Sally Kern is an Oklahoma state representative who recently found herself a YouTube star thanks to gay advocacy group the Victory Fund. Mrs. Kern, a second term lawmaker from Oklahoma City and Baptist pastor’s wife, was secretly taped giving a rambling speech to her Republican colleagues regarding threats to conservatives in local political races. Her comments, now viewed over 1 million times on YouTube have ignited a firestorm of controversy and opposition, particularly among homosexual rights groups. Perhaps most quoted has been this passage
Matter of fact, studies show no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than, you know, a few decades. So it’s the death knell for this country. I honestly think it’s the biggest threat even, that our nation has, even more so than terrorism or Islam, which I think is a big threat, okay.
Predictably, a firestorm of controversy has enveloped Rep. Kern. She has been defiant and resolute in response. Several days after the YouTube video hit the cyberstreet, Kern was interviewed by a supportive Matt Barber of the Concerned Women for America, where she again stated, “homosexuality, in my opinion, is a bigger threat to this nation than terrorism.”
All of this reminded me of survey findings reported in the recent book, UnChristian, reviewed recently by fellow Crosswalk blogger, Regis Nicoll. Here is Regis’ take on what UnChristian has to say about homosexuality:
In survey after survey, Kinnaman found that the homosexuality issue, more than any other has shaped public perceptions about Christians. “Hostility toward gays–not just opposition to homosexual politics and behaviors but disdain for gay individuals–has become virtually synonymous with the Christian faith,” Kinnaman writes.
Whether or not that’s a fair association, it reflects how we come across to others. When our criticism of homosexual behavior is out of proportion to our concern over heterosexual divorce and promiscuity in the church, it smacks of hypocrisy. Add to that, a perceived air of moral superiority, and you’ve got the picture of the “unChristian.” Again, while these impressions may not accurately represent Christianity, they do affect how the Christian message is received.
Seems to me, Sally Kern’s comments, refusal to see the offense they cause, and the stance of her defenders put an exclamation point on the findings of UnChristian. What makes her comments all the more jarring is that she represents a district in Oklahoma City, scene of the Murrah Federal Building destroyed by domestic terrorist, Timothy McVeigh.
While it is tempting to opine further, I would like to hear from readers on this one. What should Rep. Kern do? Should she stick to her guns, basing her views on her faith? Or should she retract this comparison and engage in dialogue with those who are offended? Or something else?
Teri,
What I was saying – as you very clearly understood but pretended not to in order to make some specious argument - is that gay people want equal rights.
Thanks for proving that you have no interest in honest communication. Jesus must be very proud of you.
Tim,
I did misunderstand you.
I thought you meant that I was making an artificial distinction between activists and ordinary LGBT people where none exists – that you were all pretty much on the same page. (contradicting Michael’s assertion)
Of course it matters whether BM is supported by the movers and shakers. If it were just some fringe group, who would care? Fringe groups don’t have the power to change things.
You might want to look at the list of signatories before you declare it to be unrepresentative of ‘mainstream’ GLBT activists. It is very long and has an awful lot of influential people on it.
Teri,
Sigh.
A person that has never taken a drug is not a drug addict. A person who has never set foot to pedel is not a speeder. A person who has never married is not a polygamist.
Yet every single solitary gay person I have EVER come across was aware of their same-sex attraction long before they ever even knew what it meant, much less acted upon it.
And further, discrimination is not only against gay persons that “behave” in some manner. Virginal gay persons are banned from the military if they even so much as tell someone of their orientation. Gay children in schools are frequently beaten and sometimes killed for being gay – though they’ve never so much as kissed another person.
The reason why you refuse to recognize orientation isn’t because it isn’t real. The reason why you demand that gay means behavior is because it allows you to be cruel and nasty and pretend that you aren’t.
The truth is that your policies are cruel. And arbitrary. And based in animus.
But you don’t like that. So if you tell yourself that it’s a behavior you are punishing, then you can claim righteousness.
Fine. Go on with your self-congratulatory cruely and arrogance. Tell yourself you are a warrior for God.
