Wednesday, March 27, 2013

Equality: Homosexuals, Marriage, and Christian Blindness


You know, I'm seeing a lot of different things being posted about equality. I'm seeing Christians posting anti-homosexual sentiments (at the worst), as well as more reasonable Christians posting things to the effect of 'I support Biblical model marriage,' and other variations on the theme.
On the other hand, I'm also seeing many other people posting graphics which paint those who don't agree with homosexuality as a life style as being as bad as those who want to outright kill homosexuals. Granted, this is the worst element; the more reasonable ones are simply saying that marriage is not a church institution; never was; this is not a Christian country and never was; etc.
Each group has valid points made with valid facts, and each group has a great deal of invalid points created from invalid facts. 

You know what I think, folks?  I think Christians have lost sight of the big picture.  Since when has Christianity been about earthly equality, or lack thereof?

Of course, I could say the same for Equality of Marriage supporters: Since when has Christianity been about earthly equality, or lack thereof?

You see, the same question applies to both camps, believe it or not.


Let me address Christians first, because honestly, I see them as being far more responsible for the problems at hand.  
Brothers and sisters, we are more responsible, like it or not.  We are held to a higher standard, and as such, we are more responsible now for the issues that are now than unbelievers are.  Sure, those who remain unbelievers will be held accountable in the final judgment, but until that day comes, guess who's holding?

Yep.  Us.

So let me put it to you this way: Our job is not to make rules and laws for unbelievers to follow.  Straight up, that makes us pharisees.  That makes us the people Christ verbally slapped every time they came around.  I do not feel like getting that kind of a backhand, and none of you should want it either.  Additionally, we were not put here to dictate life choices to others; the laws of the Bible may apply to all, but forcing people who do not believe is the same as a Muslim demanding conversion at the end of a sword: That's not God's way, and it should not be ours.  Let them fall on the Rock of their own accord and be broken.  Let the judgment fall upon them through their own iniquity, by their own hand, and quit trying to be the proverbial sword- Again, that is not our job.
People get caught up in this being a Christian nation, and they forget something very important: The Christians who had a part in the founding of this country paired up with Deists, Atheists, and a slew of others to do so.  This country was not made a theocracy, nor should it become one.  There are more than enough of those in the world: Most are in the Middle East, and you can see how well they're doing.  And don't give me the "well they're not serving the living God" bull.  They aren't, there we agree; but how many humans have you met that have it completely, 100% together?  Who would you honestly trust with absolute power to enforce the will of God?  If you can't name a single man or woman you'd trust in that capacity, then you need to quite talking out of your hindquarters and quit pushing morality on people who have shifting morality.  For the record, if you CAN name someone you'd trust in that position, you need to evaluate the cult you belong to, because even Moses screwed the pooch.

Don't like the straight talk?  Too bad.  Even Paul wrote that he considered the things of this world to be shit compared to Christ Jesus, and I'll be tarred, feathered and set alight before I speak any differently than plain.


You unbelievers and supporters of marriage equality- Listen up.

The most loudmouthed Christians are not those who represent Christianity.  You people accuse Christians of judging you all based upon varying examples, yet do the exact same thing.  Grow up, think like an adult, and use that gray matter to recognize that random examples of Christian intolerance do not properly represent the Christian community as a whole.  
You want your opponents to quit characterizing every homosexual male as an overly effeminate, lisping moron with a jones for jocks?  Quit acting like every Christian is a homophobe. You want your opponents to quit speaking and acting as if every homosexual female is a bull dike, more man than woman, and only lacking the scrotum and body hair?  Quit portraying every opponent as a knife wielding, hood wearing, "God hates fags" nutcase.

You people want equality?  Start behaving like equals.  Start arguing on an intellectual level, and quit acting like two year olds without toys.
Case in point: I have a friend, Toni, who is an amazingly intelligent, witty and down-to-earth young man.  This is a man who is, at times, given to purely emotional outbursts.  However, the majority of the time, he gives a highly intellectual argument; presents well thought out points; and generally treats the people he is debating with respect.  He, folks, ought to be upheld as a model for others to follow in this regard.


Now, if anything I've said here offends you, let me be the first to say "Good."  The nation got into this mess because of its obsession with political correctness, and the crap needs to end.  Pushing political correctness is the same damn thing as legislating morality, and I'm sick as f*ck of both.


Bottom line: Equality is a bullsh!t word.  Secular equality means that everyone has the same rights, the same freedoms, etc.  Biblical equality, (look this up if you disagree), says that every human being on the face of the earth today is as much a sinner as the next.  Ask any random ten people on the street what equality is, and you are more likely to get ten different responses than you are to find ten people who voted in the last election.  
The majority of the equality advocates which I have met are not advocating equality for the sake of equality- they are advocating it because they're angry at religious folks; because they believe God is imaginary and religion is a hoax; and/or because they have been hurt somehow in some way in the past.


Christians, our duty is not to these people's sexual practices, deviant or not.  Our duty is to their souls, and like it or not, demanding they conform to a standard of practice is NOT going to save them.  Sorry.  You'll actually have to get off your asses and actually DO something... 

