest response I can put is: nonsense! Since when does one’s color affect one’s ability to have a proper relationship with God?
——————–
And:
“But let us not forget the call God gave us, which is laid out very simply for you in scripture.”
Unfortunately for your way of thinking, the way things are laid out in scripture is NOT the complete story; there were additional implications based in the culture of that ancient time and place.
What Biblical scholars wish more people knew about the Levitical prohibition of male-male sex (interesting that female-female sex was not addressed, no?) is: that the Jews were being admonished to not practice male-male sex … in the manner of male temple prostitutes belonging to rival tribes and religions! That more complete statement, with its (possibility of) conveying sufficient understanding, is what you were (apparently) unknowingly addressing when you wrote: “He knew that if his people were to intermingle, they would begin to do the same things.”
——————–
And:
“Yes, God made our bodies so that sex among homosexuals would “feel good”, but procreation, and maintaining man-and-woman relationships in his image are his call for us.”
So, heterosexual but infertile people should not conduct sexual relations, because they can’t procreate? That’s a logical (but not defensible) extension of your statement.
Further, regarding procreation–I recall a bumper sticker, written about 1 billion people ago: “Six billion ‘little miracles’ is ENOUGH!”
——————–
As a Christian friend has mentioned to me: when he was involved with his church leadership, and some policy dispute arose concerning their interactions with various people (non-white, non-heterosexual, non-whatever), he would remind them with a simple but profound question: “What is the *loving* thing to do?” He says that it helped a lot.
Do think about it, sir.
[Reply]
Colin Simpson Reply:
July 24th, 2012 at 12:38 pm
I did not mean God condemned marriage of different races. You left out the part about idol-worship, which was the key part of what I was trying to say. God shows the importance of having a covenant with someone of the same faith as you, so when he condemned marriage with other nations it was for that reason.
I understand that “homosexuality may mean something else entirely”. But the scripture laid out is absent of that word entirely. I won’t pretend to understand the temple prostitute argument that Christians are divided on agreeing with, but the simple fact stands that the key scriptures we use to determine about our opinions on such matters does not always contain this word. “Men committed shameful acts with other men”, now I don’t know about you, but that scripture doesn’t really leave me much room for imagination of what those two men could have been doing.
I know the argument about about infertile couples is popular, but I don’t see it any different as when someone important to you dies. It’s hard to imagine it being a part of the almighty God’s plan. Those are always instances that I refer to Jeremiah 29:11, because it reassures us that God DOES have a plan. Which I would also add to your “six million little miracles” statement, because we’ve all seen a catchy bumper sticker. But I wholeheartedly disagree with it.
Love the sinner, hate the sin. That’s my view on your last question. I don’t want to sound heartless and I know that’s how I’m being made out to be, but I don’t think that just because you are nice to a person you have to support their lifestyle. My answer is simple: I’m just as nice to a gay person as I am to anyone, because I’m not full of hatred towards them as it’s made out to sound, but consider their sexual orientation that which only comes from sin.
[Reply]
Stuart Reply:
July 25th, 2012 at 12:14 am
Colin Simpson:
“I did not mean God condemned marriage of different races. You left out the part about idol-worship, which was the key part of what I was trying to say.”
Sorry if I misinterpreted; what you wrote was not entirely clear about your feelings on interracial couples. Not associating with people from cultures of which one disapproves is understandable (though perhaps a bit too broad-brush an approach); not associating with people *just* because they wear a different color is not. (I do hope that you did not mean that the latter (racist) position was OK!)
————
“I understand that ‘homosexuality may mean something else entirely’. But the scripture laid out is absent of that word entirely.”
Scripture refers to that condition, and those acts, whose *modern* name is “homosexuality”. Don’t think that because the earlier English translations predated the existence of the word, that its *meaning* was not present, or not intended.
————
“I won’t pretend to understand the temple prostitute argument that Christians are divided on agreeing with”
Why won’t you even pretend to understand it? It’s not incomprehensible, just not well known.
