Although this article in the Ventura County Star doesn’t predict a new Jesus Movement, the conditions described seem to be a good foundation for such a prediction. And the information relating to homosexuality should be read by every evangelical leader.
Last night at GCC, I gave a talk to a group called God and the Gay Neighbor. This article dovetails very nicely with that talk and with what I heard from the students. A couple of students asked questions about how to counter activism but mostly, the interest was in how to love.
And then there is there is this column by Matt Barber which includes an excerpt from a paper by his little brother Jared Barber, age 19. This illustrates nicely the type of sentiment described in the polling by the Barna group, noted in the Ventura newspaper piece above.
Jared Barber wrote:
Another problem arises here, though; and it is this: Christians, as a whole, focus too much on the homosexual issue alone. They attack it solely, denounce it, and live whichever way they please. Adultery, fornication, racism, pride, jealousy, selfish ambition, drunkenness; all of these immoral acts take to the background in view of homosexuality, and so we as Christians are set up as anti-gay instead of anti-immorality. We need to end our own hypocrisy, all of us, I as much as any, so that we can more blamelessly broach this subject and others.
And foremost, we must remember that Christ preached one thing above all else: Love. We must love others, with, as [C.S.] Lewis said, “…a real and costly love, with deep feeling for the sins in spite of which we love the sinner — no mere tolerance, or indulgence which parodies love as flippancy parodies merriment.”
Marty –
Although “we the people” do indeed have the right to amend and delete as we see fit, perhaps we should not forget history in doing so…
For example, if segregation or interracial marriage bans would have been up to “we the people,” it would likely be found somewhere in our constitution today. Although both were disposed of by the court system…in its time, they were not supported by the general public. If both issues would have gone to public vote, we’d likely still see two races unable to marry.
History has a funny way of showing us fairness and equality. Just because the majority endorses discrimination, for example, doesn’t make that discrimination right…or legal.
Looking at constitutional issues, perhaps it is best that the whims of “we the people” are kept in check.
Marty said in post 61983:
“We the people” have the right to amend and delete our constitution. We have the right to make it say whatever we decide we want it to say.
However, you weren’t talking about amending the constitution in post 61244, you were talking about laws.
And the only time the US Constitution was amended to restrict people’s rights it had some pretty disastrous results and ended up getting repealed.
“We the people” have the right to amend and delete our constitution. We have the right to make it say whatever we decide we want it to say.
The Bill of Rights wasn’t written on stone tablets and handed down to Moses — it was written by human beings and ratified by the various states. As were every one of the subsequent amendments.
I’m suprised anyone even questions this fact.
First of all, to the owner of this website, I congratulate you on allowing others to comment on your thoughts which you expressed in this blog.
Note: One of the first to respond was Peter Labarbera, who himself denies others the opportunity to comment on his thoughts and musings via his blog “americans for (peters) truth”. He is a man who speaks, yet never listens to others. He does not allow anyone with a opposing viewpoint to comment on his site which shows how gutless he is. Sadly, “he can dish it out, but can’t take it”
I think one thing we have to note is that men like Peter Labarbera and Matt Barber have withdrawn from mainstream society at this point and now make their livings on the backs of gays. They say they do it for god, but do they? Only they know the truth and birds of a feather flock together. Neither of these men would survive the real world that we all face. The hide out on websites writing their prideful articles and get high on having people read their “works of art”
Imagine going to work at Allstate, or any company for that matter and you start to talk about Gays and how you think they are immoral, sinners, incompatible with christianity, etc., etc. Besides being unChrist like, it is completely mean sprited and inhuman, yet these men fight for their rights to keep hurting others. That is why they are so worried ENDA will pass. They would have to stop hurting others in the name of God.
