# Anti-gay Christians are merely bigots **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 10, 2015, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810 "2015-07-10T22:26:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![lalaith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/96bed5/32.png) [@lalaith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lalaith)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/121 "2015-07-13T14:23:23Z")
> [@lalaith](#): > > “The Bible may be the oldest, most continually used Rorschach test in Western civilization. Because which parts of the Bible someone chooses to follow and which parts someone chooses to ignore tell a lot about that person.” > [@bobot](#): > > I like this! So true, well said. Thanks.🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Hershele\_Ostropoler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e47c2d/32.png) [@Hershele\_Ostropoler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hershele_Ostropoler)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/122 "2015-07-13T14:23:43Z")
IANAC. But I think I can understand why same-sex marriage is particularly offensive to the sensibilities of many who are. Because same-sex marriage is not a sin; it’s the display and elevation and celebration of a sinful life. If it’s wrong to sin, it’s even more wrong to put on a big display of one’s sinning, or to present it as a virtue. In that sense the SSM opponents are surprisingly similar to Occupy. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/123 "2015-07-13T14:30:19Z")
> [@raindog](#): > > Comments like this have often made this site utterly intolerable. Being a former veteran of most bible themed threads, the level of ignorance of biblical ignorance (without regard to doctrine or interpretation!) at SDMB is nothing shirt of pandemic. > > Arrogance, on the other hand, is pandemic also. Well, I suppose I’m flattered that my snark makes the site intolerable. Would you mind correcting some of our terrible Biblical ignorance? My point, however arrogant it might have come across, was intended only to convey that the sentiments in the OP are not particularly new or unusual, and that we’ve seen the arguments before. I did not communicate that very well, certainly. But instead of just grousing about how things are intolerable and ignorant and arrogant, please help me out. What ignorance is being perpetuated in this thread that has not yet been addressed? ---
**Author:** ![lalaith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/96bed5/32.png) [@lalaith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lalaith)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/124 "2015-07-13T14:32:05Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > But that doesnt mean my church has to perform or accept it. Like many groups, my church has strict moral guidelines one must agree to before becoming a member. If you dont like it, their is a liberal Presbyterian church just down the street. That church does all kinds of gay friendly stuff. This is just a red herring of an argument… I was raised a Catholic. The Roman Catholic Church has not, does not, will not marry a divorced person. Even though divorced people remarrying is legal. Even when those legally divorced, now have a legal marriage license people are members of that Catholic church. Still won’t marry them. No, your church will not have to perform or accept a homosexual marriage. And the government’s not going to make them. The government will _ **never** _ make them. Doesn’t mean your church’s own membership can’t push for a change within your church. So someday your church may perform homosexual weddings, but it will do so because your church decided it wanted to. So this argument that keeps getting raised about churches being forced to perform homosexual weddings is ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![lalaith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/96bed5/32.png) [@lalaith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lalaith)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/125 "2015-07-13T14:33:18Z")
> [@Hershele\_Ostropoler](#): > > In that sense the SSM opponents are surprisingly similar to Occupy. Huh??? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/126 "2015-07-13T14:57:57Z")
Someone might’ve responded to this earlier, but just thought I’d put in my thoughts quickly since I don’t have time to read the full thread until later: > [@Pinmin](#): > > What is wrong with celibacy for someone with same sex attractions? Nothing’s wrong with it, just so long as it’s their choice, just like for everyone else. But if you’re saying that celibacy is the only moral option for persons not sexually attracted to the opposite sex, then there’s this problem where most of us Christians regard the celibate life as a particular _calling_. A _calling_ is when you believe God’s communicating with you personally to direct your choices. But saying celibacy is the only moral option for gays is saying that they are called, _en masse_, to celibacy - that God spoke to them, not in any sort of personal manner, but in a very impersonal, opaque sort of way, by giving them this orientation, this set of desires, and having other people interpret that orientation for them as their having received this calling. And this is bullshit. You don’t discover that you have a calling from God when someone else tells you. If God’s calling you, _you know_. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/127 "2015-07-13T15:10:27Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > And part of the proof that they are not bigots is that many would be perfectly happy to extended to SS couples all the legal benefits and privileges available to OS couples. This is absurd. Many states were fighting adoption for same sex couples long after they were given the right to marry. Utah is an example of this. > [@Urbanredneck](#): > > Now personally, I look at gay marriage as a civil not a religious issue. I’m a Christian but actually ok with gays being allowed to legally be married. Especially in this day and age when marriage has become such a joke anymore (ex. bridezillas, Vegas drive thru wedding chapels, couples marrying in expensive weddings and then divorcing soon after, etc…) but thats another discussion. So marriages are OK now for gays because they’ve been reduced to second rate status? (hint: “that’s” is [another](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18388952&postcount=2) one of these words which take an apostrophe.) > [@](#): > > But that doesnt mean my church has to perform or accept it. Like many groups, my church has strict moral guidelines one must agree to before becoming a member. If you dont like it, their is a liberal Presbyterian church just down the street. That church does all kinds of gay friendly stuff. “doesn’t” and “don’t” also take apostrophes. I would say that holding on the outdated ideas of morality based on iron age sheep farmers well into modern times is an act of willful ignorance and bigotry. