Category: philosophy/religion topics
Most of you know I'm an atheist, but for those who don't I'm being honest about my bias here.
Since my daughter is untraceable from this site, it's fair to say, she has recently come out as bisexual. She's also a person of faith, a Christian. Everyone talks about how hard it is between lGBT and Christians. But here's one for ya: there can be a great deal of misunderstanding between LGBT Christians and us atheists. I've eaten a lot of humble pie in the past few weeks. She's been explaining to me some things from some books she's read in the past few weeks.
Unlike what we skeptics often think, she's not clinging to her faith out of guilt; she's passionate about it. And unlike what it seems many evangelicals think, they're not just "justifying their lifestyle," they've actually done their homework on this stuff. She knew she was bi for two years before telling me for just that reason. The recent book she was talking from is "God and the Gay Christian" by Matthew Vines.
I can't recall everything she was saying, but in short, the type of "homosexuality" or any other sexualities as we understand them were not understood then. What was being talked about was power play, or "lust", and occultic practices.
The whole Sodom and Gomorrah bit? while she was duly unimpressed by my former attempts to convince her there never was a Sodom and Gomorrah, based on archeological lack of evidence, they have an entirely faith-based explanation for the situation.
I'm not here asking atheists to believe what my daughter and them believe. I don't believe any of it, especially as it pertains to nonexistent cities in a geologically stable area, where we should have found bronze melted into rock, ash casts of twisted tres, evidence of calamity and destroyed buildings ... something like the city of Pompeii.
No, I'm not presenting her arguments, or the evangelicals' arguments, as believable. But Only there's more to the story than we atheists, as well as evangelicals, understand apparently.
I've just personally realized that many of us need greater understanding. To my fellow skeptics I'd only say we ought to listen to what these people are saying, even if we really don't understand it, even if the god concept we were born and raised with more closely approximates that of Terrance on here.
I'd challenge evangelicals to give that book a read, at the very least realize that these people are not "trying to justify their lifestyle." it's quite obviously been a lot of hard work for them. My daughter says that none of this has come easily. I'm certainly in no place to ask an evangelical to believe as my daughter now believes. I'd be hypocritical if I did: I am reasonably convinced by the lack of archeological evidence that Sodom and Gomorrah never existed, and that the volcanic calamity described in your Bible never happened in a location withouth the requisite fault lines that creat volcanoes. So no, I'm not asking you to believe like she does. Only to perhaps get a copy of this book and come to some understanding of her / their side. Then, if you really believe you're right, you could argue against their actual arguments instead of the false straw men your apologists have so artfully sculpted for you.
For my part, unconvinced as I may be in the faith department, I'm committed to gaining a greater understanding of her situation so I can be more supportive.
To that end: if an LGBT person of faith, or an LGBT ally person of faith were to speak up on this topic, I'd be most grateful.
I've read several books like this, about different subjects, and the one thing
I've come to realize is that their arguments are based on nothing. They just try
desperately to find a way to have the lifestyle they need and the faith they
want. I have no respect for bad history, even when being used to justify
something as pointless as the interactions of a genetic disposition and a made
up faerie tale.
A very curious topic, Leo. I for one would be quite interested in reading that book. I know how my own church feels about the subject, and while I agree with nearly everything about what my church teaches about existence, our destiny etc, homosexuality is one thing I really, really struggle with when trying to speak about my church's beliefs. In short, I talk about how love and marriage are important, and how sexuality is sacred and should be respected. Then here comes pretty much all of christianity saying that while that's true, it's only true for men who are with women. And from an eternal perspective I understand that. But my issue is when men and women truly are attracted to members of the same sex, they find someone they want to share their lives with, they love each other, and everyone of faith say “no.” They say it’s a sin. They say your type of love is wrong. Some say you’re going to go to hell. While I don’t prescribe to the fire and brimstone eternal damnation theory like so many do, that doesn’t change the fact that I hate the whole issue. I hate that it is even an issue. I hated the issue of civil rights and women’s rights just as much, not because they happened , they needed to happen – but because they were even necessary at all. If homosexuality is a trial to be faced and mastered, then it’s one of the cruellest God can give us. I know that in many ways to be gay is, at this time, “the thing to do”. It’s cool to be gay. And in ways that’s great. It’s about time it starts not being a taboo. But I know a lot of people out there just “try it”. They experiment with it. I’m not going to speak about that. That’s more of a choice. But for the people who actually are “born gay”, or who truly discover it later in life, to them I have so very much sympathy, and I can’t bring myself to fault them. I want them to be able to be happy. I want them to be able to get married, and yes, I want them to be able to raise children. I don’t want churches who are against it to have to be forced to perform those marriages, but nor do I think they should be interfering with gay rights either. It will be very interesting to see how some Christians and Christian groups will defend gay rights. I know they’re out there.