I’m not going to argue with you anymore. Go be right. You don’t answer to me. You can explain your actions to God some day.
In fact, I hope you are very public about this. It is attitudes like your that save me a whole lot of persuation when I talk to those who aren’t motivated by whatever motivates you.
The only downside is that many many people will be turned away from God through the words you say and the behaviors you demonstrate in His name.
Teri,
I did look at the list. And unlike you, I know who is influential in my community and who is left-over from the 70′s.
If Teri is Christ’s ambassador, then I want nothing to do with Christ.
Mary,
I’m sorry I forgot to answer your question about your mother. I don’t know enough about the ramifications of healthcare coverage to say whether or not I think she should be covered under your plan.
However, I thought that everyone 65 and older had Medicare.
I am sure that it is not necessary to legally recognize all the ‘household configurations’ listed on that page in order to get your mother healthcare coverage.
There are always disagreements within any community. And there are always loons out there seeking attention.
But other than a few nuts, we are in agreement on the notion that gay people should all receive the exact same rights, benefits, obligations, and recognition that heterosexual people enjoy. Leftist loons believe that. Right-wing apologists believe that. Average Joe auto-body shop worker believes that. Signers of the beyondmarriage.org petition believe that. Stonewall Democrats believe that. Log Cabin Republicans believe that. Writers at queerty believe that. Writers as indegayforum believe that. Catholics believe that. Baptists believe that. MCC members believe that. Wiccans believe that.
Gay people – all of us – are in agreement that we are entitled to equality.
Well I think I’m done aggravating all of you. It has been both challenging and interesting but I’m sure this conversation is probably now doing more harm than good so I think it best to close.
God’s best to you all.
-Teri
John 8:32
Teri,
Your lack of understanding the “ramifications” about what benefits are available to a family shows that you have no knowledge of the financial discrimination that occurs to gays. (At the time my mom and I shared a household – she was not anywhere near 65) How long do you think I should wait and let her go without healthcare? 10 years? That’s about $400.00 x 12 x 10 = $48,000. Now let’s add in medication? Or does that not count?
Matthew 8:15-23
Absolutely.
Along with John 8:31 and Matthew 25:31-46
Teri: For the record, I have never asserted most gays are “apolitical” or that “we’re all pretty much on the same page” There are gay extremists and straight extremists. But, most folks are not
We gays are as varied in our politcal beliefs and practices as straights are. Bring up politics in a gay bar — and you will notice marked diversity, not unaminity of opinion. Ever talk to a conservative, Republican gay person? It’s weird…
My point is, that when Kern says that homosexuality is a “bigger threat than terrorism”, she only fans the flames of anti-gay hatred and fear — and she reveals that she is only an extremist who has been listening only to extremists.
Now that she is meeting with some real gay people and their families, perhaps she will disover that the only threat we may pose is that she might have to let go of some of her fear and prejudice.. .
Ahem… I’ll accept an apology now, Michael
Well… actually I’m more libertarian. I’m fiscally conservative and socially moderate. But really, even the conservative Republican gays favor equality. I know a lot of them.
Ever meet a gay person who does not want marriage rights because of the lawyer’s fees.
Michael said:
Excuse me??? I can’t believe you even said that.
Holy Buckets! I’m glad I got distracted from this one.
Timothy, David–
The beliefs (and the attitude) expressed by Teri completely justify the work you are doing.
Teri–
I don’t know how to say it but, up til reading your diatribes, I never had any real trouble saying I’m a conservative Christian. I’m an ex-gay myself due to those Christian beliefs but I don’t think I’d be comfortable at all in your church.
Allan–
Although a lot of what you said was ‘heavy’, I found your genuineness refreshing. I hope you’ll speak again on another topic sometime.
Best laughs of the day:
I absolutely loved the verse slinging! (There was a Raymond episode where Peter Boyle and Fred Willard were having a prayer battle….)
And Teri’s comment that ‘this conversation is now probably causing more harm than good’. LOL. The conversation reached that point long, long ago.
