(Home-My Story)....... True, Tragic and Unnecessary Gay Youth Suicide Stories...................... (Español)
.
PART 2 - Page 11 of 34
Reasons for Continued Negativity Towards Homosexuals
Gay Sex is Morally Wrong Because It Makes Straights Very Uncomfortable?
Can The Bible Be Wrong? Is Slavery Justified In The Bible?
Over 5,900 Gay Friendly Christian Churches in the USA
The first reason is called "The
Tyranny of The Majority" and can best be understood by
remembering two things: Number one is that
prejudices throughout history have been created by the
majority imposing its will over a minority.
For centuries sexual attitudes, sexual taboos, and sexual practices have been
used by dominant groups in society to keep others subordinate. Those who
possess power define those who are powerless and then impose their own
definition on the ones defined. The guiding principle is to ensure the
comfort, the convenience, the happiness, and the well-being of the dominant
ones. (1) And secondly, history constantly
reminds us that majority opinions are nor necessarily true. Let’s talk about left-handedness as one example:
Until the 1930s in the twentieth century, left-handedness was considered
"abnormal", even sinister (from the Latin sinister, "on the left
side"), with left-handed children being forced - often at considerable
psychological cost - to use their "right [or correct]" hand. (2) For example elementary school
teachers throughout the USA and Europe would demand that their students only
use their right hand for writing and would often punish children for using
their left hand, typically by slapping it with a ruler or even tying it
behind their back. An example of such treatment involves 2 famous baseball
players in the USA during the 1920’s, Lou Gehrig and Babe Ruth, who both hit
and threw left-handed but wrote right-handed after enduring left-handed
suppression during their formative years. Left-handedness was often
interpreted as a sign of Satanic influence, and thus prohibited by many
societies. (Click
Here to read more.) There are examples in ancient Christian texts and drawings in
which the wicked or evil sit at the left hand of God, while the righteous
sit at the right hand of God during the Last Judgment. Now we think of such
prejudice as almost funny, but members of what many say is the “last
prejudice standing”, homosexuals and bisexuals, are not laughing. They know
that their homosexuality is just like left-handedness, something that
they have no control of, something that was just a given. It is a normal, if
minority variation of human nature, all within God's original blessing,
morally neutral. (3) So what is wrong is homophobia and religiously
based prejudice against people who have nothing wrong with them. God doesn’t make junk.
In what constitutes the
second reason for the continual negativity toward
homosexuals is the idea that “if your ox isn’t getting gored” you don’t have
to worry about the problem or you can just ignore it and hope that it will
go away. After all, why should anyone get themselves involved in such a
controversial subject like homosexuality unless they absolutely have to? The
fear is that people will start to think that you are “a homo”. The often
heard expression is “I don’t want to talk about it” when the subject comes
up. In other words 90% (or a large majority) of the people don’t do any real
investigation for the truth regarding homosexuality because they aren’t
personally affected (assuming that the widely help belief that only around
10% or less of the population is homosexual or bisexual. (4) So basically it
seems that the main types of heterosexuals that understand, like or love
homosexuals are the people who liked or loved homosexuals before they knew
they were homosexuals and realize that they are the same people after they
found out as they were before. These are the loving parents, grandparents,
aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters and other relatives, good friends and even
their own children, who care enough about these people to get themselves
informed and not only find out the truth but are open minded enough to
lovingly accept all the hard to understand complexities.
The
third reason is that people tend to be afraid of what they don’t
understand. Just because you feel really uncomfortable when you see 2 same
sex teenagers or adults, either kissing or holding hands in a romantic way
doesn’t mean that it’s wrong and that it is a sin. Homosexuals should be
able to show affection in public to the same degree that heterosexual
couples are allowed to. It is because society looks down on gays and
lesbians showing their love for each other in public that they wind up in
gay bars and bath houses to meet one another, because there are so few other
places to go. I plead guilty to this uncomfortable feeling in this situation
but I’m working on it and am determined to get over it. It’s just that we’ve
all been brainwashed. But really, our prior repressive social, cultural and
religious conditioning shouldn’t stop us from being open to and doing the
right thing.