One thing is absolutely true. One really needs to do their digging when it comes to such subjects – any subjects. I’ve been saying for years on this board that, in terms of religion, people need to look beyond the vocal preachers and the face value of the scriptures. Religion is never meant to be taken at face value. If you’re going to prescribe to a faith, or even criticize it, learn as much as you can about it and don’t assume you know everything about it either.:)
Right, you want them to be happy, and have equal rights... just not enough to
stop supporting the institution which is causing them not to have those rights or
that happiness. Nice double standard.
Cody, a month ago I would have agreed with you to a point, as I haven't read the books you have. After all, I'd say, just come on out and admit the faith system isn't tenable.
However, if I pushed this? I would endanger my relationship with my own daughter.
I'm not entirely convinced that their arguments are fallacious. They are based on a lot of places that didn't technically exist, people who didn't exist, and a god I see no evidence of. However, you and I both know that polytheistic religions of that time period certainly did employ male and female sex workers in their practices. It does seem logical to conclude that a religion based on a solitary warlord deity might in its proscription against other gods also proscribe their practices. It's pretty muddy here of course, not the hard sciences, more of the humanities type stuff. But I'm not convinced they're making it up.
What comes to mind is if this was the year 1965, where here in Oregon mixed race relations was highly illegal, and my daughter came home and told me she was with a black man, we might be in the same situation. Christians then, as you know, thought mixing of the races was an abomination and used their scriptures to back it. Were Christians who came after the civil rights era just "making it up"?
Honestly, I don't know.
I will say though, that my goal is to understand her better. Admittedly I'm not terribly interested in reading another religious or counterapologetic text at the moment, so I have been taking her word for a great deal of this.
I for years have seen the correlation between the interracial situation in the 60s and the LGBT situation now.
And I have to admit: I don't understand what makes people believe or, like you and I, come to the place where we simply don't believe any of it anymore. What makes people change into something more moderated, but not disbelieve? Why is it that in even largely secular countries, there are people who adopt a sort of spirituality even if it has no gods? I personally am still holding out on some discovery like turning the belief phenotype hypothesis into a bona fide scientific theory.
But my daughter's not an idea, she's a person. And I feel I owe her to understand her better, even if I don't believe in the god or the text.
I’d rather not derail Leo’s topic with our usual back and forth so early, Cody, but yes, , I suppose it is a bit of a double-standard. I suppose I can even understand how you’d question my sincerity about how I feel towards the subject. But I also can’t abandon the many things I do truly believe because of a few things I simply have a hard time with, because I accept that I don’t have all the answers. There’s a lot more to this than simply “we are against gay people.” We aren’t against the people, just the practice. But I also realize that that pretty much equates to the same thing for the victims. I don’t disagree with my church that, from an eternal perspective, homosexuality isn’t sound. But nor do I feel it’s particularly fair either. Our standards are different, and it isn’t right for us to impose our standards on the world. It’s not going to help, and I also don’t find it “right”. It’s left me with a feeling of dicotamy, and I have been very vocal in my church about my support of gay marriage. It hasn’t kept me out of the temple, or led me to disfellowship or excommunication or anything like that. Were that to be the case, I still don’t think I could change my mind about it.
Now Cody, since you’ve challenged me so very early, I’ll ask the question I was going to after your first post, and then didn’t as to not get off topic. What, to you constitutes “good” history? I’m curious because for me, I find I have trouble trusting history. Some things are certain. There’s more than enough evidence to conclude that yes, World War II and the holacost really happened, even though there are people who adamantly deny the latter. But when it comes to some things it can be really difficult to determine whether what you’re reading is really truth. Take 911 for instance. It’s clear it happened; we can see the results for ourselves. But there are so many theories about the why behind it. Some are conspiracy theories certainly, and yet many of these theories survive. And this is not the only example. The history of a part of the world can change based on who is wrighting about it, and to what end. So, just as I have a hard time with knowing what to believe in the media, I have a hard time taking history at face value. It’s why I don’t put a lot of stock in it disproving my religion; not because one can’t find information to do so, but because it’s hard to know whether that information is reliable.
