Christians, why do you hate Gays?

[Alceste]

No actually a few years ago a group of us did a poll to see what the Non-christians thought about same sex marriage and their main objections. really and truly there were a significant amount of people stating it is just un natural.I would say i personnally polled aprox 200, though the group had well over a thousand. I do not know the stats of how many used the against nature reasoning, but it was significant and not to be cast out as irrelevant.

Where did you find 200 non-Christians, and how did you establish that they weren't religious?

 

[Katzpur]

There is no such thing as a true Christian, at least not an accepted understanding of the term. Catholics don't consider Protestants to be true Christians and vice versa. Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are not considered to be true Christians by anyone but themselves. As a Unitarian Christian I'm considered a Heretic and not a true Christian by many but that doesn't change the fact that I consider myself a Christian and that's all the truly matters.

Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses and Unitarian Christians are considered true Christians by people other than themselves. It's mostly just the fundamentalist Christians who hate us all. That said, I frequently remind myself of my favorite Catholic Christian's (Mother Teresa) words:

"For you see, in the end, it is between you and God.
It never was between you and them anyway."

 

[Onkara]

where do you see Jesus removed the law? and older verses were annulled?

Hi Lady B
Jesus removed the law according to Paul:

Romans 6.4
Don’t let sin keep ruling your lives. You are ruled by God’s kindness and not by the Law.

6.15
What does all this mean? Does it mean we are free to sin, because we are ruled by God’s wonderful kindness and not by the Law? Certainly not!

7.4
4 That is how it is with you, my friends. You are now part of the body of Christ and are dead to the power of the Law. You are free to belong to Christ, who was raised to life so that we could serve God. 5 When we thought only of ourselves, the Law made us have sinful desires. It made every part of our bodies into slaves who are doomed to die. 6 But the Law no longer rules over us. We are like dead people, and it cannot have any power over us. Now we can serve God in a new way by obeying his Spirit, and not in the old way by obeying the written Law.

Link: Romans 7 CEV - An Example from Marriage - My friends, - Bible Gateway

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

There is no such thing as a true Christian, at least not an accepted understanding of the term. Catholics don't consider Protestants to be true Christians and vice versa. Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are not considered to be true Christians by anyone but themselves. As a Unitarian Christian I'm considered a Heretic and not a true Christian by many but that doesn't change the fact that I consider myself a Christian and that's all the truly matters.

When measured by the "standard of Trinitarinism"
Unitarians, Mormons and JW's are not Christian.
I am an Anglican Heretic with Unitarian beliefs with a view on God, his Son and the Holy spirit more akin to Mormon understanding.

All these are beliefs about God and Jesus, held by people since the dawn of Christianity.
Catholics do consider Trinitarian Protestants to be Christian and accept their baptism as valid.

It is this question of Baptism and belief in the trinity that is the major sticking point between "Christian faiths"
Very Few Unitarians believe in the divinity of Jesus, so they are not accepted by any other Christian church.

 

[sojourner]

What basic human rights are being denied them by christians?

According to Beverly Eileen Mitchell, in her 2009 book, Plantations and Death Camps: religion, Ideology, and Human Dignity, (Fortress Press), there were several strategies used by "the system" in the dehumanization of American slaves in the 18th and 19th centuries, and the German Jews during the Holocaust. Some of these are also being used in dehumanizing homosexuals. They are:

Set apart as pariahs: Today, homosexuals are being identified as the "destroyers of family" and as "subverting biblical marriage." Forget the heterosexual affairs that are rampant, the advocacy and overuse of divorce, drug abuse, physical violence, and emotional abuse that are all destroying marriages. Homosexual marriage is somehow the grandaddy of them all, and homosexuals are being unfairly lumped in with these miscreants as the ones most responsible for the downfall of marriage.

Wrenching familial separation: In some cases, homosexuals are barred from church affiliation, are forbidden to enter ministry, ousted from homes, and separated from families who see them as dirty, sinful, and not "good enough" to associate with. In some cases, a narrow theological stance condemns them to hell, just for being who they are. In most cases, homosexuals are kept from being fully with the ones they love by being denied marriage.