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/128 "2015-07-13T15:34:32Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > And part of the proof that they are not bigots is that many would be perfectly happy to extended to SS couples all the legal benefits and privileges available to OS couples. Just not the name itself, since that would be … what is the word you like to use in claiming that view for yourself? Oh yes … “diluting” marriage. No, nothing bigoted there. ---
**Author:** ![Haberdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Haberdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haberdash)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/129 "2015-07-13T15:45:54Z")
The entire basis of Harlan’s dissent in Plessy was that segregation was a “badge of slavery.” It doesn’t matter if separate but equal is in fact equal (which, as you may recall from Brown, it is legally impossible for it to be) – the mere fact of government-imposed separation is a statement of inferiority which is impermissible under the Fourteenth Amendment. This is settled law, but that will never stop people from arguing in circles. ---
**Author:** ![Hiker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3be4f8/32.png) [@Hiker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hiker)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/130 "2015-07-13T16:16:44Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > And part of the proof that they are not bigots is that many would be perfectly happy to extended to SS couples all the legal benefits and privileges available to OS couples. That is an interesting argument. Does it mean that you would agree that those, who would \*not \*be perfectly happy to extended all these legal benefits and privileges to same sex couples are in fact bigots? You said “part of the proof” so maybe not. But then I would like to see the rest of it. As I understand your post, the point you are making is that for many Christians the debate really only comes down to an (in their view) appropriate application of the term marriage, with no value statement attached. I would agree that there is no much of a basis for calling such a person a bigot. However, the way I perceive it, many of those who oppose calling a same sex partnership a marriage do so, because they consider it a “lesser” form of partnership. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/131 "2015-07-13T16:40:10Z")
> [@Dhammyjhay](#): > > First and foremost, i’d like us to recall that God created man and woman(not man nd man or woman nd woman)… > > Secondly, if i’m not mistaken, it is clearly stated in the bible that a man and woman(again not man nd man or woman nd woman) shall leave their parents home nd come together to live as one… > > Now, what i’m tryinq to point out is the simple, clear, nd obvious fact that the bible never for one mention ‘gay marriage’… Then why should we as xtians support that which was not commanded by God… Nd i’m sure that if God wanted gay marriage then the bible would av made that know to us… The bible never once mentions air conditioning, cars, or MP3 players, but you probably avail yourself of at least one of them. And you don’t get to retire, either: > **[Tea Party historian says Bible commands humans to work until death: 'God did...](https://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/tea-party-historian-says-bible-commands-humans-to-work-until-death-god-did-not-design-us-for-retirement/)** > > Another conservative has pushed the idea that retirement went against biblical teachings.David Barton, a Tea Party activist and Oral Roberts University-educated history author who promotes the idea that the United States was founded by evangelical... But okay, back to what you said: Assume that god created man and woman. Fine. That doesn’t mean that all men are going to be attracted to women or vice versa. People just don’t operate that simply. You can’t command a person to love the opposite sex. They can’t force it. ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/132 "2015-07-13T16:59:51Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Also, you must have misunderstood my point about “80%”. It was not that 80% of your thread talked about things other than the heart of your OP, it was that 80%, hell 100%, is talked about in other threads, as well. So for you to point to one part of the discussion and say, "Oh this is discussed elsewhere, go talk about it there, while it is still germane to the discussion, is odd to say the least. I think it’s not at all odd to point out posts that are off-topic, when they are exactly the topic of another thread. I also think it’s reasonable to address a question that happens to be discussed in another thread, when the relevant posts are buried amid a largely semantic discussion that doesn’t interest me. > [@JRDelirious](#): > > I said in one of the other threads, part of the problem is, nobody believes HIMSELF a bigot. Well, not quite nobody. I’m a bigot. In my desire to not be a bigot, I find it’s most helpful if I assume I have prejudices and to be on the lookout for them. Frankly, I think the best hope anyone has of being less bigoted is to assume that they have prejudices and face them. It’s a lot easier to say than to do. I displayed a bit of anti-Christian bigotry in the OP. My bad. ---
