Homosexuality, Regret & Genuine Dialogue
It has been just over two months since I stepped out and shared my personal experience with homosexual orientation (see my post “Homosexuality: A Personal Reflection”). As you might imagine, it was nearly a year of processing and wrestling over this decision before taking the step. You might be surprised, however, on the main cause of my hesitation.
One of my central concerns in sharing my personal experience and position on the issue of homosexuality and Christianity was how it would be perceived by those in the GLBT community. Further, I was concerned it might be used as ammunition by Christians who treat this issue with a violent and often casual bigotry. For the most part, I have been pleasantly surprised at the positive response, even helping several people find the confidence to come to terms with their sexual orientation rather than hide or ignore it.
However, last Thursday a new blog was launched called “Bad Fruit/ Bad Trees: Admonishing Those Who Preach Homophobia”. The site describes itself as follows:
“Conservative Christians go on and on and on about the alleged sinfullness of homosexuality, or homosexual lovemaking. But while same-sex coupling does not destroy lives or faith, the bias against homosexuality spawns hate crimes, discrimination, abuse, lies, and division and discord. It is long past time to call those who malign and revile homosexuals to repent of their sins against real human beings. That is what this space is about.”
In its inaugural post, “Sin of Arrogance”, a previous post of mine, “Homosexuality & the Church – Part 1″, was mentioned. It was cited in respect to the trend within Conservative Christianity to dismiss any other perspective but their own. It says:
“When challenged by evidence from the lives of GLBTQ people, or by challenges to the theology behind the condemnation, these authors consistently responded within the premise that their belief (homosexuality is condemned in the Bible) is unquestionably correct. These authors practice for themselves an intrinsic superiority – what they believe is automatically correct, they cannot be wrong, anyone who disagrees with them cannot be correct. The effort to even consider that their interpretation could be in error is simply not made.”
While it suggests that my post poses genuine challenges to these assumptions, he goes on to say that my subsequent posts dehumanize the GLBT community. My heart was crushed by this statement. Obviously, the author and I do not see eye to eye on this issue, but I am not sure the assessment is fair. I want to try and respond as best I can. However, I must first make a few things clear.
By and large, I believe the author is quite accurate it their portrayal of a large portion of the Conservative/Evangelical Christian community in its treatment of this issue and those people involved. For centuries homosexuals have suffered devastating and inhumane treatment- tortured, murdered, mocked, denied rights, etc., often at the hands of and/or with the blessing of the Christian establishment. While much has improved, too many Christians still arrogantly boast of their own moral superiority by using this issue, framed in the shallow simplicity of “black and white” language, as a way of proving their “righteousness” (and thus avoiding the deeper, far more pervasive culpability in other failings).
Further, talk about the so called “Homosexual Agenda” must stop. Portraying the work of the GLBT community to secure basic human rights and freedoms as a dark and secretive conspiracy aiming to undermine society is alarmist and offensive. Even if you do not agree with their purposes, to frame their efforts in such terms is propoganda that is patently false, manipulating people to believing dangerous untruths about the homosexual community to gain greater support for their efforts to stop this “agenda”. This technique has been used in the past (and sadly, still is in places) to perpetuate the evil system of racial segregation. As Christians we can have nothing to do with this kind of thing.
That being said, I struggled reading the post in question. While I agree with much of their critique of the typical Conservative Christian response to homosexuality, it does not allow any room for genuine dialogue. It argues that Conservatives are not willing to even consider that their position might be wrong, but I see no such willingness from the author of this post to do the same. The article uses words like “proof” and “evidence” that give more definitive authority to ideas and circumstances that are not so clear cut.