Deprivations: This is related to familial separation, but it goes further than that. Homosexuals are deprived in their relationships of the same cultural "stamp of approval" that others enjoy. They are also deprived of sharing fully in the ministry of the church, in which Christ is evoked in the midst of the relationship. Animals do not marry. Neither do homosexuals. The dehumanization becomes apparent.

Brutality: In some cases, known or suspected homosexuals are subjected to physical harm. In addition to that, they are more frequently subjected to emotional abuse in the insinuation that there is something inherently "wrong" with them -- that they are, somehow, "broken."

Transportation: Blacks and Jews were subject to nightmarish transportations. While homosexuals are not so treated, a vestige of that system is continued, in that, in most cases, homosexuals who wish to marry are forced to relocate to gay-friendly states or countries, and cannot return home, if they wish their marriage to be honored.

In illustration of "how Christians deny basic human rights," here's a link to a short speech, made by a clergy friend of mine, speaking at a city council meeting. There's a bill before the council to include homosexuals specifically in a local anti-discrimination law:
[youtube]A8JsRx2lois[/youtube]
OFFICIAL Preacher Phil Snider gives interesting gay rights speech - YouTube

 

[Storm]

I said a group of us informally polled and my own personal poling was aprox 200 people, those that I actually talked with, and so I surely can speak for myself right? I do not know why you insinuate I am lying to you,because I misread an article now all I say must be inaccurate? For what purpose? Frankly I don't take stock in what you believe or disbelieve, but I would ask you for some respect with your arguments please.

No, I don't believe it because I've done surveys before, professionally. 200 completions takes about 4 days of 6 hour shifts.

 

[sojourner]

No I commend you for your fairness, I am only trying to show how it is seen as hate minded Christians because we refuse to allow it in the churches and that is very unfair. There is a story recently how a chapel refused to perform a same sex marriage and they were sued and forced to shut down. what are your thoughts on that?

But it's not unfair. It is hate -- disguised as piety, to be sure, but it is hate at its core, and here's why:

To say that someone is "wrong" or "broken" because of the way they were made, and to deny the full participation of Christ in their union, and to bar certain people and set them apart from the cultural "norm" is violent and dehumanizing. Violence and dehumanization are acts of hate.

To either perpetrate acts of violence, or to be complicit in those acts done by others, in the name of 3 or 4 biblical references to sexual violence, claiming that those passages are injunctions against homosexuality, is irresponsible and unfair. People are being hurt in the "name of Jesus" and that's just wrong, no matter how you cut it.

 

[sojourner]

Memyself:

Also notice how all he is describing is behavior. If the homosexual does not perform homosexual acts, then he jumps out of that condemnation.

The behavior that's being described isn't homosexual love -- it's rape.

 

[Jainarayan]

Today, homosexuals are being identified as the "destroyers of family" and as "subverting biblical marriage." ...

This one makes me because those who use it are grasping at straws. I cannot understand how two men or two women will destroy another couple's marriage. Do these people who believe this think gay men are going to seduce straight married men away from their wives and families? No, rather, they have the equally inane belief that same-sex marriage makes a mockery of "traditional" marriage. Case in point: years ago my sister made that very claim. However, with her son, my nephew, working on his second acrimonious divorce in 15 years; another niece divorced because she fooled around with a guy at work; my steady monogamous partnership of over 16 1/2 years (the last 6 legally recognized by NJ), she has changed her tune.

 

[sojourner]

Lady B:

You see racial segregation is the same as refusal to perform a ceremony contrary to Scripture? cmon, being black is not a sin in any way shape or form and segregation is indeed wrong and a violation of human rights, This is not the same.

In fact, it is the same. Condemnation, separation, and denial of full participation in the culture based upon who one is, is segregation.

 

[sojourner]

To go further in clarification, It is not against the bible to love one another, serving one another and caring for their needs. However The church must take a firm stnd against what the Bible deems as sin, and not in any way support sin. doesn't mean a gay man should be shunned by the church, He just should never see justification for his sexual preferences in God's word and the believers.

