Larry Gross writes about the Church and homosexuality, a tired subject for how relentless the Reich is in defaming decent human beings who are not meant to be plumbers. Plumbers fit the male thread to the female thread. So what if gays and lesbians don’t want to be plumbers. Not all people have to be plumbers. Some can be carpenters cutting different paths. Jesus was a carpenter.

And anyhow, the god of the Jews and Christians was a homosexual.

See more at http://www.godisajoke.com

Reply to #72:——-My apologies. I mistook you for a correspondent who wanted to learn something.——-

  You were mistaken.  You want to teach me mr. Earl?  When you make sense, maybe I’ll listen.  When you actually make some logical arguments instead of crazy, hurtful attacks of opinions, maybe I’ll listen.  I don’t think it was an absolute waste of time.  Apparently the conversation is over.  I hope you learned something.  I think I’ve been the one to point out the “fundamental ignorance” in you.  Key, basic concepts have eluded people’s minds, and these things need to be corrected.  All of you followers need to start thinking for yourselves.  How bigoted of you to call me bigoted.    Apology accepted.

To Kevin in #70:

My apologies. I mistook you for a correspondent who wanted to learn something.

We all realize now that all you really wanted was an opportunity to broadcast your blind Christian prejudices and profound bigotry.

Well, you’ve done it. And those two obvious character flaws are only outclassed by your unbelievable fundamental ignorance about almost everything.

As Shakespeare wrote in “The Winter’s Tale” (2.1.173-4)... “Either thou are most ignorant by age, or thou wert born a fool.”

I also apologize to all others for wasting time and space in this “dig” by engaging Kevin on this topic. I should have known better.

Re #66 - Adamchik

Let me see if I understand you. G-d created the world and everything in and on it and then, in writing, set up “very complicated rules for understanding what is to be understood literally in the bible, and what is not.”

Further, He added to the obfuscation the requirement that “The amount of critical thinking and reasoning involved in understanding Talmudic discussions goes far beyond nearly any modern science or Ivy League education (this you can believe). The Masechta of Eruvin is more difficult material than FASB statements, the US Code, or Stephen Hawkin.”

So, loosely interpreted, unless you have the IQ of an Einstein, it’s unlikely that you’ll ever understand what G-d wants.

And this MAKES SENSE TO YOU?

With all due respect, sir, I don’t care how far back into history the Jews or any other race or group can reach for “instructions” from G-d. Just because something is OLD is proof to me that it is nothing more than it’s OLD. Why do you accept that a “scripture” scratched on a 2,000 or 3,000 year old scroll is any more “truth from G-d” than what is published by today’s scribes? Do you really believe that all these ancient scribes were super intelligent messengers from G-d and that, as part of the game, G-d buried His message in the sands to be stumbled over by modern day Indiana Joneses? (By the way… when was the last time “we” received an authenticated “message from G-d” in written form?

If you actually believe this stuff, or anything close to it, you and I couldn’t peacefully coexist in the same conversation for more than a few minutes. I think it’s nothing more than ancient storytelling that some today, with only the fewest fragments in hand, forge ahead to construct “the whole truth.” I have a very low tolerance for glib opinion and unsupported assumptions when they’re being pawned off as Godspeak! Opinion and assumption doesn’t gain authenticity and value with TIME.

I consider it NONSENSICAL to accept that a G-d exists who is hoping for the adoration and worship of the billions of uneducated, low IQ people with which He’s obviously populated this planet. Who or what in It’s right mind would have created those expectations ESPECIALLY when He/She/It determined that there be an “unbroken tradition ... not for the gullible, unthinking or stupid.  It is spectacularly subtle…”?

Sorry… my philosophy of life is based on the KISS principle. But then, heh, heh, I’m not G-d.

Reply to Earl #67:
    The homosexuals most certainly have a movement.  God DID NOT make homosexuals.  Another ignorant statement.  Homosexuality is a result of environment, family life, and other issues.  It’s a choice and part of growth.  They may feel like it is overwhelming, but it can be overcome.  Look at the homes that homosexuals come from.  Usually single parent homes.  If I’m not opposed to something, then I must be SUPPORTING it.  Live in ignorance?  You are telling me that homosexuality is healthy and natural?  Come back to reality.
    Many people are misinterpreting the Bible because they don’t study it.  It speaks on judging others, but not against it.  If someone is doing something wrong, you are to tell them unless you have a “beam in your own eye.”  Basically, I can’t be hypocrytically.  I’m not perfect, but I try. 
  1st Corinthians 6:3 “Do you not know that we will judge angels?  How much more matters of this life?”
  Luke 12:57 ” And why do you not even on your own initiative judge what is right?”
  Jesus speaks of marriage between a man and a woman.  He also quotes from the Old Testament which contains information against homosexuality. 
  The homosexual movement insults the American family and many people’s beliefs on marriage and relationships.  There are a small number of homosexuals, and yet they are known around the nation.  This is most definitely a dangerous movement.  They will ruin families and social structure.  They are speaking out and creating notions that Christians are against them.  We are against what they practice, not them as people.

Reply to #68:
 
    Hey bud, where do whales live?  Oh yeah, the WATER!  I bet Jonah would have to take them on his boat.  They can’t breathe under water or anything.  Oh my goodness.  Can we please get intelligent responses instead of crazy attacks, please?

#63. Comment by Kevin on 1/20 at 6:01 pm

“Do I believe Jonah could have built a boat to survive the flood with all the animals?  Well, it took him and his sons about 60 years or something, and they were bigger, had more oxygen, and they had the time.  They took all baby animals most likely, and God helped with that.”

I actually laughed out loud while reading this paragraph. It’s funny on so many levels.
I can’t help but wonder, how did Jonah fit two whales on his Ark?

Re Kevin’s rant in #65…

ALL NONSENSE.

I’d be hard pressed to find such a monumental collection of codswallop in any other posting on the internet.

It’s fascinating to watch the fundamentalist mentality move as fast as the speed of light to disaster-mongering (sex with 8 year olds, sex with animals) when it runs into the brick wall that is reality but which doesn’t agree with their poured-in-concrete, black-and-white prejudices.

I especially delight in this diatribe that Kevin posted above…

“If you want me to support an unnatural, unhealthy (in many ways) sexual partnership, you’re wrong.  The homosexual movement interferes in with my beliefs.”

Kevin, as usual, misses the point entirely. The main one being… HOMOSEXUALS, OR ANY OTHER LIVING SPECIES ON THE PLANET DON’T NEED YOUR PERMISSION OR SUPPORT TO LIVE LIFE IN FREEDOM FROM YOUR “BELIEFS.”

There is NO “homosexual movement” any more than there is a “black movement.” How dare you point your arrogant, hypocritical nose in the air and characterize, in such a degrogatory tone, the complaints of documented discrimination and abuse by an individual or group as a “movement” as if those you are discriminating against don’t have the right to complain!

It’s YOUR “beliefs” that are the problem… they’re STOMPING ALL OVER OTHER PEOPLE’S RIGHT TO LIVE IN FREEDOM ...FROM… YOUR BELIEFS. If you want to believe that a loving, homosexual relationship is one that is “unnatural” and “unhealthy” then fine… believe it and live in ignorance. Acutally, it’s not even that your wacko “beliefs” that are the problem… it’s that you can’t just believe what you want to believe without trying to IMPOSE them on others.

