The churches moving from mainstream Presbyterianism to anti-gay, hidebound fundamentalist Presbyterianism are on the wrong side of history and religion.
For the first time in history, the most religious country in the history of the world – the U.S. – now has a majority that supports gay marriage. Clearly, most people understand that there is no conflict between their religious faith and the full rights of gays and lesbians, or maybe they know that neither Jesus nor a Jewish prophet ever made a pronouncement about homosexuality (and it’s worth noting that it was common in Biblical times).
In reading the justifications for why some Presbyterian churches are abandoning the mainstream for a brand of Protestantism that is a witch’s brew of exclusion, politics, and Christian superiority, we are awestruck. Rev. Chris Scruggs, senior pastor at Advent Presbyterian Church in Cordova said: “We believe that joining the EPC will best allow Advent to conduct its mission to share God’s love with others as we have seen it in Jesus Christ and to reach out in ministry and mission without having to divert energy into denominational conflict.”
When we read these justifications, we wonder why the Presbyterian Church (USA) didn’t ask them to leave already. This kind of exclusionary Christian attitude runs so contrary to the words and deeds of Jesus Christ that it’s baffling. The homophobia at its core suggests that if Jesus were alive today and running around the countryside with 12 men, these same ministers would be way too suspicious of His “lifestyle” to welcome Him into their sanctuaries.
Spectator Sport
For most of us who have become spectators to these kinds of events and the regular pronouncements, we end up feeling like our faith is being highjacked. It’s past time to reclaim it. As a result of the anti-gay language spewed by some fundamentalist Christian leaders, there is a misperception by the news media that somehow these views represent Christianity and that these people represent it.
To us, the essence of Christianity calls on all of us to ensure that gay and lesbian partnerships have legitimate legal protection, regardless of our individual views on gay marriage. These are matters of fundamental civil rights, and it’s disturbing that those who have felt the sting of inequality are not now leaders for equal rights for every American.
As Sojourner magazine wrote, let’s not worry about taking a position on gay marriage right now, but commit ourselves to the civil dialogue between Christians who understand that their faith is anchored in justice and compassion. If the heads of our churches can’t lead that kind of discussion, we are indeed doomed.
As for us here, we continue to believe that the legalities of marriage should be separated from religion – as they once were. All couples should be free to receive civil union papers from the government. These would protect basic rights, such as inheritance, ownership of property and health insurance. It’s up to individual churches to conduct marriage ceremonies, and each of them can decide whom they are willing to marry. If a church believes that marriage is a sacrament between a man and a woman, it doesn’t have to marry same-sex couples – and it should not interfere with churches that offer blessings on same-sex couples.
Anti-Theological
There’s just something fundamentally strange about the Church taking a stand against people who want to make life-long commitments and people who feel called to the ministry. With the 50-50 chances of heterosexual marriages succeeding, certainly same-sex ceremonies can’t do much injury to the record of straight couples when it comes to protecting the sanctity of marriage.
Here’s the dirty little secret about gays and lesbians – the values they exhibit in their daily lives are no different than the rest of us. They are committed to their neighborhoods, they love their family, they follow the law, they volunteer to charities, they try to be good citizens, they want meaningful relationships and most remarkably of all, they are religious.
It’s almost too much for the mind to take in. Once, gays and lesbians were attacked as promiscuous and unable to form lasting relationships, and then they confused things by asking for the right to marry. It was bad enough when they were just asking for the right to serve in the military, but now they want on all of our battlegrounds.
Sometimes it seems that for so many people, there is no greater impulse than to appeal to the basest aspects of human nature – the urge to marginalize those who are different, to dehumanize other people’s basic humanity, to feel superior to someone and to use the Bible (or the one verse they obsess on) as a club to beat up other people.
Selective Service
In pleas for the sanctity of marriage, one leader said that marriage has been the fundamental building block of civilization for 2,000 years. (Apparently, they aren’t so sure about Jewish civilization before Christ.) Of course, it’s not worth mentioning that women and blacks were essentially chattel during most of those 20 centuries, but no matter, we’re supposed to be listening to the red meat rhetoric, not choking on the lapses in logic.