**Author:** ![Find\_Friends](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c37758/32.png) [@Find\_Friends](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Find_Friends)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/133 "2015-07-13T17:27:34Z")
> [@Pinmin](#): > > … Then there are religious Christians who attempt to follow Jesus and the teachings of the Bible. I speak for the second group. You really want to to there? Please tell me that you have sold all your possessions and given the money for them to the poor. Then we can talk about “following Jesus”. > [@Pinmin](#): > > … Can you define the mistakes God made? I don’t understand how that follows. (This is probably not the direction intended.) 1 in 1600 people were created by your deity as TRUE HERMAPHODITES. If you add in all the less drastic examples of “intersex” in general, including sexual chromosones tallies other than XX and XY, the total comes to about 5% of the population. Given THAT, it’s a little strange that your deity not only wants all sex to be with a man and his wife… or wives… or concubines… but also… Even goes so far as to prohibit dressing according to the opposite gender. Whatever “opposite” may mean to a true hermaphrodite. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/134 "2015-07-13T22:21:31Z")
> [@Hiker](#): > > . . . As I understand your post, the point you are making is that for many Christians the debate really only comes down to an (in their view) appropriate application of the term marriage, with no value statement attached. I would agree that there is no much of a basis for calling such a person a bigot. However, the way I perceive it, many of those who oppose calling a same sex partnership a marriage do so, because they consider it a “lesser” form of partnership. And it doesn’t matter, because the right of freedom of speech would almost immediately have had the same effect. Suppose that the Supreme Court had said, No, same-sex couples cannot get married, however states must provide “Civil Union” contracts that have all of the same benefits, and the Federal Government must recognize this also. (Allowing such couples to file joint income tax returns, etc.) Well, even though Jack and Joe aren’t “married” they’re going to say they are. They have the right to say anything they want. And a lot of the rest of us are also going to say they are too. The common use of language would come around to calling these unions “Marriages.” There’s no way to forbid it! (Just as, right now, there’s no way to forbid a religious believer from saying, “Jack and Joe aren’t really married.” A lot of people are saying exactly that…and it’s perfectly legal.) You can legislate some things, but not terms used by the public in their everyday speech. (And O.J. Simpson is a murderer, goddamit.) ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2015, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/135 "2015-07-14T04:11:56Z")
> [@TokyoBayer](#): > > I would say that holding on the outdated ideas of morality based on iron age sheep farmers well into modern times is an act of willful ignorance and bigotry. Oh now that is one keen argument which I’m sure goes over well in your little atheist circle but has absolutely NO impact on me. Next. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2015, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/136 "2015-07-14T04:16:44Z")
> [@Hiker](#): > > As I understand your post, the point you are making is that for many Christians the debate really only comes down to an (in their view) appropriate application of the term marriage, with no value statement attached. I would agree that there is no much of a basis for calling such a person a bigot. However, the way I perceive it, many of those who oppose calling a same sex partnership a marriage do so, because they consider it a “lesser” form of partnership. Yeah, I was ok with gays calling them “unions” or something. Whatever just go down to the courthouse and sign a paper in front of a judge saying your sharing financial responsibilities. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2015, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/137 "2015-07-14T04:18:45Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > Oh now that is one keen argument which I’m sure goes over well in your little atheist circle but has absolutely NO impact on me. > > Next. You seem to think your agreement is required for this. Frankly, we don’t give two shits anymore. It’s done. You lost. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2015, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/138 "2015-07-14T04:39:08Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > Yeah, I was ok with gays calling them “unions” or something. Whatever just go down to the courthouse and sign a paper in front of a judge saying your sharing financial responsibilities. O,h how generous of you. You still stood on the side of the issue along side bigots. It’s always been about denying equal rights to gay people. You’ll have to catch up and join them with the next losing issue. The gay marriage debate has been settled in this country. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2015, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/139 "2015-07-14T05:10:35Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > Oh now that is one keen argument which I’m sure goes over well in your little atheist circle but has absolutely NO impact on me. > > Next. Yeah, but your religion has a lot of impact on those who think it is a pile of crap. If the faithful don’t want to marry someone of the same sex, fine with me, and fine with pretty much everyone. If they want to prevent other people from doing it, they had better get out of the way or present some pretty strong evidence this god of theirs actually exists. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2015, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810/140 "2015-07-14T06:00:33Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > Oh now that is one keen argument which I’m sure goes over well in your little atheist circle but has absolutely NO impact on me. > > Next. Seriously, UrbanRedneck, if you are going to tell me your bible proclaims “XYZ” then you need to prove that god actually wrote the bible if you want it to make any difference. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gay-christians-are-merely-bigots/724810.md?page=8)