Since your “God” made everything, He made homosexuals. Who the hell are you to play judge and jury as to why? I understand you believers are INSTRUCTED IN THE BIBLE… “Do not judge lest ye be judged” or something like that. Can’t you even follow your own rule book?

And please quote me from your Bible, where JESUS said even ONE WORD against homosexual relationships?

I can hardly wait to hear your explanation of how the “homosexual movement,” that exists only in your mind, actually “interferes with your beliefs.” When was the last time any homosexual mouthed off with such garbage as you do to try to “interfere with your beliefs?”

Many of the responses to my post remind me of why Jews do not usually engage in conversations of this nature, since the Jewish bible in English, without the Talmud and other background material, is simply unrecognizable to the original, with its accompanying commentaries and lengthy discussions.

In brief, yes, G-d did in fact make many things known about his plan for the the world through the Torah, Talmud, Midrash, etc.  Yes, G-d also created creatures with desires, not all of which we are supposed to act upon.  Mankind is unique in its endowment of free will - the basic purpose of creation is to choose a relationship with G-d, as our limited minds are able to understand it.

This relationship between G-d and mankind is different for Jew and non-Jew, but some issues (such as the prohibition against homosexuality) are clearly universal.  One of the non-Jews’ roles is to perfect the physical world (partly why they may not observe the Sabbath the same way that Jews should), so their role is clearly critical in the grand scheme of things.

There are very complicated rules for understanding what is to be understood literally in the bible, and what is not.  Generally, none of the ideas about six days of the creation of the world or early Genesis stories are meant to be taken literally (Maimonides’ Moreh N’Vuchim [Guide to the Perplexed] is probably the most important on this issue).  This is a very complicated discussion, one that is almost universally misunderstood by Christians, due to the number of sources and commentaries required to understand the issues.  Many other stories did actually occur, in whole or in part.

The amount of critical thinking and reasoning involved in understanding Talmudic discussions goes far beyond nearly any modern science or Ivy League education (this you can believe).  The Masechta of Eruvin is more difficult material than FASB statements, the US Code, or Stephen Hawking.

Suggestions that our activities are our wallowing in ignorance are simply the product of their own sort of ignorance.  One cannot have spent time wrestling with this material the way it was meant to be wrestled with and conclude that we do it because we are idiots - it just must be from lack of exposure.

Our unbroken tradition is not for the gullible, unthinking or stupid.  It is spectacularly subtle, shows empathy for human frailty and the difficulties of understanding free will, and respect for our own limited capacity for reason. 

One should prepared for the fact that some of their desires, wants, or behaviors are not in fact what they are supposed to be doing.  This sort of humility is an important start.

Maintaining the tradition that came to us from Sinai (for which there is a lot more foundation than you might imagine) and critical thinking are not mutually exclusive.

Robert Aumann’s 2005 Nobel Prize in Economics founded on Talmudic logic and game theory is but a single, recent example of the absolute cutting edge of science, inquiry, and traditional Judaism prospering together.

“G-d does not play dice with the universe” - Albert Einstein

“The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right” - Judge Learned Hand

I think I gave plenty of reasons why I don’t think some lifestyles should be practiced.  Homosexuals should not be surprised if a church has a problem with their lifestyle.  You cannot go to a real church and practice homosexuality without expecting any help or being unable to become a member. 
    Why do you think we have these inalienable rights?  Where did they come from?  Who said you have them?  The government?  Because we are made in the image of God, that’s why we have these inalienable rights.  You don’t want to interfere with others’ lives?  Then why do we set an age for drinking, smoking, and sexual intercourse?  We can’t interfere in other’s lives.  They have the choice, right?  Why can’t an 8 year old have sex with an adult?  Why can’t people have sex with animals?  If you want me to support an unnatural, unhealthy (in many ways) sexual partnership, you’re wrong.  The homosexual movement interferes in with my beliefs.  I’m not attacking homosexuals.  I’m attacking their movement. 
  “My rules” are what this country is built upon.  They are good rules and we will see the consequences of not obeying them.

I hope it’s not inappropriate of me to suggest that it’s my view that each of us born on this planet as an inalienable RIGHT to love who we wish, live how we wish, work at what we wish, think and feel and philosophize as we wish, write the music and sing the songs we wish and believe as we wish WITHOUT INTERFERENCE from anyone, any organization, institution, religion or government, just so long, of course, as our journey through life doesn’t interfere with other people’s right to do the same.

IT’S NO ONE’S BUSINESS WHAT I DO WITH MY LIFE. Is that so outrageous to expect or difficult to understand?

If you don’t agree that each of us should have this freedom to exist as we wish may I request you list for us YOUR REASONS WHY NOT?

(I don’t want to hear the reasons you’ve cribbed from any other source… bible, religions, other “authorities”... that just suck-up, mindless parroting of what you’ve been told to do and/or conditioned to believe. I want YOUR ORIGINAL REASONS WHY ALL OTHERS SHOULDN’T BE FREE TO LIVE THEIR LIVES AS THEY WISH WITHOUT INTERFERENCE FROM YOU and YOUR RULES.)

Reply #62…“Well written and researched?”  Righhhht.  Sounds like opinions to me.  Also seems to focus a lot on the Catholic Church.  The Catholic Church has had so many problems and hs been so corrupt.  That’s why Martin Luther did what he did and the United Stated got away from that kind of overzealous, money-hungry, ritualistic religion.  I have not dismissed any verifiable science.  The verifiable science just supports the Biblical (historical) information given to us over 1500 years.  Many people distort the facts to help support their own agenda or their ideas of who God should be.
    We go by rules that have been handed down over the centuries and accepted by millions.  Our Forefathers used the Bible to form the Constitution.  The separation of church and state was imposed to keep the state out of the churches affairs(since they were controlled by the king), and to keep crazy theological radicals out of the state.  If it is in the Bible, then it is clearly not radical.  God gave us rules to follow so that we would have better, safer lives.  Since we as a country have not followed them we have more diseases than ever, high numbers of single parents, ruined relationships, drunk driving….  God’s not out to hurt us or lessen our free choice.  Just like your parents give you rules that may not make sense, God gives some too.  Just because you disagree or don’t understand, doesn’t mean that it is not good for mankind. People are imperfect.  You’re going to find a lot of bad examples on both sides of the issue…

Misc Bits:

Well written & researched “dig”. 

Typical that verifiable science is once again dismissed when it conflicts with one’s world-view.

“When the pulpit addresses our politicians, the IRS should be right there: Representation without taxation.—Comment by Lohitaksha on 12/15 at 7:12 pm”
Best comment I’ve seen on the whole Church/State topic in ages.

How very sad to see the comments devolve into attacks.
“Can’t we all just get along?”
-Rodney King
No, Mr. King we cannot; humanity refuses to grow up.