————
“‘Men committed shameful acts with other men’, now I don’t know about you, but that scripture doesn’t really leave me much room for imagination of what those two men could have been doing.”
The meaning is easy to get, but keep in mind that the term “shameful acts” can cover a LOT of ground! Whether an act is shameful largely depends upon whom you ask.
(This reminds me of the joke: “Why don’t [members of uptight religious denominations] have sex standing up? —It might lead to dancing!”)
————
“I know the argument about about infertile couples is popular, but I don’t see it any different as when someone important to you dies. It’s hard to imagine it being a part of the almighty God’s plan.”
Do you truly mean to say that a reasonable interpretation of God’s plan is: that infertile couples should abstain from sexual relations, *just* because they can’t procreate?!
————
“I don’t think that just because you are nice to a person you have to support their lifestyle.”
As noted above: it’s not a lifestyle. Homosexuals cannot help what happened to them in the womb, when the usual “wiring plan” with respect to sexual orientation did not go as usual. It’s not fundamentally different from being born with genes for shortness, for musical aptitude, etc. (This means: homosexuality is, therefore, NOT A SIN — any more than is being born blind, or with a liking for broccoli, or….)
The ancient people of the Middle East (and elsewhere) had tough living conditions. The life expectancy, even in adulthood, was rather low compared to that of modern, developed nations; and childhood mortality was high. It was therefore important for people to bear largish numbers of children, in order that enough might survive to continue the local tribe. This importance led to the condemnation of sexual practices that could not result in offspring — remember the story of Onan? He wasn’t just disapproved of, for refusing a certain procreational attempt; God killed him!
Likewise, other sexual practices — such as male-male sex — that could not yield offspring were greatly disapproved of. Nowadays, when we have far too many people (in some parts of the world), the need for lots of offspring is not nearly so great. So the despisers of non-procreational sex need to give up such antiquated notions. MUCH more easily said than done, of course!
————
“My answer is simple: I’m just as nice to a gay person as I am to anyone, because I’m not full of hatred towards them as it’s made out to sound, but consider their sexual orientation that which only comes from sin.”
Your answer is not merely simple, it’s simplistic — and too much so. See above, about what sexual things “need” to be considered sinful. Also remember that the definition of sin varies with the god(s) involved. Just because a god has a large following, doesn’t mean that everyone must go along with her/his/its wishes.
Colin Simpson Reply:
July 25th, 2012 at 6:51 am
God condemned interracial marriages when the people worshiped other Gods because he didn’t want his people to do the same. My point in saying this was that God had no problem, as well as I, with interracial marriage outside of this. But some would like to say that I’m a hypocrite because God condemned all interracial marriage and so I don’t follow the bible or something.
I understand the concept, I just don’t agree. What about “Sodom”? It’s literally meaning is all sin revolving around sex, and it has gone without translation/change in meaning. “Temple prostitute”, as the word is said to mean, could be a valid argument. But the bible DOES talk about prostitution as a separate entity.
No matter what someone’s own interpretation of it is, it doesn’t take away from the fact that it was said to be shameful.
I absolutely do not mean that couples who are infertile should not have sex. God gave sex, I believe, to a man and a woman, to do however they want. It does not have to be only for procreation. I said that even if they can not procreate, I believe God does have a plan for them, but does NOT justify homosexuality because of one couple’s infertility.
I saw the whole “lifestyle” thing, but I ignored it. I’m aware it was there. I do not think people are born homosexual. And if they were… Some people are born with tendencies towards violence, does that make it okay for them to go out and murder someone? This is no different than a child who in their first couple years, disobeys their parents. They are not naturally gravitated towards being obedient, but are trained to over time. Yes, training a child to not lie about stealing a gummy bear is different than homosexuality, but you understand the principle I’m trying to present. I see a very unsound argument in saying that male-male sex etc. is okay now because we now have a big enough population. I understand your argument about why homosexuality was condemned because it needed to be used only for procreation, but I also believe that God would not let the bible be written against his will, but with his grace. That’s part of my faith for me. When I hear people trying to debate and be scholarly, I think it’s nice and I like the effort. However, when I see it I can not help but think of 1 Corinthians 3:19, and then James 3:15. I view it all as just trying to make the bible accommodate the your beliefs, instead of the other way around.