Given the history of Christian failure in our treatment of homosexuals and the current caustic atmosphere surrounding these issues, genuine and humble dialogue is desperately needed. While I convinced that, on both the merits of what our beliefs require of us and on our failings on this issue, Christians must take the lions share of responsibility in this process, it has to be a mutual commitment. For many of the Christians who believe that homosexuality is inconsistant with Christianity, it is not rooted in bigotry, fear or arrogance. Many struggle holding this belief, but in the context of their presuppositions about faith and truth cannot simply dismiss it. If this is not acknowledged by people, such as the other of the post in question, any chance for restoration or change is deadlocked.
As the blog does not provide contact information and because it is closed to outside comments, I have not been able to discuss this with the author. My hope is that they will see this post and be willing to engage in conversation. This what we all need to attempt to do. It will be risky, with both sides being very cautious, mistrusting and sensitive. However, it only in the journey through the Cross that Resurrection is possible.
So where do we start? How do bridge this very difficult gap?
DAWN,
I think that might help in some respect, but having read in detail all posts concerned, it has not seemed to help in respect to avoiding the nature of the conversation. Perhaps this forum is ill-equipped for such a topic. Thanks for your grace!
Peace,
Jamie
Hi Jamie,
I wasn’t offended/hurt at all by your comment on my analogy. I was serious when I said thank you for telling me otherwise… One thing that is very important to me is to try (to the best of my ability) to understand where another person is coming from or how they might take what I say. I won’t necessarily change my opinion, or comprimise on something I believe in, but I do think it’s important to understand and consider how another might take something like the analogy I used. So, I really am thankful that you told me.
I think there is a difference between respecting and loving someone and agreeing with what they do…but I think that it is a mutual effort. I don’t agree with christians pursuing homosexual relationships in the same way that I don’t agree with the sin in my own life (and I don’t see hetero/homosexual desires as being very different from each other).
As a Christian, who holds the belief that I have, will I forever be viewed as unloving because of my stance? Is it possible to “agree to disagree” and love (coming from both sides) despite…or is that just something that I cling to because of my own conflict-avoidance tendancies?
Amy,
Thanks for your open heart and mind. Sadly, we will always be seen as unloving by some when we stand by some of our conviction. It is this that inspires me to reflect and articulate my faith in action more than in words. As my friend, Brother Maynard, frequently says:
“The best theology is in boots, not books”
Peace,
Jamie
Jamie – yes, that was exactly my feeling on the matter. Now, having said that, I know many GLBT people who do not have such a visceral reaction to conservative Christians regarding their beliefs – - some people are made to be bridge builders but not all…and that’s ok. I’m not a bridge builder between pomo and modern christianity and I realize that. and it’s ok. so too in this arena, not all straight people and not all GLBT people are bridge builders.
Mak,
I agree. In fact, I have friends in the GLBT community who are very patient and gracious with me and other Christians who are wrestling with this issue. For myself, I believe that bridge building is something I am called to. In fact, that very term has been defining for me in my missional vocation for years. Thanks for making this important distinction.
Peace,
Jamie
“the best theology is founds in boots not in books” – I like that… a lot!
I agree with what was also said about bridge builders.
Amy
You wrote:
“As a Christian, who holds the belief that I have, will I forever be viewed as unloving because of my stance?”
Given what it genuinely means to condemn same-sex love and intimacy – that it says we deserve eternal torment -
if that is what you believe – yes, that is unloving. Sorry.
Keep in mind, one of the verses that people insist is about homosexuals demands that we be executed. If you believe it, you are suppposed to murder me.
Where is the love that?
“I think there is a difference between respecting and loving someone and agreeing with what they do…”
Here again that problem – my relationship doesn’t impact you. What business is it of anyone else’s to agree. Do I have the right to disagree with what you do? What if I don’t like the way you raise your kids, or what you eat, or wear? What if I don’t like who you share your life with?
“I don’t agree with christians pursuing homosexual relationships in the same way that I don’t agree with the sin in my own life”
There is a huge difference there, Amy. The first is a case of minding other people’s business, the second is a case of minding your own. The first implies that you are somehow entitled to some level of control over other people’s lives, the second asserts control over your own.