And, oh, as an elected person, Kern was totally irresponsible in her statement and, at the very least, owes an apology to the gays in the district she serves. If she cannot sincerely apologize, she should step down or be removed from her position. (Is she up for re-election this fall?)
Thanks Eddy. I have to admit, Teri and others, esp those in the Church, who not only aren’t concerned about Kern but are encouraging her in her rants, that just saddens me.
Teri acts like someone Screwtape would have had his nephew arrange to meet their patient. I hope someone helps her understand that some day.
David,
She probably never read the book.
Timothy and David: I didn’t mean that there was something wrong with being a “conservative, Republican gay person.” Just that it was somewhat of a Twilight Zone experience for me…
Michael,
Yeah it can be easy to make assumptions about the community. Everyone does it and it is true that many of the more vocal leaders in the community are closer to the liberal end of the political spectrum.
But roughly 25% of self-identified gays and lesbians voted Republican in the past few presidential elections.
As comparison, in 2004 Bush got 23% of the gay vote.
That’s more than African-Americans (11%), self identified “Liberals” (13%), and about the same as Jews (25%).
Bush got 23% of the gay vote in 2004? 25% of self-identified gays and lesbians voted Republican in the past few presidential elections”? Wow. My head iis spinning. Those statstics surprise me, but there’s always hope, right?
Wait! I think I did see a conservative Republican gay person — out the window of the plane — trying to gnaw off the wing…!!!
Nick,
I was reviewing the meesages and came across yours :
Just so you know, she may claim Christ as hers – and yet Christ is for everyone. Not everyone is like her – and I don’t I know her Christ.
Yeah, I can see how that could be – if you are expecting one point of view to go with a certain kind of person, it challenges your preconceptions, even those based on experience. That’s a good thing, though. At least you didn’t say some of your best friends are gay conservative republicans…
Michael,
Was that a LEFT wing?
David: Darn! I was about to say that “some of my best friends are gay conservative republicans!” And some even claim to be “ex-republican” — but I suspect they haven’t really “changed”.
I read in here that the gays don’t want to all be lumped together as radical gay activists. I take particular offense to the gays lumping all the Christians together as hypocritical gay haters. I have known gay people, I lived in Montrose in Houston for several years, pretty hard to avoid gay people there. I have yet to meet one I hate. But because I believe the Bible says that homosexuality is a sin and is immoral it makes me a gay hater. I don’t hate the gay, I hate the sin, but I am not going to hold it against that person. I have my own sinful battles to fight and I hope that a gay person (or anyone else) wouldn’t hold that against me. The difference between me and those working the radical gay agenda is I am not asking for any special rights or treatment because to make my sins more bearable.
I imagine this comment, like many above, will spark some angry responses. My take on the gay activists is they will bash me, just as they have others. Instead of engaging in any kind of civil dialouge until I look like the Christian, gay bashing hypocrite they want me to be.
Scott S –
I am not asking for any special rights or treatment because to make my sins more bearable.
You’re comment above doesn’t necessarily make you a gay hater, but it does make you anti-gay. Gay people, by and large, aren’t asking for special rights – the religious right tries to make it sound as if they are in order to further their own agenda – what they are seeking is equality under the law.
Scott, you already have the special rights simply for being a Christian. You are protected in hate crime legislation. You cannot be denied work or housing because of your chosen lifestyle. So, it seems to me that you call these rights special because you have them and don’t want others to, simply because you are biased. Well, you’ll be pleased to know that I don’t hate Christians – I just hate their bigotry and apparent inability to reason. And if you think that’s a gross generalization, then perhaps you should go back and reevaluate your comments. Gays who are celibate can still be fired for their “lifestyle”, exactly why that “celibate lifestyle” is offensive is beyond me. Celibate gays can still be denied housing. Exactly why that should be allowed is beyond me. That Christians such as you are apparently demanding the “right” to discriminate against gays demonstrates to me that you have no clue about who Jesus was or what Jesus taught.