Then they have the nerve to say that they verbally assault people with their biblical words so they can “save them” so we can be in heaven with them one day. (side note from me: I think someone needs to save them)
To poor Matt Barbers brother Jared, I understand you are worried about him. When you watch someone become obsessed with any subject, that is scarey. It must be frightening to listen to your brother rant about gays all day long. I say pray for him, and ask god to set him free of this obsession. Remember, he got fired for trying to get others to dislike a group of people and now he has to justify what he doing by saying “this war was brought to him”. As you know, he brought it on himself by using company time and equipment to bash. Not cool Matt.
Mary,
Actually pedophile hurts an innocent victim as does drunk driving have the potential to harm an innocent person. That’s why they are illegal.
I agree – I hope I wasn’t suggesting otherwise earlier. However, pedophilia is also considered a disorder, whereas homosexuality is not.
Timothy you can’t force an either/or answer to a complicated question. The words sin and evil are heavily imposed with connotations. For me to answer with one or the other of those words would not be fair nor accurate to the issue of homosexuality. I speak for myself, my theology for myself and no one else. I don’t know what your sins are. (and yes, I did misread you – sorry.)
And I do agree (as I have said many times in this blog) that Christians view homosexuality as some greater sin. The idea that sins are graded is a deep myth and not biblical. Those ideas need to be addressed by the whole church worldwide.
Mary
Tminothy,
I disagree that people are to accept homosexuality as biblically correct before we can get along. We do have to treat eachother with respect and dignity regardless of our varying views, opinions, etc… on biblical issues.
Thank you for responding to me… but I think you misread what I wrote. I did not in any instance state that people have to accept homosexuality as biblically correct in order to get along.
What I said was that though God may see all sin the same Christians treat different sins differently. Do you disagree with this?
I stated that some sins (such as lying, fornication, greed, and pride) are viewed as personal sins. Though they may be forbidden to Christian life, we don’t view those who do them as evil. Other sins (such as murder and rape) are viewed as evils rather than just sins. We shun those who do these things and call them evil. Do you disagree with this?
I view homosexuality as not being in line with God’s intentions for me.
My question was not whether you think homosexuality is in line with what God wants for you. I know that you do not view it as so.
My question for you – and for Warren – and for everyone else who is so far refusing to address this question – is whether you view homosexuality as a sin (similar to fornication and greed) or as an evil (similar to murder and rape)?
and I’m sure that is part of what is reflected in your perspective.
Jag,
Thanks – and yes, it is. Also, it has been my blessing.
Jayhuck,
Actually pedophile hurts an innocent victim as does drunk driving have the potential to harm an innocent person. That’s why they are illegal.
Tminothy,
I disagree that people are to accept homosexuality as biblically correct before we can get along. We do have to treat eachother with respect and dignity regardless of our varying views, opinions, etc… on biblical issues.
I view homosexuality as not being in line with God’s intentions for me.
I really have to proof-read better. That last sentence in post 61322 should have been:
The restrictions you listed were not illegal because they were immoral, they were illegal because they could be harmful.
Marty said in post 61244:
If “We the people” have a right to deem certain activities immoral, then we also have the right to restrict the activities of those who insist on practicing them. We do this every day in our democracy — you aren’t being singled out.
No actually “the people” don’t have the right to restrict activities simply because they consider them immoral. Just as they don’t have th right to force others to follow their religious beliefs. The restrictions you listed were illegal because they were immoral, they were illegal because they could be harmful.
In a democracy “We” have the right to do whatever “We” decide is right to do. “We” restrict certain people whose activities “We” deem immoral all the time. We don’t let drunks drive school buses, we don’t let pedophiles teach school, for example.
If “We the people” have a right to deem certain activities immoral, then we also have the right to restrict the activities of those who insist on practicing them. We do this every day in our democracy — you aren’t being singled out.
Most of us here live in the United States, which is a Constitutional Republic (in theory), not a democracy. I’m not sure which country you’re referring to as “We,” but it ain’t ours, thank goodness. In a pure democracy, 51% of the people could vote to pee in the cereal of the other 49%.