“(and I don’t see hetero/homosexual desires as being very different from each other)”
Amy, do you disagree with Christians pursuing heterosexual relationships? You know, Paul said it was better not to marry at all.
Jamie, I have to say, this is something of a cop-out:
“Sadly, we will always be seen as unloving by some when we stand by some of our conviction. “
It places the focus, and the criticism, the rebuke, in entirely the wrong place – on the “by some” instead of on “our convictions”.
The conviction that homosexuality is sin, incompatible with Christianity (despite the fact that Jesus never condemned it), and variants – is a very ugly conviction. If someone choses to hold to it anyways, they owe it to the people they judge and condemn to take responsibility for the ugliness of that conviction, personally.
Think about the real consequences here. Said conviction is calling the most beautiful and intimate, unitive sharing my partner and I engage in, worthy of torture. It agrees with a demand that we be murdered. If we took it to heart, we’d have to dissolve our relationship of nine years, emotionally, spiritually and materially devastating ourselves, causing our parents and friends grief. Think really hard about that – think about how much misery divorce causes even when those involved feel some need for it – now imagine if they were forced to divorce or convinced to, against their instincts?
If we took your conviction to heart, we’d have to discard and disregard our own relationship with God, and reject what He has done in our lives and told us and taught us. We’d have to reject God, to agree with your convictions on this matter.
Aforesaid ‘conviction’ is extremely brutal in its implications and consequences. The problem is not with those of us who see such horrific consequences as unloving – but with the conviction that does so much harm to others.
For the conviction ‘homosexuality is sin’ to be seen as anything other than unloving, Jamie, one would have to prove, yes, prove, that vilifying my relationship wasn’t cruel and vicious, that ‘you deserve torture’ is a sweet and loving thing to say or imply.
Sorry, Jamie, but to those of us who actually endure the consequences of your conviction about our lives, that conviction will always have only horrific consequences, and will never be perceived as loving.
If you don’t like that, the solution is not to change us – that is pretty presumptuous, but to change the conviction.
Amy,
I’m going to tell you exactly what I thought about your analogy, the comparison of my life to slavery. I have to tell you in advance, this is going to be, as one person has said, hard learning.
I thought your comparison was very presumptuous, arrogant and condescending. Let me show you why.
“Let’s say there was a slave in chains bound up in a cell.”
First off, this is just insulting. You don’t know anything about my relationship, but you are comparing it to something that inflicts horrific, constant pain, something violates the intrinsic nature of a human being, that degrades their selfhood and deprives them of their liberty.
My marriage (in substance but not name) with my partner is anything but slavery. It is an incredible blessing, one that lifted our lives, our faith, our relationships with others, to ever higher levels. Rather than inflict pain, it has healed pain, rather than imprison, it has given each of us freedom, by providing a strong foundation.
If you talk to and then listen to GLBTQ people, Amy, you hear us consistently explain that the prison and slavery of this issue is not our sexuality or our relationships, but the persecution and harassment we endure from those who have convinced themselves ‘homosexuality is sin’.
“He’d been there nearly his entire life. For whatever reason, one day someone came by and opened the cell, and unlocked his chains so that he could go free.”
This is just so invasively presumptuous. In it, you assume things about my life that you cannot know, solely based on a ‘conviction’ – something you’ve been convinced about.
I will tell you, though, that I was imprisoned by anti-homosexual theology, and that one day, Jesus did come by and open the cell, unlocking my chains. Not by changing me, but by revealing the malice of ‘homosexuality is sin’ and pointing out that God is not malicious.
“You walk by the slave and realize that although the cell and chains were unlocked, the slave remained crouched in the corner as if he were still a slave.”
Here again, is the presumption that heterosexual conservatives know the ‘real truth’ about our lives. This is just a covert way of saying ‘you aren’t really gay, you just think you are, you could be heterosexual if you just tried’.