Remy, I don't know how Mormonism works. In the realm of Protestant interdenominational Christianity there seems to be the proverbial wiggleroom if only because there's no pope or president.
So, what would happen if a more liberal contingent read something different from the texts re: loving LGBT relationships? Would they have to split off?
My daughter claims to have handled herself with Christians who claimed she wasn't Christian because of this.
Would Mormons claim a member wasn't Mormon if they were allies, or LGBT themselves?
Like most things, where it gets niggly is where theory meets practice.
Leo, I've said a bit about this on Twitter, but I'll say it here, too. I totally respect you for your open mind, and your efforts to listen to your daughter, even if you don't agree with her. I respect you for knowing you could hurt her deeply or push her away if you approached this with a closed mind, and for actively trying not to cause that harm . That's the mark of a loving parent if ever there was one. Props to you, and my prayers with your daughter as she navigates what has to be a very difficult path.
Thanks Alicia. That's really what it boils down to for me. There's the whole apologetics and counterapologetics arguments, but then when it's people involved it's often quite different. Neither my wife nor my daughter are into the whole apologetics / counterapologetics arguments thing as many of us have experienced over the years. It's a whole different dimension for them.
Good for you, Lio, for doing what you're doing to support your daughter.
I really have to echo Alicia, Leo. I imagine it must be difficult for her, being Christian, and having her mom be Christian. How is her mom taking it, if I may ask? Unless this is a phase, and people do go through such things - she Obviously can’t just “turn off” these feelings. I’ve always been interested in bisexuality. It almost seems like the fense sitting of sexual orientation, but I know that isn’t really fair to say, considering Iv’e never gone through it. I don’t know her or you relaly, but in such a situation I’d probably be concerned with you saying “I told you so.” Not at all saying you would do that of course. That human aspect of situations like this appear to be where people either focus too much, or too little. On one hand, if you truly believe that someone practing this will “actually” be damned, you’d want to “save” them from that fate. That, along with simply being offended by it, can lead one to do some really terrible things potentially. On the other hand, people are individuals with feelings, wants, needs and personalities. It seems incredibly unfair to lump everyone together like that, and forget the humanness.
You pose an interesting question about Mormonism, Leo. Allow me to describe the leadership of my church for a moment. Skip to the next paragraph if any of you don’t care about this issue leo has raised.
We do have a president, our Prophet. Currently his name is Thomas S Monson. He is a normal person with a normal life. He’s been in the general authorities of our church for over fifty years, though only our prophet for around eight. He does not get paid, and had a regular job. We believe him to be ordained of God to be the leader of our church, who has the gifts of seeing, prophecying and revelation. He is supported by two councellors, and a quarom of twelve others known as apostles. It’s not an elected position. Usually, though not always, when a prophet dies, one of his councellors takes over, and the apostles need to be unanimous in their agreement. Then that unanimity must be passed down to the members of the other General authorities, and the LDS church at large. In fact that’s how it works for any calling in the church, even down at the individual ward – a ward is what we call our individual congregational meeting houses - level. If I were called as a teacher of the youth Sunday school – which is what I am right now - the ward where I am would be asked to sustain me in that position. It would then be asked if there are any opposed. If anyone opposes it, they have the ability to bring their concerns to our bishop, and if it goes any higher, to the stake president. A stake is usually in charge of several congrogations throughout a particular vicinity. If that happens, my calling may be called into question, and addressed accordingly. I have never personally seen that happen; things are always unanimous. I think people consider it a ritual to be honest. It’s an automatic response. Anyway, even the lowest member can oppose the calling or sustaining of a church authority. One person can’t necessarily stop it, but they are allowed to make their feelings known, first to the bishop, then the stake president. I don’t know what happens beyond that point. During our last general conference, which is a semi-annual event either attended by or broadcast too nearly the entire world, one of the things we do is sustain those general authorities, including the prophet. During one of the most recent ones, we actually had a very vocal couple oppose him. That stirred up interest because, while not unheard of, it is still very rare.