Between them, the Human Rights Campaign, GLAAD, Lambda Legal Defense, the ACLU’s Gay and Lesbian Project, the Gay and Lesbian Task Force, GLSEN, PFLAG and other homsoexual activist groups have literally hundreds of staff people and upwards of $35 million annually devoted single mindedly to this issue. Focus on the Family, AFA, FRC, CWA and other pro-family groups devote a tiny portion of their budgets to this issue. I think Peter was being optimistic that the gays are outspending pro-family activists by 50 to 1.
Traditional Values Coalition currently has 27 articles up attacking The Gay Agenda on the front page of their website. Whetever percentage of their budgets are actually spent on anti-gay lobbying, beating the fear-of-gays horse remains the primary fundraising vehicle of these groups.
And when you throw in Hollywood, the NEA, universities, corporate diversity programs and other actively pro-homosexual forces, the gays are astronomically richer and better staffed.
Wait, I thought you weren’t counting groups if they only devote a tiny portion of their resources to the issue? I suppose I shouldn’t expect consistency from a concerned woman named Robert Knight.
Wait a minute… come to think of it, what am I disagreeing with you guys for? The more anti-gay stuff you spew, the more it turns younger people off. Sorry, I was completely wrong! Y’all should do lots more spewing!!! Go to it!
Marty,
Being a pedophile is a pathological condition, which is why we don’t have them teach school – Driving drunk is against the law, which is why we don’t like it when people do that. You have no right to force your idea of sin on other people through legislation. You have a right TO that idea – I would agree with you on that, but you don’t have the right to force it on others through legal means. The mere fact that you and others like you try and do that is likely one reason why youth are leaving religion.
Being gay is not a disease and it is not against the law – and just because you might not agree with it, does not mean you can or should try and restrict those who disagree with you.
Warren –
Again, it seemed you misunderstood the question. I said :
“It isn’t that nobody thinks other “sins” are being pursued by christianity…it is the degree and funding on the pursuit of homosexuality vs. other behavior deemed “immoral.”
…. If you have the numbers or stats on how much “family values” groups are funding, lobbying, and focusing on homosexuality vs. other perceived immoral actions, please post them.”
To which you stated:
“It is true that the Christian based advocacy groups do not allocate their entire budget to anti-homosexual advocacy. ”
No one suggested that groups allocate their entire budget to anti-homosexual causes…just that the degree and funding of these particular ones vs. other perceived sins…many that could be argued to be far more detrimental to the “family” – although far less likely to open pursestrings.
Ann –
I would like to see how many individuals from activist organizations participate in volunteer work…with issues like AIDS, etc. It is impressive how long you have dedicated yourself to such work, and I’m sure that is part of what is reflected in your perspective.
Many would likely benefit from being more involved…myself included.
Mary,
What do you disagree about, specifically?
And to clairify, Mary, do you view homosexuality as a sin or as an evil?
Timothy,
I disagree. Many denominations have varying theologies about what is considered apprpriate, sinful etc… But the bottom line is that despite our theologies, there is NO reason to be hateful.
Much of the question about the church’s appropriate response to homosexuality comes down to this question: Is homosexuality “sin” or is it “evil”.
Let me clarify. Although the church says that all sins are equal, this is not the way in which either the church, society, or anyone here actually views sin. We share categories that place some sins as personal, between man and God and only applicable to those who embrace Christianity. Others are unacceptable social behaviors forbidden to all.
For example pride, lust, boastfulness are all sins that impact our lives. Failure to love your neighbor is a sin, as is hautiness. But we tend to view these as personal failings, areas that need growth. Other sins such as lying and fornication we see as destructive and inappropriate, but we have an expectation that sinners will engage in these behaviors. And we make no efforts to criminalize or legislate around any of these sins. And we don’t really see those who engage in boasting or fornication as “evil”. Perhaps they are “unsaved”, but we don’t shun them.
Other sins we see as universally evil: murder, theft, rape. We expect nonbelievers to not do these things. And we shun and publically repudiate those who commit these evils.
So the question is: is homosexuality as sin like pride and fornication or is it an evil like murder and rape?