There are thousands and thousands of GLBTQ christians who have tried to become heterosexual. All of them that I know personally – hundreds, or have read of – an uncountable number by this point, were devastated by their attempt. Words cannot fully convey the extreme anguish I endured while begging God for years to make me heterosexual, or asexual, or just kill me, anything but ‘an abomination’. It would eat all of Jamie’s bandwidth to cover just a tiny portion of the damage caused by ‘ex-gay’ ministries and reparative therapy.
Sexual orientation is not mutable. The most people with your conviction can accomplish is to convince GLBTQ people to castrate their souls, to ampute our ability to connect physically and emotionally and spiritually with anyone. Now that is a prison.
“Do you, walk by the cell pretending to not notice? Or do you go in, help the slave stand up, help him remove the chains that no longer hold him, walk him out of the cell and help him to learn what it means to be free? Hopefully it’s the latter.”
Actually, Amy, what you do is really and genuinely listen to GLBTQ people, set aside your preconceived notions, and trust us when we tell the truth about our lives. Discard any idea of knowing our lives and experiences better than we do.
FOJ,
I am sorry you feel that way about what I have written. I stand by it in its intention. Beyond that, I am not sure how else I can respond to you.
Peace,
Jamie
friend of jonathan,
I’m sorry for the pain and shame you have been made to feel by those who call themselves Christians. I am sorry we (the universal we of Christianity) have said and done things to hurt and belittle you.
However, that does not mean I can let your harsh tone go unchallenged when it is aimed at someone I like and respect (and please keep in mind I’m not a “typical conservative Christian” in regard to this issue so don’t bother blaming my challenge on hatred or bigotry)
You’re using some false logic in your most recent statement there. primarily taking the extreme of a position and judging all by those extremes. Jamie never said homosexuals are all going to hell or that we should kill them. He never even implied that you cannot be a Christian and be gay. In fact, I’m not sure you really know what Jamie has said based on your responses because Jamie has condemned, time and again, Christians who DO make such statements.
Jamie is humbly and in his best way possible as a flawed human (as we all are) trying to reach out by condemning the wrong Christianity has done to the GLBT community while simultaneously remaining true to his convictions.
The very fact that you refuse to acknowledge at least an attempt on Jamie’s part to be gracious and respectful reveals your tunnel vision and shows your own bigotry against conservative Christians, a bigotry I understand but cannot excuse.
Your feelings are real and valid, and just because they are raw does not make them any less so. You have every right to voice your anger and frustration. But I think it might be best to keep your strongest and most visceral reactions and thoughts in a monologue format.
Engaging in dialog requires a bit of self censoring at times, a lot of grace, forgiveness and a dose of selfishness as well as a willingness to apply positive intent and recognizing the attempts of the other to do the same.
If you are experiencing such hurt and pain right now that you are unable to do that, (which is fine, it’s not bad or wrong, it just is what it is), then maybe disengaging from this dialog would be best…I fear that right now you are adding fuel to the fire….as unintentional as it might be.
Right now, you’re being very disrespectful. And saying that you feel disrespected by Jamie is not an excuse to “return the favor”.
My feelings about your tone have nothing whatever to do with your sexual orientation, I would feel this no matter the topic.
Mak,
“However, that does not mean I can let your harsh tone go unchallenged”
Harsh tone. What exactly are you interpretting as harsh, Mak? Be specific, for unsubstantiated accusations don’t sit well with me.
“You’re using some false logic in your most recent statement there.”
Demonstrate any false logic, please. But, don’t use false accusations to do so. I’m not someone who can be trampled on.
“primarily taking the extreme of a position and judging all by those extremes.”
First off, I haven’t judged ‘all’ people, and if you read carefully, you’ll see I’ve been very careful to judge ideas, not people.
As for ‘taking the extreme of a position’ – that’s an empty declaration. Please, eludicate what middle-ground you think is possible in the idea of condemning and reviling my relationship?
“Jamie never said homosexuals are all going to hell or that we should kill them.”