I tell you all of this to give you a better idea of what our prophet’s position is. When we sustain him, we follow what he says. We believe he does indeed speak for the church at large, and gets revelation from God. Anyone can receive revelation from God pertaining to their own lives, but no one, save the prophet can receive revelation for the entire church. That could sound pretty dangerous, and I think it’s one reason people like Terrence consider us a “cult”. It’s a major trust excersize, certainly. The thing about it though is if a prophet were to ever act in a way contrary to God’s commandments, or give revelation of his own divizing, he would be removed as prophet. Now, in the case of our conversation. There is only one “Mormon” church. Yes there are some offshoots, such as the fundamentalist LDS, but they are not recognized by us as the same religion. They have their own prophet, Warren Jeffs, a man who has acted in many ways which are, not only nasty by our, and many peple’s standards, but also in direct opposition to what we believe God’s laws to be. If someone like our Prophet was to suddenly completely embrace the idea of gay marriage and all it contains, certainly his authority would be called into question by many people. Because he is the prophet, many would take his revelation as just that, a revelation, and continue to follow him, trusting in him as they always have. Likely many of those would wonder why the sudden change of heart. It would be very convenient if, right now, that happened. Cody has brought up the convenience of our church’s major decisions regarding sexuality and race in the past, and at this time, I have no defense against that, as I feel the same way. In this case though, considering the way all scriptures, from the Bible, to the Book of Mormon, and all the others, including all the modern day talks about it feel about homosexuality, I really don’t see your scenario happening. We’ve clearly stated that, while God does not recognize homosexual marriage, and while the actual practice of it is wrong, homosexuals themselves are not evil, not bad, and should be afforded the same freedoms and rights as any other. We were against gay marriage – and still are, as a church ourselves because of the eternal nature of marriage and the family unit. But according to our creed, the articles of faith, we also subject ourselves to the laws of kings, presidents etc, essentially the laws of the land. Now that the law has passed – personally something I couldn’t be happier about – I think it’s more about acquiescence and equality. We also believe – another tenant in our articles of faith, that we reserve the right to worship almighty god according to the dictates of our own conscience, and we afford all others that same right. That really sort of tells me it isn’t our place to lobby against it legally, though again, from an eternal perspective, I do see why we do. I’ve mentioned the dycotamy I feel about the subject. As for if our prophet, a married man of many and many a year suddenly came out gay, or transgender? Well, again, I can’t see that happening, but were it to do so, I expect he would willingly step down from the church as its head. I can’t say for sure, because such a thing has, according to my knowledge, never happened. We do have gay memebers of our church though who are very active members. I believe there are even some stories about their experiences floating around out there. I have no doubt we have a support system in place for people who find themselves in that position. We have supports for a lot fo things. We even have an entirely addiction recovery program, covering all manner of addictions.
So, growing up as a transgender pan romantic demisexual person with
Episcopalian parents, grandparents, and rest of family, i was never excepted. To
clarify though, i was a born female, but i identify as a male. As for pan
romantic, it basically means that i can be attracted to people of any gender
identity including male, female, gender, bigender, trigender, gender fluid, things
like that. Demisexual was discussed in another topic, but i'm not attracted to
anyone without being emotionally connected to them. to get back to my point
though, i was raised in a church that is often seen as the most excepting, but i
was never excepted. I was the poor blind kid that Jesus didn't fix yet. I had to
act feminine and straight or risk basically being forced into conversion therapy. I
was treated like a person who didn't deserve to exist. So Leo, thank you for
excepting your daughter. I would just like to say that its not always an easy
thing to be lgbt and religious, but it should be easier.
Thankyou for posting that. It's very interesting and brings a lot of perspective and humanity to hear from people who are members of the LGBT community. I honestly think it's very important, as a religious person, to be friends with members of that community. It helps keep things in perspective and helps us think about things from another point of view. it also helps when we remember that the people we're discussing are, in fact, real people, with thoughts, feelings emotions and trials to face. What I mean by that is, when discussing any group, one usually considers rights of the group as a whole, but not so much the individual human element of a group. And now I’m going to be silent, because I’m rambling. I must admit, on the subject that I’ve never encountered the terms “demisexual, tri gender, or gender flow before. Nor have I had any real opportunity to engage with a person who identifies as trans-gender.
Even if you haven't encountered the terms, its still a very very good thing that
your trying to understand, except things and understand that we are people too.
I don't mind questions about it or anything really to do with lgbt because i feel
like its something that should be normalized.
Leo, you're a good father. A fantastic father, even. Screw the whole religious debate when it comes to your own kid. It's all good and well to debate behind a keyboard with people you'll probably never meet, but when it's about your own loved ones, you just gotta shut up and listen. And try to understand so you can support. And be grateful that they're willing to show you their side of the story; that they trust you to give them that support they're looking for.
