Acceptance of gays vs. view of religions

I once saw a former Christian say that, back when he was a fundamentalist Christian, he was against gay adoption. His reasoning was that if kids grew up in a loving same-sex parent household, they would reject Christianity if it was preached to them.

Well, it does seem that current-day Christianity, mainly the fundie version, is making such a huge issue of how eeeeevil teh gheys are that it's backfiring. Acceptance of gays, especially among the twenty-somethings, is going up, while my generation is also the fastest to drop out of church and claim they have no religion (and not in a "it's a relationship, not a religion" kind of way either).

A book titled unChristian: What a New Generation Thinks About Us and Why It Matters polled numrous non-Christians and found out that "too anti-gay" was at the top of the list of critcisms of Christianity (along with "too political", owing to the rise of the Religious Right).

In short, it appears that by tying X to Y - in which X = Christianity and Y = intolerance of gays - in the hopes of making people accept both, they've made the mistake of having people reject both. As more and more people realize that sexual orientation is not a choice and that gays are not the terrible people that fundies make them out to be - and with fundamentalist Christianity consuming a larger percentage of Christianity in the US (i.e. it is extremizing, and the moderates/"outliers" are leaving), people are turning against Christianity.

What do you think of this?

I'm up for joining Discord servers! PM me if you know any good ones!

I think it's depressing, that's what I think. It's terrible that people think that being "anti-gay" is a tenet of Christianity.

There's no justice in the world and there never was~

Well there are numerous protestant religions that are very accepting of gays, moreso than others, and Catholicism has dropped a lot of its anti-gay views. Most Catholics these days are fairly liberal (only conservative Catholics don't like gay marriage and gay adoption, so it's not tied to the religion much). Is this topic only about Christianity?

I don't think it matters if it's a choice or not to be homosexual, it's just that as population density has increased, along with liberalism, it doesn't make as much sense to be homophobic these days. If we take a look, at instance, at the most populous countries in the world, China and India, the views on homosexuality have softened incredibly in the past 10-20 years. China went from banning homosexuality to listing it as a mental illness to having zero status on it (official policy is "No encouragement, no discouragement"). India is the same, there are growing number of people who are openly gay and it is much more acceptable in the major cities. I think tolerance on homosexuality is largely a pressure from population density issues and resource contention but the specific manifestations are tenets of religion or culture.

^^ It depends on what you mean by that. It's perfectly reasonable for an individual to think that anti-homosexuality is a core tenet of Christianity when so many Christians make such a huge deal about it. Now, if you mean that it's terrible that so many Christians make such a huge deal about it, then I agree totally. But I've heard people make both arguments.

The theological argument is that homosexuality is not mentioned in the NT, and as such doesn't really count. You're just relying on the whole Leviticus thing. The problem I have with the argument is that the OT generally is respected in terms of other topics..the 10 Commandments, for an example.

So my amateur (but researched/discussed) opinion:

Yes, anti-homosexuality is a tenet of Christianity

No that doesn't mean that all Christians are anti-homosexual, it's just that not all Christians follow every tenet (And to be honest, that's probably a good thing on the whole)

Yes, that means that anti-homosexual Christians should be protesting in front of Red Lobster and Wal-Mart

The argument really on these matters is if it's worth additional support from non-anti-homosexual Christians to actively push back on the idea of anti-homosexuality as a core Christian belief. My experience is that there's very little interest in editing/changing things in such a way that makes it crystal clear that bad/immoral Christian tenets are bad/immoral, and as such, expecting non-anti-homosexual Christians to do much change from the 'inside' is probably going to be an impossible haul.

Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserve

What is of issue so far as I can see, is the way that homosexuals are demonized at times.

It basically seems as though Christianity can only either be "Kill the gays with fire" or "homosexuality is perfectly fine and the Bible is completely inaccurate and made up".

Both sides will often completely miss the in-between: homosexuality is a sin because the Bible states it as being such, but the Bible also says that we need to accepting, kind and loving to everyone. "Everyone" includes homosexuals.

If there is so much as a splinter of distaste in one's mind, they are not as welcoming as they should be.

As for why homosexuality is considered a sin, and how Christians expect this to be handled, that's a whole 'nother can of worms I'd leave for elsewhere.

edited 24th Jan '11 9:54:13 AM by TheMightyAnonym

Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! ~ GOD

"I once saw a former Christian say that, back when he was a fundamentalist Christian, he was against gay adoption. His reasoning was that if kids grew up in a loving same-sex parent household, they would reject Christianity if it was preached to them." - bonsai

If the belief system is that easily threatened it is rather fragile. Though frankly, I feel that way about Christianity to begin with anyway.

"Well, it does seem that current-day Christianity, mainly the fundie version, is making such a huge issue of how eeeeevil teh gheys are that it's backfiring. Acceptance of gays, especially among the twenty-somethings, is going up, while my generation is also the fastest to drop out of church and claim they have no religion (and not in a "it's a relationship, not a religion" kind of way either)." - bonsai

Well, the extent of "backfire" from the homophobic aspects of religion is probably negligible compared to however much else that is hammering away at religion, from science-centric to logic-centric perspectives, not to mention all the other taboos religion has been associated with. (Homosexuals make up, what, 2, maybe 3 percent of the population? Issues like abortion or abstinence-only education probably have more to do with the backfire to religion than religious homophobia.)