Nor did I say he had, so why defend him against an accusation I never made. I did, however, point out what it means to declare homosexuality to be a sin – ‘the wages of death is death’, and I did point out that one of the verses used for the interpretation ‘homosexuality is sin’ calls for the murder of homosexuals.
Are you suggesting that Christians should believe only the first half of Leviticus 20:13, but not the second?
“13 ” ‘If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”
Look at that. Read it. To declare that homosexuality is sin, is to agree with that.
What is a person to do? If one concludes that the second half is false, it becomes more than likely that the first half is false as well. If one believe the first half, the second half has to follow.
“The very fact that you refuse to acknowledge at least an attempt on Jamie’s part to be gracious and respectful reveals your tunnel vision and shows your own bigotry against conservative Christians,”
Kindly substantiate this accusation with a direct quote from me that that explictly states refusal on my part. You’ve falsely accused me. Here too, you are employing ad hominem, rather than reason. That has been a pretty consistent pattern. People level nasty criticisms of me as a person, instead of addressing the actual points I raise.
I think it is because people can’t actually dispute or disprove the points I’ve made, and don’t want to be seen either agreeing with them, or approving of the harm and destruction that ‘homosexuality is sin’ intrinsically inflicts.
“Your feelings are real and valid, and just because they are raw does not make them any less so. You have every right to voice your anger and frustration. But I think it might be best to keep your strongest and most visceral reactions and thoughts in a monologue format.”
Now you are projecting. I haven’t voiced any anger here. I’ve been clinically cool. And, please, don’t presume to know better than I do what I’m feeling when I write.
It is a very pathetic tactic, Mak, to dismiss the accuracy of my statements by chalking them to extreme emotion.
Face reality. Condemning same-sex couples, their lovemaking, their innate orientation truly is brutal. Shellacing with treacle doesn’t make poison any less fatal.
“Engaging in dialog requires a bit of self censoring at times”
I trust that this is advice you will practice in the future, and refrain from ad hominem declarations about people’s character.
“Right now, you’re being very disrespectful.”
Another unsubstantiated accusation. You may feel that I’m being disrespectful, but that doesn’t make it so. You are free, of course, to substantiate your false accusation, to indicate what you interpretted as disrespect.
Of course, doing so would have given me the oppportunity to explain exactly where your interpretation went astray. For some people, that potential can be a reason for not substantiating claims like ‘Right now, you’re being very disrespectful. “
“My feelings about your tone have nothing whatever to do with your sexual orientation, I would feel this no matter the topic.”
Actually, I am convinced, by both experience and a study of psychology, that it has everything to do my orientation. The fact that you have no criticism for ad hominem remarks directed at me by others, and made a few yourself, is only further evidence to support my conviction in this matter.
I think you are projecting a great many assumptions about me onto my posts, interpretting my words not on what they convey, but based on what you think about GLBTQ people.
“I think you are projecting a great many assumptions about me onto my posts, interpretting my words not on what they convey, but based on what you think about GLBTQ people.”
I think you are projecting a great many assumptions about me and Jamie into our posts, interpreting our words not on what they convey by based on what you think about Conservative Christians.
I’m not going to engage you in debate FOJ nor do I have anything to add. I will let my words stand on their own merit and allow you to take ownership of your feelings about them.
Jamie Arpin-Ricci,
You wrote:
“I am sorry you feel that way about what I have written. I stand by it in its intention.”
I’m glad you raised the concept of intention.
If ‘good intentions’ can absolve or soften or alter the consequences of something, then people who condemn homosexual lovemaking have to consider the intentions of homosexuals:
to be loved, to express love, to share and be intimate in a unitive, personal, honest and open way with another human being
And that makes the entire criticism of homosexual intimacy pointless. Our intentions are equal to those of any heterosexual.