Also, most heterosexuals think “Yuck!” and “That is so disgusting!” when
they think of homosexual sex. First of all, you shouldn’t be thinking about
it. Since it’s none of your business, you just need to move on and start
thinking about something you actually know something about! And secondly,
I’m very sorry, but that is an extremely poor reason to put a whole class of
people in the very real garbage. It is because of men and women’s limited
knowledge and understanding that Jesus told us not to judge. This point is
huge so I will repeat it - It is because of our limited understanding of
this world and our fellow human beings and their complexities that Christ
implored us not to judge each other. Only God is qualified to judge us since
he made us and anyway, historically, we have never been very good at it.
Remember that the "good" religious people of France had Joan of Arc burned
at the stake during the Middle Ages.
Gay Sex is Morally Wrong Because It Makes Straights Very Uncomfortable???
John B. Cobb Jr. Phd., writes in short essay entitled "Being Christian about Homosexuality", . . . . . . The real ground for moral condemnation today [of physical expression of same-sex love], as in much of the Christian past, is the sense that they are unnatural and hence against God's intentions. The strength of this sense comes from the revulsion felt by many heterosexuals at the thought of physical intimacy with members of their own gender. This personal revulsion causes revulsion also at the thought of others engaged in such activity.
Instead of wanting to reduce this revulsion, those who feel it typically desire that it remain strong and be widely shared. They fear that if it declines, some who are now inhibited by it, even their own children might experiment with same-sex relations. Hence there is a strong desire to maintain the moral prohibitions and to prevent those who violate it from functioning as role models for youth.
Those of us who are on the other side need to recognize the power of this involuntary revulsion in many just as we recognize the power of involuntary same-sex attraction in others. In seeking to avoid condemnation of the latter we should not condemn the former. But we cannot remain neutral with regard to what is to be done.
Whereas some consider it moral to act on their involuntary revulsion by condemning what revolts them, we believe that such condemnation is wrong. No one is to be blamed for feeling revulsion, but the decision to act on that revulsion in a way that injures others falls under moral criticism. The question is whether, in fact, homosexual acts are inherently immoral. We do not see any reason to suppose that this is so.
Instead of putting matters in purely moral terms, the Christian church should ask a different question. What does the church recommend as a lifestyle to those whose sexual attractions are for member of their own sex? How is such a question to be answered?
The church should have in mind the total well-being of the person in question. It should also have in mind the well-being of actual or possible sexual partners. And it should be concerned for the larger social effects as well.
Consider the options. [Option One] The church can recommend that natural feelings be denied and that the gay or lesbian person find a partner of the other gender. Presumably the church would encourage complete honesty, so that the partner would understand the limitations of the relations that can be expected.
In much of human history, marriage has been understood as a social relation having more to do with property and procreation than with the personal or sexual fulfillment of the partners. In that context this advice to gay and lesbian persons made sense. The question then arose as to whether it was permissible to seek in other ways the sexual satisfactions lacking in marriage or whether these hungers must be permanently repressed.
Although this arrangement is not impossible today, most Christians draw back from recommending it. Our understanding of the purposes of marriage is violated by it. And although there may be instances in which heterosexual marriage remains the best solution for one who is homosexually oriented, few of us would recommend it as the normative pattern for all. [To read about what usually happens when gay men marry straight women, click Here]
This leads to the second option. The church can urge gay and lesbian persons to abstain from sexual activity throughout their lives. It would be foolish to suppose that large numbers would fully follow this teaching. But the church can create a climate that generates considerable feelings of guilt when this ideal is violated. [The doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church comes to mind here]. Such guilt feeling does not always reduce sexual activity, but in some people it does.
If the church's goal is to reduce homosexual activity as much as possible, then this may be the correct teaching. But heterosexual Christians must ask why they demand so much suffering from those with a different sexual orientation. If they believe that sexual activity is something inherently bad, so that it is justified only in its connection with procreation, they will have reason to continue this teaching. But this is now a rare view. Most of those who urge abstinence on gays and lesbians regard sexual fulfillment as inherently positive in the case of heterosexuals. It is only their view that same-sex love is against nature that leads to its condemnation.
