Serious Question: Practicing Gay AND Christian??

[frankandcathy]

Hey everyone. I can see that my last post created some disappointment (especially in Keltic). I am sorry to see that.

I think it is a struggle to communicate across the board in human relationships because we all desire to be known, understood, and (whether we admit it or not) have others validate where we're coming from.

It's cannot say that I can validate where every homosexual person is coming from. And, obviously, it's hard for some homosexual people to say that they can validate where I'm coming from. If I say that in some ways it's easier to just "believe what you believe" then I am somehow a disappointment to those who want a real discussion and resolution. It is desired of me that I attempt to try very hard to validate someone else's thoughts and understand where they're coming from but if I feel safe enough to express my own true thoughts, then I get derided as being one of the intolerant masses.

To change ingrained thought patterns is (as you all know) very difficult work. And it's not a process that will take place on a message board alone, or over a short period of time.

I don't believe that there will ever be a real dialogue between the two sides of theology until we can say to one another, "I see where you're coming from. I don't agree but I understand. Do you see where I'm coming from? Do you understand? Not necessarily agree, but understand?"

Therein lies the problem I think with the politicization of certain issues. It's no longer okay to disagree but also try to understand. So much is at stake that we feel we MUST come to agreement or someone MUST be subjigated to the beliefs of another.

Keltic: I have to say I think you are often misunderstanding what I"m saying. Even when I'm trying to make the point that not all Christians are alike, you seem to think that I'm saying, "All Christians are alike."

Indeed. It is easier for EVERYONE to believe what they want to believe spiritually. Chances are, if you had not been homosexual, YOU would have been perfectly happy to do the same. Please let that sink in for a moment.

I am not here to just say, "Oh well, that was interesting. I'll go right back to what I believe." I am here for the primary purpose of learning what YOU believe. And I have done that. And you have been most helpful. And I thank you for it.

Everyone here has broadened my understanding beyond what it was before (Yes, even you Willy). I certainly have more compassion and more knowledge now that I did before. I'd never thought about some of the painful issues that gay people struggle with. I hope that now I will be more sensitive and loving.

I have some questions to ask myself about what the purpose of scripture is, if I am simply "picking and choosing" what suits me, and what role the Bible should play in my life and the lives of others.

What on Earth makes you think that I'm not thinking about, praying about, meditating on, and studying this topic? Just become I don't come to your conclusions doesn't mean that I'm not thoughtful or that I don't care. If I didn't care, I wouldn't be here.

As ever, I would never say that a "sin issue" or a "commandment" is more important than loving people. Let me repeat, I am here in an effort to learn to love people better by finding out about them. Please don't forget that during this sometimes hurtful conversation. This may be a good time to exercise, "Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do" in regards to me if you can.

You have a great point about the infallability argument and why I feel I can apply certain standards to myself and not to you. Again, I'm thinking about that one and, no, it doesn't scream hypocrisy at me right now. Most likely because I've been immersed in a culture that does the same thing.

When I say "every version of the Bible I've read says it's a sin," I mean that the words are translated differently than the way they would be in a gay-friendly Bible. "The Letter" documents those differences well and I'm sure you've read it so I didn't feel the need to re-post them here.

I'll admit I was a little wounded on the "is pride no longer a sin" thing. But that's okay. Please let me clarify. I'm not trying to be prideful (but perhaps I am). I just meant to say that if any of us having sin in our lives that we ARE AWARE OF and we choose to say, "You know God, I really don't care about that one," that's unrepentant sin.

Do I feel like I have sin in my life? ABSOLUTELY! Do I feel like I have anything that I am doing that I KNOW is wrong that I am just telling God to "bug off" on? No. Do I keep sinning every day? ABSOLUTELY! Would I love to stop? Oh yeah. Can I? Not this side of heaven.

Do I feel I'm superior to others in general? Sometimes. I attribute that to my personality and some issues I had growing up but there's no excuse for it and it certainly doesn't belong in the kingdom of God. I think my journey here is helping me to understand better, "Take the plank out of your own eye..."

And I think this is probably where gay Christians have an advantage over straight ones. You've been beaten up enough to understand that beating someone over the head for "their sins" doesn't really help. You know that to try to force someone to be something you believe "God wants them to be" is often cruel. I am so thankful to see this humility here.

Keltic: Again, your point is my point. Jesus certainly didn't say the political climate should affect sinfulness or the degree or measure we judge it with. That is my point, too. We have let it do so (I mean we as in the "straight Christian" community).

I am certainly not here to cast stones. If I were the wife of Mel White OR Ted Haggard I would be devastated. I think that's part of the reason why I wound up here. How could a man do this to his wife? How could a straight man do this to his wife? A gay man? Any man? And honestly, Keltic, this is where I'm going to draw the line on trying to stretch my understanding. You make a vow at an altar to love someone forever, you make babies with them, and then for ANY reason you CHOOSE to leave, that bites. Am I saying that he CHOSE to be gay, no. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying he CHOSE to leave. Am I sorry that he was ever put in that situation? YES! Am I aware that he would suffer for the rest of his life if he stayed? YES! Does it matter all that much to me? NO!

In our society, we applaud people like Nancy Reagan or the wife of Christopher Reeves for taking their marriage vows seriously. Yet we are expected to simply dismiss a gay man who leaves his wife because he's gay.

Did Mrs. Reagan or Mrs. Reeves ever get their sexual needs met again from their husbands? Probably not. Did they ever want to just walk away and go make themselves happy? I'm sure. Did they ever get tired of not being recognized by someone they'd poured out their lives to or get tired of changing adult diapers? I'm sure. And yet...they made a commitment. They stayed. And they should be applauded because in those moments they were the most like God. They sacrificed their own desires for the sake of someone else. You can paint it however you want but to make a family with a woman and then leave her for ANYONE else is pure selfishness. I don't care what the reason is.