Now, what was your intention in writing:
“Sadly, we will always be seen as unloving by some when we stand by some of our conviction. “
The sentence construction makes those who revile GLBTQ people to be the victims – “we” are “seen” by “some”. It isn’t about “you” at all, it is about the conviction, the sad and monstrous guess ‘homosexuality is sin’. What is so hard about looking at what the guess actually does to other people?
Look, if you want to stand by your conviction, then you have a duty to it, to take responsibility for what it means, for its consequences. That is the honest thing to do, to say ‘yes, this belief attacks your very humanity, GLBTQ people, but I accept that as appropriate’.
If you can’t live with that, then you owe it to us, as human beings, to at least keep that conviction out of our lives in every way you can.
But trying to wish away the consequences of that conviction does no one any good. Those consequences make it painfully clear that the conviction itself is anything but loving, and yes, rightfully so, that reflects on the person who clings to such a conviction.
“Beyond that, I am not sure how else I can respond to you.”
Well, you could have acknowledged what the consequences of the conviction ‘homosexuality is sin’ (or incompatible with Christianity – same basic thing) and explained why you feel those consequences are acceptable, appropriate, etc.
You could have posited other consequences for examination and consideration, to be tested against the real life experiences of GLBTQ people.
You could have made an attempt to show how the consequences of aforesaid conviction really are loving. I think it would be an impossible case to make, frankly. I haven’t seen any application of love that would do the trick, but, you could have tried.
Or, acknowledged that there is no way that the conviction can be accurately perceived as loving, given its intrinsic consequences.
Heck, you could just answered some of the questions, saying by commenting on what it would be like to coerced into separating from your wife.
Something, anything. A “you know, I never thought of it that specifically” even.
You know, considering that you suggested that I was unwilling to engage in discussion on this issue, I think you should take a really clinical look at the posts here. Pay attention to how often people have replied to me with ad hominem, instead of rebuttal of the points I’ve made. Look at how often people have said ‘I’m not going to discuss this with you’. Look at how many posts are just ‘I don’t know what to say’.
And then look at the wealth of explanation, examples, points of argument, I’ve presented.
“I think you are projecting a great many assumptions about me and Jamie into our posts,”
Here’s the difference, Mak. I’ve pretty consistently quoted the specific statements I challenged. You did not. Even here, you have not provided even a single example. I pointed out specific false accusations and errors in your post, you did not show me the same respect.
Did you?
“interpreting our words not on what they convey by based on what you think about Conservative Christians.”
Here again, you are presuming to know something you cannot – what is in my head, better than I do. And you make this claim without a single example. You are bearing false witness against me, Mak. I forgive you, but still must ask you to repent.
“I’m not going to engage you in debate FOJ nor do I have anything to add.”
I see. You get to level accusations against me, but are unwilling to discuss the accuracy of those accusations, I’m to be denied, in spirit at least, the right to defend myself, to prove you wrong.
Where have I seen that before? Oh, yeah, in anti-homosexual theology, in just about statement by any homophobe I’ve encountered in more than 20 years.
“I will let my words stand on their own merit and allow you to take ownership of your feelings about them.’
My feelings – if you really want to know, is that you know you shouldn’t be biased against GLBTQ people, that some part of you might genuinely want to not be biased against us, but that the predominant part of you not only is biased against us, but attains some satisfaction out of it still. My feeling is that you want to look the part of being opposed to persecuting GLBTQ people, without making any real effort to listen to us, or even recognize the extend of damage ‘homosexuality is sin’ inflicts on us.
You are ‘not going to engage’, so as Amy and Jamie feared, you are perceived as unloving. Sorry about that.
Friend of Jonathan,
Brother, I may be wrong, but I feel like there is a lot of defensiveness or anger coming from you (perhaps rightfully so). I’m not on this site to argue, or condemn. I have no idea what it’s like to be you, or to live the life you have lived. I don’t know how hard (or if it was hard) to grow up in a church, father a minister, knowing that you’re gay, and trying to reconcile beliefs, internal desires, and the stigma that exists. I don’t know what predijuces you’ve faced, I won’t pretend like I do. I’m sorry for the conservative christians you’ve encountered who have not shown or sought out the love for other’s that God has for us, and I’m sorry if you’ve read into my posts a judgement and condemnation that was never intended to be there. I’m sorry.