Start with obeying Christ, above any and every man, and begin to actually spread the Gospel; you know, instead of paying it lip service, and doing the exact opposite?

In short... Why do we attempt to do for God what God does not do for Himself?



EDIT: A very important section of this article was somehow lost when I published it- The phrase "which I have met" now appears where it should have been from the beginning.

21 comments:

  1. In all my years of attending church (Lutheran), I have never heard a sermon on Matthew 6. The chapter consists entirely of the words of Jesus, with no commentary. It is the only place in the Gospels where he repeats himself ("Be not like the hypocrites who . . ."), tells followers to "pray in their closets," and recites the Lord's Prayer (". . . forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us, . . ."). But, I read a joke in "The Jewish Encyclopedia of Humor" edited by Bennett Cerf: "Going to a synagogue doesn't make you a good Jew anymore than going to the hen house makes you a good chicken." Substitute "church" and "Christian."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately, you are one hundred percent correct. There is another saying: Being in church makes you as Christian as standing in a garage makes you a car.

      Thank you for your comment.

      Delete
  2. I was with you until the end. You make these arguments about how we need to be mature and intelligent in our arguments, the at the end you claim the majority of people for marriage equality are anti religion and angry at religious folks. Wy go from a thoughtful, honest argument to dismissing your opponents out of hand has being irrational?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Reger, I want to thank you for your comment.

      I hadn't realized that a very key phrase in that section had somehow gone missing, but there it was. Thanks for pointing out the omission; it has been fixed.

      Actually, I only dismiss a few as being irrational, and it is usually because they simply ARE irrational. I know you've run into the type, so I don't believe that needs any explanation.


      Thanks again for your comment.

      Delete
  3. I think this is very well thought-out and presents good advice to both sides of the debate. I do think though, that you should not group the sides as "believers" vs. "unbelievers". There are many Christians who support "secular equality", probably because they believe in Biblical equality. Homosexuality is actually mis-named, because it's not really about sex -- it's about love. And, according to Jesus, God is love, right? Wouldn't he be a proponent of love?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for commenting, Giggles.

      Actually, homosexuality has nothing to do with love as the majority of Christians understand it. Don't shoot me yet.

      The actual word homosexuality does not imply a strict sex definition at all; instead, it means "an attraction, romantically or sexually, to a member of the same gender." That is exactly what homosexuality is, and quite honestly, sex does in fact play a part in the majority's lives.

      That said, there is a false dichotomy in your comment regarding "God is love." From a secular point of view, love is a state of being; an emotional expression of a psychological state, brought on by intimacy, commitment and passion. That is why people can "fall in love," and fall back out!

      However, biblical love is a great deal different.

      Biblical love (BL) encompasses patience with the faults of the object of love; whereas secular love (SL) will become frustrated.

      BL includes kindness without requirement, meaning it demands nothing in exchange for being kind; SL, as I'm sure you've heard, is "give and take."

      BL is not envious of anything, be it success, money, etc., nor is it envious of others for the human affection which they have. SL, on the other hand, can regularly be corrupted by the desire for the "Bigger, Better Deal." Nowhere is this seen so well as Hollywood relationships, in my mind.

      BL does not lead to boasting about how amazing it is; in other words, you'll not see someone looking to inspire jealously in another. SL, though, does seem to do so, especially after recent break-ups, divorces, etc.

      BL does not put itself higher than others; it allows others to praise it, or not. SL regularly seeks to put itself out there as better than any other; case in point, "All You Need Is Love," "Come and Get my Love," etc.

      The list goes on, but perhaps the greatest and most significant difference is this: BL does not "delight in evil." We in the Western world seem to have this ethereal understanding of the word "evil," but not so with the biblical languages.
      In the Greek, 1Cor 13:5 uses the word kakos, which breaks down to mean, literally, worthless rebellion. In the Hebrew, every form of the word evil has its root in the ancient Hebrew word for rebellion. So, BL does not desire (or delight in) rebellion- But rebellion against what?

      Here, for BL, it is rebellion against God, and once more, we are back to the fact that homosexuality is considered an abomination by God.

      This is the crux of the matter for any Bible-based Christian.


      Now, you state that I should not group sides into believers vs unbelievers. However, the goal of this article is to address the Christian element first and foremost; and the majority of these either do not believe that "true" Christians will support homosexual marriage, or they believe that those who do are deceived.

      Hope that helps explain the why behind how I approached the article. Thanks again for your comment!

      Delete
  4. "The majority of the equality advocates which I have met are not advocating equality for the sake of equality- they are advocating it because they're angry at religious folks."

    That's strange, because not a single one of the hundreds I know uses that rationale. Most point to somethingnoike the 1st and 14th Amendments.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed on the last point, as many which I see debating the issue will use that. However, I try to get to know those on the other side of the argument as best I can. While they do not use that rational, based upon their life experiences, it is a motivating factor.

      And again, that's the majority of those which I personally know- So I make no argument that the small segment I know typifies the community as a whole.

      Thanks for your time!