Reply to #60:
    If you want to talk about FACTS, you need to get some first.  You can’t just make facts up.  Facts in regard to the creation of the earth and it’s inhabitants are only based on ideas that make as much sense as possible from the remains we have because we cannot test it in a lab.  You say the Bible is “mixed up and crazy,”, and yet thousands of scholars all over the world are studying it every day and learning from it.  Millions use it daily.  I think you are in the minority on that one, bud.  Do I believe that the God who is omnicient, omnipotent, and who created the world could take a rib from Adam and make someone else?  Well, yes I do.  The events in the Bible actually occurred.  There are many intricate details that could not have been made up.  Do I believe a flood covered the earth?  Well, it says it happened in the Bible, and the earth definitely shows signs of a mass flood even now.  So yeah, I guess I do.  Do I believe Jonah could have built a boat to survive the flood with all the animals?  Well, it took him and his sons about 60 years or something, and they were bigger, had more oxygen, and they had the time.  They took all baby animals most likely, and God helped with that.  You say “christian values were CLEARLY plagarized.”  Okay, I’m glad you have all-knowing insight on that subject.  Some may seem plagarized because it was a universal truth that was being presented again.  If you BELIEVE in evolution, you have NO facts to support what you believe.  I have written historical documents from many, many years ago (some originals) to back me up.  Along with common sense and observation, my claims make absolutely plenty of sense.  You make absolutely no sense in your last paragraph.  YOU ALSO CONTRADICTED YOURSELF IN THE LAST PARAGRAPH.  YOU SAY, “EVERYTHING SEEMS TO BE DESIGNED TO HAVE A LIFESPAN, AND THEN DISAPPEAR”  You’re right.  Everything is DESIGNED to do that.  It didn’t just get that way on it’s own.  That wasn’t the original design, until man messed things up in the Garden.  Please reevaluate your beliefs and FACTS.

Re Kevin’s #59 posting…

All the shoulda, coulda, woulda bafflegab you can dream up won’t create an iota of FACT.

Kevin also wrote: “The ideas presented in the Bible are all timeless.  They have been around much longer than this crazy notion of Macroevolution.”

I believe it is FACT that MOST of the “ideas presented in the Bible” existed long before anyone dreamed up the crazy mixed-up concoction you call The Bible.

The Old Testament stories are just that… STORIES… like Grimm’s Fairy Tales. Sure, they may have a point, but only someone with very limited mental faculties would accept them as FACT. You don’t really believe G-D decided to actually take a rib from “Adam” to make “Eve?” But I guess you do, since you seem to actually believe that a flood covered the planet and you likely also accept that an actual Noah collected two of everything and floated them on a boat (I assumed that included two Ebola viruses?) Those who actually believe this stuff deserve our pity.

And the New Testament’s “Christian values” are clearly plagiarized from “religions” and philosophies that existed for centuries before your Christ allegedly walked on water. It’s an outrage for Christians to lay claim to “family values” etc., when an incredible diversity of family values existed and served the populations well for a long time before anyone dreamed up “Christianity.”

Funny you should ask, Kevin “Now why would all living traces dissappear?” For the same reason that all living traces of YOU and I will disappear. EVERYTHING seems to be designed to have a lifespan and then disappear. Even the rock itself is returned to molecules and atoms from whence it came (love the language). Don’t you learn ANYTHING from observation and common sense. At least the information I get “fed” and believe has a few FACTS to support it. What’s your excuse?

Re: #57…Your 8 years of higher education have not taught you to ask questions and find answers for yourself.  You just get fed information and take it as truth?  Ideas can be timeless.  They don’t have to go extinct.  Hopefully the ideas of evolution become extinct.  The ideas presented in the Bible are all timeless.  They have been around much longer than this crazy notion of Macroevolution.  I’m not surprised that you are flabbergasted.  You’ve been fed incorrect information for 8 years.  It’s like you have to come out of the Matrix.  Now why would all living traces dissappear?  That’s the assumption you make, but it makes no sense.  There should not be a problem finding just one mixed fossil.  There should have been millions preserved.  Sometimes scientists have thought that an animal is extinct when in fact they go and find it alive today (coelacanth).  The so-called “dino-fish”.  A cataclysmic event occurred a few thousand years ago preserving living things within minutes.  Flood.  This explains the trees going straight through millions of year old rock.  All living traces dissappear?  Wow.  I’m glad I’ve enlightened someone.

The claim on the part of certain people who call themselves «Christian» to know with certainty the will of a transcendent deity on the basis of certain passages from the Old Testament is intriguing, not to say presumptuous. Have they forgotten Paulus’ statement in 1 Corinthios 13:12 :

videmus nunc per speculum in enigmate tunc autem facie ad faciem nunc cognosco ex parte tunc autem cognoscam sicut et cognitus sum

Perhaps they should wait for the life to come to express themselves with such assurance ?...

Re Kevin’s #56 posting…

I had to read this post several times to make sure it wasn’t just a joke. But nope… I think Kevin really means what he posted.

I think flabbergasted is a delightful word and it so describes my reaction. I thought once a species, for example, Homo neanderthalensis, dies out, all living traces disappear.

Kevin clearly demonstrates that views and opinions and attitudes and beliefs that I understood were extinct are indeed alive and well in 2006!

So much for my 8 years of expensive higher education! Almost everything accepted as either proven fact, or that all evidence points to a high likelihood of being correct, and being taught in anthropology, sociology and psychology classes around the world is apparently hogwash.

Thanks for the enlightenment, Kevin!

1 Corinthians 6:9-11.  1st Timothy 1:10.  The Bible speaks of Homosexuality.  It is a sin, but the Christian church should not be judgemental or adament about throwing people out or anything.  The church is there to help.  The church will not leave a practicing homosexual alone.  They are there for support to overcome it.  If you do not wish for their help, and you wish to continue in the sin, of course the church will have a problem with that.  God destroyed the city of Sodom becuase of homosexuality and other unnatural sex practices.  It means something to God, so it’s going to mean something to His people. 
    The hostility stems from the fact that homosexuals are looking for liberty in their practices and the Christians look at it as liberty to sin freely.  There is no proof that homosexuality is genetic.  It is caused by unnatural household environments ie(single parents, abusive parents, two of the same parent, sexual content on t.v, etc.).  It happens becuase of other sin.  It is not something you are stuck with.  It’s something you may just have to struggle with.  God set up an order, and that’s how He wants it done.  If you don’t believe in God and you believe in evolution (humanist), you are also at a loss for the homosexual standpoint.  Apparently the natural way is for men and women to be together.  You are going against the natural order of things either way.  And if you are a humanist, there is no help for you in regard to homosexuality (or anything for that matter.)

Right on, R.A.!
And people who are deep into religion and “God’s word” can’t you see what this sort of rhetoric does to humanity? When you use your religion to try to control other people’s behavior, you exclude them from it. In other words you are teaching people to not believe in God. Do any of your religions support turning people away from God? Oh yeah, satanism.

“How About Judaism” in #53 makes some rather grandiose assumptions in my view.

“Life is NOT about doing what you want, as most Western societies would posit.  Life is about doing what G-d has requested of YOU.”

This statement sounds quite straightforward… like it was actually a fundamental TRUTH or something. C’mon. It’s an OPINION and nothing more. If anyone wants to make it a PERSONAL TRUTH they’re certainly free to do so, but please don’t offer up such unsupportable assumptions as TRUTH… we’re not that gullible!

“Regarding this discussion, homosexuality is clearly not part of G-d’s plan for the world.”

Oh really? First, please let us all know how you came to KNOW what G-d’s plans are. Did “He” phone you… or perhaps post something on the internet?

If there is a G-d, which is a ridiculous notion to begin with, but if there is, then by definition, “He” is the creator/overseer of EVERYTHING. This means, of course, that “He” created HOMOSEXUALS every bit as deliberately as he created non-homosexuals. Or perhaps you think G-d just made a mistake when he created the lesbian down the street or at the office? It’s an outrageous assumption to post this silage just because YOU can’t accept or understand the diversity in this world.

