Why are gay people a Christian target?

[Colorado127]

I am perplexed by fundamentalist christians that are always targeting gay people. They want to pass all sorts of laws restricting rights and privileges that everyone else has. What frustrates me the most is that they seem to be tunnel-visioned on gays. There are many things in the christian bible that they could talk about. I bet you there are more adulterers in the US than gay people and adultery is a ten commandments topic. What about honoring your parents? Can we focus on that for a while? This gay marriage thing being a religious idea only? I know of several religions that encourage gay people to find partners to marry including Unity, Unitarian Universalists and the Quakers.

I believe that gay people are the target because the christian religion, or its higher ups, have nothing else to target? They have lost the battle with alcohol and porn, they used to say black people couldn't marry white people but can't do that anymore. They try to stop drugs but you can't pass any more laws about that. Ok I'm being a bit out there, but really, Christianity has been losing its control over its flock for decades, if not centuries. Every sociologist and psychology person can easily see that when someone or some group sees its former control waning they will do anything to regain it. It's a desparate act. These fundamentalist christians have to find something to rally the troops.....wha-laa!.....gay people. A marginalized group in our over masculinized, sports culture that many people feel uncomfortable with. From history, the Nazi's for example, we know that hate is an excellent way to mobilize a group.

Isn't it blatantly unconstitutional to forbid the marriage of two people? In Virginia they want to outlaw any 'marraige like' contracts between two people of the same sex, doesn't that seem unconstitutional? The sodomy laws that Chief Justice Souter condemned was obviously directed at gay men. The 14th amendments says no state shall pass a law abridging the rights of its citizens. The only people saying I cannot marry another guy is christians? Right there we have a church-state conflict.

Ok, let me have it!

[micatala]

But Shamgar, it seems to me you have taken scripture out of context on several occasions. You have given somtimes lengthy, sometimes short quotations of scripture, or even lists of several citations. Often you have not given any context or ignored the context. Several times I have pointed to the larger context in which these scriptures reside, and how your interpretation does not square with the larger context, and you have mostly not responded.

I would agree with you, one should consider the context, and should also consider the passage in question relative to other relevant passages of scripture. I did this when pointing you to Romans 1:18 in response to your citation of I Cor. 5.

The question is, how does the particular quotation, short or long, fit into the larger context? In this particular situation, I absolutely did consider the context, and it is exactly applicable to one of the points I have been making all along! Paul is saying the believers are not given sanction to judge all of society on the basis of their own religious beliefs. This implies that believers are not given sanction to use state power to discriminate against homosexuals or others who might be considered sinful.

How would you read verses 12 and 13 differently, based on your reading of the context?

[Shamgar]

What I like is your ability to parrot everything I say, such as context. See no evidence to support claim, no independent thought, no debate.

[micatala]

If you want to debate, then why not respond directly to the issues and questions at hand instead of avoiding the issue and hurling insults?

12 For what have I to do with judging them that are without? Do not ye judge them that are within? 13 But them that are without God judgeth. Put away the wicked man from among yourselves.

Paul is saying the believers are not given sanction to judge all of society on the basis of their own religious beliefs. This implies that believers are not given sanction to use state power to discriminate against homosexuals or others who might be considered sinful.

How would you read verses 12 and 13 differently, based on your reading of the context?

Would you say that Jesus violated your understanding of what Paul is saying here by associating with 'sinners', as he is frequently documented as doing in the Gospels?

I agree, Jesus would not want us to sin. However, I again say, the judgment of sin is ultimately God's to make. In the passage in John chapter 8, Jesus is going against the established law of God, or is at least allowing that it need not be followed. Why would Jesus not simply go along with the stoning of the woman? The 'Teachers of the Law' are only suggesting exactly what scripture proscribes, just as you feel discriminating against gays is doing exactly what scripture proscribes. If Jesus is suggesting there is another way, how can you be so confident that He would not suggest another way to you?

Are we loving homosexual people by discriminating against them? I don't believe so. If by our behavior, we cause a person to reject God, then are we not acting against God's purposes? Jesus upbraids the Pharisees for laying burdens on men that they are not able to carry, and then not lifting a finger to help them. If we ask a gay person, who in his or her heart has searched and in all good conscience cannot come to any other conclusion other then their sexuality is intrinsically part of who they are, to deny who they are, are we not laying a burden on them that we who are heterosexual do not have to carry? Are we doing anything to help them carry this burden?

It is worth noting that Jesus frequently associated with the 'sinners' of his time, including adulterers. What should we do, follow Jesus example or Paul's direction?