Okay, I know that sounded a little vehement but it touches my heart. I wouldn't expect you to understand in the same way I do. You're a man who is in no danger of having this happen to you. You don't understand a mother's heart or the heart of a wife. I don't fault you for this. I'm just saying there is not excuse for the behavior. No matter how desperate someone may feel.

Let me ask you this. If I get really, really, really fat when I'm 50 and my husband is no longer attracted to me anymore, should he be able to divorce me? I mean, his sexual needs aren't going to be met. He will probably feel repulsed by me. He will feel unloved and uncherished. Is it okay, then, for him to say his goodbyes? Or is that just selfish?

Inn regards to divorce: I bet you're wondering if I feel that divorce is wrong. Well yes, I do. I have divorced friends who are fond of talking about the "ex-wife" or the "ex-husband" and my heart breaks. How can you make a life with someone and then just leave it?

Look, my grandpa was an alcoholic who beat the crud out of my grandmother and father and uncle. Eventually, my grandmother moved out with the boys and didn't go back. She never divorced my grandfather and never dated another man. She lived the rest of her life as a sacrifice to the vow she made. Is that a super situation? No. But do I admire her for remaining faithful to her marriage? Yes!

Do I think God can restore people, forgive them, and use their lives? Yes! Do I think divorce was ever the best plan? No. I am quite sure that every divorced person would choose something different for themselves if they had it to do over again.

None of this means that I don't have compassion on divorced people or that I don't feel sympathy for them. I think this is one of the problems. You might think that because I have a standard of beliefs and behavior that I am incapable of feeling sympathy for someone else. This is not true. You might think that because I am able to draw a mental line, that I am incapable of showing grace. Also not true. Because that's how God is. He draws lines but loves us when we cross them. I admit this isn't easy to do and too many straight Christians have just drawn the line and forgotten about the love...but not all of us.

keltic: Because I believe something does not make it so. I am sharing my beliefs. I am not arrogant enough to think that just because I believe something that it is necessarily true or will be accepted as true by everyone else.

You believing the scholars who translated the way that suits you doesn't make it so, either. You are choosing to trust one set of scholars. I choose to trust another. Why am I to be villified for the same thing that you yourself do? The truth is, neither one of us is a Greek or Hebrew scholar. We must, therefore, trust someone other than ourselves.

You ask a great question about why can't Christ's love be represented through ANY human love? Why not the love of best friends? Why not the love of a mother/child? Why not the love of two men? On some level, yes, every human love speaks of God. I am speaking in the terms of Paul, though. Marriage between a man and woman, specifically, their sexual union. I didn't choose the symbol...Paul did.

Do I subscribe to the idea of a woman being SUBSERVIENT or SUBMISSIVE? BOTH! I believe we are all to serve one another. Thus: sub-servient. I believe we are all to submit to one another. I believe there is an authority structure in the home. The husband is to love his wife and serve her and lead her as Jesus himself does the church. The wife is to serve and love her husband as the church should do for Jesus (remember, I'm very symbolic). Do I believe that women should be doormats for men (suffer physical and verbal abuses)? No. Do I believe that MEN should be doormats for their wives (get verbally belittled, "bitched" at constantly, go visually unstimulated, etc.)? No.

I don't understand what you meant about "this statement assumes that gay people wish everyone was like them." I don't think gay people wish everyone was like them.

I personally don't ignore the scriptures about divorce so I can't explain why some people feel justified in following Jesus and getting divorced.

Guys, my kids are awake from naptime. I have to go. Wish I could type more now but can't. Keltic, I hope to hear back from you soon.

~C

P.S. Willy: sorry the Christian community has left you disillusioned. I hope someone somewhere is showing you Jesus in a loving, practical way (I bet they are here!)

[frankandcathy]

Originally Posted by Willy

I want to say to them: Yeah, I know you don't like it. I don't like your cheesy Christian music and those stupid fish decals, either. But it's not like I'm trying to ban it, so how about you back off?
)

Just for the record, I don't have a fish decal anywhere in my possession and I also dislike "cheesy Christian music." I prefer some good Southern Rock any day and my oldest child has announced that "Sweet Home Alabama" is her favorite song even though we've never taken her to Alabama. So there.

[frankandcathy]

Dave and Andrew:

I believe I'll take your advice on having a more private discussion with a few people. There are certainly several here that are obviously willing and theologically aware. Please don't feel bad for having participated, Andrew. You are "like me" and your opinions lent credence to some ideas.

In retrospect (being now armed wtih this new understanding) I can see how just plain "out there" it was to post in a forum like this with no real understanding of the complexities or personality, belief, etc. At least I can say that I'm now more aware or what that must feel like to all of you. I would like to thank everyone for their input and thoughts and for submitting to questioning by a clueless someone in cyberspace.

I do not fault anyone for anything that they said or replied. It is obvious that there is much hurt and misunderstanding on both sides. I have seen that it is FAR too easy to paint a convenient portrait of "them" whether through political motivation, pain, or fear. It's too easy to talk about "those gays" or "those right-wing Christians" as though everyone were popped out of a mold somewhere.

My sincerest hope is that the gay community is now somehow more aware of how *some* Christians think. I think this is crucial in strategizing how to come to an understanding and peaceable conclusion.

I, for instance, would never have guessed that there is a belief in biblical mistranslation. Now, being armed with this understanding, I must be aware that if I am ministering to someone who is gay and they ask, "Does the Bible say homosexuality is a sin?" I can at least say, "Well, here's what I've heard on both sides of the aisle. This is what I think and why. Here is what many gay Christians think and why." I hope that above all, my love for the Lord and my love for other human beings will shine through any semantics, translational issues, etc.

I would hope that the issues that I brought up are not easily brushed aside, either. I think it would be a shame for me to take one on the chin for my beliefs and then not have them really analyzed. It would be the height of "intolerant tolerance" to demand that I give serious thought to the "gay side" of the issue and to merely dismiss my thoughts as "right-wing hate speech." Which, unfortunately, I think it will be easy for many to do.