      Delete
  5. Thank you sir. I was raised a Christian, though I am more of an agnostic these days. I have no beef with anyone having - and following - whatever religious beliefs they may find appropriate to their lives. With two caveats - 1) 'Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's' - No one's religious beliefs are a way around the duty to obey secular law; and 2) Whatever your religious beliefs are, no one gets to, as you pointed out, 'convert at the point of a sword'. If you can't bring people to your beliefs by debate and example, coercion is not gonna work.

    That said, I applaud you for a very well spoken and well reasoned article. I pray that others will take your words to heart.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you very much, Bill. That is my prayer also.

      Appreciate you stopping by.

      Delete
  6. Hey man, here is the Joshua Black Kickstarter link!

    ReplyDelete
  7. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/conartistent/joshua-black-the-hierarchy-of-christ

    ReplyDelete
  8. I Don't disagree with a single word you said, though you used a few words I wouldn't have. ;)

    Seriously though, you are right on the mark, but keep in mind, we as Christians can have our opinions, can vote the issues the way we believe, etc.

    Keeping that in mind, I posted what my opinion was on my Facebook page, did not argue one flipping point, just posted my opinion, in fact even said this is my opinion only, if someone doesn't agree, no worries off my back. Yet I got accused of shoving my false religion down someone else's throat.

    Yet, in reality, they were upset I did not adhere to their beliefs, in a sense, shoving their beliefs down my throat.

    SO, yes I agree with you that we are to love all people, and I do my best… I just don't have to agree with their beliefs.

    When it comes to issues like this, I believe in tolerance, not acceptance. Make sense?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely makes sense, Gregg.

      The point that you bring up about the reaction to you voicing your beliefs is one that happens countless times across the nation; and when you bring into that the fact that people in other countries have an inordinate amount of interest in US politics, it becomes a world-wide issue.

      The thing is, (and this is where a lot of Christians stop liking me), is that most Christians today who are standing up for their beliefs are reaping the whirlwind. As little as ten years ago, when this issue would be discussed, it was the homosexual marriage proponent who was being slammed in the exact same manner. I have personally been guilty of this in the past; I know it happened.

      The next thing that will get a lot of people wrapped around a pole on this is the fact that at one point I personally struggled with the concept of my sexuality. I was attracted to men; found them more desirable than women, etc.
      However, I also discovered something very important, and that is the fact that it is, in fact, a choice; the lifestyle I now live was a choice that I made- And honestly, I am far more happy now than I ever was then.

      Unfortunately, I went the opposite direction after making said choice, and began treating people who were just like me as if they were the scum of the earth. It was not intentional, at all, but that is how I came across.
      So, knowing all of this, I speak from experience on both sides of this issue; as Paul stated, I am the chiefest of sinners. As such, I feel it is my duty to speak up, speak out, and most importantly, come against many of the very things I once did.

      Why?

      Because they were wrong, and I do not want to see anyone experience the road I walked. I can't force anyone, nor would I want to force anyone, to stop walking that way; but I can present my experience in the hope that it strikes a chord.

      Delete
  9. I have written on this topic any number of times myself.

    However, as I am not, myself, a Christian, I feel that my personal level of Biblical knowledge doesn't permit me to argue Biblical points from a standpoint of any authority whatsoever.

    So, I have been approaching things from a simple standpoint, and it is one that you sort-of kind-of touched on in your excellent, well-written article, which I will be sharing as widely as I can.

    That being, that any attempt to LEGALLY define marriage by the standards of a single religion, is de facto legal recognition of a state religion. That is not only unconstitutional, but frankly dumb.

    One Biblical reference I can make without worry about interpretation is Matthew 22, 15-22; Jesus said that the things that belong to God are God's, and the earthly things belong to the earthly authorities. Earthly governments should not be concerned with religion, and merely mortal religious authorities should not concern themselves with the business of government.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you very much for your comment, Xeno.

      You bring up an excellent point that I would make to a more diverse crowd, and that is the issue of unconstitutionality. However, as my blog is read (to my knowledge) by a majority of Christians, I wanted to address it in such a way that would not bring up the "this is a Christian nation" argument. I'm sure you've run into this yourself; a well meaning individual will argue that the US is a Christian nation, and that the founding fathers would WANT marriage defined... Forgetting entirely, of course, that such a definition is precisely what they wrote the Constitution to prevent.

      I also wanted to express my gratitude to you for sharing this article: I hope that in the days to come, this reaches far more people than I ever dreamed. Hopefully, it will cause people to think, if not reconsider their positions entirely.

      Thanks for your contribution, friend!

      Delete
  10. in case you're tracking, I followed a link from fark.com (I like my news agglomerated sometimes).

    Excellently stated, as a liber-Christian, I'll be reading your blog from here out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for the kind words, Matthew; I too like to get as much news as I can from sources that are a bit off the mainstream.

      If you check back, I'd love to hear your definition of "liber-Christian."

      Thank you, once again, for your time- And I look forward to, and appreciate, having you as a reader!

      Delete

Due to continued abuse, all comments are now being moderated. I am sorry, but this is an all ages blog, and there was pornographic material being linked to and posted.

Thank you for understanding.