So, I ask yet again, which of the behaviors described in the verses you quote should we make illegal, and which not, and on what basis? Why would Christians think it is OK to have a constitutional amendment against gay marriage, and not include adultery or divorce?

[Logetic]

The homosexual community attacks the Christian community at every turn and at every angle. Christianity has been defined for thousands of years since Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And alarmingly, the Gay Agenda is demanding to be let into every household in a strikingly similar way as described in Genesis.

Christians knowing the law of God, have always opposed divorce and adultery. Even the most "liberal" translations haven't whitewashed that away from scripture.

Remember Jesus' great great grandmother Bathsheba could have been stoned to death. By law.

The civil courts did away with the condemnation of adultery and divorce not the Church. And it is of course, the civil courts that the Gay Agenda turns to for its release on society.

There is nothing in scripture that says that sinners cannot rid the land of sin. Jesus was using a good tool of guilt versus guilt to save the adulterers life. In fact, the Israelites, major sin-doers, cleansed many, many lands of abominations and the people who did them. No?

Homosexuals like all other sinners wanting a place at the table without repenting, can only point to other sins to find a stance for activity they know is condemned from cover to cover in the Bible. Licentiousness and gluttony are two very accurate words to describe a lifestyle defined exclusively by your sex life. Do the math! Ezekial is scary how accurately it describes sexual miscreants. Selfishness is the perfect place to find an accurate judgment of sexual licentious behavior.

Remember the parable about the angels seperating the good from the bad. Notice that the bad and good were found dwelling together.

Prophetic don't you think?

[bernee51]

The homosexual community attacks the Christian community at every turn and at every angle.

Really? I'm sure you have evidence of this otherwise you would not have posted it, would you?

Christianity has been defined for thousands of years since Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

That's news to me, and a lot of christians I would imagine.

And alarmingly, the Gay Agenda is demanding to be let into every household in a strikingly similar way as described in Genesis.

My household does not feel under demand from the 'Gay Agenda' - therefore I think you must be wrong in your use of the word 'every'.

Remember Jesus' great great grandmother Bathsheba could have been stoned to death. By law.

God has a great grandmother? Wow? So god does have a 'cause' after all.

There is nothing in scripture that says that sinners cannot rid the land of sin. Jesus was using a good tool of guilt versus guilt to save the adulterers life. In fact, the Israelites, major sin-doers, cleansed many, many lands of abominations and the people who did them. No?

Sorry 'sin' is a theological phenomenon not a secular one. The only sinners are those who believe in your god or other gods that have made a determination in regards to sin. If 'sinners' want to get rid of 'sin;' they should start with themselves and leave everyone else to do the same.

Licentiousness and gluttony are two very accurate words to describe a lifestyle defined exclusively by your sex life.

Sounds like middle class society in general - judging by mainstream media.

Notice that the bad and good were found dwelling together.

There is a very good reason for that.

Prophetic don't you think?

Sounds more like commonsense to me.

[micatala]

The homosexual community attacks the Christian community at every turn and at every angle. Christianity has been defined for thousands of years since Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And alarmingly, the Gay Agenda is demanding to be let into every household in a strikingly similar way as described in Genesis.

As bernee has asked, can you support this assertion? I would agree that some or 'a few' in the homosexual community might engage in attacks on Christianity. Why do you think that is? Could it be that there is a significant number of Christians who attack homosexuals, who demonize them, who talk about them as if they are somehow not completely human, who refuse to show them the respect that all human beings deserve.

Could it be that homosexuals are tired of being abused, beat up, lynched, denied their basic human rights, etc. etc.

I would grant that not all of this abuse is done on the part of Christians. A lot of people abuse homosexuals just because they are 'different' and they have a hard time dealing with that difference. I remember going to a Marine recruiting station when I was 16, and one of the recruiting sargeants colleagues spent about 10 minutes relating how much fun he had at the beach beating up faggots. I don't think this was because of his Christian views. However, it is just another example of the abuse homosexuals have had to put up with, abuse that no one should have to put up with, especially when the justification is something that is arguably innate and unchangeable.

Christians knowing the law of God, have always opposed divorce and adultery. Even the most "liberal" translations haven't whitewashed that away from scripture.