I will gracefully bow out now (at the suggestion of Dave and Andrew) and will try to answer any questions or replies by private message. Again, thank you all for your time and replies! I pray that God leads us all into a place where we are, above all else, loving him and loving and serving one another.

[BruceChris]

I am again a little bit rushed here, but I hope that I can add something positive here. First of all, of course it is not just men who do not figure out that they are gay, until they have been hetrosexually married for years, sometimes until they are quite old. Please read the link below, and read Both of my postings (it's not long), because I only put the explanation in the second one.

http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1300

Just got your mssg, B right back

[BruceChris]

That most people do not get a chance to learn about their sexuality until they may have made many mistakes. And no, I'm NOT promoting promiscuity. If everyone is taught that they are going to get involved with the opposite sex, all but the most flaming queens and masculine dykes will tend to believe it, at least until they have hurt themselves and/or someone else. O.K., by that I simply mean those who KNOW, deep down, from the time that they are very young.

Indeed, one theological definition of SIN that is accepted as one possible meaning of the word is simply that of making a mistake that you were unable to avoid making. And in that sense, we ARE all sinners, no question of that.

I see you're still here--BC

[BruceChris]

I get the impression that the first thread was posted by Frank, and that all of the last few have come from Cathy. Cathy, I find you MUCH easier to take, and to talk to. (Now I hope I haven't offended Frank!!)

C, I like you, to the extent that I know you, and I RESPECT your standing up for your beliefs, even as I believe differently. I don't know how long you will be online, and I should probably just write this as if you were'nt coming back for a few days, but I see just now, that you're still here.

And I just read your latest post, if briefly. I DO WANT this thread to continue, although I would not be opposed to one-on-one, off line.--BC

[frankandcathy]

Well Bruce, both you and keltic have sort of requested that I stick it out here.

I'm a little wary of stepping on people's toes and hurting their feelings. I am asking in advance if comments about divorce, children, etc. are hurtful to please just forgive.

ROFL! No, the first post was Cathy as well. That was just my "late night" alter-ego of short and sweet, get to the point, "what are these people thinking" self! Franky is too busy chasing me around the room most of the time to go online and post stuff (Hey, I'm not practicing anything either! ).

Anyway, while I understand the problem of not realizing your feelings toward the opposite sex in our society, I still have no real desire to say that it's "okay" to leave your spouse. There's just a line there for me.

I did read the Oprah thread. I really think it's funny that so many people look to Oprah as some sort of spiritual giant...but that's another story.

Anyway, I am not going to be able to wrap my mind around dragging someone's children through this mess. I don't care who gets along with whom. I don't care how jolly and happy everything seems on a television show. It's just not right to do that to your children. A divorce is confusing enough much less pulling in, "now Daddy has a boyfriend" and "mommy has a girlfriend." Again, I'm sorry if this offends anyone but it's just how I see things.

Oh my goodness, it's way too late. I should have been in bed like half and hour ago. I'll have to check this later tomorrow!

Thanks.
~C

[Willy]

Originally Posted by frankandcathy

Willy: sorry the Christian community has left you disillusioned. I hope someone somewhere is showing you Jesus in a loving, practical way (I bet they are here!)

One of the things about growing older is that you start seeing things come around the track the second, third and fourth time. One of them being what I might call "the humble and reasonable Christian." Just when you start to think it might be for real, then comes Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson to tell you how it's really going to be. And as you watch that broadcast live from the Freeway Megachurch in East Nowhere, Texas, lo and behold in the crowd you see the humble and reasonable Christian, shouting Praise the Lord and hand me that noose! when Jerry 'n Pat inform the flock that God wanted America to be attacked on 9/11 because it tolerates the ACLU and homosexuals.

I've never had a problem with Jesus, and in fact when the Bible isn't contradicting itself or advocating genocide there are some genuine pearls of wisdom throughout. And why shouldn't there be? It's not the world's best selling book for nothing. Jesus ain't the problem. It's his followers that are the issue, especially the ones who proclaim that, as long as they believe, they can do anything they please between now and the Rapture. Which isn't even in the Bible, but hey, when did that ever matter to anyone anyway?

Like I say, if there weren't so many poor souls who take this stuff seriously, it would be a great show for Comedy Central.

[tdogg]

Hi Cathy,

I do understand where you are coming from in your beliefs - that was me for many years, although it wasn't necessary something I actually believed in my heart. But, because I wanted to make my family proud, to be the best Christian, to earn respect of my Christian mentors, I 'went along with' what I was told, but in regards to many issues, I never believed in certain things I was told in my heart. At this point in my life's journey, i'm finally in a position where I have accepted myself, actually like myself, and learned much - although I have much to learn. I can finally stand up for what my heart believes even if the rest of the world doesn't believe it. And I do.

So yes, I can understand why you believe what you do, and disagree with what you believe and still have a compassionate, understanding and genuine conversation with you. And many more on this forum can do the same.

Andrew, please don't go. I haven't had the opportunity to read many posts by you - maybe you haven't posted much - and your posts have touched me greatly. I would really miss what you have to say if you this thread drive you away! Don't, please.

This is really one of the rare threads in which I truly believe the person asking questions is genuinely interested in what we feel, believe and our experiences, and not here to beat us down, condemn us or cause us grief. I appreciate that Cathy, and as long as that holds true, I think you will find most willing to converse with you. I'm enjoying it so far myself!