I think that young people are disconecting from the church in part because they do not see homosexuality as any greater sin than any other, and the church has been treating it as though it were a super-evil, expending far more time and energy than on murder, theft and rape. And certainly far more time than on lying, corruption, theft, white-collar crime, pride, gluttony, environmental disregard, and other sins that young people believe may be more relevant to their lives and their future.
Does anyone have any knowledge about actual volunteer time members of advocacy groups spend working at hospices assisting with the care of and for people with AIDS? In my volunteer work over the past 19 years, I have not met any.
1. It is true that the Christian based advocacy groups do not allocate their entire budget to anti-homosexual advocacy. It is probably a small portion for the groups mentioned by Bob Knight.
2. I do not know how the actual amounts would line up. If someone has the time to actually do the research, it would be quite interesting.
3. My point was not to say other groups advocating against a traditional sexual ethic were as powerful or well funded as gay rights groups. The article by Matt Barber promotes the view that other groups do not exist. Perhaps, the caveats about well-funded and powerful were meant to say other groups exist but they are not the equal of gay groups.
4. Other sexual behaviors definitely have their advocacy groups although I do not know how well funded they are. I do not have the time nor the inclination to research the groups supporting gambling, tobacco, alcohol but I did find this website which supports the porn (“adult entertainment”) industry. By the way, if you believe the government should do more in the war on porn, read what this website says in its history about the Clinton administration.
5. As to the relative expenditures and efforts, I was hit between the eyes yesterday in church by a speaker from a group called Sisters In Service which advocates for women in third world countries. Talk about being underfunded. These people work on a shoestring despite being the hands of Jesus to the least of these. I hope to write more about this work in the coming days.
What’s the world coming to when you can’t do something like not fully accept someone without being portrayed as regressive?
Boo,
I think most people equate human rights issues with the acceptance of homosexuality. One is ok with them, the other isn’t. They cannot seem to separate the two. If the emphasis of lobbying was solely on equal rights for ALL people without the promoting or endorsing of same gendered couples, there would be a greater chance of this being viewed differently than it is now. Everyone is entitled to have the same rights because they are human and, especially, because they live in America, not based on how they are describing their sexual orientation. That is where the stagnation comes in and the process is prolonged. Homosexuality becomes the focus instead of equal rights. Acceptance of homosexuality will either happen or not and will more than likely be based on individual relationships – not groups promoting it. No amount of money, lobbying, or parades can force someone to feel a certain way. Coercion never works in the long term, neither does berating. Support and acceptance will depend on wanting to interact with each other because of mutual respect and from that positive interaction, a relationship is formed and develops from there, which could very well, and many times, involve acceptance.
Between them, the Human Rights Campaign, GLAAD, Lambda Legal Defense, the ACLU’s Gay and Lesbian Project, the Gay and Lesbian Task Force, GLSEN, PFLAG and other homsoexual activist groups have literally hundreds of staff people and upwards of $35 million annually devoted single mindedly to this issue. Focus on the Family, AFA, FRC, CWA and other pro-family groups devote a tiny portion of their budgets to this issue. I think Peter was being optimistic that the gays are outspending pro-family activists by 50 to 1. And when you throw in Hollywood, the NEA, universities, corporate diversity programs and other actively pro-homosexual forces, the gays are astronomically richer and better staffed. It’s not David vs Goliath. It is David vs. 1,000 Goliaths. And no, Warren, no other “sin” issue has a lobbying force like this, even the abortion issue.
Jayhuck, it was Jared Barber that “lumped them together” not I. I only attempted to explain the disparate response by the Church. Aldulters and drunks pay taxes too, but they aren’t out there insisting that their activities are not immoral.
Really? All adulterers are out there insisting that they are immoral? None of them ever try to justify their actions? Wow… interesting planet you live on, what’s its name?
Who do you have in mind? Name some names and lets see if they compare to GLAAD, HRC, Dignity, Integrity, etc etc.