I don't think this would be universally true among all Christians. Even if it were, the fact is that Christians tolerate this behavior to a much greater extent then they tolerate homosexuals, even when the homosexuals do not act on their sexuality. Why do we have a proposed gay marriage amendment, and not include divorce or adultery? If the rationale is that gay marriage is bad for kids and bad for society, then the same is true a hundred fold for adultery and divorce. Just because of the numbers, it is pretty clear that divorce among heterosexuals has had a much more deleterious effect on our society than gay marriage ever could, even if you only count divorce among Christians.

You equate homosexuality with "selfishness". DOes this mean heterosexuals are not "selfish" when they act on their sexuality? I would agree that God calls us to to go beyond our selfish urges, to curb them and not let them dominate us. But this applies to all of us who accept Christianity. Why should we put an unbearable burden on homosexuals by denying them any capacity to act on their sexuality, when we would never place that burden on heterosexuals?

Ezekial is scary how accurately it describes sexual miscreants. Selfishness is the perfect place to find an accurate judgment of sexual licentious behavior.

Remember the parable about the angels seperating the good from the bad. Notice that the bad and good were found dwelling together.

Prophetic don't you think?

You'll have to give me a reference to what prophecy you're referring to here.

[Overcomer]

I don't think "target" is the correct word to use re: a Christian's attitude toward homosexuals. That implies an attack. I don't attack homosexuals. I DO attack homosexuality, but not the individuals who are caught up in that demonic stronghold. That's what homosexuality is. It's a demonic stronghold.

As a Christian, I don't want to see anybody miss out on heaven and spend eternity in hell. Therefore, I speak out against homosexuality because it's a sin that will keep people separated from God for eternity.

I speak out against ALL sin, not just that of homosexuality. It's just that this is a sin that gay people are trying to get everybody to accept these days so that's why it seems that Christians are focusing on them rather than on others. I won't accept that sin any more than I will accept the sin of adultery or prostitution or pedophilia, all equally deadly sexual sins.

I also want to point out that none of those sexual sins are any worse than any other sin. Homosexuality isn't any worse than some of my own sins that I have had to face up to and confess and repent of. All sin is ugly to God. I have no superiority over the homosexual just because I'm heterosexual.

Look at it this way. If I'm in a house that's on fire and I know the one way to escape, would you want me to just run out the door and leave everybody else to burn? As a Christian, I know the way out of the burning house and I am going to point out the exit to everybody I encounter. There will be some people who refuse to believe me and some who might get downright nasty with me for trying to point them in the right direction, but that's not going to stop me from trying to help them.

If I hated homosexuals, I wouldn't say a thing about their homosexuality. I'd just let them go to hell. It's because I love homosexuals that I speak out and offer them a chance to break free and enjoy life and connect with God.

The idea that homosexuals are born that way is a complete myth with no scientific proof that they cannot change. In fact, they CAN change. There are all kinds of ex-gays who share how they broke from that prison and help others leave that lifestyle behind. You can read some of them here:

http://www.exodus-international.org/

I think what really bugs me about the gay agenda is the way they have tried to pass off their concerns as a human rights issue like that of African-Americans. That's such an insult to African-Americans who are born with their skin colour, did not choose it and cannot change it. Nor should they have to because there's nothing sinful about having skin that isn't white.

But there is something sinful about homosexuality and homosexuals CAN and DO change all the time. Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and should NOT be treated as a human rights issue any more than prostitution or pedophilia can be considered human rights issues. No one would argue that it's discriminatory to stop men from having sex with five-year-olds. By the same token, no one should argue with people who speak out against homosexuality.

Homosexuals have done a tremendous job selling their case. What they don't realize is they're condemning themselves to an afterlife that isn't going to be pleasant. But I intend to keep speaking out with the hope that some will see the truth and eagerly accept Christ and allow him to change them.

One last point: Are there people who call themselves Christians who are beating up gays, calling them names, etc.? Yes, there are, and they make me sick! I question whether they really have the love of God in them because someone who knows the Lord and shares his love will NOT abuse gay people. They will try to help them with love and encouragement. Those people who are abusive to gays and pass themselves off as Christians make me angry.

[The Happy Humanist]

Overcomer, a few questions for you.

1) Given the monstrous problems that beset the gay community, and even more so gays that lived before there was a gay community, such as AIDS, bans on gay marriage, social stigmas, lynchings, Pastor Fred Whatsisname (godhatesfags.com), etc....why would anyone in their right mind choose this lifestyle?