As we learned in the days of the civil rights movement, laws that refuse to allow men and women to connect fully with their own identities in the end only rob all of us, not just members of the minority. In fact, it is in how we treat the minorities among us that we most define who we are as Americans. It’s a test we’ve struggled with for centuries.
But here’s the thing: even if people oppose legal protection for gays on their interpretation of the Bible, they are still conveniently selective about which verses they choose to emphasize, because there’s no similar orthodoxy about verses dealing with usury, obligations to the poor, stoning disobedient children and no divorces. In addition, there are verses about when husbands can use prostitutes and verses against masturbation and coitus interruptus.
Golden Oldies
Here’s a few of our favorite verses that never get mentioned by people who argue that the Bible is inerrant and must be literally followed:
Deuteronomy 22:13-20: If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” then the girl’s father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate…If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death.
Leviticus warns heterosexuals that having sex during a woman’s period can lead to execution.
Another Deuteronomy favorite: If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.
Mark 12 talks about a widow having sex with each of her husband’s brothers in turn until she bears a son: Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. ″Teacher,” they said, “Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother.
It’s no wonder that it’s been said that even the devil can quote Scripture in support of his purposes. That’s the pitfall of fundamentalism. Even if you believe that the Bible is inerrant, that doesn’t mean that your interpretations are. In fact, the history of religion in Western civilization shows that interpretations change and doctrine shifts.
Basic Human Dignity
We are reminded about the characteristically wise comments by our rabbi, Micah Greenstein of Temple Israel, when City Council was considering an anti-discrimination ordinance. He said: “Contrary to what some preach, discussion about ending discrimination based on sexual orientation is not a gay issue any more than racism or anti-Semitism is a black or Jewish issue. Racism in the 60s wasn’t the fault of black America; it’s about what whites did to blacks in America. Similarly, anti-Semitism has nothing to do with Judaism; it’s about what others have done to Jews. My point? Gays should not be held accountable for the discrimination perpetrated against them – it’s the rest of us who aren’t gay who must stand up and speak out against bigotry…After all, isn’t this what the faith of Jesus and all good religions teach?
“Isn’t this the meaning of the prophet’s plea: “Have we not all one Father? Hath not one God created us? Why then do some deal treacherously every man against his brother?” Whether gay or straight, black or white, Jew or Gentile, all are children of God, created in the divine image. That is why I subscribe to Jesus the Jew’s central idea – not Jesus the Baptist – but Jesus the Jew’s central idea to love one another, especially those different than me.
“The shameful demonization of people who happen to be gay or lesbian underscores what must happen now. We must all take a stand for non-discrimination and basic human dignity in the public square or be labeled a pious fraud. People of all faiths need to be remember that we forfeit the right to worship God whenever we denigrate the image of God in other human beings.
“I pray that any person infuriated by, obsessed with, or tired of dealing with discrimination against gay people will turn to the Bible and follow the words of Psalm 118, which reads, ”I called out to God from my narrowness, and God answered me with a great expanse.”
I’m really unmoved about all this denomination-hopping. The world is moving forward, they’re stuck in the muck. Who cares.
Equating the stupid opposition of “inter-racial marriage” with the opposition of men ‘marrying’ men, or women ‘marrying’ women is offensive to most rational people.
“Using” race as a backdrop to legitimize any argument, pro or con, for homosexual conduct in pursuit of acquiring the “same status” as heterosexual “marriage” is quite foolish.
Marriage between one woman, and one man, whether one is black, the other white, or one is black and the other Asian for example speaks for itself…..that being each is the opposite GENDER.
“Marriage” between the same GENDERS is, by definition, not the same concept of purpose.
Marriage between opposite genders is primarily for proceation, and the futhering of the human RACE (not necessarily for ‘one race’). Heterosexuals engage in conduct that is intentionally designed biologically to create offspring. That seems simple enough to understand.
HOMOSEXUAL conduct has no such primary purpose, thus it’s not on equal footing at all, nor should it be ‘sold’ as if it were.
No matter how much homosexuals try to suggest that it is “equal”, frankly that’s rubbish.
Homosexuals can’t reproduce…solely between each other…..period. Therein lies the fundamental and huge physical, social, family difference. Again, that seems pretty easy to understand.