"A book titled unChristian: What a New Generation Thinks About Us and Why It Matters polled numrous non-Christians and found out that "too anti-gay" was at the top of the list of critcisms of Christianity (along with "too political", owing to the rise of the Religious Right)." - bonsai

"Too political" hardly sounds like a logical concern; I'd be more focused on specifics like whether or not it was too politically DOGMATIC in particular. (Though even that puts aside the "is it a symptom of dogma or a cause of it" question about religion; I think of it as both but tend towards the former.)

"In short, it appears that by tying X to Y - in which X = Christianity and Y = intolerance of gays - in the hopes of making people accept both, they've made the mistake of having people reject both." - bonsai

Well, I suppose in this case you may as well say that Y is a function of X because Christianity itself is tied to homophobia. Let's not forget "Romans 1:26-27" and "1 Corinthians 6:9-10" after all.

"As more and more people realize that sexual orientation is not a choice" - bonsai

Based on modern psychological evidence. Religious beliefs aren't exactly known for being in line with scientific evidence to begin with.

"and that gays are not the terrible people that fundies make them out to be" - bonsai

Same could be said for atheists, who make up a much more significant portion of the population than gays.

"and with fundamentalist Christianity consuming a larger percentage of Christianity in the US (i.e. it is extremizing, and the moderates/"outliers" are leaving), people are turning against Christianity." - bonsai

Well yeah. One has to wonder what the point is of being a "moderate" Christian to begin with.

Quoted for truth. Of course, in today's public square, that doesn't sell. Moderation doesn't sell. Trainwrecks of people do.

Huh? Should "moderation" BE something that sells in the context of religious ideologies? If so, why?

^^^ Again, Christians (of all stripes) have worked very hard in order to make 'sin' be a measure of morality in our society. The people who's base impression is that the Christian perspective is that homosexuality is immoral, are not wrong on this, or at least they're not wrong from the information as presented (by most/virtually all) Christians to them.

Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserve

It's not wrong, just not the whole story, and lacks nuance.

I don't see how what I stated would be moderation. The two points are absolutes. Observe:

• Homosexuality is a sin.
• Be loving to everyone, under all conditions.

Two absolutes. Neither of those statements comes in moderation. Absolutes are important because without them there will always be the question of how far one should go.

That said, I'd like to reiterate the one and only task of Christians: Spread the love and mercy of Christ.

How hard could it be...?

All you have to do is act like Christ, and tell people about him. His friend to all living things status should be an obvious trait if you read scripture.

Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! ~ GOD

That homosexuality is still intrinsically a sin according to Christian doctrine is still a sticking point, though. A gay person may feel from their perspective that no matter how warm and friendly the Christians in their lives may be to them they are still being judged for practising sin.

And as long as it remains a sin it is going to remain a negative point from people outside of the religion.

edited 24th Jan '11 10:14:46 AM by pagad

With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.

"I don't see how what I stated would be moderation." - TMA

Well, I was kind of responding to Cojuanco, not you. o.o

In any case, I think it's more that "being kind to everyone" isn't really going to work in practice. The "be kind to those who curse you" thing Jesus supposedly preached would yield some who would use that to walk all over you. I think people realize the unfeasibility, or at least potential for backfire, of "trying to be kind to everyone" and decide to salvage the (relatively) more feasible fragments of Christianity. Whatever, it's a mess either way.

edited 24th Jan '11 10:15:19 AM by neoYTPism

At this point it gets more into the idea of the holy spirit taking control, and other religiousy things. If you believe in all of this, then it becomes viable to you to practice celibacy or have the holy spirit flat-out change you.

Though yes, it does remain a negative point. I would squarely place blame though, on the sleaze who genuinely hate homosexuals and twist Christ's good work with their foolish ignorance.

That's funny, last time I checked everything was working fine for me.

And anyhow, "kind to everyone" includes more than just those who are actively a threat to you, but oh well.

This in mind, I fail to see how being kind = getting walked on.

edited 24th Jan '11 10:24:17 AM by TheMightyAnonym

Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! ~ GOD

So very true. It is not in any way an unreasonable conclusion for them, nor is it unreasonable to expect to meat quite a noticeable number of Christians who hold anti-gay views. So, is anti-gays are not the people one wants to associate with, it is not strange for then to be unwilling to associate themselves with Christianity too.

Besides, even if homosexuals are not to be treated badly, homosexual acts are still considered immoral, which can be offensive to some. Just how can one reconcile genuinely loving one's homosexual partner and spouse, in the way other couples love each other romantically - you know, marry, live together, make love and raise kids - with being a good Christian? Again, disassociation is understandable.

edited 24th Jan '11 10:31:51 AM by Beholderess

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common

What sort of thin-skinned egotist would only join a religion that tells them none of their pre-existing behaviors are immoral, though?