I’m so sick and tired of ignoramuses such as this author spewing garbage that is pure, prejudiced opinion and wanting us to accept it as TRUTH.

I hate censorship in almost all it’s forms… except, I would surely support a system of heavy FINES for anyone publishing for public consumption as FACT or TRUTH this kind of crap that is clearly UNSUPPORTABLE ASSUMPTION and GLIB OPINION. There are millions of ill-educated and easily impressionable people whose critial thinking skills may be limited who are apt to BELIEVE such nonsense.

Judaism explains that people have a deep responsibility to G-d, not only to their fellow. 

Life is NOT about doing what you want, as most Western societies would posit.  Life is about doing what G-d has requested of YOU.  There are almost no rights in the (Jewish) bible - it is all about responsibilities.

Regarding this discussion, homosexuality is clearly not part of G-d’s plan for the world.  There are different responsibilities for Jews (such as the requirements to eat kosher food, etc.) and other nations.  However, homosexuality is clearly a universal prohibition concerning everyone.

The righteous of all of the nations have a place in the world to come, so it is not that Jews believe that they are better than anyone else, by any stretch of the imagination.

It is worth adding that, as life stands now, we are prohibited from discriminating against sinners, and simply must hope that they change their ways.  Hatred based on homophobia is clearly prohibited.

Judaism also explains the central role of free choice, as being one of the main purposes of creation (i.e. the world was created so that we would choose a relationship with G-d).

Whatever struggles one has with G-d’s commandments, whether it is with honesty in business, homosexuality, or disrespect to parents, are struggles that we sincerely hope everyone will overcome.

The issue of whether a government should make laws regarding disrespecting parents, homosexuality, and honesty in business, is a completely different discussion, and very, very complicated.  The short answer is that probably some of them should be legislated, but not all of them.

You might be interested to go to Google and search for “Public Law 102-14” to see some small bit of this very large discussion of what sorts of things a government should do.  These are the seven universal laws given to Noah, for all of the nations.

The source for the seven Noahide laws is the Talmud, 73 volumes (in translation) of background, “oral law,” discussion, and commentary, without which it is simply impossible to understand the bible.

As a final aside, we recently observed the fast of the 10th day of the month of Tevet, which commemorates, among other tragedies, the translation of the Jewish bible into Greek (the “Septuagint”).  Do not underestimate the extent of problems that poor, biased, and uneducated translations have hurt people of all faiths.

If you discuss these issues with someone sensitive to the “original,” you will find more nuance, concern, and enlightened discussion than you might expect.

I believe many who harbor anti-gay hostility and resentment do so because, in part, DEEP DOWN, they’re JEALOUS.

They might think along these lines: “If I have to be saddled with a nagging spouse, screaming kids, a killer mortgage, a job I hate, and an endless treadmill of a life, then EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE TO SUFFER RIGHT ALONG WITH ME. How dare these faggots shuck the bonds of servility - no responsibilities or obligations - just living the good life, prancing around the world, sleeping with all who appeal and laughing at the rest of us stooges.”

Also, I think MANY heteros have “tasted” of the homo fruit and KNOW that intimate relationships between people of the SAME sex can be every bit as loving, emotionally rich and satisfying as straight bonding… WITHOUT the participants being saddled with all the baggage that society expects hetero couples to carry.

The whole scenario reminds me of the banning of bear baiting (the “sport” of tying a toothless and clawless bear to a stake in an arena before cheering crowds and letting ferocious dogs tear the helpless animals apart). It was not until 1835 that baitings were prohibited by the British Parliament.

In 1849, Catharine Macaulay wrote,“The Puritans hated bearbaiting, not because it gave pain to the bear, but because it gave pleasure to the spectators.”

Baiting is now banned worldwide but can still be found in parts of the Middle East and Pakistan. (Interesting that the oldest “civilizations” are in some ways, the LEAST CIVILIZED on the planet.)

So the hostility towards gays and lesbians, I think stems, in part, because it looks to some ignorant straights (the “Puritans”) that homos are just having TOO MUCH FUN in life.

Amusing.

In #18 Daniel Casselberry wrote, in part

“It’s almost embarrassing to describe oneself as a Christian these days, because I don’t want to be associated with the hate and bigotry of those two(Pat Robertson & Jerry Falwell) who often get described as “Christian leaders or spokespersons”.”

Oh, but you ARE associated with them, Daniel, and you SHOULD BE embarrassed blood red. These two con men (and many others like them) have hijacked your religion and are filling their OWN coffers with the ransom. Until you and all your Christian fellows figure a way to “excommunicate” these charlatans and thieves who operate under your “Christian” banner they will continue to represent YOU to the mainstream.

How long do you think Microsoft or Wal-Mart would allow me to operate using their trade names without authorization?

Christianity is BIG BUSINESS too… and cunning fools like the aforementioned loudmouths are skimming the cream from your “milk of human kindness.” You (the mainstream churches) will be lucky to end up with your shirts still on. WAKE UP AND SMELL THE STENCH BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE!

Jason, I appreciate your firm stand against persecution. But you should examine this certainty you have that a marriage necessarily needs a man and a woman to be “real.” You’re entitled to that opinion, I guess, but that doesn’t mean it should be the law of the land.

Let’s start with this. You say that “it does not take a church for God to recognize your love for one another.” Good. Please note that, in most places you’d want to live, it also doesn’t take a God to recognize a marriage.

Marriage is not an invention of the Christian church, or of Judaism, either—it is far older than either, and as you appreciate, a universal human institution.

My first marriage was performed in the living room of a justice of the peace. I took an oath to love, honor and cherish, and also to conduct myself according to the laws of my State.

There are churches that do not recognize that marriage and that none-the-less especially dislike the fact that it ended in divorce. (This seems inconsistant to me, but never mind.) After a struggle, they have sulkily agreed, for now,in this country, to settle for differentiating between “real” marriages, i.e. the ones they perform, and all other kinds. But that’s just their opinion, it isn’t the law of the land. Like your opinion about marriage requiring a man and a woman, except for the law of the land part.

Our government does not allow plural marriage despite the fact that some religions practically require it. The law of the land does not care about that religious conviction.

I understand that you think that gay marriage is obviously unnatural. It seems self-evident to you. This is because of the culture you grew up in. If you think there have been no cultures that recognize homosexual marriages, you are mistaken.

Personally, I have been married twice. The J-P one lasted til the kids were grown. The second, current one is entirely unofficial, and we have no kids, and will have no kids, but we are absolutely married, and it’s been going on for almost twenty years, and if anybody tries to tell us that it’s not a marriage, or shouldn’t be a marriage, you can appreciate what our answer will be: who the hell asked you?

Suppose my sexual and life partner was of my gender, and we were together this long, and felt this married, and our friends—hell, anybody who knew us—recognized the marriage in the same way. Suppose some guy came to us and said, “that’s not a marriage, you can’t call that a marriage, and it’s all wrong,” our only sane answer would have to be, once again, who asked you?

If a couple of 18 year-olds can hook up in Vegas and get married by an Elvis impersonator, and they’re undeniably legally married, with all that entails, then why do you think this other thing is anybody’s business but the people involved?

You may never change religious text. But as Gays and Lesbians, you are most definately loved and respected. You are no lesser than any other person on this planet and you should be treated with respect. You may not persue marriage but you may persue civil union. Afterall, it does not take a church for GOD to recognize your love for one another. But It does require a man and a woman to marry. That is and always will be the naturally designed state of the human landscape.