I have a lot of respect for you, and this thread just reaffirms it.
That's all.
Thanks all.
Thanks Frozen Teardrop for your explanation.
Thanks Remy for explaining how your church works.
I'm of the opinion, even if it differs from some LGBT, that this stuff is biological.
I know it takes time to figure it out for people. But no, insofar as I have read --
from real hard sciences people -- bisexuality is not a "fence sitter", it's just
attraction to both.
What I have learned of late, it's not just the extremely religious people who can
make an LGBT person of faith feel discounted. Because their faith can be so
important to them, like in the case of my daughter, it's easy for us to make
them feel discounted regarding their faith. Even when we mean well. She
belongs to a crowd few people talk about. Frozen Teardrop I understand from
what you're saying that you were expected to play the straight cis part just to
get by in that religious setting. Hiding a major part of yourself, or even a minor
one, for the gratifications of others is pretty morally icky.
Remy, as to your question about her mom? She's supportive of her daughter's
concerns. I wouldn't speak for Her of course, but will say Her faith is not that of
Terrance and other similar people. She's had Her own struggles being a natural-
born and self-cultivated leader, where many in churches place an artificial cap
on what people with two x chromosomes can do.
Our daughter came out to us separately, but she had different concerns from
each of us. Naturally, for instance, when coming out to her mom, she wouldn't
have to stress how important her faith was, like she did me, making it clear she
wasn't interested in the skeptical arguments against faith in general or LGBT
and faith in particular.
Frozen, are you a member of any faith community anymore,? Just curious and
interested in any insight if you're still trying to remain in that space, and how
you do.
Domestic Goddess, as always, thank you.
Leo
I am Wiccan now. Not because i'm lgbt, but because it fits me more and it
makes more sense to me now. I agree that its biological, mostly because... Why
would you choose to be attracted to a gender? Yes, there are the ones who do it
for attention, but i'm talking about people who are actually LGBT.
I am Wiccan too and bi.
We have talked about this some Leo in public chat.
I knew how you'd react before you did, so.
Thanks for all your responses.
It does seem that LGBT folks tend towards Wicca or some other form of native
spirituality. I admit before I realized I don't believe in the gods, I toyed with the
notion of the Path of Heroes, or Odinism, as I do love the Norse mythologies,
and I actually think it's good for everyone to learn from the folklore of their
ancestors. But they aren't real to me, even if the tales are of value.
No, I imagine Christians aren't the only ones your daughter has taken crap from. There's plenty of mud-slinging by the other side. A lot of LGBT people, even the ones who claim to be the most tolerant and open-minded, will feel she should leave her faith now that she's decided she's one of them. They won't understand how she can stay with it, and instead of putting the understanding and tolerance they preach into practice, they will criticize her for staying with her faith. That's why I said, I have no doubt she's on a difficult path from both sides, and I'm glad she has both your and your wife's support.
When the Christians have rejected us for so many years, is it any wonder that we finally figured out that it was best to turn away from that religion?
Leo, I hope your daughter reads the Bible and asks God to help her understand the meaning of its words. After all, the Bible says the act of being with someone of one's same gender is wrong.
Hey, Leo, I have to say that I really respect you for just trying to understand. That's more than can be said for a lot of people, Christian or otherwise. People believe in different things, but as long as you're not hurting anyone, what's the issue? Why can't people just get on with their lives, without being told their lifestyle or the way they do things is wrong? That applies to everyone: people who think that being LGBTQ+ is wrong, and people who are LGBT and think your daughter should turn away from her faith.
Thanks all.
Alicia I'm afraid you're right. Anthony as an atheist I have to say the most
logical path would seem to me for an LGBT person to end up outside the faith.
However, She has read the Bible and "in context," Chelsea. She's at a Christian
college right now, to be honest, which was admittedly difficult for me but
something she practically begged of me and said She'd find a way to go to. Now
this one isn't what I think of as a Christian college, they're not six-day
Creationists or 1980s evangelicals, they're "liberal Christians" and she's getting
a degree in social work, which in my upbringing Christians would've called
"communist".
Anthony I just don't think it's as easy as you or I might imagine it is; she's very
passionate about this stuff, to the point She really gets upset sometimes about
the more skeptical arguments which is why I've learned to just chill with that
stuff at home.