Homosexuals have the right to engage in any aberrant behavior they choose. The same freedom exists in the heterosexual community.
The community, nad church also have the right and in some cases the responsibilty to suggest norms of human values within the context of any religion.
Presenting homosexuals, and homosexual conduct in the identical light of heterosexual purpose defies biological reasoning. They will never be the “same”, and everyone in society knows that.
Practicing Homosexuals can associate with whom they wish, without encumbrance…..but many churches and relgions simply don’t endorse homosexual conduct as within the guidelines and edicts of their own understanding of, for example Christianity, and certainly Judaism, and certainly Islam. Frankly many many ancient world relgions reject any forced legitimacy of Homosexual conduct.
Homosexual conduct has certainly been shunned within many organized religions. There is nothing new about that it seems. There is also religious precedent for that whether you agree with it or not.
Some homosexuals have even suggested and claimed that Jesus was a homosexual. Imagine that. Lots of causes use lots of points of view in order to attempt to legtimize all kinds of behavior, and sexual conduct. SOme homosexual men believe it’s acceptable to engage in homosexual acts with young boys and become lovers of young boys.
Homosexual acts have no purpose of procreation…they are simply sex acts, and expressions of sexual desire and same gender attraction.
Same gender attraction is clearly not the “norm”. Same gender “couples” are outside what can be defined as an obvious natural order. Again, that seems fairly obvious given the fact that there are two opposite genders that were created for a useful purpose for humanity.
If Homosexual conduct ceased to exist tomorrow, human procreation, families, and society would not miss a beat, and would continue to exist now and in the future for the human race.
If heterosexual conduct ceased to exist tomorrow, the death of the human race would be inevitable.
Homosexual conduct is thus not vital for the futherance and existence of the human race as we know it.
So, which behavior is more important ? which conduct is more valuable, ergo “sacred” to human LIFE ?
Some of my practicing homosexuals have no license to be so self-absorbed in their heated pursuit for “endorsement”.
Sorry, I don’t have to endorse any aberrant conduct, or abnormal sex acts whether it emanates from HOMOSEXUALS or heterosexuals….and neither does, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, or any human-organized religion.
If you’re a rabbi, I’m the Easter Bunny.
Alleged rabbi:
Rarely have we read so much gobbleygook in one comment. Please give us a statement by any Jewish prophet that supports your opinion. Also, if homosexuality is so bad, why was it so widely accepted in ancient Biblical times.
Finally, here’s what a real rabbi and a man of God has to say:
ur rabbi, Micah Greenstein of Temple Israel, delivered this statement yesterday as one of the religious leaders speaking for the proposed anti-discrimination ordinance before Memphis City Council:
As a fomer President of the Memphis Ministers Association and twenty-year religious leader involved in the greater community, it’s become clear to me that whenever theology mixes with politics, both suffer.
Why do I say that? Because religious leaders and voices who never appear at city hall when the subject is education, welfare or the poor, suddenly show up to condone the firing of gay people and label their protection from indiscriminate firing as “special rights.”
Saving souls may be the business of ministers, but the oath taken by government officials is not to save souls. It is to protect rights; and not the rights of the majority but the rights of any minority who is the object of discrimination. Non-discrimination ordinances are not about special rights or a gay agenda. They are at the core of America’s agenda to protect anyone and everyone from blatant discrimination. This ordinance is fundamentally about one thing – the right to be free of publicly condoned bigotry in Memphis, including gay and lesbian citizens who earn their livings, pay their taxes, and give back to this community.
In the sixties, a reason given for why black families were denied use of bathrooms after driving five hours on the highway was that the white owner of the gas station, often with one bathroom, would say, “It violates my right to let a person of color use the bathroom or water fountain I own.” While I understand the opposition to gay marriage, it’s beyond me how anyone could speak against or vote against equal protection for all people and reframe it as special rights. Are gay people really a bigger threat to this city than bigotry masquerading as piety?
Contrary to what some preach, discussion about ending discrimination based on sexual orientation is not a gay issue any more than racism or anti-Semitism is a black or Jewish issue. Racism in the 60s wasn’t the fault of black America; it’s about what whites did to blacks in America. Similarly, anti-Semitism has nothing to do with Judaism; it’s about what others have done to Jews.