You cannot take two verses out of the Bible and use it to persecute Gays and Lesbians. It was not what they did that was wrong or unnatural, it was how they ACTED that got GOD angry.

But that was then, not now.

There is nothing like being persecuted under law, religion and personal prejudice. This persecution must end immediately.

The scientific study of human sexuality tells us what is normal and a further understanding of the genome can tell us if homosexuality is natural. There is something to be gained from a scientific approach to this problem that does not trivialize it.

Religious people will be intolerant and will resist that knowledge but for how long.

I think using Jewish ancestry and the problem of anti-semiticism is an inappropriate metaphor. Race, culture, religion - all those things it means to be Jewish are much more complex than a behavior.

On another note, comparing homosexuality to pedophilia and adultery barely deserves a comment but nonetheless - I was outraged to see these compared. Pride is also a sin. Eating the fruit from a particular tree in the Garden was a sin. Barely anything that any person does is not without some taint of sin. I am so sick of religions and the ignorance of the righteous.

If you believe in ‘God’ then be happy in how ‘God’ made you and focus on yourself - no attacking others. Once you are perfect and have everything figured out then go ahead and have a go at making others perfect - NOT!

Religions are the biggest clubs there are and just remember if you aren’t in my club, my god said I can kill you - Give me a break. It is time for another enlightenment. In America it seems we are headed back to the Dark Ages. Maybe the rest of the world wants to come with us - I hope not though.

Oddly, it seems, something is being avoided in these discussions when one makes reference to the anti-homosexual nature of the Church, Synagogue, or Mosque, or other official organizations - sports clubs, congress, parliaments, etc.  For are not these offical men’s groups not themselves constantly on the verge of being homosexual institutions ... in spite of themselves?  I am not saying this to be flippant, on the contrary, since the author mentions Freud, one should, to be fair, bring out the fact that for Freud homosexuality was not a perversion, but manifested itself as the other side of the coin of paranoia.  That is to say, the manifestation of paranoia recognizable in official men’s groups is the other of a homosexuality that is not counter our democratic institutions, but since the Greek philosophers, part of its paranoiac structure.  This much said, it would be a regression to trivialize this problem of difference in the name of DNA, when there is progress to be made in getting clear on similar prejudices in other fields - most notably racism and anti-semiticism.  For example, knowing a Jew is Jewish by trying to trace this down to their genes, does little to resolve the problem of anti-semiticism.  On the contrary, it makes it worse as it was precisely this form of genetic explication for behaviour that the Nazi’s were trying to implement to begin with.

In any case, just some thoughts,

scully

In addressing the first comment re: how gays feel threatened by those on the “right” side of this argument, don’t you think the right feels threatened also? Gays want to be a part of the church; they want positions of authority within the church; in essence, they want to be included and accepted without accepting that homosexuality is a sin. In other words, you want the religious right..those who believe and accept Gods word..the Old Testament and the New…to change and accept homosexuality! Why should they accept it? Homesexuality is a sin just as pedophilia and adultery and even witchcraft, are a sin! And if your sin is found out, it should be dealt with accordingly! And if the church, whether that church be Catholic, Lutheren, Methodists, etc, is right with God and His word, then that church will deal with it! At least, I would hope so. I sometimes wonder with the Catholic Church. (sorry, my little jab at them! lol)

The crux of the matter for me is that I feel just as threatened as the gay person feels threatened by the traditional religious right. I feel the gay person wants to impose acceptance of their lifestyle on me and where I go to church. Why should I accept it? Why should I accept your sin? Especially since you don’t see it as a sin? Your sin is no worse than my sin of stealing or adultery or whatever. It’s all sin according to God! The difference is, I accept my sin and I make a choice to accept that I have sinned and that I must change. A gay person does not accept that. A gay person wants to ignore the ref’s within the Old and New testament. A gay person wants everyone else to change their attitudes. I say, no…if you cannot accept the views of the church, Catholic, Methodist, whatever…then go start your own! Its a free country. Just quit trying to make me and others accept your lifestyle. Just as the church should not be accepting adultery, or stealing or any other sin as spelled out in Gods word, I should not have to accept homosexuality as a lifestyle within my place of worship. If that place of worship does accept it, then I will find another.

Also, I thought that was interesting that the author pointed out how a rule applied just to Jews and not Gentiles. Did the author miss the bigger point, that once you decide to follow God, that you become part of Gods family? His own? Was the author trying to imply by extension that maybe those old rules were only rules specifically for one group of people and for only that time, thereby implying that, now that Jesus came to accept everyone who would believe in Him, Jew or Gentile, as described in the New Testament, that old perversions were no longer viewed as such? Hmmm….I doubt it. Nice try though.

Finally, yes, we should all love one another. If i am part of a church, my church should accept the gay person, the stealer, the pedophile, the sinner! with love and open arms. We all sin! But dont ask a church, a people who are trying to live by Gods teachings, to change what it believes in. Instead, agree to disagree and go find the church that agrees with your view.

Within this century I expect the clarification of the power of genes, the genome and the diversity within the species will show indisputedly that homosexuality is ‘natural’ as many scientists suspect - I say that based upon observations in nature and experiment. Despite the possibility that science and religion could coexist peacefully today are we nearing a time when the conflict will leave even less room for reconcilition and for religions to maneuver. I will not be surprised when religions and religious people some day use what science learns from studies of the genome in order to re-introduce eugenics programs or destroy fetuses with ‘gay’ or other ‘religiously intolerable’ genes.

Such FOCUS (and the harmful effects of the focus) by any religion on a particular type of victimless ‘sin’ is abhorrent anyway considering the current state of the world (fill-in-the-blank, take your pick of this world’s injustices) and should be condemned every time we have opportunity to do so. There is no room for intolerance in religion, the planet is too small and people’s lives are too short to be condemned for what some would say GOD built into the genepool and I expect we are near to finding out just that. 

I think Jesus’ message about not casting stones needs to be heeded by Christians and the commandment of love needs to take its place as THE commandment. The fact that Christ’s words have not been heeded by the Christian church has led to the largest crisis in faith for some, myself included. I now count myself an agnostic and have some small fear in regards to how my former fellow Christians hate my attitudes (or me) as well. Forget the hate the sin not the sinner distinction - that is so fine a point that it makes no difference in practice how people are treated.

Homosexuality does not deserve to be a top 100 list of this world’s current ‘evils’ but when I guess it is something they can all get behind that means something.

There are no protections of ANY kind or form, regarding human sexuality, nor are there any restrictions, within any of the text of the U.S. Constitution or the Bill Of Rights. Only states can manufacture said entities, covering the legal
residents of their sovereign selves. Every time, as far as I can recall, that these laws have been
challenged, at the SCOTUS level, they have been
over-turned, as UN-CONSTITUTIONAL. In states where ballot initiatives are allowed, the track record is not the same, and the results have been chaotic and confusing at best, for both protection or restriction in this area.
  State legislatures are voted in at the local
level. The resources required to accomplish this are forthcoming from that same local power base. Whoever has the money can set the agenda, for those who seek election/continued incumbency.
‘Communities’ are mostly made up of people who
belong to and adhere to a faith of some kind.(check your polls from any election)
  The ‘faith-based’ agenda is to deny legitimacy
to any minority following that would seek to
disrupt the status quo- ie; financially, socially, culturally, educationally,et al and take away the primacy of their ‘currently’ ruling
power base. This is not a new phenomenon.
It is, by its’ nature a naturally ocurring human reaction, to the idea of the long-demonized
concept of change.
Religion, brandished as the cudgel against the ‘heretic’ du jour,  accomplishes both the primary agenda of ‘institutionalized’ isolation of said heretical minority and the secondary feeling of ‘being on the right? side’ in a struggle(in essence BELONGING)that gives us and our lives a greater meaning.
  The true fallacy is that ‘BELIEVING’ in something only closes our minds to those who do not beleive what we believe.
There is no right or wrong. There is only
life. Everything else is just shadows and dust.
 
dislodge the

Great article!