The practical consequences of both of the teachings noted [above] is to encourage homosexual promiscuity. Church members can engage in many short-term liaisons without raising questions about their standing in the church. We tend not to pry into one another's private lives. But if a man brings another man to church with him regularly, if they give the same address and show signs of mutual affection, then there is likely to be a scandal. The dominant effect of church teaching is to encourage secret, temporary liaisons without commitment and to discourage long-term fidelity.
The third recommendation that the church can offer is that gay and lesbian persons look forward to finding partners of the same gender with whom to share their lives through thick and thin. In short, the same ideal that the church holds for heterosexual persons can apply to them. The implication is that the church should celebrate and support committed same-sex unions in the same way as heterosexual ones.
. . . .
[Remember that] our goal is human flourishing, holistic personal fulfillment
for all. If, as most of us believe, this occurs best in the context of
committed relationships that include sexual love, then we should teach this
ideal without apology and without excluding a whole class of persons from
it. Heterosexual and homosexual Christians can then work together to
bring some healthy order out of the sexual chaos of our time.
. . . . . . . . .
The above selection out of an essay entitled "Being Christian about
Homosexuality" by John B. Cobb Jr., Ph.D, was part of the book edited by
Walter Wink, "Homosexuality
and Christian Faith - Questions of Conscience for the Churches",
Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 1999. John B. Cobb, Jr., Ph.D., has held many
positions including Ingraham Professor of Theology at the Claremont School
of Theology, Avery Professor at the Claremont Graduate School, Fulbright
Professor at the University of Mainz, Visiting Professor at Vanderbilt,
Harvard, and Chicago Divinity Schools. His writings include: Christ in a
Pluralistic Age; God and the World; and co-author with Herman
Daly of For the Common Good which was co-winner of the Grawemeyer
Award for Ideas Improving World Order.
The
fourth reason is that certain insecure folks just need to feel superior
to other people to feel good about themselves. For some people to acquire
self-respect, though false and artificial, they seem to have a need to gain
ascendance over other people and to put them down through hurtful words and
harmful actions. Maybe people with little self-esteem and a huge inferiority
complex fall in this category. This may not be a scientific observation but
at the very least it is a very personal observation on my part after living
more than 71 years on this earth.
And the fifth reason is that throughout history, people have understood Holy
Scripture through the lens of the morals and beliefs of the society in which
they lived. In other words, this happens when a religious group consents to
and supports the cultural traditions that are commonly accepted within a particular
society and looks for and “supposedly finds” Bible verses that support the
practice.
One example are the beliefs and religious practices towards the issue of slavery of Negroes by "Christians" in the Southern USA before the Civil War (1861 - 1865) and bigotry and racial prejudice toward Blacks (Negroes) right up to the present (though reduced to a large extent since the 1970’s, finally) by these same Southern United States Christians - a time span of over 200 years. They vigorously defended the practice of slavery and racial bigotry based on Genesis 9:20-25 (The Curse on Canaan, son of Ham), Ephesians 6:5 (“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear”) and all the other scriptures that accommodate the practice. But now times have changed and most of the Christian world now believes that slavery and racial prejudice are wrong based on sound Biblical truths (Acts 10:34-35).
Can The Bible Be Wrong? Is Slavery Justified In The Bible?
In his essay entitled Homosexuality and the Bible in his book "Homosexuality and Christian Faith, Walter Wink writes:
Where the Bible mentions homosexual behavior at all, it clearly condemns it. I freely grant that. The issue is precisely whether that biblical judgment is correct. The Bible sanctioned slavery as well and nowhere attacked it as unjust. Are we prepared to argue today that slavery is biblically justified? One hundred and fifty years ago, when the debate over slavery was raging, the Bible seemed to be clearly on the slaveholders' side. Abolitionists were hard-pressed to justify their opposition to slavery on biblical grounds. Yet today, if you were to ask Christians in the South whether the Bible sanctions slavery, virtually everyone would agree that it does not. In the same way, fifty years from now people will look back in wonder that the church could be so obtuse and so resistant to the new thing the Holy Spirit was doing among us regarding homosexuality.