Chelsea, she has read the Bible and commentaries, I'd have to say it appears
She seems to understand some about it that I didn't; I thought the same as you
about how the Bible speaks on this topic, which made me personally say "The
Bible must clearly be wrong on this issue." I realize that's not what it did for
you, and I've never been LGBT myself, but speaking as an engineer if the parts
don't fit and the arguments don't match up I'm thoroughly unconvinced, as if an
intern presented me proudly with their program full of bugs.
Take a good look at the passage at the end of Romans chapter 1, for instance. It
reads like a philosopher soft sciences paltry attempt at a flow chart, attempting
to draw association between turning from faith and turning gay. Now, the
problem with that is apostasy is rather common in scientific and industrialized
societies, but being LGBT is still statistically very rare. And will be, as otherwise
would not be genetically viable. That argument's a dud, and if your guy Paul
was indeed educated by the Greeks as many believe, he ought to have known
better from Aristotelian and Pythagorean natural sciences and proofs. Nobody
with a Greek education would have written something so incredibly silly. You
think the works of Aristotle, or even Plato who was far less scientific, would
have drawn such associations? Sorry, he collapses the LGBT argument in my
mind by such a grievous error. Of course, I don't necessarily believe Paul existed
as advertised, and probably someone with a basic humanities education and
some Socratic Rhetoric wrote his works. Aristotle and Pythagorus would have
slapped him silly for making such illogical non sequitur associations in that
passage alone. Many of his other arguments you can see his Socratic method
and how he arrives at his conclusions, but he never ought to have tried his hand
at progressive cause/effect relationship like he did at the end of that passage.
Now, Christians like my daughter will say "context" this, and "the times" that. I
don't know; hers is more of a soft sciences and humanities education. I guess
they can make it work.
But the irony is, I read the passage and concluded as Chelsea has, that the
passage seems proscriptive, albeit very poorly done, but I'm an atheist. And my
daughter's Christian and finds something else.
I know there are other passages and inferences, but I draw attention to that
particular one because Paul is their main man. And, since he's alleged to be
Greek-educated he doesn't get the same pass that we would some Bronze'aged
party who hasn't got the same analytical tools. Again, doubtful this was a real
Paul, just some humanities-educated person who knew enough Socratic method
and enough Jewish lore to string the situation together. The evangelicals like
Romans 1, so ask yourself if a proof like that would pass junior high geometry
class when doing a basic proof. Because that's what it looks like he's trying to
do there. Maybe my daughter's right, maybe I've got it all wrong, I don't know.
But we don't argue that stuff anymore.
Alicia's right, she doesn't want to be dictated to by either side of extremists.
Way too deep for me. I believe in God, as it were, but I'd personally be ashamed to associate with most of the people who proudly scream Christianity. I've seen how they live and how they judge and their double standards and lies, and I'm not interested in partaking of it. Call me closed minded or whatever. I don't put others down for what they believe, and all I ask for is the same respect. Most of the so called Christians that I've encountered, just can't seem to grasp this concept. some have even told me that homosexuality is the most unforgiveable sin, so I'm going to hell anyway. My response is, then why even bother? My fait is predetermined, so I might as well just saddle up and enjoy the ride.
I'm glad that your daughter has found a place where she's accepted. I'm happy that she is working toward what seems to be a very good cause, in my own opinion. If I was around these newer aged Christians where it's safe to be gay and Christian, it might do me a world of good. I really don't know, but since it's something I've never experienced, I just know that the hot stove burns me when I place my hand on it, and I know that the Christians judge and condemn me, so there ya have it.
I think for me, the problem with Christianity as a whole is that I wasn't raised in a loving Christian environment. it was a god fearing one, where we were shipped off to church more as a way to get rid of us for a few hours than anything. If we acted up and it was found out, we went to bed without lunch, and didn't get up until Monday morning. It was hard for me to associate any of this with a loving god. Then when the whole subject of being gay came up, it got even worse. Back then, we didn't have the internet, so research was slow and difficult. We didn't have such a wide range of social interaction, so everyone thought they were the only one facing a certain problem. Things were just sort of kept hush hush and not talked about back then. So I really am happy that there are such things as Christian churches who welcome the LGBT as well. It's refreshing.
Just wanted to put that out there, in case my last post came off as way too harsh.
I didn't find it harsh, Anthony. If not for my daughter I would think like you do.