[Willy]

p.s.: You can kinda sorta call me a Deist, at least on those days when I'm inclined to consider a belief in a supreme being, guiding force or what have you. Deists, in spite of the many lies told by Christians, were the founders of the United States. Unlike Christians they believed:

- That Christ was good and wise, but not divine

- That the Bible was good and wise (when it wasn't crazy and violent), but not divinely inspired or dictated

- That the concept of the trinity was stark, raving nuts

- That the "virgin birth" was stark, raving nuts on ergot (they didn't have steroids back then, but they did have mold)

- That God existed, but not as an active guider of human affairs, and certainly not of this or that election

- That the very worst governments were the ones in Europe that mixed Christianity with secular authority

Hence, when they created the governing plan for the U.S., as embodied in the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution, they protected the free exercise of religion while prohibiting the encroachment of religion into government. In the original text of the Constitution, for example, religion is mentioned only as a potential threat to freedom. No religious test shall ever be imposed for holding office, the document stated.

The founding documents never mentioned Jesus Christ, and specifically recognized non-believers by making provision that someone who didn't want to swear an oath could instead provide an "affirmation." These were NOT people who envisioned some sort of Christian nation, the many lies told by contemporary evangelicals (who ignore that inconvenient commandment about bearing false witness whenever it suits them to ignore it) notwithstanding.

I think James Madison, the fourth president, put it rather succinctly:

During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.

I would say one more thing. All of this might lead you to think I'm terribly hostile to Christianity. I'm not. Like the founders, I think there's plenty to recommend it, at least the "humble and reasonable" variant. But experience and a reading of history teaches me to be suspicious as hell, not so much of Christianity but of Christians.

[Daniel]

Cathy and Frank (why not the other way around for a change?)- Like others have expressed, I hope you stick around.

I saw your post about gay men leaving their wives (that's what we're talking about here, yes?) earlier in the evening and want to say that I understand you concerns from the point of view as a married man myself. No matter the gender involved, to deal with one's partner leaving- for whatever reason- is very hard to take.

I think one of the problems here is that many people enter into relationships without full awareness of who they are, much less their partner. An environment which doesn't affirm gay people is hardly one which leads to self-disclosure, much less to anyone else. But the force of sexuality being what it is, same-sex attraction tends to seep out past one's best intentions and even fervent commitments- whether it be to one's God or one's flesh and blood spouse. Setting aside the issue of whether being gay offends God (you can imagine what I think about that!), the reality of offending one's spouse is at least a relative reality.

It would be great if everyone who entered into marriage knew what they were doing, but alas, wanting it to be so doesn't make it so, does it?

I cannot imagine what Mrs. Haggard is going through right now, but simply hope that- even though the pain must be immense- the truth- even though it must be extremely hard to bear- will set her free.

[Dash]

Limiting gay relationships to "meeting sexual needs" ignores the basis of loving relationships, which is...yes...love. Please do not do to us what you would not have done to you. Our relationships are not just "about sex" any more than your relationship with your spouse is just "about sex".

Living in a long-term situation without love is debilitating to the soul. It is as dangerous and painful as losing a spouse. I think if your spouse came out as gay, you'd find that the issue is not as black and white as is often painted.

Regarding divorce...Christ denied men the right to take their leave of their wives, which left a woman poor and defenseless in a society where an unmarried woman was worth very little. The situation in today's world is much different. Then, Christ's wisdom empowered and supported women. To maintain today that no one should ever divorce is actually an oppressive injustice. Our society, with its expectation of spousal and child support, addresses the very same injustice that Christ addressed in his day.

The apostle Paul wisely recognized that there is no law against love...indeed there can never be a law against it. In his letter to the Galatians, he accounted love among the fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22). This Christian "agape" love is the same love that Solomon praised in his Song of Songs--with all its devotion, erotic desire, and celebration of the beloved. When the Jews translated the Hebrew Testament into Greek, they rendered Solomon's Hebrew word for "love" in his great Song of Songs as "agape". Centuries later, Paul recalled the Greek of this Jewish wisdom literature and, inspired by the Holy Spirit, acknowledged that love was a special dispensation of the Divine for humanity. Against it, and against other fruits of this Spirit, there can never be laws. The love of gay men and women is just as precious and God-honoring as heterosexual love. Love is love, and our love is love. There is no legislative power that can stand against it...not secular, nor religious. All law bows to love.

Anti-gay Christians who arrogate themselves to judge gay people are no witness in the proof of the love we live, for only God and each individual soul can testify to its love. Therefore, all denials of the legitimacy of our loving relationships are really the equivalent of slander against us (and I personally believe blasphemy against Love). Such Christians may be guiltier of persistent and unrepentant sin than they allow themselves to consider. Under Judeo-Christian ethics it is considered wrong to bear false witness against your neighbors; and since those who judge us cannot bear true witness about our love, denying both it and our earnest claims of faith can only be said to be bearing false witness against us.

Marriage as we know it today is very recent invention. For the greatest part of history, including that which is recorded in the bible and Western history, heterosexual marriage was about property, money, inheritance, social status...many things, but not necessarily about romantic love. As Christianity grew, ascetic factions and leaders at various times in the early centuries would have preferred that even in heterosexual marriage the spouses remain celibate! Hundreds of years before the Church decided to take a controlling hand in heterosexual marriage--making it a sacrament--homosexual marriage unions were being blessed in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It was not until the 14th century, that bitter foes of same sex love were able to stamp out these marriage ceremonies.

Modern conservative Christianity has lost both its connection to history and its connection to the compassion and social justice that Christ modeled. It believes in, and indeed idolizes, a kind of 1950s television image of marriage and family--one that is blatantly and often dangerously false. Even a cursory reading of the Bible reveals that the loving familial and sexual relationships described therein have little to compare with the false idol of modern Christianity's "Family." A cursory reading of Christ's ministry and thoughts reveals an attitude toward Jewish laws that bears little resemblance to modern conservative Christianity's legalism.

Legalism and oppression...idolatry and fanaticism...complacency and injustice...these are common pitfalls seen throughout Judeo-Christian history. It is no surprise that conservative forces continue to oppress minority members of society today. It is what they have always done. Christ stood up against it. We do also by the strength of that Spirit.

