The Issue of Homosexuality

[Draka]

Once again, do you believe that all Christianity, (not Christians but the religion itself), hates homosexuality? Just because a lot of Christians use their religion to justify their prejudices doesn't mean that the prejudice is inherent in the religion itself. So my question is do you believe that Christianity as a religion promotes hatred towards homosexuals? I don't think you do but that is the perception I get from some of your posts so I'm looking for a clarification.

A religion can't hate anything. No more than any other philosophy can hate. The scriptures that Christianity are based upon lend very well to validation of discrimination and hate though. You read into all the smiting and "thou shalt not suffer...to live" and "their blood shall be upon them" and it's not a far cry to see where this judgement and disdain for others comes from. Ironic considering that there are also parts of the same book which preach non-judgement and loving each other. It is HOW the scriptures are taught and which parts of them are taught that lend to prejudice. So, it is not all Christians who take and teach discrimination and hate, but enough that do, with bible in hand, that it has made a difference. If it didn't, you wouldn't hear the constant arguments about the "sanctity of marriage", "against god", and so on. The vast majority of arguments against same sex marriage have been based upon religious beliefs, have they not? And as I said, we are not born with prejudices, we have to learn them from somewhere. It makes far more sense that people learned them religiously than learned them some other way first and went traipsing through religious beliefs trying to find a way to justify their prejudices. At least, that's how it makes sense to me.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

A religion can't hate anything. No more than any other philosophy can hate. The scriptures that Christianity are based upon lend very well to validation of discrimination and hate though. You read into all the smiting and "thou shalt not suffer...to live" and "their blood shall be upon them" and it's not a far cry to see where this judgement and disdain for others comes from. Ironic considering that there are also parts of the same book which preach non-judgement and loving each other. It is HOW the scriptures are taught and which parts of them are taught that lend to prejudice. So, it is not all Christians who take and teach discrimination and hate, but enough that do, with bible in hand, that it has made a difference. If it didn't, you wouldn't hear the constant arguments about the "sanctity of marriage", "against god", and so on. The vast majority of arguments against same sex marriage have been based upon religious beliefs, have they not? And as I said, we are not born with prejudices, we have to learn them from somewhere. It makes far more sense that people learned them religiously than learned them some other way first and went traipsing through religious beliefs trying to find a way to justify their prejudices. At least, that's how it makes sense to me.

So you are saying that Christianity is not a religion that is inherently about hating gays and that a person has to choose to interpret it in that way and then teach it to others so that they also interpret it that way.

This is exactly what I meant when I said that people use the religion as an excuse for their hatred. It isn't a part of the religion, it is an interpretation and one that has to be taught. I'm not sure why you don't like the language I am using to describe the situation but it sure looks like we are seeing it in the same way.

 

[Alceste]

A religion can't hate anything. No more than any other philosophy can hate. The scriptures that Christianity are based upon lend very well to validation of discrimination and hate though. You read into all the smiting and "thou shalt not suffer...to live" and "their blood shall be upon them" and it's not a far cry to see where this judgement and disdain for others comes from. Ironic considering that there are also parts of the same book which preach non-judgement and loving each other. It is HOW the scriptures are taught and which parts of them are taught that lend to prejudice. So, it is not all Christians who take and teach discrimination and hate, but enough that do, with bible in hand, that it has made a difference. If it didn't, you wouldn't hear the constant arguments about the "sanctity of marriage", "against god", and so on. The vast majority of arguments against same sex marriage have been based upon religious beliefs, have they not? And as I said, we are not born with prejudices, we have to learn them from somewhere. It makes far more sense that people learned them religiously than learned them some other way first and went traipsing through religious beliefs trying to find a way to justify their prejudices. At least, that's how it makes sense to me.

Makes sense to me too. Some degree of xenophobia is innate because we are social mammals, and a big part of our bond with our own social group is mutual mistrust of outsiders. But I think what we do with those feelings and who we single out is learned behavior. Sometimes we can be persuaded to direct that innate tendency towards people we would otherwise have considered "us" rather than "them".

Because gay people look and act just like non-gay people and come from the same culture as non-gay people, they do not make a very good natural target for xenophobia. IOW, I am quite certain Christian and Islamic religious leaders teach children who would not otherwise have been fearful or mistrustful of GLBTG people to direct their innate mistrust of "outsiders" toward that group.

To get a general sense of the import of the religion factor, we can observe that the countries that are least tolerant of homosexuality are also the most religious (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Burma, the red states of the US, etc.) and the countries that are most tolerant are also the most secular (Canada, Denmark, Iceland, a growing number of blue states, etc).

 

[Draka]

So you are saying that Christianity is not a religion that is inherently about hating gays and that a person has to choose to interpret it in that way and then teach it to others so that they also interpret it that way.

This is exactly what I meant when I said that people use the religion as an excuse for their hatred. It isn't a part of the religion, it is an interpretation and one that has to be taught. I'm not sure why you don't like the language I am using to describe the situation but it sure looks like we are seeing it in the same way.