It saddens me really that the gay community sees christians as hateful homophobes, It really is not the case. Yes Christians must hold on to their beliefs if they feel it is indeed God's laws, which we do. The church does not need to comform to any man's desires and we will not, to do so would be against a holy God who instituted marriage between a man and a woman.

This is not hateful, this is love. whether we as a people agree in the sin nature of homosexuality or not, If we truly care for our fellow man, we should always uphold truth as we know it and not give in to men and their desires of the flesh. Unfortuanatly truth has become subjective for many, but for Christians it is objectively the word of God, The Bible.

I am not a homophobe by any means. I do not hate and I do not wish anyone ill will. I would not discriminate them, and I would sit and share a meal and love them. I just would not tell them what they are doing is Godly, and I would never perform a wedding ceremony. I can't Go against God knowingly and willingly even for my relative whom I love so much.

So, not including them fully in the culture of the church and society is "caring for their needs" -- how, exactly?
How is homosexual love a sin, again? I just don't read it that way.
No, it's hate wrapped up in piety.
But you are discriminating against them. In what way is judging someone as "unGodly" for being the way they are not discrimination?
You are putting your head in the sand and are complicit in the problem by doing so.

 

[sojourner]

LADY B:

should we tolerate the pedophiles too? or Is it hateful to not do so?

First of all, pedophilia is a mental illness. Homosexuality is not. Second, perping on kids is an act of violence. Consensual, adult sexual relations is not. There's simply no comparison.

 

[oldbadger]

It's called Christianity, not Paulianity.

Paul's not in charge.

Yes he was, and in most Christian creeds he still is. He took hold of the teachings and name of Jesus, and converted all to his own idea of a religion. Where Jesus intended his teaching for the Jewish people, Paul challenged James and others and managed to gain their agreement to seek Gentile converts., thereafter taking control of that whole part of christianity. He took words of Jesus (in my opinion, out of context) and spun them into masses of 'laws' and rules of conduct. His convert John is believed to have witten the fourth Gospel, to which worrying additions were made. More than half of the NT 'books' are either about Paul or by Paul, and in discussions with Christians (I find that) Pauline books are quoted many times more than others.

Christianity (big C) is Pauline. But most devout Christians that I know have dropped many of Paul's self-rules and self-laws, which is good, because they now focus more on Jesus's teachings and guidance. In the UK this is a massively good idea, because since 1976 it has been a criminal offence to discriminate against religions or creeds (I meant to write sexes, marital states or sexual preferences) ...... obviously there have been incidents which have caused our Governments to adapt and rethink, but we seem to be much more tolerant than some American States. So these Christians are falling away from Pauline doctrine and may... one day... just go back to basics, taking Jesus's teachings and assuming that He would eventually have allowed all to share in and benefit from his ministry

We do have our prejudiced morons, and hate attacks and even hate murders have occurred here, but our anti-discrimination laws are intense and strongly enforced. Having been taught so much by so many on this forum, I can tell you straight that my sense of national pride has risen from 'very low' to 'significantly higher'!

 

[oldbadger]

Yeah, what did Gandhi say? Something like "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians; they are so unlike your Christ". It may be apocryphal but it 's too often true.

Ha ha! You got it in one!! When Christians will finally throw off the Pauline yoke, and go back to Jesus's true teachings, then Christians will at last be trying to be like Jesus wanted them to be.

In Europe we have caught too many so-called 'christian priests' and even 'christian nunns' doing truly dreadful things to minors and young people for anybody to dare to tell decent loving gays and lesbians that they are wrong. I tell you.....when I came onto this forum I did not understand why so many members identified themselves as 'Proud Gay' or 'Proud Lesbian'. After learning about American dark-age judgements I am surprised that they don't identify themselves as 'Defiant'!! I just don't know how they cope with such discrimination.