Why don’t you engage in a little Bible study? On one sheet of paper right down every specific thing Jesus told people to do, and on another sheet of paper right down every specific thing Jesus told people to not do. (Pay attention to the passages that aren’t believed to be in the original documents, but apparently were added later in time). After reading them through, why don’t you try doing the ones Jesus told you to do and avoid the ones Jesus told you to not do? You might be surprised at what you see on those lists.
that should be “write” down, not “right” down.
Nick,
I did engage in some Bible study, that is what gives me the belief that homosexuality is sinful. I don’t think this is an issue over gays, it is an issue over whether or not the Bible is without error. I believe it has to be or the things you want to me write down that Jesus said are worthless. I could pick and choose which to follow and which to not, just as you seem to have done.
I just want to recommend a movie that has helped thousands of people understand what it’s like to be on the receiving end of comments like Kern’s. It’s called God and Gays: Bridging the Gap.
Many Christians such as myself have seen it and have so appreciated the story it tells. I’d highly recommend it to Sally Kern, as a Christian for a Christian.
They are doing a free call tonight (and then later the recording archived) with the producer of the movie and some guests talking about Kern’s comments and the spiritual response. Go to their website to learn more: http://www.godandgaysthemovie.com
Scott,
You are entitled to believe that homosexuality is sinful. While my research has led me to different conclusions about the message of Christ and how it applies to same-sex attracted persons, I would never try to deny you the right to disagree with me.
I don’t doubt that there are a number of issues on which we disagree. I don’t know your theology so I cannot assume what they are, but they may include such items as:
The rightful age of baptism
The necessity or importance of water immersion
The hierarchy of the church
The place of women within the church
Veneration of the Saints
The Trinity
The nature of sin
Confession
The structure of prayer
Liturgy
Fasting
Demon possession and exorcism
Miracles
Prayer for the sick
And many many more
While I suppose it’s possible that we agree fully, it’s much more likely that we differ on a number of items. Yet each of us (and everyone else in the body of believers) rely on what we find in Scripture for the basis of our faith.
While wars have been fought over these issues, I don’t believe that they are much important. What is important is how we respond to our differences.
Gay people are not asking for special rights at all. And their purpose for asking for equality is to “make their sins more bearable”. They simply want civil equality under law.
What sets you apart from, say gay activists, is that you seem to believe that your faith entitles you do impose your personal code on others. You seem, unless I misunderstand you, to place this single doctrinal dispute into a category quite unlike the authority of the Pope, or speaking in tongues, or belief in the Book of Mormon.
I respectfully suggest you prayerfully reconsider your priorities.
Scott S. said: “it is an issue over whether or not the Bible is without error” Nnot really, Scott. It is an issue over whether or not the people who read the Bible are without error.
It may mean one thing to you and something entirely different to me. For example, some Christians believe that water baptism by immersion is necesssary for salvation.
Some believe that you can lose your Salvatiion. Some believe that blood transfusions are sin. How do fallible humans make decisions on what the infallible Bible says?
And yet, when I read the Bible I don’t see that.
I see Sodom as being about inhospitality, given every reference prior to Jude deals with that issue, while Jude suggests sex with angels was the wrongdoing.
I see Leviticus as being part of the purity code – isn’t it funny how no one considers men having sex with women who are menstruating sinful? Even though that is in the same passage as the supposed condemnation of male homosexuality? And, furthermore, the Hebrew in the condemnation deals with purity, not morality.
Corinthians and Timothy, well no Bible prior to 1952 condemns gays there. Interesting how modern Bibles have twisted the original translations to condemn people who weren’t originally condemned in those passages. Until someone can produce translations that explicitly condemned gays in those passages prior to 1952, well I’ll think you’re just basing things on your prejudice.
And Romans? Well, read the entire book for a change, keeping in mind Paul was trying to reconcile the Jewish and Gentile believers. When read in that context (aka the context of the letter), suddenly there’s no condemnation of gays.
So, forgive me, but I think your view is grounded in prejudice. Even Gagnon has to resort to circular reasoning in order to make the Bible condemn gays.