Now turning to the current topic of discussion-homosexuality: With so much of American and Mexican society opposed to “what they understand to be homosexuality (the perverse and condescending idea that lust can be the only sexual feeling homosexuals have)”, is it really hard to comprehend that so few of the Christian churches in these 2 countries (and most other countries and religions in the world as well) provide a safe haven and welcoming atmosphere for members of the gay community? Yes, the beliefs of these churches (synagogues and mosques) just conveniently match those of the society in which they find themselves.
But times are changing:
By
the end of 2009 there were
5,916 Gay Friendly Congregations in the United States alone, an increase of
615 churches from the previous year. (5) Below are 3 Charts
which show the rapid growth from 1990 to 2009, 2009 growth rate by denomination
and make up of the affirming Christian congregations as of December 31, 2009 in
the United States which take a pro-gay stance. For a more thorough analysis of
the three charts below please go to the below website link from which these
charts and the above information were taken:
http://www.gaychurch.org/The_Word/Welcoming_Church_Report/2009_affirming_church_survey.htm
(Used with permission)
is a web site
dedicated to ministering to the gay Christian community and to the friends of
our community.
Chart A - Rate of Growth of
Gay-Friendly Christian Churches from 1990 through 2009
(5)
Chart B - Gay Friendly Christian Denominations Listed by Largest Percentage of Growth in 2009
|
Total Number of Affirming Churches |
% increase from 2008 |
Denomination
|
|
991 |
15% |
United Church of Christ |
|
921 |
12% |
Episcopal |
|
765 |
15% |
Presbyterian |
|
690 |
3% |
Lutheran |
|
634 |
11% |
United Methodist Church |
|
333 |
6% |
Non-denominational (Charismatic) |
|
281 |
-1% |
Roman Catholic |
|
237 |
n/a |
Other (a) |
|
229 |
n/a |
Catholic (other) (b) |
|
223 |
0% |
MCC |
|
154 |
3% |
Anglican |
|
121 |
2% |
Baptist |
|
120 |
2% |
Disciples of Christ |
|
110 |
2% |
United Church of Canada |
|
107 |
0% |
Quaker |
Chart C - Denominational Make-up Percentages as of December 31, 2009 in the Affirming Christian Church Survey
(5)
Notes of
interest:
(a) Includes all other, non Catholic denominations (e.g. Mennonite, Community of
Christ, Alliance of Christian Churches, Brethren).
(b) Includes all Catholic denominations that are not associated with the Roman
Catholic church (e.g. Independent Catholic, American Catholic). (5)
The 3,000 plus member Cathedral of Hope in Dallas, Texas (United Church of Christ) is known as the “world’s largest gay church”. Click here to link to a website which lists gay friendly churches throughout the world.
All this reminds me of what Jesus said in Matthew 7:13-14 - (New Living Translation) “You can enter God’s Kingdom only through the narrow gate. The highway to hell is broad, and its gate is wide for the many who choose the easy way. But the gateway to life is small, and the road is narrow, and only a few ever find it.” Is “the easy way”, just to do and believe what everybody else around you believes, especially about a particularly controversial issue such as homosexuality, and not put yourself at risk by being different? After all, what would the neighbors say?
Click Here for
a listing of all the gay-friendly branches of the world's religions: Roman
Catholicism, Eastern and Orthodox Catholicism, Protestantism, Judaism,
Muslimism, Buddhism, Christian Scientism, Paganism, etc.