I don’t claim to be the end-all, be-all, know all when it comes to God. I’ve been a Christian for almost 6 years, and I still couldn’t tell you the difference in denominations (nor do I care to know). One thing I do know is that I don’t know anyone that truely deserves what God has to offer, and trust me when I say that I see my shortcomings louder and more clearer than I see anothers’ (and have no place telling another what they can and can’t do when I have enough trouble doing what I think I should/should not do with respect to my own beliefs). I see a loving God, not in us being okay all the time (and I’m being super general with this idea), but instead find a loving God when I realize that despite our shortcomings, and before we were ever able to be “perfect, good people”, before we ever felt like we could finally “get it right”, while we were still sinful Christ died for us (all of us). I find a loving God when I read about His unlimited patience in 1 Tim 1:16 and when I have those moments where I am reminded of God’s incredible grace. Just as what I know and understand about all this is between me and God, so are your beliefs, convictions, etc with all of this between you and God. Brother, I’m on a journey. I don’t claim to have it all figured out, and I come to this website because of the honesty and open-ness of the author and the discussion that is often found under his posts. I’m here to learn…I jumped into this discussion because I do care about the GLBT and want to love people more and more like Christ would love them. I haven’t figured it out, maybe I never will…but I’m wanting to try
Friend, I don’t know if you realize this, but in some ways you’ve accused and attacked and sterotyped me (and others), in the same way I think you see “conservative christians” doing to the GLBT community…and I don’t even know how much of a “conservative christian” I really am. I claim no control over another’s life, and would never force my opinion onto someone else. I would engage in such conversations when asked, but I don’t think such discussion is absolutely necessary in the business of befriending and loving another person, whoever they are and whatever their sexual orientation may be.
The question you raise about heterosexual relations and the idea of paul and marriage from scripture, needs to be addressed in the context of scripture before it can be adequately addressed…I don’t know if this is the appropriate place to begin such discussion.
Do you sincerely wish to reconcile the tensions and problems between “conservative christians” and the LGBT community, or are you here to point your fingers at the chruch? Perhaps there is some justification in the latter…but I don’t think it’s fair to throw every christian you encounter in that box, before sincerely considering their heart and the fact that they are on their own journey, trying to figure out God, love, and how to love others just as much as the next person. If, however, your intent and desire is for the former, then I humbly say that we both have a lot to learn about love and acceptance and patience…especially when it comes to those who may see the world, God, and life a little differently than you and I do respectively.
Amy
There is a lot of speculation in your post about me, and very little addressing the points I raised. Why is that?
“I have no idea what it’s like to be you, or to live the life you have lived.”
And yet, you’ve judged me anyways. Why is that?
“One thing I do know is that I don’t know anyone that truely deserves what God has to offer”
What does deserve have to do with genuine love?
“Friend, I don’t know if you realize this, but in some ways you’ve accused and attacked and sterotyped me (and others), in the same way I think you see “conservative christians” doing to the GLBT community”
Please substantiate this accusation, Amy. Where have I done any of these things? Did I say you were enslaved, and compare your relationship to a prison cell?
“The question you raise about heterosexual relations and the idea of paul and marriage from scripture, needs to be addressed in the context of scripture before it can be adequately addressed…I don’t know if this is the appropriate place to begin such discussion. “
A yes or no answer to my question was all that is necessary. “Amy, do you disagree with Christians pursuing heterosexual relationships?” Yes, or no. If no, then you are holding me, and every other GLBTQ person, to a different standard than you apply to heterosexuals. Is that truly compatible with Christ’s teachings?
