Hate Pride and Self Deception

In My Humble Opinion
41

Is it?

You wanna be a racist? Peachy. You wanna worship Jesus, Jehovah, Allah, or Cthulhu? Fine by me. You wanna hate gay people, transgender people, ANY damn kind of people? Peachy.

Or maybe you don’t HATE 'em, but you don’t think they’re ready to vote or participate in mainstream society yet. Whatever. I don’t really care, long as you’re not doing it in my living room.

But I have met and heard any number of people who are doin’ a thing in relation to this whole gay marriage (or gay EXISTENCE) thing… that I find unconscionable:

  1. Lying about it. “Naw, naw, I don’t hate gay people, I just think that if God wanted… he’d’a made Adam and Steve. But that’s not a religious argument. Despite God.”

  2. Letting someone else make your decision. “Well, Ted Cruz says…”

Naw.

Face it, people. The ghey is here. It’s always BEEN here. It predates the Bible. Hell, it may predate Homo Sapiens, judging from what the bonobo chimps are up to. The Ghey is nothing new. It exists in every single human culture, despite what that Iranian politician tried to tell the kids during his lecture tour.

The Ghey Is Here. It Has Always Been Here. And It Is Going On Right Now.

And I have heard way too many people complain about that.

Why? Are they doing it in your living room? Or is sex like a bowl of candy, and if them gay folks are taking too much, there won’t be any left for you? Or is MARRIAGE like a bowl of candy, because for the life of me I can’t figure out this business about gay marriage devaluing all the regular marriage out there.

And I have come to understand a thing about the people who can’t stand the gay marriage impending doom abomination horror horror horror…

They want all the gays to go back in the closet. They want 'em all to go back out to Fire Island and Castro Street and places where they don’t have to LOOK at them… as opposed to maybe getting married, buying the house next to YOURS, and ohghod oghod oghod adopting a kid or two who will be going to school with YOURS, and spreading the evil evil ghey ghey ghey…

That’s it. I’m sure there are plenty of people against it for other reasons … I’ve met a few who are quite sure they know the mind of God, and God said it, we believe it, and that settles it… but most of the thinkin’ people I know just want the gays to go away. They don’t want to have to look at them or think about them, and if they MUST exist, can’t they just go back to acting NORMAL like they used to?

So I have this to say: If you’re REALLY CONVINCED that God doesn’t want them gay folks gettin’ married like ordinary decent people… well, tough. Jews think God hates pork, but they don’t get to outlaw my bacon supply, at least not in America. BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT AMERICA WAS MADE FOR. We settled the religious issue a LONG time ago. Believe whatever you want, but don’t try to make ME do it.

And those of you who maybe aren’t God motivated, but wanna talk about Adam and Steve? Fine. Talk, demonstrate, and speechify all you want. But don’t blow sunshine up my ass. And I would really rather you quit lying to YOURSELVES, too.

Just admit it: gay people freak you out, and you don’t want to have to deal with them, and that’s pretty much it. Because, as far as I can tell, that IS it.

But perhaps I am wrong. Anyone out there wanna correct me?

42

Why do you get to decide this rule? Don’t I get a vote?

43

About as brave as posting “I love anime” on an anime fan site.

44

I don’t say that you should give a shit. As you point out, it’s functionally indistinguishable, and your reaction ought to be, “Great - now stop helping me with your ‘love,’ ok?” or something more forceful but similarly targeted. His motive is irrelevant if his position is still denying you legal rights.

Not Jesus, but yes, in the New Testament: in Acts 21, the results of a debate about what laws Gentile followers of Christ must observe – as opposed to Jewish followers of Christ – came to resolution. Apart from the Ten Commandments, Gentiles need only follow the laws concerning sexual immorality, food sacrificed to idols, and blood from the meat of strangled animals. Gentiles are not bound to follow the mitzvot from Leviticus.

Did you not know this?

45

I did, but you seem to have glossed over my gentle efforts at correction.

I’m imagining a person who says, “I am convinced that homosexuality is immoral, and I believe this is reason enough to deny marriage to same-sex couples. I believe it’s immoral because of its prohibition in the Bible, and I don’t agree that America forbids keeping in place a law that is intended to promote morality, even if the law was originally based on a Biblical tenet. For example, in America, legislative bodies open each session with a prayer offered by a chaplain paid by public funds, and that practice is legal. Each coin bears the motto ‘In God We Trust,’ and that practice is legal.”

(Please note this this is not my position, but the position of the hypothetical defender of a same-sex marriage ban).

Now, your attack on such a person seems to be that they are lying about it, or letting someone else make the decision for them, and I don’t agree that fairly describes my hypothetical respondent.

46

I knew there was a bit in there that said, “None of those Jewish laws apply, except for when it’s convenient for us that they should.” Wasn’t clear on the context, though - who said it, or what criteria they used for deciding what counted, and what didn’t.

47

You sound like marriage is the only issue gay people have been facing for the last few generations. It goes way beyond marriage, to the core of what we are, as human beings.

If someone speaks and acts like they hate me, I have no choice but to assume they hate me. I can’t crawl inside every anti-gay person’s head and ferret out their innermost thoughts and feelings and motivations. If someone is denying me the same rights they claim for themselves . . . implying that somehow I’m less of a human being than he is . . . I have every reason to assume that, on some level, there’s hate.