 

[Lady B]

There's a contradiction there. Voting based on religious beliefs is making laws based on religious beliefs. Moreover, this is not a democracy. It is a representative republic. Democracy is tyranny and rule of the majority. Our representatives' responsibilities are to ensure fairness to all citizens within the constraints of the Constitution. For example, if 90% of voting Americans are heterosexual and opposed to same-sex marriage, is it fair to the other 10% who are gay, to not be able to marry? Is that what the US is based on, majority rule? I think not. :no:

There is no contradiction, we have the right to vote in how we believe, same as homosexuals have the right to vote per their convictions, it is not the voters fault they are a majority and thus laws are passed based on the majoral vote. should some of the voters lie in their convictions to make it fair? is that what you want? would a homosexual go vote against same sex marriage if his vote was the majority would that be fair? It seems that your blaming christians for using their convictions to vote, but arent homosexuals doing the same?

 

[Lady B]

LADY B:

First of all, pedophilia is a mental illness. Homosexuality is not. Second, perping on kids is an act of violence. Consensual, adult sexual relations is not. There's simply no comparison.

The comparison is that the church holds both as sin, not in degree but both things are considered sin, so asking the church to condone one can be asking for anything against The scriptures to be condoned.

 

[Jainarayan]

However The church must take a firm stnd against what the Bible deems as sin, and not in any way support sin.

What about those of us who don't belong to Christianity? Your scriptures and churches are not binding on us. So why should we be forced to accept your world view when there is no evidence that your scriptures are any more valid and true than mine? Your scriptures say they are true; so do mine. So how about we get religion out of civil law? If any religious institution wants to perform same sex marriages, great; if not, great. You're also missing the point that no marriage performed by any clergyperson... a rabbi, priest, minister, preacher, imam, pujari, in any religious setting is valid without a state-issued marriage license. People who never get married in church are no less married when married by a judge. These arguments by people citing God's laws and scriptures in light of civil law are really quite tiresome and old. They only show how many people are unaware of the real world and civil laws, and are stuck in the pages of a scriptural book.

 

[Lady B]

What about those of us who don't belong to Christianity? Your scriptures and churches are not binding on us. So why should we be forced to accept your world view when there is no evidence that your scriptures are any more valid and true than mine? Your scriptures say they are true; so do mine. So how about we get religion out of civil law? If any religious institution wants to perform same sex marriages, great; if not, great. You're also missing the point that no marriage performed by any clergyperson... a rabbi, priest, minister, preacher, imam, pujari, in any religious setting is valid without a state-issued marriage license. People who never get married in church are no less married when married by a judge. These arguments by people citing God's laws and scriptures in light of civil law are really quite tiresome and old. They only show how many people are unaware of the real world and civil laws, and are stuck in the pages of a scriptural book.

I do not agree that the church is setting the laws. The voters set the law and we all have the right to vote do we not? should we go vote against our convictions to make it more fair?

 

[sojourner]

The comparison is that the church holds both as sin, not in degree but both things are considered sin, so asking the church to condone one can be asking for anything against The scriptures to be condoned.

No, "it" doesn't. Some parts of it hold homosexuality as sin. But as I've pointed out, the "sin" isn't homosexuality. The sin is male rape. Rape is violent. perping on kids is violent. Love is never violent. Love is condoned by scriptural text -- and by the church.

 

[Lady B]

I explained this already. If you phone a random number of Americans and ask whether they oppose gay marriage, over half will say no, and about 40% will say yes. Although it is a minority opinion, it is a very politically active and motivated minority. When it comes to ballot measures, only people who vote get to have a say, so if more people from one side than the other turn up at the polls, it is decided that way rather than by popular opinion.

Nobody who rages against homophobia is sneakily voting against gay marriage. That's wishful thinking. Little by little marriage equality is gaining acceptance, state by state, country by country. Gay marriage is already completely legal and equal to straight marriage in my country and many others. Civil unions are legal in 9 states, and full, equal marriage is legal in 6. There are many gay marriage measures on the ballot in this election, and the momentum is certainly in favour of marriage equality.

Check out this map for more info.

Same-sex marriage status in the United States

If same sex marriage is the momentum, it would be the majority and the laws would be passed accordingly. You surely cannot blame conservatives and christians for showing up at the polls can you?