I just find it interesting how in the 80s you'd never hear of a Christian going to
social work college, that was considered communist. Now she does this, and it's
actually a Christian college, and they have it all wrapped in their version of
faith.
Lol I'm afraid if she knew your story, she'd probably tell you what she told me,
that the evangelicals "ruined it" for you, and "weren't doing it right"..
For my part, so long as I see her being safe and not mistreated then I am
dedicated to not resisting what she does in that space. I know it upset her when
I told her, but I'm not sorry I said, anyone who acts against her does so at their
peril. It's all different for her kind, though, they're "Christian pacifist" if you can
believe that.
Ecclesiastes is perhaps wrong: there must be something new under the sun.
Whether it's Christianity reinventing itself to remain relevant, as many of my
fellow skeptics think? Perhaps so. But then why the pacifism? Folks like Bower
and Dobson and others were clearly marketing geniuses to saddle their faith
with military arms as the crusaders of old did, which is probably in part what
makes evangelicalism so popular, the war games motif that runs through their
thought, and all their apocalyptic fantasies.
I'll admit to you Anthony, hearing her talk sometimes makes me feel like I'm
looking into the twilight zone.
But so long as she's safe and unmolested by the wish-they-were-Isis
fundamentalist types, I'm okay with it, even if I don't get most of it.
If you stop to think of it though, Christian pacifism makes total sense. And so does open acceptance of gay people in the Christian church. How? Here again, I’m no major biblical scholar. Nor am I gunna suddenly surprise everybody here and declare myself a Christian. What I am is accepting that there are Christians out there who hold to both views. I know one, and we’re really good friends. But the gist of it is this: Christ said that the greatest commandment, as I understand it, is to love God and love your neighbor as yourself. When you stop and think about it, this is the simplest commandment, as my friend would say, and the most confounding. Because it means loving everybody despite everything. This means ideally there should be no war. That’s how the pacifism comes into play. Unfortunately, the major flaw in this ideal is that we still haven’t evolved enough to embrace that ideal and get rid of war. War is based on hatred. The crusaders were the ultimate hypocrites. The Christofascists, in this regard, are no better than those medieval hypocrites. Neither the crusaders nor the Christofascists of today who espouse war would have been looked on with any favor by Christ, I would imagine.
Now, as for gays being accepted in Christianity? Here again, I’m gunna repeat something I’ve said in the past. Christ never mentioned anything about homosexuality in any of the four gospels. We know Paul did, but those books were not in the original four gospels, and in any event, he was not an original disciple. Henever even met the guy. But getting back to the four gospels, again Christ said to love everybody. Unfortunately for the Christofascists, this means loving your gay cousin. You don’t really have a choice if you wanna call yourself a Christian in the truest sense of the word. And since Christ never even mentioned it, I submit that there are at least two possible interpretations where this lack is concerned. Either Christ believed that nothing more need be said because there are passages that condemn homosexuality in the Old Testament long before he ever started preaching, and hence the obvious need not be overstated. The second interpretation is that maybe, just maybe, he didn’t give a rat’s ass about homosexuality or whether you loved someone of the same or opposite gender as long as you lived your life according to his basic commandment. So, yeah. Actually, Leo, your daughter makes a lot of sense to me. And I applaud you for how you’ve handled the situation with her. Not every parent would. Certainly not the Christofascists.
If you read the teachings of Jesus and some other profits, your sex life just wasn't important.
Leo, I'm sorry I haven't gotten back to you; I just kept forgetting. I will do so.
Thanks RDFreak I look forward to your responses, whenever you got time and
however is comfortable.
I understand Anthony's point, I really do, but for my daughter I would probably
see things that way. Johndy, that was a really good post. Thanks for that I really
appreciate it, food for thought.
I perfectly understand why so many homosexuals are driven away from the church. Where I grew up you needed to be careful about who you told about that kind of thing. My gay friends worried about assault, were regularly subjected to harassment, because god said no homosexuals. They've been fired from jobs for no other reason than their sexual orientation. My family and friends should never have to suffer because of someones opinions about something that is a non issue to them. And I've met a good few Christians that object to the treatment of these people who would never say anything, because why rock the boat.
That much abuse harassment and discrimination caused peopleI know to consider taking their lives. Some of them have turned to drugs. I'd bet at least one of you on this sight knew someone who actually took their life in part because of some of these reasons.