How sincere is it on your part, Amy, to post guesses and insinuations about me, rather than address the concepts I put forth? Is it sincere to make false accusations about my posts? Is it sincere to accuse me of things I have not done, like:
“but I don’t think it’s fair to throw every christian you encounter in that box,”
Because, Amy, I haven’t even hinted at that. Besides, how could I, given that I am following Christ, a Christian, and have repeatedly written of GLBTQ Christians? Is it sincere to question my sincerity, when you avoid all of the points I raise, and critique me as a person instead?
It was hardly sincere to judge my heart over and over again, Amy. It looks like an attempt to make me go away, rather than a sincere interest in reconciliation.
So, please, how do you envision reconciliation?
I’ll tell you how others with views and criticisms that mirror your own, have envisioned it.
GLBTQ are to shut up about being persecuted, not ask for, much less expect, to be listened to and heard, understood much less respected. We are to stop making everyone else uncomfortable with our talk of injustice and harm, hate crimes and destruction. We are to sit quietly and wait for as long as it take for heterosexuals to recognize our humanity and right to exist.
It isn’t a pretty vision, but it is the one that has been drawn by conservative Christians who defend ‘homosexuality is sin’ while claiming to reject the overt physical persecution of GLBTQ people.
The question is, what is your vision, Amy? If you are not on this site to argue – to debate, discuss, examine and weigh arguments for and against something – what are you here for? Why are you talking about GLBTQ people?
Why not sincerely talk to us?
Jamie, Mak, Amy, John, et al
The link between the conviction that homosexuality is sin, or “inconsistent with Christianity” and the persecution and abuse of GLBTQ people, is a causal one – a case of cause and effect. The supporting evidence for that is overwhelming, I touched on just a nano-sliver of the totality of it.
The teaching breeds the destruction. It is a bad tree that only bears bad fruit.
Given that you’ve all said, in various ways, that you oppose the persecution of GLBTQ people, you are going to have to look at the conviction in light of its consequences and decide which is more important to you
staying true to an interpretation of a handful of sentences
or
not participating, even indirectly, in the persecution and harassment and destruction of GLBTQ people.
One cannot the cause and reject the consequences, it isn’t rational. The two are not divisable.
How you chose is up to you, as is how you get there. What you cannot do, regarding my life, is pretend that teaching ugly things about my life does not intrinsically have ugly consequences.
FOJ,
Thank you for clearly sharing your perspective. I cannot speak to the others, but I will give it serious thought and prayer.
Peace,
Jamie
“but I will give it serious thought and prayer.”
That’s really all a person can ask for.
I have every confidence in God that, given however much time is appropriate for you, ‘serious thought and prayer’ will accomplish a great deal.
serious thought and prayer certainly
its been an interesting debate
I think I am inclined to believe that, judging by the results (fruits if you will)of the “Gays are an abomination to God” school of scripture interpretation, Jesus is very likely not to be found in that camp.
In case the convoluted wording of that last post has everyone confused
I meant to say
I think Jesus would not approve of the Conservative reading and use of scriture.
Marginalizing, rejecting and abusing others is not a good fruit of a good tree.
impossibleape,
I would “probably” agree (wink).
Peace,
Jamie
ImpossibleApe, Jamie,
There is an odd irony that I’ve encountered many times of the years.
I’ve read posts, or essays, elsewhere, wherein a conservative Christian argues that Islam must be satanic (actual word choice that appeared in multiple sources) because – followed by a laundry list of harms and crimes – suicide bombers, oppression of women, burka, etc.
Same persons, and again, not referring to anyone on this blog or its comments, then insist that the logic of bad fruit = bad trees doesn’t apply to ‘homosexuality is sin’.
Go figure.
Well Jamie:
a wink is as good as a nod in my books
so God Bless us all and good night Mrs. Calabash, where-ever you are.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=484864
impossibleape,
Great link. Of course, you do know I wasn’t trying to be sarcastic with my wink, right? Anyway, thanks!
Peace,
Jamie