Anti-gay churches lack Christian compassion
I find myself being astonished at Christian churches taking an anti-gay stance (News & Record, Nov. 15). Do they actually know any gay people? Do they really think gays choose to be so? If so, who would choose to be so discriminated against, even hated? Ask Ted Haggard. The church leaders should ask themselves when they "chose" to be heterosexual, to understand the absurdity of their stance.
Studies and anecdotal evidence (ask a gay person) suggest that these people were born that way, just as others are born with traits they did not choose, like skin color. This is discrimination, pure and simple, something we as a culture can grow beyond.
Where is the compassion that is fundamental to Christian teaching being demonstrated by these churches? What are they afraid of? Gay contagion?
And if there is anything like a "gay gene," the means to its removal is to accept homosexuality as a variation, even a mutation, beyond the control of the individual. They need compassion and acceptance, just like the rest of us, if not more, because of such ignorance and prejudice.
These churches have larger and more serious issues to see to rather than to ostracize "the least of these."
James R. Jackson
Reidsville
Comments (16)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
The last sentence of this LTE says it all! What a great synopsis. Succinct. Good work.
Posted on December 6, 2006 9:02 AM
Wonder what those homophobic Baptists think about this latest story:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16070170/
They have gone on record saying gay and lesbians shouldn't be allowed to adopt and rear children, so how do they feel about the above story???
Where is Pastor Ted Haggard when they really need him!!! ;)
Posted on December 6, 2006 9:12 AM
Fine, whatever, so the homosexual was born that way. It wasn't his/her choice...but do you agree that satan is loose in the world and the world is his? Well I do, so go ahead and don't accept or show any tolerance to my fundamental belief that there is absolute truth in this world, which was the bottom line attraction of my 'conversion' from a secular/liberal/humanist relativist/intellectual idolater, much like those who frequent these blogs and despise my new 'biblical fundamentalism' as I despise in turn their ever growing numbers of 'secular fundamentalism'...
Satan is responsible for this 'torn ripped apart world' that most of you believe you were called 'to mend' somehow (like NGFM with pacifism as the answer to heal the world)....if G-d wants to mend the world He does not need you to accomplish that task and that is not yours or anyone's 'calling'; the world is satan's and will always be torn, and satan will see to it and work very hard to see to it that there will always be issues spawning from weak-willed families who have no foundation which will then in turn keep us all in bondage and away from truth for our few years here on earth... that is what satan does best, his job, and he enjoys his job because we make it so easy for him....if you are a believer, you are called to witness the truth of Jesus Christ to the ends of the earth....if you want to use your skills and passions and trades and expertise along with that witness of the truth of Christ as a way to HELP mend the world (i.e., you're a doctor and you build hospitals in Africa)then you are to be admired at the least for going the way extra mile in your witness.
If you believe that your witness of Jesus Christ is to be compassionate and tolerant and understanding to the homosexual so that your witness is such that Lord Jesus Christ is accepting of the homosexual and his need to lie with another man then by all means go and witness that. One day you will know if you were correct or not just as I will witnessing the opposite. I, and just for the heck of it, go ahead and agree that you were born that way, cause I don't know and no one knows if it is so, but I do believe satan had a say on heterosexuality and homosexuality paths...heterosexuality has certainly ruined lives as much or more so as homosexuality and satan is pleased with either 'choice' - he can bring you down either way. If you are seeking truth, and you are homosexual (take darryl for example who was a pastor and in a conversation with G-d was 'set free' to pursue unfettered homosexuality while also retaining his identity in Christ) then you are also capable of knowing G-d's Will for your life...however, do we know if it was G-d he spoke to, or isnt it even remotely possible it was the deceiving voice of satan?....it is satan's world and he rules here on earth- he can 'play G-d' very well if he wants to and if it serves his purpose of destroying lives...he can deceive even pastors, as we well know from recent news..
also to Prag who replied (sarcastically) last week to a post of mine that it is better to have sex where piss comes from than where dookie comes from....there are 'truths' about piss and dookie....human excrement has no further value, not even as fertilizer like animal excrement, we flush it as final dead waste and it is gone because it cannot serve any other purpose. Urine on the other hand has some values that I have read about-it can help to prolong your life if you are without water and waiting to be rescued (you cant eat dookie to save yourself) and it can act medicinally for example with man of war bites to heal the wound quickly (you cant rub dookie on you as a healing agent)...I'm sure y'all can come up with a list pros and cons on pee and poop so i'll leave it there...Shalom
Posted on December 6, 2006 9:36 AM
jews4jesus,
I respect your right to believe as you do but your mean-spiritness and insults drown out any 'good news' message you might have. Your letters ooze anger and malice towards nonbelievers. Jesus didn't send you to do that. Satan, is more likely using you to turn people away from Christ.
As far as the letter, I thought it was pretty negative and insulting with plenty of strawman arguments as well. I'll only address one of the many: I think it is entirely possible that gay people both were not born that way and did not choose to be gay.