My point? Gays should not be held accountable for the discrimination perpetrated against them – it’s the rest of us who aren’t gay who must stand up and speak out against bigotry.
For those who want to get biblical, let’s discuss scriptural texts outside city hall in God’s original word – Hebrew. Let’s discuss the verses some select and the ones they ignore, like the selling of daughters into slavery (Ex 21:7), the owning of male and female slaves (Lev 25:44), and the bible’s command to kill any child who insults his parents. We’d all be dead.
I am not the only clergyman who has been called a gay lover and a negro-lover (with a different “n” word). And it’s true. I love people who are black and those who are brown and white and gay.
After all, isn’t this what the faith of Jesus and all good religions teach? Isn’t this the meaning of the prophet’s plea: “Have we not all one Father? Hath not one God created us? Why then do some deal treacherously every man against his brother?” Whether gay or straight, black or white, Jew or Gentile, all are children of God, created in the divine image. That is why I subscribe to Jesus the Jew’s central idea – not Jesus the Baptist – but Jesus the Jew’s central idea to love one another, especially those different than me.
The shameful demonization of people who happen to be gay or lesbian underscores what must happen now. We must all take a stand for non-discrimination and basic human dignity in the public square or be labeled a pious fraud. People of all faiths need to be remember that we forfeit the right to worship God whenever we denigrate the image of God in other human beings.
I pray that any person infuriated by, obsessed with, or tired of dealing with discrimination against gay people will turn to the Bible and follow the words of Psalm 118, which reads, ”I called out to God from my narrowness, and God answered me with a great expanse.”
Re: Memphis Rabbi’s comment that:
“Marriage between opposite genders is primarily for proceation, and the futhering of the human RACE”
Really???
If marriage is primarily for procreation, maybe that explains why we are at an all-time high for unmarried couples living together and seeing no need for marriage.
Then perhaps we should also ban marriage for any person unable to procreate.
SCM – Great post! Keep ’em coming.
And kudos to Micah Greenstein for his comprehension and well expressed take on this issue. It is refreshing to see a clergyman advocate for non-discrimination and civil rights for everyone, especially among the hordes of so many “people of faith” (e.g., Memphis “rabbi”) who use their draconian religious agendas to demonize minorities.
Thanks for this one. I think it was divinely inspired.
If “marriage between opposite genders is primarily for procreation, and the furthering of the human RACE” then why, in a world of over 6 billion people, would we still be concerned about “furthering the human RACE”?
Steve Montgomery, senior pastor at Idlewild Presbyterian Church, emailed this to his members this week:
Dear members of Idlewild,
As we approach the week that we call Holy, which begins with Jesus riding triumphantly into the city only to face the ultimate cost of faith and obedience to God, you might have noticed today’s Commercial Appeal article describing Advent Presbyterian Church’s decision to exercise their right to leave the PC(USA) to another reformed body, as stipulated in our constitution (G. 11.0103i). The headline read “Advent Bolts Presbyterian Flock.”
As I read that, I was still absorbing the inspiration many of us heard from Brooks Ramsey, at the dinner we had for Brooks and Rebecca last night, as he shared stories of his life of faith, how he was present as a minister and held to his convictions for what he believed were “right and faithful” choices in a difficult time—particularly when he unflinchingly remained obedient to the Gospel of love and justice during the Civil Rights Movement.
He quoted scripture, but also quoted one of the books that has been most influential to him, Stephen Gilligan’s The Courage to Love. The premise of Gilligan’s book is that the relationship to self is the first step in loving, which leads to living into relationships in a world where life is great, but sometimes the pain is almost unbearable. He describes that each individual has an indestructible “tender soft spot” that exists within their core.
These days in the PC(USA) are hard, and difficult places and decisions to leave the fold can expose pain, reveal abandonment, and provoke anger that ripples across and through loyal church people who confess Jesus as both Lord and Savior.