You must understand that fundamentalist Christians believe that the Bible—ALL of it—is the inspired word of God.

And, the Bible condemns ALL sin, not just homosexuality.  The Apostle Paul lists homosexuality in a long list of sins (including drunkeness, infidelity, coveting, etc) that will exculde those who practice them from the Kingdom of Heaven.  He then calls on everyone to repent of their sins—ALL of their sins—and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. 

I don’t know why some groups single out homosexuality when it is one in a large number of sins that will condemn the practitioner to hell for all eternity.

When the pulpit addresses our politicians, the IRS should be right there: Representation without taxation.

The photo tells it like it is:  That all these male religious leaders in their funny hats and long dresses would put aside their otherwise lethal differences to condemn and oppress other males who only want to celebrate their love for one another…

The Sullivan quote is priceless. What a sorry wanker.

OK gang, Most of you have figured out Thor and Zeus don’t have any relevance to your sex lives. Take that reasoning one logical step further and live your lives in rationality without the weight of a two thousand year old book on your brains. Every one of you knows how to live a moral life and treat others with dignity.

To Dannybill’s closing comment- 12/3:

AMEN!!!!

Response to James 12/3:

In your final comment, “The next time a Christian suggests that Christians enforce their beliefs on sex to the society at large…”, I have to ask, than who is enforcing their beliefs on every one of us?  You probably are saying, ‘the government’; but since ‘we are the government’in America anyway, who is the enforcer.  Who has petitioned our legislatures to create all kinds of laws banning us from specific and personal behavior, that we may indulge in alone or with another consenting adult?  IT IS THE CHRISTIAN/CATHOLIC CHURCH and their ‘fundamentlist’ members.  Just because you as a ‘christian’ don’t think homosexuality is right, it isn’t….........FOR YOU AND ONLY YOU! If I’m not causing injury or hurting anyone with my ‘sexuality mindset’, than what my sexuality is, ‘gay or straight’ is REALLY NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Pax

To Rheamode 12/1:

Unfortunately, the converse of J. Krishnamurti’s quote is the life philosophy of our current president!  To him, ‘you’re evil if you don’t follow’!

To Graziano 12/6 post:

YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY 150% CORRECT, ABOUT THAT!

and we need to stop behaving like ‘sheepeople’ and learn this valuable lesson about life before it’s too late!
Pax!

Response to Michael’s comment 12/1:
I think I agree with your mindset; but my concern is simply, if sex and intimate relationships are consentual acts, than ‘why’ is there any need to ‘draw lines’.  I personally believe and I’ll bet ‘everybody’ else does as well in their own minds and spirit, that ‘what you do in the privacy of your own home/bedroom is your business and your business alone; as long as you are not causing any harm or injury to anyone.  In other words, acts that have NO VICTIMS!  Prostitution is NOT a crime because by it’s general definition, it’s sex between 2 consenting adults for a price.  Barring any ‘weirdness’ or other behavior that causes harm or hurts either of the parties, there are NO VICTIMS.  People should not be arrested from any behavior that does not hurt or harm another ‘animal’;we’re ‘human animals’.  However, inherent in this, any behavior that does cause injury or harms another needs to be dealt with and arrested. NOW,HERE THERE IS/ARE VICTIMS; and these sick people need to be ‘banished from existence’! (just kidding there). Even our Constitution, which guarantees our basic human rights (thank you, Thomas J.)says it is our right to “...life, liberty and the pursuit of happeness”;  our pursuit of happeness, as individual ‘animals’, not the pursuit we are ‘ordered’ to follow by anyone else (except our parents in the early stages of our lives), or the government or the church!
These are my feelings and beliefs, which is ‘why’ I asked my earlier question about ‘drawing lines’.
Pax!

Jesus did not come to condemn the world but to save it. I never really thought that He was condemning them from what I have read in the bible.  I honestly just think that the Left and the Right have successfully divided themselves, which is not what true Christianity is.

Is marriage a right?  What is the foundation and history of marriage?  I think both questions are important contextualize the discussion.

Big Chris

In America today, government attempts to forbid gay marriage privilege by law the religious ideas of one sect over those of another. All such moves are made illegal in the first phrase of the first sentence in the first amendment of the US constitution.

Wacko ministers like to say “God didn’t create Adam and Steve.” I like to say, the founders of America didn’t create a Bill of Wrongs.

I’ve blogged on this topic many times. Many of your comments and observations resonate with mine.

Besides, what possible business is it if two men get married? Many that want marriage already live together… this would change nothing for the fundamentalists that foam at the mouth over the issue.

As I’ve posted previously, I feel the best course of determining right and wrong (i.e. - what is ‘moral’) is the use of the human intellect. Many argue that our sense of right and wrong comes from god, or the gods. I certainly hope not: more atrocities have been committed in god’s name than for practically any other reason. And once the debate starts down that path: i.e. - “here’s what I believe my god says”; truly critical thought is out the window.
I put my trust in our own gray matter… as the “Intellectual Insurgent” says on her blog:

  Is it possible to be so confident that you have the one sole only Right answer without crossing the line between good and evil? No.
Question your conclusions. Seek out and analyze the facts. Adherence to dogma shuts down the thinking process. Without critical though you are on the path to blind obedience—and you are on the path to disaster.

Since when is the Roman Catholic Church a state/country?  I was under the impression that Italy was the country, and Rome was simply the Capitol.  Further, I protest the United States giving such a universal form of Diplomatic Immunity to everyone.  Don’t we have enough problems with crime already?  The Diplomatic Immunity should only apply to Misdemeanors, as it does with most other countries.

There are a couple of things that are important to remember about the historic church and about some contemporary churches. I think it’s important to recognize that, historically,  the Catholic church has regarded ALL sex to be sinful—although sex for procreation’s sake might be some-what less sinful, because useful.  This attitude towards sex continues in the Catholic church and in those contemporary fundamentalist churches that are bound up in the judgments of the Hebrew Bible.  Are the folks in these churches uncomfortable in their own skins?  You bet.  Does this make them angry at those who remind them of their discomfort with things physical?  Absolutely.

How scarry is it to be able to build nuclear bombs and weapons of mass destruction when we have only begun to think? And how ironic that the insane amongst us should be leading the pack?
When considering the lack of intelligence or logic in the homophobic reactions of religious leaders around the world - whose entire perspective is emotionally driven as opposed to cerebral - then know with certainty that you have not escaped the Neanderthal stage in the development of mankind.

Shiloh Seven

“And make no mistake two people of the same gender can most definitely love one another with the very same love a hetersexual couple does. The emotion is one and the same.”

Nice words. I’m a straight male with at least one gay closeted family member, and I have believed that “love is love” for a number of years now.