48

Acts 10:9-16: “9 On the next day, as they were on their way and approaching the city, Peter went up on the housetop about the [f]sixth hour to pray. 10 But he became hungry and was desiring to eat; but while they were making preparations, he fell into a trance; 11 and he *saw the [g]sky opened up, and an [h]object like a great sheet coming down, lowered by four corners to the ground, 12 and there were in it all kinds of four-footed animals and *crawling creatures of the earth and birds of the [j]air. 13 A voice came to him, “Get up, Peter, [k]kill and eat!” 14 But Peter said, “By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything [l]unholy and unclean.” 15 Again a voice came to him a second time, “What God has cleansed, no longer consider [m]unholy.” 16 This happened three times, and immediately the [n]object was taken up into the [o]sky.”
The context is a Roman is about to send for Peter to ask him about Jesus.
There were three types of law in the Old Testament, the moral law, the civil law, and the ceremonial law. The moral laws were such things as murder, adultery, lying, disobeying your parents, fornication, homosexuality, etc. The civil laws had to do with organization of Israel into tribes, what punishments to give to those who broke the moral laws, how to divide land, how to provide for the poor, etc. Ceremonial law had to do with ritual cleansings, sacrifices, how to enter the presence of God, and how to keep Israel separate from the surrounding culture. In ceremonial law, everything such as what you ate and what you wore was designed to emphasize your separateness from the surrounding heathens and to keep Jews from assimilating. This is why Jews have survived as a culture for five thousand years.
When Jesus died, his sacrifice made everyone who believes clean before God for all time. There is no more need for cleansings or sacrifices. He also removed all barriers between Jews and Gentiles. In Christ there is no need to distinguish yourself through what you eat or what you wear, what is in your heart is what makes you different.
Thus all the Old Testament laws about what you should eat or wear no longer apply.
However, Jesus expressly said he did not change any of the moral law. Matthew 5:17-20: "17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not [h]the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches *others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever [j]keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20 “For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven."

So God himself told us which laws still apply and which do not. A Christian can then eat all the lobster she wants, wear any kind of fabric she wants, but is sinning if they lie, steal, or have sex outside of marriage. This has all been well understood for almost two thousand years. Arguing that Christians are hypocritical for opposing gay marriage but being okay with Red Lobster is just showing ignorance.

49

Do you think children should be able to get married? Is that because you hate children?
I don’t want children to be able to get married, and I like children.
I don’t want to change the definition of marriage to include gay marriage, plural marriage, incestous marriage or any other type. That is because I think that is what is best for society and will ultimately benefit gays since they are a part of society. If you disagree it may be because you hate me or because you have an honest difference of opinion. I am going to assume the latter because the former is uncharitable.

50

Excuse me, but I am not a child, and my rights are not limited by what is appropriate to a child. My partner and I have been together over 27 years. Do you really think it will “ultimately benefit” us to not be allowed to marry? How does it benefit society, for some of its members to have fewer rights than everyone else? The definition of marriage has been continually changing since ancient times, to reflect society’s growth. Do you really believe that the marriage of the Old Testament should still be the model for 2015?

51

There’s nothing in the text that resembles “…except for when it’s convenient for us that they should.” I grant you that religious interpretation is not always rigorous, but in this case there’s really nothing to support your paraphrase.

52

Sigh. And here we go.

“It is immoral because of its prohibition in the Bible.”

I don’t buy that. I’ve had people quote Deuteronomy at me until the toads come home, and not a one has ever explained why the ghey is evil but mixed polyester and cotton slacks, not having slaves, and Red Lobster is all okay.

But for the sake of argument, fine. Your religion is against the ghey. And like every other religion in America, you don’t get to jam it down anyone else’s throat. I can eat bacon, despite Jews. I can eat beef despite Hindus. And women don’t have to wear pup tents, despite Islam.

Your religious rights end where you begin attempting to force other people to live your lifestyle. Be as Old Testament as you want in your own home; this is your right. What’s your justification for demanding that everyone ELSE do it your way? Oh, wait, are we talking God again?

53

Except that I did precisely that in post #10, with respect to Red Lobster.

If you don’t agree with the reasoning therein, perhaps you could share the specifics of your disagreement. But you cannot continue to claim that “…not a one has ever explained…” when in this very thread I supplied a reasonably detailed explanation.

Post #10.

And then in post #44, I provided the specific biblical citation that addresses the remainder of your complaints. Again, this was a specific and cited verse.

Once again, in the face of that, you have announced that “…not a one has ever explained…” in the very thread that contains the explanation.

Why?

54

That’s definitely one of the more psychotic things I’ve ever read.

How and where are these delineations described in the Bible?

I’m not seeing “…except for those parts arbitrarily designated as civil and ceremonial law. Those parts you can ditch entirely.”

Doesn’t matter how many years you’re wrong about something. It doesn’t suddenly turn into “right” after enough time goes by.

55

Well, there’s my deep distrust of the motives of priests and churches. But you’re right, I shouldn’t be projecting that into the text. It’s a little hard to remain respectful of the Bible when my primary exposure to it comes from it being used as a weapon against me.

56

Sure, I understand completely. And my view is that secular policy should not be created by reference to Biblical authority, so I wouldn’t be in agreement with the hypothetical speaker I created earlier.

But I think it’s important to distinguish between the real and the imagined flaws in the Christian view.