By the strength of that Spirit we who follow the path of Soulforce strive to forgive our oppressors, and teach those who have been misguided by the Church.

[Pablo Rafael]

Cathy,

Just one final comment to your thread.(Last time, I promise.) I have appeciated your openess and interest. Being in a conservative Christian environment I have found that almost without fail gay and lesbian individuals have been thrown into the "evil, degenerate, going-to-hell" camp. Your honesty and sincere desire to understand where we are coming from is encouraging.

Being a teacher I encourage my students to stand firm on the Word of God and not to be shaken by various forces that would lead us astray. At the same time we must be open to change our views when the Holy Spirit opens our hearts to a new understanding.

Thanks for taking the time to respond to everyone. You can see that the gay Christian community is is very diverse group with differences of belief. (As is Christianity in general.) The effort you have taken to understand gives me hope. I don't expect people to agree with me on everything. I expect people to try to understand where I am coming from and agree that I have a right to my views. Thanks for doing just that.

I've got to quit. I've got a mountain biking trip to go on. It looks like another beautiful early winter day here in Colorado.

Yours in Christ, Pablo

[Zerbie]

Cathy,

When I was 19, a gay man proposed marriage to me. He saw me as his ticket to "normal," and even threatened suicide if I refused to marry him. It was a messy situation, and as the years go by I am ever more thankful that I didn't marry him!!!!! I would never wish any couple to struggle with the pain of an incompatible mixed-orientation marriage.

I have to log off and go do some work right now, but before I go:

In order to be fully responsible, one has to know what one is doing. One has to be self-aware. You have acknowledged that you had no idea the kinds of things gay people go through until you came here.
Well. One of my frequently used phrases is that anyone who knows the kind and depth of pain and misery a gay person feels while trying to fulfil expectations in an opposite-sex relationship that he (this applies to women too but you were talking about men, so I'll say he) is unable to fulfil - would not wish them to remain in that suffering. A struggling, questioning gay person who is being told from all sides that getting married is what he should do, and hopes against hope that it will all "change" once he does, cannot tell up from down, let alone have the self-awareness necessary to make a major life commitment. Trying to do the 'right' thing and be a 'good person,' he will walk right into his own cage and close the door behind himself.

I would like to say much more, but really need to go write a paper for class. . .

[BruceChris]

You have said a lot of things that I was planning to get around to saying. i.e.,

-----------------------------"GEE I Wish I'd Said That"---------------------------

--------------------DITTO, ZERBIE

Cathy, I am seeing you more and more as a truly loving person, with what I will call a very practical level of humility. As a matter of fact, I think that you are actually a closet case. - A closet liberal, that is.

It is more and more becoming my understanding that all good things come from love, and that all bad things come from fear. I believe that all of us have belief systems that are partially love based, and partially fear based, and that emotional maturity/spiritual growth consists of learning to be more loving, and less vulnerable to fear.

And that speaking very generally, most of those that are called liberals tend to try to move toward love, and hope, when they feel safe to do so, while most of those that we see as conservatives retreat regularly into fear, as their main coping mechanism. And I know I'm gonna catch hell from somebody for saying that.

Conservative Christians (CC's) (well, the high profile ones, anyway) seem to be seeking to simplify reality, as much as they can. The world was created in 7 days, 5000 to 10,000 years ago, depending on who you ask, and nothing of any consequence has happened since. Scientists tell us that carbon dating yields reasonably accurate results back 100,000 to 200,000 years, while astronomers date the age of the universe at about 14 billion years.

Some CC's will try to tell us that God "planted the evidence", as a way to test our faith. I do not believe that. I do not believe that God would lie to us. I believe that God gave us science, or rather, allowed us to develop science, a little bit at a time, as a way to learn about the world around us, a little bit at a time.

There are male and female people, but there are a whole lot of us in between. Did you know that medical science has so far isolated 37 varieties of sex chromosomes? It's not just XX or XY anymore. Or that there are otherwise normal men who have XX chromosomes, and otherwise normal women with XY? They are infertile, of course.

I am going to offer you a little Biblical literalism here, but be warned. In Genesis 5 it tells us that God created us male and female, not male or female. That's right, each and every one of us is both male and female. In both you and I you will find exactly the same organs, tissues, and hormones. They're just a little different size and shape, or in slightly different places. And of course, for the first few weeks of life, we all have exactly the same bodies. If the chromosomes are XX or XY, and the hormones and hormone receptors do what they are supposed to do, we will end up with a normal and fertile male or female. CC's will try to tell us that any "errors" were never part of God's plan, and blame it on the Fall. That's right, Man (no, actually, I guess it was Woman ) broke something that God couldn't fix. That is not part of my belief system, either.

It seems to be becoming increasingly clear that our sexual identity, our sexual orientation, our sex organs, and ultimately our fertility are determined by the hormones present, and their effect on hormone receptors, during the first few weeks of life. And not at exactly the same time, or not in exactly the same way, which is why there are so many different varieties of sexuality. A person may look like a given gender, act masculine or feminine, identify themselves as one or the other (or a little of both), be attracted to one or the other or both, or different genders at different times of their lives, have male or female parts between their legs or something that is not clearly either, -- IN ANY COMBINATION.

O.K., I'm gonna stop here, I don't know how much medical or scientific backgroung you may have, or how long it may take to absorb. It is my observation that scientists do not tell lies, as they know that every other scientist would immediately jump on them. And when a mistake is made, there is often a race to be the one to correct it. And when CC's claim that science is "attacking" them, this usually means that science has discovered something that makes a simple world view inconsistant. CC's, well most of them, it seems, very much want to have exact, simple, and unquestioned answers to all questions. My friends who have been to liberal seminaries tell me that the more they study, the MORE questions they have, and they accept this as part of God's plan.