IMO, I can’t see anything wrong with gay couples raising kids, really.  Parenting is supposd to be about providing for kids’ needs in a loving environment.  What do anti-gay, straight couples offer kids? Gendered stereotypes. No wonder latent gay kids are confused!  When you’re gravely ill, you want the love of your life to be there—why does that require your spouse/partner to be of the opposite gender? 

I think if straight people learned a thing or two, they would not fear gays so proactively.

I was chatting with a clergy friend one day when he asked when I thought this issue would stop being a distraction to the real causes of pain and suffering in the world. I answered, just as with Moses, a generation will once again be sent into the wilderness to die. As with all this bickering based upon, at least from my point of view, a dominant holding on of power, much is at stake. For those who belive the spirit is leading us in a more open framework totally in line with the spiritual, we must work hard and long at education, not only with those inside churches, but people who are not involved in a faith community. Evnetually truth will win out over those who use fear as their power. Fear is evil, and we are seeing much of it these days.

It is gratifying to read a historical analysis of this depth on the Religious sources and evolution of Homophobia in the western world. While those of us, gay and strait, who support gay rights can surely look to the bible to find support for tolerance (Christ’s compassion, love your neighbor, etc.) those on the religious right will always be able to supply a counter argument from their own theology. It seems that, in the course of debating the merits of freedom of marriage, for example, we need to find concrete answers for their social arguments against it. With the development of Freedom of Marriage in Massachusetts, Canada, parts of Europe, and now South Africa, does anyone know of any research into Gay Marriage’s affect on Strait Marriage? If it can be shown that marriage between homosexuals has no affect on divorce rates or other social ills, a powerful bullet would be removed from the conservative’s rhetorical gun.

During a long and eventful lifetime during which I have been exposed to most of the diversities of our culture neither my freedom nor my family life has been threatened by homosexuality.  I am not gay and no one has ever tried to change my sexual preference.  I can’t say the same about the Catholic Church.  I am not a Catholic but by words and deeds, the Catholic Church has constantly intruded in my privacy and attempted to change my value system and life style. One need not go beyond the history of the Church to know that it cannot speak for Christ.

Unfortunately, many of the comments to this article, and indeed the article itself, distort Church teaching regarding the status of persons who experience same-sex attractions. I quote relevant paragraphs from the Catechism:

<excerpt>
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. [They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial.] This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
</excerpt>

The vocation of married life is not for everyone, and while it may be the norm today to disregard the need for self-control and restraint in the pursuit of selfish pleasures, some people still heed God’s call. David Morrison’s book Beyond Gay recounts the terrible suffering he experienced and how accepting God’s grace transformed his life. Would that we could all be so blessed.

I am Christian and I believe that Jesus loves and accepts homosexuals who are in truly loving relationships.  If that sounds limiting, let state that I think Jesus disapproves of heterosexual relationships that are not loving.
In other words, it must be love that makes the relationship, love that gives the partners the ability to be caring, supportive members of a community ..that helps them grow the fruits of the Spirit (tolerance, charity, peace, and such other good things) ...
  Unfortunately, Christianity seem to abandon love and the fruits of the Spirit and decided to go for assimulation and power ...
  I know this and I tell people when they start in on how homosexuals are ‘sinful’ (that is the politest word they use).... Well, at several times in my life, I have been in real need of someone showing me the love of Jesus Christ, and each time, it has been a homosexual person who has done that.

Church or government leadership’s misuse of a majority to discriminate against a minority is a lever of power.  In the most recent politically manipulated exercise to waste church energy a “Minnesota Pastors Summit - Minnesota for Marriage” was recently held. My post on a tiny blog dealing with this follows:

http://mrclm.blogspot.com/2005/10/minnesota-pastors-summit-minnestoa-for.html

With all the good that a church can do why continually try to keep focus on continuing to prevent equal civil rights based on sexual orientation?

In days gone by a church’s Sunday message may have included appeals to prevent women’s suffrage. And years before that one might have heard appeals to help fight abolition. It is hard to imagine now, but there had to have been a time when both religion and law had rationalized these injustices to be acceptable. I think people will look back someday and feel the same about this issue.

Like many or most people, I believe a marriage between a man and woman is preferable and in many ways incomparable to a commitment between two men or two women. However, that is my personal opinion due to things beyond my control such as my physiology, possibly reinforced by my upbringing. I have come to accept that some people have a different orientation that, like mine, is natural to them and not a matter of question.

I believe discrimination based on sexual orientation is a product of societal norms and customs of the majority and is not supported by philosophical reasoning or by Christian theology. For these and other reasons it is my opinion that legal recognition of same-sex relationships be afforded no fewer rights and responsibilities than those provided in a traditional husband/wife relationship.

There are many dimensions to marriage: From a legal standpoint, it is estimated that married couples enjoy well over 1000 specific legal rights and benefits unmarried couples do not. As for the social and personal benefits experienced by reason of a traditional marriage, how can anyone honestly claim they are any more or less than those gained by same-sex partners?

In the U.S., religious organizations are exempt from many laws prohibiting discrimination. For that reason, a Church is within its rights to, among other things, not recognize same-sex marriages. In addition, a Christian church cannot be compelled by law to worship Buddha, and Jews cannot be forced to recognize Jesus as the Son of God. Corollary to this I think it is just as inappropriate for a church to support passing laws codifying its view of marriage as it is for a church to try to legally codify its theology.

The 1st amendment to the U.S. constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” It is widely accepted that it follows that rules based solely on the principals of a given religion should not be made law. From a secular legalistic standpoint, to impose as law a Biblical definition of marriage is in conflict with rights provided in the Constitution. For this reason, groups intent on forcing their views on others are promoting constitutional amendments. I believe history shows these injustices ultimately do not stand, and equality will someday be provided to all, regardless of sexual orientation.

As for the religious aspects of marriage, I am not in a position to judge how much is derived more from ritual and practice than from scripture. However, I do know the word “marriage” is mentioned relatively few times in the New Testament. The most frequent reference is repeated in the Gospels - Jesus teaches that at the resurrection there is no marriage (Matthew 22:30, Mark 12:25, Luke 20:34). 1
Corinthians exhorts that marriage is a distraction that the unmarried are best off staying that way. However, it also states it is better to marry than burn with passion.

In closing, I can’t comprehend a God that does not love all regardless of race, color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation. Remember the concept of Grace and imagine the infinite love of God.

The church’s actions against those it considers sexually immoral outside the church are in direct opposition to the apostle Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 5. Paul counsels that Christians maintain purity within their own community, but not enforce their beliefs outside the church. Verses 9-13: “I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

“What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside.” (NIV)

The next time a Christian suggests that Christians enforce their beliefs on sex to the society at large, read him or her those verses.

As a clergyman, I’m sad to say that “the Church” is usually the last place where progressive social change takes place.  As long as legalisms trump love, organized Christianity will continue to miss the boat.  Consider how long it took the Church to move beyond its support of slavery and segregation.  The main stream media rarely interviews pastors of traditional Protestant churches; they invariably turn to the extremists like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell.  It’s almost embarrassing to describe oneself as a Christian these days, because I don’t want to be associated with the hate and bigotry of those two who often get described as “Christian leaders or spokespersons”.