I understand that many people have different views than me on homosexuality, and especially so with the differing of or the absence of a religion. However, I am not going to read the scripture I believe to be written with God’s grace, and then turn around and condone homosexuality. That is simply not moral to me. I’m not going to go out and break up a gay couple or protest a wedding, but I thought it necessary to put my thoughts in on this essay.
Desponyd Reply:
March 22nd, 2013 at 5:18 pm
Colin Simpson, I find it cute that you insist that a book that, at it’s most recent, was penned two thousand years ago has anything whatsoever of relevancy to offer our culture. Sure, the ideals are nice, but the social mores offered therein are of no more relevance to our present culture than the gladitorial pits from the Roman empire would be. The poetry is beautiful, the message is beautiful, but the way that it is interpreted in today’s world begets hatred and grief. Jesus would be ashamed to call you His follower.
[Reply]
The Episcopal Church welcomes you.
[Reply]
I think there are a lot more things that people need to quit thinking, saying and believing about gay individuals. But this was a great article to read and I really appreciated how you have backed everything up with fact.
[Reply]
Wow, like everyone else said, this is really well-written. It’s definitely giving me a lot to think about.
[Reply]
I’m guessing that most of the time you hear things like that, they’re coming from men. It really seems to be a sort of unconscious way of saying that they’d really hate it if gay men treated them the same way as they treat women, in terms of unwanted advances and attention.
[Reply]
While I don’t support the LGBT “cure clinics” or programs in the least, I think it’s important to remember that sexuality is fluid. The Kinsey scale can be helpful, but where someone falls on the spectrum isn’t always set in stone. People discover new things about themselves all the time, and a change in preference can happen in many people’s lives more often than you might think.
That being said, I enjoyed reading the points you have made here. Very well thought out, and something that needs to be said!
[Reply]
Why look at something we can see or prove right now. Easiest thing is to look at what you CAN see–the lives of glbt Christians. Clearly God is putting His Spirit in them. If God has no issue with it–what would make it illegitimate? Medical associations have deemed homosexual as a normal variation. For me, the question is NOT the one you should be asking with the info we have right now.
[Reply]
A statement I hear all the time is, “I have no problem with someone being Gay, just as long as they don’t try to impose there Homosexuality on me.” There are several variations to this as well.
Do these folks actually think there are LGBT people out there on a covert mission to “score” with Heterosexuals? That’s just silly.
Also, with a red face and bowed head, I must admit that I, too, used your examples in the distant past. I have also been guilty of saying all Blacks have rhythm and all Jews are greedy. I am so very, VERY glad I grew up!!
Thanks for a good reminder and a “booster shot” of common sense!!
[Reply]
Thank you for your further insight/information on how the Bible verses regarding same sex activity are couched. It was always enough for me to just go to Jesus’ two commandments:
“Love the Lord Thy God… and love thy neighbor as thyself,” said in answer to an argument about whose rules to follow. That says to me that these two laws incorporate all that is important in previous and future lists of laws and standards of behavior. I knew that the Old Testament verses occurred along with such things as how to treat one’s slaves and such bizarre (to us) directions as not wearing together two different kinds of cloth (and stoning those who do). That pretty much discounts a literal application of part of those verses and not the rest. But it is very helpful to have the further analysis that ALL of these references mention the sexual behavior in the context of violent and abusive behavior. That identifies the WRONG in question as ABUSE AND VIOLATION, not loving and consentual human behavior.
[Reply]
One of your best essays ever Kathy!
[Reply]
I wonder, what if sexual orientation is not innate. Does that make homosexuality “illegitimate” in any way?