And hey, you have given me a good reason here to say some things that I have wanted to post here, for a LONG time. (And I am undoubtedly boring the hell out of those who know more of this stuff that I do)

May God grant his(her?) Peace and Love unto you, and unto all of us, Bruce Chris

[frankandcathy]

Hey all. I'm going to be busy for the next couple of days with family stuff but I wanted to (after QUICKLY skimming the latest posts) say, "thank you" again to everyone for being so honest. I will never say that I can understand the hurt, pain, and even shame some of you have felt. I just can't do it. But I will sympathize the best I can.

Lol! I'll don't think I'll ever be "liberal." Sorry. I am leaning toward libertarianism, as a matter of fact. I'm about fed up with the government trying to do what the church should have been doing for many years. It wastes money, breaks community, and basically doesn't work all that well.

Anyway, I do regret not being able to answer more now. I'm finding this to be a litle too addictive and am having to stop myself from logging on when the children are awake. I have a rule for myself that they need my attention far more than the computer so I only allow myself to log on when they're napping or asleep for the night. Then, of course, when my hubby is home I am occupied during those times. So, all of that to say...I'll do my best to get on again soon.

I want to say one last thing: please, please, please don't hear me as not being compassionate to those who were married once in a straight marriage. I know it was painful and I understand why it happened. I just personally have to draw the line somewhere. That's probably more about my love for my husband and children than about anything else.

Thanks again!
~C

[Willy]

Speaking of Christians, I understand Alaska's Republican Party to be dominated by the kind who regard the Bible as an object to be hollowed out, fitted with a lead weight and hurled at the head of the nearest heathen they can find.

Recently, Alaska's supreme court ruled that the state had to provide domestic partner benefits on the same basis as those provided to married couples. Rather than comply with the law, Alaska's evanglical-dominated Republican House of Representatives have chosen to ignore the law.

http://tinyurl.com/w3fou

So much for the "reasonable Christian" and quaint notions of the "rule of law," or even Jesus H's own advice to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and so on. Unfortunately, the evanglical mainstream believes that their hatred trumps mere incoveniences like the law and the, ahem, holy scriptures. Maybe that Caesar line was in the part that got hollowed out, as described above?

Forgive me for not being surprised.

And now, moving on to Florida, here are some more reasonable Christians, who are against asking gubernatorial appointees whether they have been accused of discriminating against gay people on the job. So, frank 'n cathy, are you reasonable Christians who post soothing messages here -- well, after you offend people and then claim not to have had any such intention -- and then turn right around and push your hate agenda?

Just askin'

http://tinyurl.com/yhmjev

[frankandcathy]

I have just a few minutes to kind of let you guys know where I'm at.

I admit that I really like my simplistic view of things. I like having answers. I dislike not knowing or not understanding God. It drives me nuts to think about why God sometimes heals and sometimes doesn't.
I'm the kind of person that doesn't even want to watch a movie with no definite resolution.

Of course, in every area of my walk with God I've experienced not understanding and not knowing. It doesn't help that the BIble has so many conflicting ideals. Don't get married. Get married rather than burn with lust. Act like you're not married. Don't judge. Judge those within the church. Expel the immoral brother. Judge not lest ye be judged.

This is what I don't think: I don't think that conservative Christians are morons or are looking for quick fixes. I don't think that they're unintelligent or even choosing to turn a blind eye. As I'm sure you all know (I hope you all know) there are many, many conservative theologians who also research and look for answers. They definitely interpret things differently but it doesn't mean they're not sincere. I also don't think conservative Christians are hate-mongers. I DO think they've been whipped into a frenzy of fear by their political leaders.

I think it's a mistake to categorize ALL conservative Christians in the same way it's a mistake to categorize ALL liberal Christians. Is it possible that both sides represent parts of God? Is it possible that grace is better represented on the liberal side and judgment better represented on the conservative side? (While God is super graceful and loving we know that he also judges sin.) The question would then be: how do we work together to be "one body, many parts?" How do we work together to complete the picture?

I really want to encourage many in the gay community that even though the political climate is one that seems to be hatred-induced, there ARE straight Christians out there who have decided to "fix their eyes on Jesus" and not James Dobson or Jerry Falwell. We try each day to hear his voice. We try each day to seek his will. We live our lives as best we can to impact others with his love. I go to a church FULL of "manly men." They all hunt, fish, make tons of babies, etc. But I know their hearts. And while they're a little weird about hugging other guys, do I for one second think that they would say, "I can't love you as a brother or sister in Christ because you're gay?" No, I don't. Maybe I'm wrong. But I don't think so. Working out the "sin" issue is a totally different subject...which reminds me...

I think that the Lord has been trying to teach me in many, many ways that I am too judgmental. Our message this morning was on thankfulness, of course, and I began to wonder at what point we STOP being thankful for God's grace in our lives and start trying to shove rules down someone else's throat. Our pastor was even talking about that once and said very clearly, "You've got to want to love and serve people more than you want to shove the truth down their throats." I actually blushed because I thought, "He's talking to me."

I have had this problem repeatedly with good friends who are just not making wise life choices in my estimation. I find it very difficult to relate to them if they're not doing what I think they should do. It occurs to me that one of my best friends would rather spend time with her heathen friends than me because she just feels judged when she's with me. I really HATE that. I feel like my time here is really helping me see that attitude magnified and played out to its full extent.

One of the verses we read this morning was the one where Paul talks about: "Hey, you weren't saved by works but through faith. Are you now going to try to live by works? No! Let the Holy Spirit do his work!" I think this reminded me that if there is a sin to be pointed out....I'M NOT THE HOLY SPIRIT!!! The confusing part of that is...when does God use you to point it out and how do you know if it's just your flesh or God speaking to you??

I am turning the issue of judment over in my mind lately. Jesus said, "Don't judge others. Period." Paul said, "Don't judge sinners. Period. Judge those who are immoral within the church. Heck, I don't even judge MYSELF. God will judge the motives of all men's hearts."

I wish their were addendums after Revelation that just cleared this stuff up. For instance, "What I meant on the judgment thing: Let me do it except in situations x, y, and z."