The “line” we should be talking about is that which seperates Christ-like behavior and Biblical-bahvior. Jesus was not the representative of a massive power structure embodied by millions of dollars and followers. IMHO, Jesus’ teachings in and of themselves don’t lend themselves to centralized notions of power and control. But the Bible does. It gives these Biblicists (they are Christians only by nomenclature) a framework in which they can nurture their fears of the unknown. Inherent in Biblical teaching is the concept of “us” vs “them”. Without a “them” to condemn, there is no “us” to save. All this being said, we should be careful and not expect even an undistilled version of Jesus to convince the Bilblicists that homosexuality is OK. For all we know, he was a raging homophobe, too. He was, after all, a product of his time.

When do we realize as gay men and women that
the three abrahamic traditions are hostile to our very existance!!!This is war, and they mean to destroy us!It’s too late for hand ringing and
being spritually torn. These are luxuries that we cannot afford to indulge,our sorrow for our many losses on all fronts is simply to be borne!One answer is a vigorous stategy of using litigation groups to push freedoms’ agenda!
We must be as unrelenting as the Right has been since 1964.They took over the Republican party.
We have many friends,many who will help us. We’re not the only ones who have suffered and are suffering.No more self-pity!!!!

Michael, one “draws” the line at non-consensual relationships: marriage can only exist between consenting beings. (This understanding, BTW, is in line with Catholic teaching, which holds a marriage null—non-existent—if not freely consented to.) Adults of whatever gender can consent to a relationship, children and animals cannot.

Frankly, I think those who condemn homosexuality have not the mind of Christ.

Thank God for science.

The “threat to the family” presented by the opponnets of gay rights and gay marriage imples that if homosexuality is recognized as a valid way of life for those who freely choose it, many more people would go that way. If a significant number of traditional marriages occur because the partners consider the gay alternative attractive but reject gayness only because it is unnatural and sinful, then the human race is indeed in deep trouble. It must be quite heartbreaking for the wives of Dobson, Phelps etc to know that they are only the second choice of their tormented but devout husbands.

But dear Ms Respess, you are not <u>expected</u> to get it ; you’re just expected to do as you are told. That is why the Benedictines, for example, chose as their motto not sape, but ora et labora....

Credo quia absurdam....

The Catholic Church is increasingly part of the lives of Africans and Asians where traditional and public “family vaules” are adhered to. While Western Europe and North America may be moving towards liberalization in our secular laws in regards to gay issues, we can’t expect that the Church is going to suddenly reverse its teachings and say homosexuality is OK.

However, as a non-Catholic and a gay person, I object to and fear any faith that condems those biological facts that cannot be changed. We are born gay and remain that way—but Christianity is a lifestyle choice and how one practices it can be reformed and modified to tolerate and understand the truth about human sexuality. If it is “true” that Christ was born in immaculate conception then anybody who accepts the Church’s teachings on sexuality is being informed by a lie.

A quote from J. Krishnamurti cuts to the heart of the matter:  “All following is evil.”  Until that is understood, there will continue to be those who are torn between their “faith” and the reality of their lives.

Sexual taboos in western society has for centuries included adultery, sodomy (homosexuality), pedophila and intercourse with animals.

While adultery hardly gets a notice except with the parties involved, sodomy has “come a long way” down this same path. However, heterosexuals are the majoritiy and thus homosexuality holds less attraction than does adultery. Pedophila has fewer advocates still and “farmsex” is still way down there on societal approval lists.

So where do you draw the line? All or nothing? Or is it “do as I say and not as I do?”  Ideally, none of the above is the healthiest for society. But would a lesbian couple approve of their child (adopted or otherwise) marrying a horse? How would they answer the very same questions they put forth to justify their position? Okay then marry your horse because that is your sexual preference? Or would it be well that’s different, a horse is not a huuman being. To which heterosexuals will say, well that’s different, we’re of opposite sexes and can naturally produce offspring.

So if one has to draw a line then best to draw it at none of the above because then any argument used to justify one can be used to justify the other. The road to Singapore, as they say, is paved with good intentions.

Disjointed comments from a 20 year convert to Catholicism…
The thing about the “new” strictures of the Vatican against practicing gay priests is overblown.  The Vatican need only say the same thing about heterosexuals.  Heterosexual priests aren’t allowed to practice either, so what’s the big deal?
It’s time for priests to be allowed to marry. And gays too, while we’re at it.

It’s time for gays to be allowed in society to live openly and with the same rights as heteros, including marriage.

Great photo! We “used” that one ourselves at grokyourworld.com.

The church is the last stand of the patriarchial establishment of spiritual and state control.  The collusion between the two is nothing more than the bullies on the playground of our lives.  They are so desperate to control what is in heaven and on earth that they have confused themselves relative to God.

They function only by what is ordained by man, not by the creator, their souls are veiled with power, greed and control in order to satify their own inadequacies, real or imagined.  They require our love and prayers, they too are born into sin and are of sin.

I would rather be the camel that slipped through the hole of the needle rather than the one left to hold the needle looking up at the light trying to find the hole.

For the love of God, why do we have to continue this debate?  It seems to me that the only people who put their energy into this matter are the religious fanatics.  Perhaps if they moved on to more pressing matters, like, peace and feeding the hungry, they would get over their hidden perversions.  I think their interest in what goes on in someone else’s bedroom is just their own perversion looking to be quenched.

as a homosexual myself, i have come to realize that i play an essential role in society and organized religion. without me - and the millions of other men and women like me - politicians, clergy, and the “faithful” of all stripes would have no convenient way to distract themselves from that tedious, old question of navigating a moral, ethical, godly course in a world of ever-increasing information and ever-dwindling resources.

and that would just suck, y’know?

Excellent article. Those of us who have bothered to study the subject of homosexuality know that there is abundant proof of the genetic basis for homosexuality. The very unchrist-like posturing by the culture’s “moral” leaders is just the continutation of the tradition of exclusion of what they peceive as different from themselves. Apparently SOMEONE must be the scapegoat or the enemy. The Church has a long history of genetic discrimination ; look how they continue to perceive women! The heart goes out to those who have been demonized by an ignorant, bigoted hierarchy so bereft of christlike or even human kindness.

Until the church can show me when or where Love is ever a sin then it’s incessant teaching of condemnation towards homosexuals is one of the most blatent heresies of Christ’s teaching ever. It takes the second commandment to love your neighbor as yourself and adds this caveat, unless your neighbor is gay. And make no mistake two people of the same gender can most definitely love one another with the very same love a hetersexual couple does. The emotion is one and the same.

However I as a lesbian take up my cross and hang there saying “Father forgvie them, they know not what they do”. Perhaps one day these self-righteous hypocritical Saducees and Pharisees will one day come to know they are forgiven, only as they forgive, and that blaspemy of the Holy Spirit (Love) is the only sin that isn’t be forgiven.

As a lesbian I feel threatened and unwelcome in my own country.  I live in California where anti-gay groups are trying to put at least 3 propositions on the ballot for next year that would not only ban same-sex marriage but would also overturn all the hard-won domestic partner legislation we have and I fear that this will pass because even the people I always considered to be progressive are opposed to same-sex marriage and their arguments are just as nonsensical as the rigt-wingers.  I am at a loss to understand the hostility that we engender.  After Gene Robinson was installed as the first openly gay bishop the Anglican Church has started to splinter over it and one of the most vociferous critics was the archbishop from Uganda who somehow saw this as terrible threat yet not the civil war raging in his own country that continues to kill thousands of people every year.  With all of the poverty, misery, disease, death, and war in the world it is a mystery why homosexualty is seen as a terrible threat.  When the Catholic pope issues an edict it is about not the suffering in the world but gay priests.  I don’t get it and I never will.