Posted on December 6, 2006 2:54 PM
"Studies and anecdotal evidence (ask a gay person) suggest that these people were born that way, just as others are born with traits they did not choose"
There is absolutely no significant evidence in behavioral genetics that prove that people are 'born' gay. Just goes to show that if people repeat something enough times, sooner or later others will consider it fact. Scientist can actually pinpoint what genes determine skin color. There is virtually no comparison between the two in terms of gene study.
Personally, I have a bad temper and I've always tended to get along with people with brown eyes. If you ask me, I could say I was born that way but I wouldn't really know. I could state that I had felt that way as long as I can remember and that would be true.
Posted on December 6, 2006 4:02 PM
jew4jesus, if you are obeying Jesus' command to love the Lord your God with all your heart and to love your neighbor as yourself, you have seriously low self-esteem. I feel sorry for you if you feel that you must sneer at other people to feel good about yourself.
nitpicker, there have been animal studies where researcher have caused alternative sexual behavior in animals. High levels of testosterone in a female animal in utero cause the animal to exhibit mounting and urinating behaviors like the male. Low levels of testosterone in a male in utero cause the animal to behave as a female. It's a congenital condition, but not genetic. I think the same probably happens in humans.
Posted on December 6, 2006 4:26 PM
beadbaby,
I won't argue research regarding testosterone but I haven't seen anybody claiming that gay men have less tesosterone than straight men.
Posted on December 6, 2006 5:03 PM
Nit,
I hope you continue to face your struggle with gay people in a positive way. Like I've said before, "who would choose to be gay"?
Posted on December 6, 2006 7:34 PM
James-
I could not disagree more with your letter. The question of sexuality DOES belong in the church. I think any church should follow what it believes. It doesn't matter whether or not as a society we agree. For me, I will not join a baptist church. But that's OK. Methodist and UCC offer me welcomeness. It took me a long time to realize this absolute.
I will continue to fight for gay rights in the legal spectrum. You cannot deny equal rights to anyone and call your self civilized. But I will continue to respect (but disagree) with people who use faith as an arguement to equal rights! I won't debate them faithfully, only legally.
We cannot expect people to accept that which they believe to be an abomination. But we can force them to legally recognize us. I won't debate anyone faithfully. But I challenge anyone of faith who believes homosexuality is not protected by equal rights to debate me legally!
Let the Baptists be baptists. Let su be who we are. There is space on this (growingly small) vast planet for all of us to live in harmony.
Darryl always ends his comments with "shalom". I don't know what shalom means, so I will end with...
con amor por todos--
(with love for all)
Gaytony
Posted on December 6, 2006 8:34 PM
sorry no apologies...i take the war against secular fundamentalism zealously just as they take their war with biblical fundamentalism zealously.... its not towards nonbelievers pitlicker, although yes, obviously all secular fundamentalists are nonbelievers...i take the war against secular fundamentalism as a righteous cause most worthy of righteous anger...the war is against the demon who is loose to wreak havoc in this world, and that enemy satan is on the side of secular fundamentalism, which will destroy lives as it continues to try to keep those millions of shallow souls who are earnestly seeking from knowing the truth of Jesus Christ ...
i am no diplomat, you go ahead and do that job pitlicker...i am a soldier at the front...shalom
Posted on December 6, 2006 8:41 PM
nit-
You may find this humouous---I know I did. I was recently diagnosed as testosterone deficient, as was one of my gay friends. Hmmmmmmm....do we have an explanation???
Posted on December 6, 2006 8:59 PM
sorry---the word was supposed to be "humorous".
Posted on December 6, 2006 9:00 PM
jew4jesus, I have a couple of questions for you. To what denomination do you belong? And exactly what is the philosophy you call "secular fundamentalism"? I am not trying to rile you; I genuinely want to understand.
It's also my personal opinion that we don't need to blame Satan for the evil in the world. That's a kind of scapegoating, saying, "The Devil made me do it." We human beings do a good job of committing atrocities without that excuse.
Posted on December 6, 2006 9:02 PM
gaytony, I think the study addressed prenatal testosterone levels, but adult levels may contribute. I really don't know. My point was that homosexuality is a biological, not merely psychological, phenomenon. Anecdotally, my husband's best friend is taking testosterone, and he's as straight as an arrow.
Posted on December 6, 2006 10:29 PM
Wonderful post, gaytony. I agree completely.
We can regulate behavior but not belief. Until we form the thought-police, that is.
Many people, however, feel so self-assured, enlightened and superior as to dictate to others what their beliefs should be.
Posted on December 6, 2006 11:26 PM
Interesting coincidence, tony.
beadbaby, I think the study is just that, a study. There hasn't been any definitive study that has proven that homosexuality is caused by genetics or testosterone level. There may be a time one day when there is, but even many scientists see that as a long shot. The nature of behavioral genetics just doesn't lend itself well to absolutes. You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Many folks believe that homosexuality is biological or physiological. Many believe it is more from societal influences or psychological. Some believe in both.
I can say without a doubt that I do not know. It's only when folks claim to know one way or the other as fact that I ask them to put up the proof. As of right now, there is no such proof.
Posted on December 7, 2006 9:21 AM