I could ALMOST agree with the idea that we should just let the Bible speak to us in non-literal way and let God tell you what He meant by it. The only problem I have with that is...sometimes I just MISUNDERSTAND what God is trying to tell me.

If I, therefore, rely on what my brain says God is saying to me, it could be whacky as in, "God told me to beat the crap out of this gay man because he's an abomination" or "God told me to cut my baby's arms off and kill her (a true story)."

That's really the only problem I have with just using the Word as a "guideline" and letting Jesus himself tell me the details. To me, the details have to line up with what's written or who the heck knows who's hearing the Lord and who's not? Then it's just a free-for-all. If there's no set standard of behavior, there's chaos.

And isn't that really what Willy has been saying? Isn't that what drives him to be so vehemently angry? He doesn't see the behavior of conservative Christians to be lining up with the standard of scripture. And isn't that what James Dobson is saying? Isn't that what drives HIM to be so vehemently angry? He doesn't see homosexuality as lining up with the standard of biblical behavior. So we see that even when we use scripture as a guideline, things get fuzzy. Good grief!

What, then are we to say? The fruit of the Spirit is "love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, kindness, gentleness, faithfulness, and self-control." Against such things there is no law. Okay, so then, if I want to know if you're really following the Lord, then I'll look for those things in your life. But, uh-oh, wait a minute, you're having sex with another man. There's no "self-control" there. That's sexual immorality (fruit of the flesh). You must not be saved. Wait a minute, I'm totally not gentle to my children and am far too sarcastic with them. I'm not saved?

Okay, well THAT'S obviously wrong. Let's see. Okay, how about this: you don't have to be perfect you just have to be getting better? Uh-oh, the only thing you're getting better at is making love to a man. You're not saved! Wait, though, I've been praying for TEN YEARS to be less angry and more gentle and I'm only marginally getting better. I'm not saved? Again, good grief!

Okay, I've been on too long. I must go. I hope this hasn't been too rambling. It's almost stream of concsiouness I guess. Sorry.

I leave you with one thought more: I am NOT happy with the political right-wing Christian community because I think they've created an atmosphere of unnecessary fear and loathing. I can understand believing in something but to never once (in my hearing) say GOOD things about what the homosexual community (or church) is doing, to never once (in my hearing) call for volunteers or money to serve those they "mean to rule" so to speak (Braveheart moment), to never once (in my hearing) say something about the pain and suffering that so many homosexuals go through...is just wrong. It shows a lack of compassion and love. Just as it is equally wrong for the gay political community (whoever leads them...I don't know) to respond in kind. None of us are without excuse. Not me, not Willy, no one. Throwing stones back and forth is not going to help anything at all. Insulting someone's deeply held religous beliefs on either side isn't going to help. Hating Jerry Falwell or James Dobson isn't going to solve the problem. Hating um...I dunno...Mel White? Boy George? isn't going to solve the problem either.

Good night.
~C

P.S. I'm starting to feel like I'm making a community of friends here. Gasp.

[Willy]

I also don't think conservative Christians are hate-mongers.
That's where I disagree with you. Evangelical ministers are lost without enemies.


I go to a church FULL of "manly men." They all hunt, fish, make tons of babies, etc. But I know their hearts. And while they're a little weird about hugging other guys, do I for one second think that they would say, "I can't love you as a brother or sister in Christ because you're gay?" No, I don't. Maybe I'm wrong.
I hunt. I fish. I don't make tons of babies. I don't run around hugging guys. Only one. As for loving me as a bro' in Christ, that's a bunch of empty rhetoric that demands nothing of anyone and therefore is worth zippo. I'm into works, not faith. Which is why I'm not an evangelical who thinks that as long as I've declared myself "saved" I can stomp on anyone at any time, secure in the belief that I'll go to heaven. Right along with that Muslim bomber who thinks he's going to the same place, the only difference between him and Robertson being that the Muslim thinks he's going to get 72 virgins upon arrival while Robertson's counting on the latest-model corporate jet.


That's really the only problem I have with just using the Word as a "guideline" and letting Jesus himself tell me the details. To me, the details have to line up with what's written or who the heck knows who's hearing the Lord and who's not? Then it's just a free-for-all. If there's no set standard of behavior, there's chaos.
Sounds like a personal problem to me. In any case, if you want to set standards go right ahead. Start with the rule of reciprocity, which is one of the many things that Christians stole from their forebearers and presented it as if they discovered it for the first time. In any case, try this: "First, do no harm." As someone who, for whatever reason, finds himself attracted to members of the same sex, I have a humble request: "Dear Lord Jesus, Protect Me From Your Followers. Amen."


Isn't that what drives him to be so vehemently angry? He doesn't see the behavior of conservative Christians to be lining up with the standard of scripture. And isn't that what James Dobson is saying? Isn't that what drives HIM to be so vehemently angry? He doesn't see homosexuality as lining up with the standard of biblical behavior.
I only appear to be angry. It's because I have a direct writing style. I don't care what you or Dobson believe. Just mind your own business. Or as the old song goes, "You can't even run your own life/So I'll be damned if you'll run mine." When I was growing up, there was this wonderful American phrase that went, "Mind your own business." We sure don't hear that one very much anymore. Why not?


Insulting someone's deeply held religous beliefs on either side isn't going to help. Hating Jerry Falwell or James Dobson isn't going to solve the problem.
I don't "hate" anyone. I do resent Falwell and Dobson and his idiot followers, and I often laugh at them. I mean, when that dude in Colorado Springs went out and said, I've never had a homosexual relationship with a man in Denver, I must admit that I laughed my ass off. And when I clicked around the internet and learned about the homoerotic art in his freeway church and the perky 20-something associate pastors, I laughed again. Not at him, but at the suckers he conned out of all that money.