In “The Problems with Bible Translations on Page 5”, when I wrote that the educated
guesses of Bible translators most likely include prejudices taken from the
society in which these translators lived, I was referring specifically to
this idea that throughout history, people have understood Holy Scripture
through the lens of the morals and beliefs of the community in which they
lived. The influence of the common assumptions and strong beliefs of one’s
peers, people whose approval means so much to the translator or anybody else
for that matter, is very powerful. An example that Bishop John Shelby Spong
gives in his book,
Living in Sin-A Bishop Rethinks Human Sexuality, on page 143 is, "There are
. . . references to homosexuality in the Hebrew scriptures where the English
translation is simply in error and reflects the prejudice of the translator.
A case in point is in Deuteronomy 23:17, which the King James Bible renders.
"There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the
sons of Israel." [Click
Here to go to the text] The Hebrew word translated "whore" is
qedeshah, and the Hebrew word rendered "sodomite" is the masculine form
of the same of the same word, or qadesh. These words mean simply a
holy woman or a holy man and referred not to whoredom or homosexuality but
to the cult of male and female temple prostitutes. The Revised
Standard Version of the Bible renders this word as "cult prostitute" (for
both genders), here and in several other places. [Click
Here to go to the text] But those who are certain that the King
James Bible is the only true version of God's word find their prejudice
against homosexual persons affirmed by this blatant mistranslation."
The sixth and last reason (that I can think of) is the nearsighted or myopic
view of life. This is where knowingly or unknowingly one limits his or her
understanding of the world, kind of like using blinders which creates a
restrictive tunnel vision. The reasoning goes like this: Well I’ve never
known or heard of any happy, well adjusted monogamous homosexual couples
(either gay [male] or lesbian [female]), therefore they do not exist. (6) This person says that it is all a myth promoted in the
“immoral gay agenda” meant to destroy “traditional Christian family values”.
The only homosexuals that this person has ever heard of are the ones he or
she sees on the TV news programs that are wildly dressed and bizarre acting
that participate in the gay pride parades, the ones who go to gay bars and
bath houses to participate in casual gay sex or the millions of gay men who
have received “the judgment of God”, the ones who have died from AIDS. And
besides, this person says, for about 2,000 years my church has taught that
homosexuality is a sin and now you are coming along and saying that my
church has been wrong all this time! How dare you!
Click Here for What Parents of Gay and Lesbian Teens need to Know about Suicide - What Are The Warning Signs?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Footnotes:
(1) Spong, John Shelby, [Episcopal Bishop of Newark, NJ, USA]
Living in Sin?: A Bishop Rethinks Human Sexuality, San Francisco: Harper
San Francisco, 1988, page 23.
(2) Holben, L. R.
What Christians Think about Homosexuality - Six Representative Viewpoints,
North Richland Hills, Texas, BIBAL Press, 1999, 1999, page 284, Footnote 76.
(3) Ibid, page 176, Question 5.
(4) The number of people identifying as homosexual — and the proportion
having homosexual experiences — are quantities which have been difficult for
researchers to estimate reliably. Many recent studies indicate a prevalence
of 2% to 13% of the population. Click
Here to see the
quote and the references listed in Wikipedia.
(5) The three charts were taken from
http://www.gaychurch.org/The_Word/Welcoming_Church_Report/2009_affirming_church_survey.htm
and permission was granted to use these on this site.
(6) In a 1992 study, 55.5% of gay men and 71.2% of lesbians were reported to
be in steady relationships in the United States. Click on the following link
and scroll down on this page of statistics and look under the heading of
Family/Relationships (http://www.pflagupstatesc.org/statistics.htm)
Church is so confusing for Zack. His new pastor preaches nothing but hate and condemnation of gays and lesbians, but no matter how carefully he reads his Bible, he can’t find where it says God hates him. Will things change when Zach's boyfriend Billy suggests that they all go to his church instead? Click Here or on the icon to read the story.
Click for Page 12 - Homosexuals Are Usually Invisible and Pretending
-
Click
below to go to:
The Anti-Gay Religious
Right's Really Cruel and Idiotic Argument
Their Message to a Gay Person is: Be alone. Live alone.
Die alone.
Click for Homosexuality is neither a Choice nor a Sin - Table of contents
Click for Gary Lynn's Home Page