But it is as equally a part of it as anything else in the religion. It is there to pull from, that isn't disputed. There are many who would say that NOT standing against homosexuals is what is against the bible. That those who choose to accept, even tolerate, homosexuality are the ones doing the interpreting to their own desire. And also, if you were taught from the get go, and believed what you were taught, are you really choosing to interpret it to excuse your own already existent prejudice? At this point in time, in this country, it's not like you are raised without any knowledge of Christianity, or even Islam, to suddenly find out that they have scripture that goes against homosexuality and up and decide to choose to use that belief to substantiate your own pre-existent prejudice.

I think what we have here is a disagreement along the lines of chicken and the egg. (though we already know the egg came first )

 

[Draka]

Makes sense to me too. Some degree of xenophobia is innate because we are social mammals, and a big part of our bond with our own social group is mutual mistrust of outsiders. But I think what we do with those feelings and who we single out is learned behavior. Sometimes we can be persuaded to direct that innate tendency towards people we would otherwise have considered "us" rather than "them".

Because gay people look and act just like non-gay people and come from the same culture as non-gay people, they do not make a very good natural target for xenophobia. IOW, I am quite certain Christian and Islamic religious leaders teach children who would not otherwise have been fearful or mistrustful of GLBTG people to direct their innate mistrust of "outsiders" toward that group.

To get a general sense of the import of the religion factor, we can observe that the countries that are least tolerant of homosexuality are also the most religious (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Burma, the red states of the US, etc.) and the countries that are most tolerant are also the most secular (Canada, Denmark, Iceland, a growing number of blue states, etc).

That's exactly it. I tried to bring that up before as well. The less religious a country is the less inequality and discrimination issues. It's not that hard to see the link.

 

[Alceste]

So you are saying that Christianity is not a religion that is inherently about hating gays and that a person has to choose to interpret it in that way and then teach it to others so that they also interpret it that way.

This is exactly what I meant when I said that people use the religion as an excuse for their hatred. It isn't a part of the religion, it is an interpretation and one that has to be taught. I'm not sure why you don't like the language I am using to describe the situation but it sure looks like we are seeing it in the same way.

I can tell you why I have a (minor) problem with this language. It implies that the "teaching" that goes on in religious groups is somehow separate from the religion itself. As I see it, the teaching IS the religion. That's what happened at my church, anyway - every Sunday you go and listen to some dude or dudette in a smock talk about how to interpret cherry picked scripture in a way that reflects that church's ideological norms. Even the songs we sang had to do with how to interpret scripture and / or apply it to our lives. The craft projects we kiddies got up to were designed to reflect Bible stories that the church had singled out as particularly important. I don't remember anybody ever saying "hey, why not go read the Bible, study the history of Christianity and work everything out on your own" in church.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

But it is as equally a part of it as anything else in the religion. It is there to pull from, that isn't disputed. There are many who would say that NOT standing against homosexuals is what is against the bible. That those who choose to accept, even tolerate, homosexuality are the ones doing the interpreting to their own desire.

I disagree. It's been pretty well documented that the references to homosexuality in the OT are very few and far between and even they are constantly under debate as to whether they really meant homosexuality or not. And Jesus never mentioned it, ever. The fact is that you really have to stretch to make Christianity look like an anti-gay religion so, to me, its the haters looking for an excuse.

I think what we have here is a disagreement along the lines of chicken and the egg. (though we already know the egg came first )

Hey look, we do agree!

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I can tell you why I have a (minor) problem with this language. It implies that the "teaching" that goes on in religious groups is somehow separate from the religion itself. As I see it, the teaching IS the religion. That's what happened at my church, anyway - every Sunday you go and listen to some dude or dudette in a smock talk about how to interpret cherry picked scripture in a way that reflects that church's ideological norms. Even the songs we sang had to do with how to interpret scripture and / or apply it to our lives. The craft projects we kiddies got up to were designed to reflect Bible stories that the church had singled out as particularly important. I don't remember anybody ever saying "hey, why not go read the Bible, study the history of Christianity and work everything out on your own" in church.

I see what you are saying but that line of thought removes the ability to discuss the difference between what the religion is at its core vs what its adherents believe in their various sects.

 

[Alceste]

I see what you are saying but that line of thought removes the ability to discuss the difference between what the religion is at its core vs what its adherents believe in their various sects.

I suppose I perceive the brand of Christianity I was raised with to be a completely different religion than, for example, Catholicism or Pentecostalism. Each sect is teaching an ideology that is based on the Bible, but their ideologies have almost nothing in common, besides being called "Christianity".

Really, you can justify practically any philosophy with the Bible. It's a pretty fat book, covers a huge scope of topics and is incredibly inconsistent. That's why I lend more weight to what individual churches teach than what happens to be written in the Bible.

I doubt the members of my old church would be able to find much common ground with the members of gay-bashing Christian churches. If you base your religion on Revelations, you get a completely different ideology than if you base it on the Sermon on the Mount.