“Love is the eternal law whereby the universe was created and is ruled.” — St. Bernard

Why would you join one that didn't?

It's an open question whether or not most Americans who self-identify as Christians actually think homosexuality is a sin. I don't, and most of the one's I associate don't. I used to attend a church that had an openly lesbian minister. For us, it isn't a question of treating sinners nicely, homosexuals aren't sinners (and I still have both my eyes, in spite of being married and having looked on another woman with lust).

"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."

My mom said that in college, one of her professors stated "Culture doesn't change to fit the religion, religion changes to fit the culture", and she found that very interesting.

The religion is apparently changing from what I hear. Younger Evangelical Christians are considering even gay marriage to be a non-issue, from what I'd read. If so, it seems they're changing their religion to fit with their views, and the religion will likely change over time to adapt to society's own changing views on homosexuality.

There are plenty of cool Christians, believe me. There's a lot at my work, and they're pretty laidback. I live in the Northeastern US.

But fundamentalism is what seems to be forcing the issue, and creating the schism. And the way fundies insist that only they are the true Christians doesn't help matters at all.

edited 24th Jan '11 10:44:47 AM by BonsaiForest

I'm up for joining Discord servers! PM me if you know any good ones!

Pretty much. "We think a core fiber of your identity is disgusting and against God and/or nature, but we still love you" might be a bit better than "die in a fire, you abomination", but it's still pretty damn insulting and dickish.

"If there's a hole, it's a man's job to thrust into it!" — Ryoma Nagare, New Getter Robo

In the documentary For The Bible Tells Me So, a lesbian Christian was told by her mom in a letter "We will always love you, but we will always hate this part of you," and she committed suicide. That led her mom to realize that sexual orientation was an intrinsic part of her daughter and could not be changed after all.

So yeah, saying they "hate the sin" and that being gay is a sin puts gays that they "love" in a pretty terrible position.

I'm up for joining Discord servers! PM me if you know any good ones!

My deconversion from Christianity is linked with my sexual orientation, but it wasn't the main reason. I just came ot the conclusion that any possible supernatural creator is not the loving one as taught by Christianity.

Anyway, I don't expect any religion to accept me. Since religions tend to insist on an anthropocentric, mysticist expelanation to the universe, I don't expect something that doesn't accept the big picture in science as to planetary fromation and evolution (and cultural anthropology), I don't expect them to catch on to modern ideas like social siences.

the statement above is false

^The thing is, it's my experience that not all Christians take that anthropomorphic/materialistic view of their god. The religion is most certainly based around that view, but in a lot of cases these things are often said with an expected "wink wink nod nod" type effect, where the average person is expected to understand that these things are mostly intended as metaphors.

I've heard some people say that Seminary is where God goes to die, in other words. But there's a lot of powerful people who WANT to keep the illusion going. And in that case, again, it's not the fault of the layperson, religious or not, who understands fundamentalism/literalism to be the proper reading of Christianity.

My advice to non-literalist, non-bigoted Christians is that it has to start at the ground floor of the belief system. Right at the root. God. That's a word that means something in our society. It means an anthropomorphic/materialistic deity-type thing. It's a bad word. Because not only does it mean something that's often entirely inaccurate from what people often believe, but because the belief in (or the image of, for non-believers) such a deity does not go well with the idea of peace, love and charity. It goes well with the tropes of domination and social stratification.

edited 24th Jan '11 11:06:56 AM by Karmakin

Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserve

I've never liked that way of dealing with it. Yes you don't hate homosexuals just because they are what they are, but you hate homosexual acts which really isn't any better so far as I am concerned. I am slightly more ok with the more specific and moderate "You can be gay and love your gay lover and kiss them and such, but the sex is wrong and only that". Which is what I've run into with the monks at the Buddhist temple I visit. That only applies to non-monks and non-nuns though of course. I've never run into it with Christianity though I am sure there are those who take that stance.

It is sad that Christianity is automatically connected to "Hates gay people with great passion" and leads to outright hate and disdain for the religion as a whole I think. I've met many different Christians from different denominations. They're a many varied people and there's plenty who don't want gays to burn in a fire and yet I've known those who think they all do or that enough do to deem the religion horrible by default. I've met more than a few who are big on science. Some who are especially big on social sciences and not in a creepy "I MUST CONVERT GAYS TO HETEROSEXUALITY" way.

I didn't even think of Buddhism's opinion on homosexuality when I decided "Sure...I'm already technically Buddhist anyway...might as well make it official...". I learned about that in detail later. I have decided that even if it was prohibited in all fashions that will be a tenet I ignore wholly. I'll limit my alcohol intake, not murder things for no reason, not sleep with everything in sight (though I'd like to!), and so on. But I won't try to be straight or not do horrible nasty things like kiss a girl.

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

I'd say that giving up one's own morality is quite dangerous. Because if one gives it up, it can be given up for anything - there are no criteria to see if the replacement moralit better or worse.

Basically, if I can join religion despite considering some of it's demands wrong - not just inconvenient for me personally, but wrong - then I might as well join any sort of cult or sect, despite considering it's demands wrong also.

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common