I named two, then there’s Traditional Values Coalition, American Family Association, and there are many many well funded radical right organizations pursuing the same agenda that don’t do it explicitly as “Christian” groups, like the Heritage Foundation. I’d love to be able to suckle at the Richard Mellon Scaife teat too.
Still, anything less than FULL acceptance continues to be portrayed as more and more regressive.
What’s the world coming to when you can’t do something like not fully accept someone without being portrayed as regressive?
Jay, calm down please.
In a democracy “We” have the right to do whatever “We” decide is right to do. “We” restrict certain people whose activities “We” deem immoral all the time. We don’t let drunks drive school buses, we don’t let pedophiles teach school, for example.
If “We the people” have a right to deem certain activities immoral, then we also have the right to restrict the activities of those who insist on practicing them. We do this every day in our democracy — you aren’t being singled out.
In fact, as I said earlier, you are far freer to practice homosexuality today, than ever before in the history of the nation. Every day it seems you are less and less restricted… and yet.
Marty,
Are you saying that the issue is not necessarily with homosexuality but with the defense and promoting of it that troubles you and others?
Marty,
“Give em an inch…”
What? And they’ll take a mile? Do you realize how patronizing your last post sounded? You talk about “them” as if they are subhuman, as if they aren’t Americans who live, love and pay taxes. Gay people don’t want you to “give” them anything except the same rights and privileges everyone else gets. The activism you demonize them for is about attaining equality.
And you must have missed the point of my last post – it is not that you don’t have the right to see gay people as immoral, you do – just as other people have the right to see them as moral. What you don’t have the right to do is to prevent them from having the same rights and privileges as every other American.
Dr. T writes:
RE: advocacy – there are numerous advocacy groups for pornographers and various vices…
Who do you have in mind? Name some names and lets see if they compare to GLAAD, HRC, Dignity, Integrity, etc etc.
And if the general culture moved to remove the other’s ability to pursue their activity, those advocacy efforts would increase.
Are you implying that the general culture has moved to “remove homosexual’s right to pursue homosexuality”? That sounds like a crackdown — when the reality for the past several decades has been more and more and more acceptance of homosexuality, not less.
Still, anything less than FULL acceptance continues to be portrayed as more and more regressive.
“Give em an inch…”
Jayhuck, it was Jared Barber that “lumped them together” not I. I only attempted to explain the disparate response by the Church. Aldulters and drunks pay taxes too, but they aren’t out there insisting that their activities are not immoral.
JAG and PAM, yes, there is a bit of a “don’t ask – don’t tell” attitude towards these other immoralities. While the church continues to preach against the sin, the sinners are still welcomed, so long as they publicly admit that wrong is wrong (even while living otherwise in private). The same used to be true for homosexuality, but that is no longer an option it seems.
Again, if there were activist groups attempting to change both church policy and social attitudes in favor of adultery and drunkennes, I’m willing to bet the church would respond just as forcefully as they do to the activists trying to promote homosexuality.
Warren –
“I don’t buy the facts behind the argument that gays have advocacy and other activities not approved by the church don’t.”
Warren, I think you are misunderstanding the argument. It isn’t that nobody thinks other “sins” are being pursued by christianity…it is the degree and funding on the pursuit of homosexuality vs. other behavior deemed “immoral.”
You don’t have to “buy” it, for this to be true. If you have the numbers or stats on how much “family values” groups are funding, lobbying, and focusing on homosexuality vs. other perceived immoral actions, please post them. Personally, it’s something I’d love to see.
Peter – My point in linking to the Barber article was so readers would read it. I highlighted Jared’s good thoughts since they dovetailed well with the Barna’s research. I lean more toward Jared’s former sentiments and so apparently do many young folk.
RE: advocacy – there are numerous advocacy groups for pornographers and various vices; I don’t buy the facts behind the argument that gays have advocacy and other activities not approved by the church don’t. And if the general culture moved to remove the other’s ability to pursue their activity, those advocacy efforts would increase.
In any event, like them or not, those poll numbers cannot be ignored.