My prayer is that we begin all prayers with gratitude to God for leading us thus far, and for this particular body of Christ called Idlewild; for its steadfast mission to “pursue, personify, and practice as Presbyterians the good news of reconciliation and salvation in Christ through worship, education, fellowship, and outreach;” and that we choose love above all else. Perfect love, which is from God, casts out all fear. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. I pray with deep gratitude for our beloved denomination, which strives, albeit imperfectly, to be “reformed, and always reforming according to the will of God,” and for the generations who have served faithfully to get us to this point.
I pray that we, as a congregation, join in prayer for God’s people — those who stay in the fold of the PC(USA) and those who leave; those who feel abandoned, and those who feel disempowered; those who think they are right, and those who don’t know what to think — and that we continue to make this church a place where, as our vision statement summarizes, “all who enter find a home.”
Let me close with one of the most beautiful of all hymns in our hymnbook, “I Greet Thee, Who My Sure Redeemer Art” written by John Calvin, stanza 4:
Thou has the true and perfect gentleness,
No harshness hast Thou and no bitterness;
O grant to us the grace we find in Thee,
That we may dwell in perfect unity.
Blessings to you all, and thank you for your faithfulness.
Your pastor and friend,
Steve
Sex is for procreation.
Marriage is a societal construct, and has been used for various reasons through the centuries ranging from ownership and control of women to sharing health benefits and tax benefits.
We can (and do) propagate the human species without ever saying vows, signing a contract, getting a license, or some times even learning a surname.
I hate that we even have this discussion in 2011. Gay people are people. The key word being “people”.
“Gay people are people. The key word being ‘people'”.
…and let’s remember Soylent Green is made of people- of all sexual persuasions.
Homosexual conduct, and homosexual acts are indeed looked at by millions inside and outside of the church as a perversion.
Of course homosexuals are “people”… so are child molesters and rapists. Killers are people too, but it’s their conduct that a civil society judges.
If a homosexual male ‘falls in love’ with another man, and wishes to engage in anal sex, and other forms of sodomy, that’s his business in his private life, but the church and other private individuals or organizations certainly are not ‘required’ to ‘endorse’, or ‘bless’ his ‘relationship’ as “marriage” as defined by their own edicts, guidelines and societal morality. The homosexual of course should not automatically ‘expect’ that the church or others accept the idea and acts of sodomy for example in the same and exact context of heterosexual intercourse. Just because aberrant conduct (sexual and othrwise) has existed in societies for thousands of years is meaningless and certainly doesn’t legitimize it……so has war, evil, and other perversions.
However you regard it, homosexual conduct is certainly not “normal” by most societal metrics.
What’s next ? polygamy ? bestiality ? marrying your dog ?
Homosexuals can engage in any kind of
conduct they wish, and no body should seek to ‘rob them’ the opportunity to perform those acts in the privacy of their own surroundings, but no other person is “required” to agree, accept, or philosophically or religiously endorse those acts as normal in their own lives/communities.
And, society need not place a “stamp of approval” on it….or even tacitly approve of homosexual acts. certainly the law should not dictate it.
Sorry, shekel, you’re losing this war; society is moving toward more tolerance on this issue; within my lifetime we will see broad, although not complete, acceptance of same-sex marriage that will be reflected in the laws of this land.
Anonymous:
We certainly don’t think that you should be the arbiter of what is normal. And the national psychiatric association said before you were born that homosexuality is not abnormal.
And your phony proposition about polygamy (don’t you want TV), bestiality, etc., is a threadbare argument that fails the basic rules of logic (but that seems to be a consistent element of your comments) by ad hominem attacks when you don’t have the facts or the public opinion on your side.
And the idea of lumping gays with child molesters and rapists is simply stupid, another common element of your posts on this.
This is not about society putting a stamp of approval on it. If that were the case, women still would be property and black folks still couldn’t vote. But come to think of it, you’d probably like that.
Society is moving in the right direction on this, and with a majority of the public in favor of gay marriage, we assume that you’ll argue that society should dictate what’s accepted and what isn’t.
Just because ‘society’ appears to be moving in the so-called right direction, doesn’t make it correct or in agreement with religious principles stated clearly in many many religions.
The conflation of women’s rights, or blacks’ VOTING rights has nothing to do with religious edicts and principles of those religions….lol let’s not obfuscate the topic viz RELIGION …lol….and I’m certainly not talking about political rights.