Christians have regularly altered their views over the centuries on so many subjects, with or without direct bible support. Its long past time for them to stand up and take more of an active role in saying "enough is enough. No more people should be murdered, harassed discrimonated against and abused in the name of our faith." I'm not calling for people to protest, or even make a big deal out of this. I'm just hoping people start putting their own personal beliefs aside long enough to remember these people are human. If my friends and family had had a little more support, I know they'd have had a much easier experience coming out. I'll never forget the fears they had or the suffering they faced.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_90eOj6iWXI
leo, thank you thank you thank you!!!!!!!!!!! here's a shocker. I'm an evangelical Christian. I believe in a living god, that jesus died on the cross for my sins and that he rose in three days. on the other hand, the church I attend is wa-a-a-a-a-a-ay wrong on the issues of sexuality. the history of ancient rome and Greece has always fascinated me. i've read alot about their lifestyles etc. for years uncounted I've said the same things you wrote to people. the usual answer is that I'm a. stupid, b., wrong, or c. stupid and wrong. so I just rant to my husband who sighs and tells me to take a deep cleansing breath and relax. give your daughter a huge hug and tell her you love her.
Hi Leo. Just echoing what most people have said: I have enormous respect for you for trying hard to be a parent first and an atheist second. A dear friend of mine died recently; she committed suicide, largely because she suffered from severe mental illness, but also because she was a lesbian who never gained acceptance from most of the ones she loved. Her family considered her fiancee "the piece of shit who turned our daughter gay" and still do. Her fiancee essentially saved my friend's life, took care of her, bought her two more years, and held her hand through everything even as her parents complained that my friend would never just "snap out of it" and "straighten her life out". They ignore facts--facts like my friend having come out to me before she'd even met her fiancee, or any other woman she was truly interested in, for that matter. I am continually baffled and angered by their choice to harass and abuse the love of their daughter's life, and even more angered by choosing to be religious crusaders first and parents second. So, I am so grateful for parents like Leo.
I don't agree with the lifestyle, but I would testify that my pastor preaches not to hate those that are. So, while I won't change my thinking, I do believe the gay-bashers who use Christianity to excuse their behavior, are wrong, and I won't tolerate someone speaking hateful, about anyone.
Blessings,
Sarah
Thanks all.
It's been an interesting ride. You could say it's just one of many things going
on. She's been living with us for a few weeks and I, working from home, caring
for her through a back injury. I'm glad it's basically just a thing now, if that
makes sense. Of course, everyone deals with things differently, but now that I
understand she's safe at the college she's at, and not getting any guff from
Christian friends, I don't really think about it too much. Especially I don't worry
about the apparent dichotomy between her being bi and having faith. I admit
that some skeptics I used to associate with were pretty fundamentalist in their
approach, trying to give me some shit about why I didn't do more to
unconvinced her of her faith.
And here's the actual truth. Not only do I not want to do so; it's her life and
she's safe with it. But also, I don't really understand the liberal Christianity the
way I did the industry-standard apologetics. Even if I wanted to, I could not
deconstruct it as I know not its parts and have no real roadmap for it. But in the
end of it all, I don't want to do so. It's hers.
RDFreak I do still await your response if you ever get around to it, if only for my
own benefit, to hear from another person in her situation.
Anyway I reread this topic and many of your posts I found very meaningful, so
thank you. In the end, ideas are just that, ideas. Especially those we cannot
prove or entirely disprove. But people are people. My daughter is not a member
of some collective hive mind called LGBT, she's a person. Part of what makes
her up is she is bisexual. But as I told her recently, your evolutionary history is
not insect, but mammalian, more specifically primate. Primates are social
creatures, yes, but not the hive mind that some insect species are, or many
ideologues wish they were.
No one has said homosexuals aren't human, or that they hate them. I've never said that--as I've said, the Bible states it is wrong though, like it or not. Look in Liviticus, if you're so inclined.
I'll never understand how people term disagreement with the homosexual lifestyle as hatred. It's far from hatred, because as someone pointed out, we're supposed to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. I do exactly that; however, that doesn't mean I like what the people do. I don't have to, in order to be friends with them.
Yet Christ never spoke of homosexuality in any of the four gospels, correct? Plus, no references to homosexuality were found in the original ten commandments. And the big question, in any case, is why did this god supposedly proscribe against homosexuality? Just cuz? Why didn't Christ ever speak about it? Or is there a gospel we haven't seen yet?