So, your view is your view, but when logic and reason are employed it rings very hollow.
But, I should add, at least your view justifies the bigotry and prejudice demonstrated by so many Christians. I guess when all is said and done that is the important thing.
I would like to hear from someone who believes the Bible is the infallible word of God — but is willing to admit they may have it wrong.. How do you determine with CERTAINTY what each passsage means? Is it possible that your understanding of the Bible may be wrong? How do you decide which Old Testament laws to obey and which to overlook?
I hear very from few conservative Christians who are willing to acknowledge that they are FALLIBLE when it comes to interpreting Scripture — and that equally sincere and intelligent born-again believers might differ on what Bible passages may actually mean. Most self-righteously insist that they KNOW. Where’s the humility?
How do you determine with CERTAINTY what each passsage means?
Michael,
From my perspective, the two most important words in the Bible come from Jesus – He said follow me. He did not say to follow Christianity or other aspects that people have made up about religion to suit their own needs. He said follow me. Whenever I hear someone talking about (or bragging about their Christianity), it is meaningless to me on so many different levels. When I hear or see someone talk and act in a Christ like way, I become gravitated to that individual and want to know more about them and aspire to be more like them. BTW – if all the arrogance and exclusion of individuals that come from organized religion affects me to the extent it does, I can only imagine how it would affect another person who is on the cusp of believing and is discouraged by the “noise” that just becomes muffled after awhile.
Ann: I agree with you, but I am still curious. How do folks who believe the Bible is the infallible word of God deal with the fact that human beings are not? How do they decide which laws to obey, which to ignore and which to impose on the rest of us?
I am also concerned, as you are, “regarding how it would affect another person who is on the cusp of believing and is discouraged by the “noise”. I think Jesus got upset by this very same “noise” — the legalists, the self-righteous, the moral superiorty, the lack of love, mercy and basic human compassion that he often encountered among the “relgious” elite of His day.
Not much has changed since then. Many of those “on the cusp” simply walk away — convinced that God hates them.
How do folks who believe the Bible is the infallible word of God deal with the fact that human beings are not? How do they decide which laws to obey, which to ignore and which to impose on the rest of us?
Michael,
The answers to your questions will be as varied as the individuals you ask. We do not have any control over what or how anyone interprets the Bible, only ourselves. If you believe in Jesus and what He said and how He lived, then follow him and leave all the noise behind.
Ann,
I understand what you are saying, but I understand Michael as well. I also have my own beliefs on this, but the problem I see is this:
you said If you believe in Jesus and what He said and how He lived, then follow him and leave all the noise behind.
But EVERYTHING we know about Jesus comes to us through the writings of OTHER people – other fallible human beings. Did they tell us everything we need to know? Did they tell us the truth?
Like I said – I am a believer, but these are valid questions!
But EVERYTHING we know about Jesus comes to us through the writings of OTHER people – other fallible human beings. Did they tell us everything we need to know? Did they tell us the truth?
Jayhuck,
Yes, you and Michael are right – I just would never hold myself out as an expert on how to answer these very valid questions. From my perspective, it is a matter or choice and faith. I believe God made us but it is up to us to make choices throughout a lifetime about which faith or religion or beliefs we want to follow. I also know we don’t have to believe what we read or what we hear from others, no matter what the resource is – sometimes, if we quiet ourselves we can hear from a small, still voice that gives us all the answers we need.
Ann,
sometimes, if we quiet ourselves we can hear from a small, still voice that gives us all the answers we need.
Absolutely!!!
Thank you for that blessed reminder.
Ann,
It is truly from the small, still voice that truth comes to us, however, with all of the noise in our lives today it is becoming increasingly difficult to hear that voice and to trust it. The internet has made that even more difficult as we now have voices screaming at us 24/7 if we allow them. It takes a great deal of patience, discipline, and love to stop ourselves long enough to hear what the voice of reason is trying to tell us all. That voice is one of balance for us not the extremes. In order to find this balance we must first be able to listen to those whose opinions differ from our own.
Great post, People need to read this.