Many religious people, Jews, Christians, and many Moslems do see it this way :
Homosexual(m) sexual conduct is/involves sodomy…FACT
Christianity, Judaism, and Islam describe, label and procllaim sodomy as an abomination…..FACT
Christianity, Judaism and Islam describe the act of sodomy as a sin before God……FACT
Those that engage in those homosexual acts of sodomy are thus sinning according to those religions (whether anyone agrees with that or not…their own holy scriptures are full of those farily exact proclamations specifically on this subject)
Thus, those individuals who engage in what is described as s ‘sinful act’, are sinners.
Sinners who engage in willful conduct of sodomy are knowlingly acting outside of those religious groups edicts.
If those sodomists aren’t Christian, Jewish, or Moslems, they are not subject to those specific religious eidcts and prinicples.
Believers of Christian, Jewish or Moslem prinicples fully understand that followers can not ‘cherry pick’ religious edicts and clcearly stated principles, and still call themselves ‘believers’ of their respective teachings about engaging in sodomy.
“Christian Sodomists”, “JEWISH sodomists”, or “Moslem sodomists” are conflicts in terms.
Non-believers of course can endorse sodomy or any other behavior they wish.
If a true believer within Christianity, Judaism or Islam endorses sodomy, or engages in sodomy, he is obviously violating his own religious principle, as stated so clearly and precisely.
Willful violation of holy scriptures, or sinning with intent is to be avoided in most religions…
Religious principles are seldom amended to provide cover for secular or popular or selfish causes.
Religious principles on this matter of sodomy seem very very clear, even to the most vocal homosexual among us.
You want to change stated religious principles and edicts about sodomy, then go try to do that…but being “revisionist” about clear and plainly articulated religious edicts about, and against sodomy (esp for Christiansy world) is baying at the moon, or disputing what many believe/consider to be the word of God.
If you choose that path, that’s your business indeed.
If you are a skeptic about the precision on the abominable acts of sodomy described in many religions, that’s your business too….but acts of sodomy are not a secular matter according to billions of religious groups….that’s part of the whole point.
Sodomists are not compatible with many organized religious principles….and that’s stated fairly clearly….and that should not be a revelation to any student of the story and history of Christianity.
So…..Homosexuals are sodomists, right ??
That seems clear as a bell in re organized Christian, Jewish and Islamic religions….and a ton of others.
Organized religion has every right ,ergo obligation to loudly set forth their rejection and condemnation of persons’ activity which they clearly proclaim fly in the face of their OWN religious edicts, requirements and principles.
You want to fight with God ? you go right ahead….because I’m a believer…I know better….but you can do anything you wish…..you can attempt to twist clear religious principles to suit whatever twisted crusade you champion…….but I, along with throngs of others may disagree with your spin.
Anon-
So in your opinion, would you suggest that religious beliefs of specific denominations and group should extend to actively barring these individuals from access to the same civil rights granted to those in the mainstream?
Let’s look at perhaps the highest profile aspect of this debate: “Gay Marriage”. It seems one thing for a church to prohibit anyone to be married within the confines of their facilities if they believe those individuals are living a life that is in opposition to what they hold as a fundamental belief. I believe those religious organizations have that right. It seems quite another to deny these same citizens the right to a civil union “marriage” ceremony which can be performed by many different public officials depending on local laws and ordinance. The act of civil union need not involve the church and in fact some marriages do not involve the church in any way. If marriage does not require the involvement of organized religion, then by what right can religious views dictate the where and when of such event?
Methinks that you protest too much, anonymous. It’s time to come out of the closet.
God’s on our side so there’s no reason to fight with him.
PS: Our religious denomination says that homosexuality is o.k., and our religious faith requires us to fight for gays, women, and anyone else whose warped vision of Christ is used to marginalize and demonize other people. Please don’t inflict your small idea of God on the rest of us.
For that matter, we’ve never thought it proper to attack gays since we don’t know if Christ or some disciples weren’t gay.
Shekel, et al, in certain passages the Bible condemns male homesexual acts, but is much, much less clear on lesbianism. Why is that? Also, is anal intercourse OK within the bounds of hetero marriage? I’m unclear on that too. And what about the shellfish thing? is that an abomination as well? And can I have sex with my wife when she is menstruating? Isn’t that an equal abomination before the Lord? What about the mixed fibers thing? So many questions I have….