2) Why is there homosexuality in the rest of the animal kingdom? Does this not imply that God created homosexuality? Could he not have avoided creating it? I know your stance is that its a perversion of the reproductive mechanism that God created. But is it based purely on a willful decision by a man or a woman to become attracted to the same sex? Is this an attraction that is innate in all of us, but most of us choose to repress? Have you ever felt attracted to the same sex? (Please, don't jump down my throat, I'm not going there...) If not, do you therefore believe that others do not feel this attraction? And if you acknowledge that they do, how does that happen if not naturally? Do you think they are forcing themselves to feel it?

3) You make a big deal about this:

I think what really bugs me about the gay agenda is the way they have tried to pass off their concerns as a human rights issue like that of African-Americans. That's such an insult to African-Americans who are born with their skin colour, did not choose it and cannot change it. Nor should they have to because there's nothing sinful about having skin that isn't white.

...in which you seem to acknowledge that people should not be persecuted for a condition they are born into. Yet the self-same Exodus Project above has this to say:

And even if homosexuality were partially or completely genetic in origin, that does not change the moral question involved: God declares in the Bible that homosexual and lesbian activities are sin (Romans 1:26–27).

In other words, born that way or not, its still sin. But how could they be born that way if God didn't make them that way? Do you agree with the Exodus position?

Finally, to the membership in general, isn't there a member here who actually wrote a book about this issue?

[ST88]

The idea that homosexuals are born that way is a complete myth with no scientific proof that they cannot change. In fact, they CAN change. There are all kinds of ex-gays who share how they broke from that prison and help others leave that lifestyle behind. You can read some of them here:

http://www.exodus-international.org/

This is incorrect. Though the research is far from complete, the "myth" aspect of your statement is false. There are biological correlates that suggest homosexuality is a genetically inherited condition. The actual mechanism is still not known, but there is evidence -- in humans -- the homosexuality has a biological basis.

The Bailey & Pillard (1991) twin study gave a statistical model of homosexuality in monozygotic twins, dizigotic twins, and adopted brothers. The co-incidence of homosexuality in monozygotic twins was 52%; in dizygotic twins it was 22%; in adoptive brothers it was 11%; and in non-twin brothers it was 9%. It should be noted that the expected percentage in the population as a whole is around 10%. If "nurture" was the primary factor, we would expect to see the adoptive brothers with a similar percentage of homosexual incidence, but because the only difference between brothers of this type is a genetic difference, "nurture" can't be the only answer.

Similar statisics occur for other quasi-inherited conditions like MS and autism.

There is also this:

In 1990, in one of the first studies to determine if the brain is dimorphic with respect to sexual orientation, D. F. Swaab found that in homosexual males, the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) of the hypothalamus, in general, was twice as large as the SCN in heterosexual males (Burr, Separate 26). Although the hypothalamus indirectly governs a person’s sexual drive, the SCN is known not to have any part in regulating it. Perhaps, though, the hypothalamus was the key. Under this premise, Laura S. Allen probed further into the hypothalamus and reported that the anterior commissure (AC) in the hypothalamus was the largest in homosexuals (LeVay 123). Yet the AC does not control sexual drive either. Nevertheless, Swaab’s and Allen’s findings are quite significant, for “the very fact that the anterior commissure [and, in turn, the SCN] is not involved in the regulation of sexual behavior makes it highly unlikely that the size differences result from differences in sexual behavior. Much more probably, the size differences came about during the original sexual differentiation” of each structure (LeVay 123).
-- The Biological Basis of Homosexuality

It should be noted that this also does not indicate a direct mechanism for homosexual behavior, just a biological difference. However, it should also be noted that the hypothalamus is a primary link in the limbic system (via GnRH) which affects both sexual pleasure and emotions. It is also a part of the endocrine system, which affects the levels of testosterone in males and estrogen/progesterone in females. This would tend to support the view that homosexuality is just as much an emotional/intellectual state as it is a physical behavior (if not more so). Why are they larger in homosexuals? Unknown, but it is a difference worth exploring.

Ed to add: Sorry, I left off a link for the Bailey & Pillard study. This link to the U of Texas is actually a skeptical view of this study & it acknowledges the relative validity of the statistics despite some problems with the actual study.
http://www.utexas.edu/courses/bio301d/T ... /Text.html

[BeHereNow]

overcomer: I won't accept that sin any more than I will accept the sin of adultery or prostitution or pedophilia, all equally deadly sexual sins.

I assume you believe that every case of divorce results in adultery (as it says this in the Bible).
Do you favor anti-divorce demonstrations as much as anti-homosexuality demonstrations?
If a close family member married a divorce person, they would be committing adultery.
Would you treat them the same as a homosexual (concerning their sin).