Marty,
So, instead of going on the “defense” as you say the church is against the gays….they just let the drunken, fornicating, adulterously divorced straight people get married, move to the suburbs, and appear to be moral. However, gay people don’t currently have that option in the eyes of the “church”.
Good point Jag. I’d call all of those forums the celebration of “immorality”. Oh boy, and the money behind those??!!! Tons.
Marty –
“I’m 100% certain that if the pro-adultery or pro-drunkenness crowd were actively promoting their lifestyle, the Church would respond just as forcefully against them as it does against homosexuality now, or against racism as it has in the past. The church is playing defense.”
But there are bars/clubs everywhere, strip clubs, liquor stores, and people promoting “happy hour” and dating sites strictly geared toward married men finding someone to cheat on their wife with. Why is the church not “playing defense” here?
While statistics clearly support that, for example alcohol contributes to domestic violence, vehicular deaths, homicides, suicides, and marital dischord…where is the vigor against it that I have seen for preventing gay people even the ability to legally commit to one another?
The argument doesn’t hold up.
I’m 100% certain that if the pro-adultery or pro-drunkenness crowd were actively promoting their lifestyle, the Church would respond just as forcefully against them as it does against homosexuality now, or against racism as it has in the past. The church is playing defense.
Ah, yes that explains the great Christian crusade against the liquor lobby I keep seeing everywhere, and why whenever conservative Christians start railing about the destruction of the family, the gigantic 50% heterosexual divorce rate is always front and center. The church is playing defense in telling other people what to do with their lives.
It might be interesting for ALL concerned evangelicals and others to compare the total budgets of GLBT groups to the portion of “pro-family” groups budgets spent opposing the GLBT agenda. I’d wager the imbalance is 25- or 50-1 against the Christians.
Yes, poor Focus on the Family and their shoestring budget. Once we Gays anounced our Gay Diet Shake to compete with Pat Robertson’s, it was all over. Now all he has to fall back on are his Liberian gold mine, his Zaire diamond operations, and his own tv station. Why, it was a mere five years ago he was struggling so much he had to sell his very own thoroughbred racehorse. Man’s practically a monk.
I guess you’d have to count Christian gay groups on both sides?
A couple of students asked questions about how to counter activism but mostly, the interest was in how to love.
But shrieking about how The Gays are coming to rape your children makes it so much easier to separate little old ladies from generous portions of their social security checks. Pat needs another horse!
Peter,
I think you missed the idea that Christian are being percieved as hateful. Regardless of your personal view on how YOU think you are supposed to treat gay people like drpaved animals, people (aka God’s children) are saying “You have a log in your eye”.
Marty,
That you lump homosexuality in with adultery and drunkeness shows why there is a problem. Gay people are not diseased, they work, pay taxes – most are responsible citizens that contribute to society. It is definitely your right to see them as immoral, but it is not your right to prevent them from having the same rights and privileges as you.
Adultery, fornication, racism, pride, jealousy, selfish ambition, drunkenness; all of these immoral acts take to the background in view of homosexuality
Of the immoral acts listed here, I can only think of one that has groups actively lobbying for its practicioners, and for acceptance of their practices.
I’m 100% certain that if the pro-adultery or pro-drunkenness crowd were actively promoting their lifestyle, the Church would respond just as forcefully against them as it does against homosexuality now, or against racism as it has in the past. The church is playing defense.
Attending a Christian college, I always found this issue alarming. I watched as I was having a dating relationship with another women (without sex…you know, the whole “christian standard”), and my to-be-missionary peers were engaging in a myriad of immoral behaviors, from drunkeness to premarital sex. This was not all of my peers of course, but the general attitude was that homosexuality was certainly a “different” kind of sin…a worse one…and that attitude was reinforced by the penalties at the school. Get caught engaging in premarital sex? The penalty was not as strict as the expulsion for homosexual sex.
The amount of criticism the gay population faces from the Christian community disturbs me in two ways. One, is that it is unwelcoming. Secondly, is that the christian community has spent millions on preventing this particular “sin” above all others. Divorce is a major issue in the family, but look at all “family values” groups, and they will spend far more to prevent two people from committing monogamously, than two people from splitting. It truly amazes me.