[Reply]
Great educational and informative in plain and simple real language that all should be able to comprehend. I have family and a couple of really close lifetime friends who are GLBT and I too have used the word gay when speaking in general terms not knowing. I don’t know that I would have much need to use it with or around them directly because we have been friends for over 25 yrs. So our conversation is naturally automatic. However, during my work as a manager etc. having to address certain policies during employment orientations or other situations in the work place, it has been mentioned and there is no one that has mentioned some of the things here. I am now able to incorporate the knowledge learned here into my professional and personal vocabulary as needed. I am glad I stumbled upon your blog, it would be so very wonderful if this is shared beyond all boarders so that smart and respectful terminology becomes common knowledge for all, how cool that would be. Thanks a million for sharing the knowledge.
[Reply]
One of the discussions I had in my first book was the difference between “life style” and “style of life”. We all have life styles. Makes no difference what “sociological marker” we place on them. What is in contrast to life style however is “style of life”. And as members of humankind, with all our bias and defense of our own selves, we feast on the contrasts of the “style of life”. “Well you are bad because you do this; you are good because you live this way and not that way”. Bottom line is to judge another is just not our job as humans or Christians. The “S” word is a factor in style of life, and therefore easy for us to “judge”. Be it our own insecurities about the word/act , or the mental pictures it conjures up, it is still the easiest of the style of life issues to address. And for little c christians it is just soooooo easy to grab good ole number 7 out of our bag of tricks and blast away at someone different than ourselves. I don’t see differences; I see uniqueness! My first exposure to same gender relationships came about in 1968, so I’ve been at this awhile. Just as I am drawn to members of the opposite gender, several folks with whom I went to school were drawn to members of the same gender. And we are still friends today!
Thanks Kathy for your article; one which I feel should be required reading by all.
[Reply]
Awesome resource! Wonderfully written. Thank you so much! Sharing with everyone!
[Reply]
Great essay. What you say is equally applicable to Jews and traditional Jewish myths, stereotypes and discrimination against LGBT people. Thank you.
[Reply]
Wow …. as an evangelical christian for almost 30 years who only came out as gay 8 years ago, I was blown away by your article. It was one of the best written articles on the subject I have read.
After all those years in church, prayer, counselling etc I could never change who I was. I ultimately came to the point where I saw taking my life as possibly the only escape. Thankfully that didn’t happen but it was at that point and by abandoning the church after 30 years and meeting others who could accept me for who I am, that I finally found the hope to live my life.
Thanks again, Patrick
[Reply]
Thanks so much for this article, Kathy. It was well worth the wait. I think that the overarching theme that I’ve noticed in talking to people who are not affirming of the LGBT community is the focus on sex, but also I sense a lot of fear that the minority (LGBT) is taking control of the majority (Evangelical Christianity). It’s difficult to explain to people that loving us LGBT people is not a competition over who has the “right” answers or who can shout the loudest, it’s about LOVING other people with unconditional agape love. I know that the biggest reason that many churches are unwilling to change is not because of theology, but because they are afraid that if they start becoming inclusive, they are going to start losing members. Two Sundays ago, the priest at the Episcopal Church I attend, said that maybe it was a good thing that TEC is losing members because they are standing up for what they know is the right thing to do–loving others as themselves. Isn’t that what we are supposed to be doing?
[Reply]
Use the argument–simple and confounding. I was thinking about it while hiking last week and it seemed so REASONABLE.
[Reply]
Having been “raised” in the faith in the Evangelical Church– I said and believed them all and interact with these comments weekly. These are STRONG beliefs. Sadly. And–GOOD FOR YOU—I should have met you a decade ago!
[Reply]
I am a progressive Christian, and I never said, or even thought ANY of these things. Christ’s actual values are not what is being touted as “Christian” these days
[Reply]
I’m an atheist. Organised religion is silly to me, but you have got the rest of your head screwed on pretty tight. Youve given me hope for Christians :3
Also great arguments against the bible verse quoters. I never know what to say to them.
[Reply]