It seems to me that the motto for churches is “do no harm.” Why would anyone want to belong to one that does the opposite?
Anonymous: We’ve decided that you can’t be serious and that you are just pulling our chain. We don’t think it’s possible for anybody to be as illogical and to be unable to follow a thread of reason. We’re through acting like your rants are worthy of serious conversation so we’re simply through with you. Thanks for visiting.
serious ? of course I am….or you would not delete my posts…..they irk you, and you resent them
Are you offended becuase you’re a sodomite in the first place ?? if so, just say so, then “we” all understand….I prefer clarity to agreement
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
If ever there was an indictment of religion, this guy is it – ignorant and emotional and insulting. More proof of the sorry state of conservative America and fundamentalist religions.
Anonymous: We’ve worked hard to keep this blog from being a printed version of talk radio, and we encourage you to call one of those stations.
As for your telling us what God says and thinks, enough said.
Why get visceral about my opinions ? can’t stomach referencing holy texts in re HOMOSEXUAL sodomy ?
strange
Forgot to add:
And this talk show mentality is why we’ve been deleting your latest posts. You just keep saying the same things over and over and with no contribution to sensible discussion of this question.
see ? you really don’t want divergent opinions at all, do you ? you want me to go on talk radio and leave you to your own sycophants, and dare not express a divergent thought…that’s bogus on it’s face to say you want a dialogue but when I express an opinion you don’t like, you just delete it….lol
sure bud, that’s plainly bogus, and you know it
are you a homosexual sodomite then ? let’s clear this up….I’m a heterosexual
btw if your denomination of a church is teaching that “homosexuality is okay”, your Christian church is violating its own christian principles…..not according to me, but according to their own religion doctrine.
Homosexual sodomy is never “okay”, as proclaimed by Christian scripture…..really.
Your denomination is confused, or deliberately twisting its own teachings for unknown reasons.
Divergent opinion? More like deranged opinion. Come out of the closet, Shekel. You still didn’t answer my questions about why homosexuality is Biblically condemned and we should take that seriously yet we’re supposed to overlook all the other biblical proscriptions.
Anonymous: I’ll be glad to let my Protestant denomination know that God has spoken to you and that we are wrong, not you.
You sure seem to be fixated on anal sex. Sorry it didn’t work out better for you.
We don’t want sycophants. We only want intelligent conversation and sadly you miss that standard by several miles.
May the Lord bless you and keep you and make his face to shine up on you and give you peace.
We strongly recommend talk radio. Rants are more the norm there.
fixed on ‘anal sex’ ??? no, but that’s what homosexual sodomites do isn’t it ??
perhaps you don’t like to be reminded what exactly the homosexuals perform ??
no fixation here, just CLARITY of the acts themselves, pal
so are you a sodomist ?? lol…say so pal
oh yeah…keep believing that twisted notion of Christianity….fine with me…but again don’t piss on my shoes and tell me it’s raining….lots of people out here in society aren’t buying it.
Right is never wrong.
I hate to break it on you, but I don’t care what two consenting adults do or what orifices they explore, including anal sex between heterosexuals. You seem to be fixated on it though, so maybe you need to do something to get it out of your system.
That said, we’ve moved on. Come back when you grow up.
PS: You proved the point of our whole post: the anti-intellectual bent of people who mix their politics and religions to become judgmental, self-righteous, condemning. Are those the lessons you learned from reading about Christ.
Right is right for each person to decide for themselves. We don’t need you playing God to tell us. But if you need the mental crutch to keep from considering the subtleties of our world, we’re all for you using them. They’ve been used before to justify people that their hatred for black people, for Jews, and now for gays is o.k. The Church has a lot of blood on its hands, and you so eloquently point out how that happens.
Say that again and louder. A certain kind of bigoted preachers are at the front of so much persecution and hatred. That’s why we need to speak out.
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
They criticize people for picking and choosing with the Bible but they themselves pick and choose which parts of the Bible to follow based on their own existing prejudices and hatreds. Shekel, you going to answer my questions or dodge like the coward you are?