They also do not join on common issues of equality, and that makes them appear bigoted. For example, if you believe everyone sins, why would you want to prevent legislation that would make it illegal to prevent someone from having catastrophic healthcare based on their gender status (transgendered individuals could be denied due to “transgenderism”), why would you not want to support gays/lesbians in not being discriminated against in employment or housing? There is a case currently of a women in pennsylvania who has been denied catastrophic healthcare for this very reason, and it is perfectly legal (although she is currently challenging this).
I understand if, for some notion of tradition or biblical reasoning you want to say that “marriage” is not between two people of the same gender, but it is hard to defend allowing someone to legally lose their housing simply because they are gay. Even the worse offenders deserve someplace to live. Not sticking up for the basic civil rights of the GLBT people, has made them look like they don’t just disagree with the morality of their private behaviors, but that their grudge and animosity extends far deeper.
Believe it or not, I’m a big fan of the church, it just makes me crazy when organizations (ex: Focus on the Family) and others distort data on same-sex relationships or behaviors, when they promote messages of intolerance without the church, and when they don’t interact with the community they should theoretically be reaching out to. Aside from protesting,
I’ve yet to see a simple booth representing a church or just be out talking to and mingling with the gay population at a picnic, pride event, etc. And, if you’ve ever seen the protests, they are even more sad. When I lived in New England, they would bus them in straight from church to the capitol…and there would be children holding signs that said “G.A.Y. = got aids yet?” and various other horrific judgmental phrases. They don’t seem to understand who the “gays” they so protest really are. It was unbelievable that as I walked hand-in-hand with my wife, I was told how I was going to burn in hell….not exactly a phrase that had me excited to know who their God was. At one point when I wanted to talk to a woman holding a sign comparing homosexuality with bestiality, she asked why the police wasn’t “protecting” her from me. That I might give her aids. Heck, I’m out doing triathlons…and she likely has far more physical ailments that I should have been fearing….but you get my point.
I don’t like when I hear those in the gay community criticizing the church…I love God, and what my church has brought into our lives….but, I can’t help but see the validity in their criticisms.
The evangelicals have become in the eyes of many, the new pharisees of old….
Personally, I’m getting a little tired of people on here trying to separate Christians and gay people into two separate camps, when there are many, many gay Christians out there.
Peter,
Gay people just want to be treated equally – to have the same rights and privileges as other Americans – if they had this, there would be no need for “activism”.
Another point that your post begs a question to: can we effectively “love” without responding to anti-Christian ideology — on the homosexual or any issue? We are called to love women who have had or are considering an abortion. Does that mean that it is unloving or unChristlike to respond on a public policy level to Planned Parenthood, or answer “pro-choice” propaganda put forth by MTV? Of course not. We MUST respond, and true love does not let lies go unanswered. The irony is that Christians are hardly coming close to parity — resource-spending-wise — when it comes to reponding to homosexual activist groups, and yet we hear voices that tell us we are “over-emphasizing” that issue. It might be interesting for ALL concerned evangelicals and others to compare the total budgets of GLBT groups to the portion of “pro-family” groups budgets spent opposing the GLBT agenda. I’d wager the imbalance is 25- or 50-1 against the Christians.
Warren, I think it’s a cheap shot that you failed to post any of Matt Barber’s well-constructed response to his little brother’s position that Christians over-focus on the homosexual problem. (Matt stressed that it is incumbent on Christians to respond to the myriad of homosexual groups — with large budgets — that are pushing an anti-Biblical position on the issue.) Matt told me that Jared — after reading his response — now completely agrees with Matt! You posted only the “set-up” part of Matt’s piece and not his rebuttal! Why don’t YOU address Matt’s arguments — which, of course, would first require you to post them?
I can definetly see both perspectives. However, it is sort of embarassing that we are not running our own lives very well ( as a public images record) and then telling others what to do at the same time.