The saving grace of the evangelical Christians is that, if you wait long enough, they'll eventually make utter fools of themselves in front of everyone. Moliere nailed it in 1664 when he wrote Tartuffe. It could be subtitled, The Jimmy Swaggart/Jim Bakker/Ted Haggard, etc. Story. I know I sound angry, but the only thing that ever makes me mad at you people is when you gain enough political power to threaten people whose freedom and happiness make you so jealous.

See, here's the deal: Instead of me having to persaude you of anything, it really ought to be the other way around because it's your crowd that's trying to tell me how to live my life. All I want out of you is to not encroach on anyone else. Why is that so hard for Christians, anyway? Why are so many Christians trying so hard with the persuasion? Is it maybe a grand effort to persaude themselves?

[andrewlittle]

Okay! I said I'm done and I meant it. But the conversation is just so interesting, I can't keep my mouth (fingers - whatever) shut.

Cathy said:

What, then are we to say? The fruit of the Spirit is "love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, kindness, gentleness, faithfulness, and self-control." Against such things there is no law. Okay, so then, if I want to know if you're really following the Lord, then I'll look for those things in your life. But, uh-oh, wait a minute, you're having sex with another man. There's no "self-control" there. That's sexual immorality (fruit of the flesh). ... Okay, how about this: you don't have to be perfect you just have to be getting better? Uh-oh, the only thing you're getting better at is making love to a man.

Cathy, I know you used these as illustrations about what's wrong with judging others, but they show a distinct cultural bias that affects the entire dialogue in our culture and seeps ever so subtly into how we think.

You, Cathy, are having sex with a man. Is that a lack of self-control? In one post, you said Frank chases you around the house - I think you were talking about him feeling amorous. Is that a lack of self-control? Is it sexual immaturity? Are you just getting better at making love to a man? I think you would consider these normal expressions of love for and from your chosen mate.

The problem here is that you have focussed on one, and only one, aspect of GLBT persons. You would be rightly offended if I, or anyone else, reduced you to your genitalia and what you do with it. But that is the discussion that's out there - and in here. GLBT persons are more than a penis or a vagina - and their lives consist of a heck of a lot more that what they do with those particular pieces of anatomy. These are complete human beings we are talking about - complete with passions, gifts, graces and love. All of these things are gifts of God and they are not depleted because of sexual orientation. What a man does with his genitalia, or a woman does with hers, is not the sum of the person - it is actually a pretty small part of the sum. But that small part is what draws the line between made in God's image and not - at least in the minds of many.

I am sorely tempted to run with your comment about your friend's "heathen friends" and what that says, but I won't.

As to conservative vs. liberal. We're talking about a linear scale running from right to left, or left to right depending on your perspective. We locate ourselves somewhere along that line and define ourselves and others by the point they inhabit. We then decide that God also resides in exactly that same place. This goes beyond arrogance.

Whether "liberal" or "conservative" we just went several steps beyond putting God in a box of our own making. We just put God into an infinitesimal point along an imaginary line - we made God in our image. Each and every one of us is far more complex than one point on a line would indicate, and God surely is. If we are made in God's image, then God is along the entire spectrum and beyond. We are but imperfect, incomplete and partial images of God and none of us possess either the entirety of God's image, nor the authority to claim absolute knowledge of God's character and purpose.

Our faith, then, is based on what makes sense to us personally. How we view scripture is dependent on how we view scripture being used for or against who and what we are. It's not tough to see why most Jews disregard the New Testament when we consider how it has been used to justify centuries of pograms against them. It's not tough to see why women disregard or reinterpret the traditional views of the sections about women wearing head covering and keeping their mouths shut in religious gatherings. Why, then, is it tough to understand that those scant few, and very debatable, sections dealing with same-sex relations are rejected by the GLBT community?

God is in all of it and, I would imagine, pretty disgusted with it all as well. There are common threads that run through scripture and the most common from the prophets through Christ - summed up in "love God...and love you neighbor as yourself" - shows that scapegoating, demonizing or ostracizing any of God's children - "liberal" or "conservative", straight or GLBT, documented or undocumented, plain white wrapper or colorful, etc - is unrighteous behavior.

We chose as a society to focus on morality, because that gives us the "right" to judge others behavior based on what we consider norms. Instead, perhaps we should focus on ethics, which gives us the responsibility of judging our own behavior and attitudes on what God, or whatever name you apply to a higher source or standard, requires. It's that "splinter in your eye" as opposed to "the log in mine" thing. We are responsible to be righteous - not to determine the righteousness of others.

And, Willy, as much as I agree that you are a pistol, and a very likeable one, pistols often shoot off our own toes. Allies from dominant culture (white) were essential for overcoming the popular, Biblically-based myth of white supremecy. Allies from dominant culture (male) were essential to overcoming the popular, Biblically-based myth that precluded women from full citizenship. Popular culture, right now, wants to reduce GLBT to less than human, less than full citizenship and aberrant. It is Biblically based, just like the other mistakes Christians have made.

I agree that it is none of our business ("our" referring to non-GLBT persons), but this is not an ideal world. As angry as you may rightly be at the prospect, allies from the straight world are needed to stand with the GLBT community. It takes dialogue, not self-righteous diatribe, to make allies.

This is a political issue, and politics requires converting people to your side. This won't be accomplished that by using a Bible as a weapon, nor will it be accomplished by collecting all "conservative" Christians into one demonized category. The fact is that virtually every denomination has active, passionate advocates for full inclusion and rights for GLBT - this includes Southern Baptist, Pentecostals, Reformed churches, and evangelical unions. Just as every GLBT is a unique and gifted person, so is every Christian.

What is required is that we each get our heads out of our own behinds, and start to listen to and talk with other people who disagree with us. That, I think, is why this thread is so popular. It is, in and of itself, a testament to the desire of different people to converse in deep and meaningful ways. It comes with some expressed baggage, and some distinct tangents, but if Cathy is sticking it out, I am too.