Why is this at all disturbing?
Churches that consider homosexuality a sin believe that this was communicated by a divine being. Why would anyone expect that just because the socio-political climate in the Western world has shifted in favor of a more tolerant attitude toward sexual practices that were once taboo, that the official stances of churches would change?
This.
Many people believe that “morality and ethics is based off of the opinion of the society of their time.” (That’s why lots of people would say things like “Come on, it’s 2017!” last year, when arguing on behalf of something.) So for instance, LGBT is in vogue today, but would be much more strongly opposed in 1800s America. But then they are baffled when some people’s morality and ethics are firmly rooted and do not sway or change with the contemporary ethics of the latest era.
And yet the official stances of churches are changing. It’s a good thing. We are headed in the right direction. We will get there.
What exactly are you doing? Sounds like you’re just “making statements” to me.
And what exactly are you asking others to do? Bomb churches? Crash religious services and protest the preacher? Yell louder? Type a strongly worded internet post in ALL CAPS?
I’m one of those that the megachurches are waging war against, and I’m asking those churches that claim to be more numerous and powerful to maybe use those numbers and that power. Yell louder? Fuck, yeah. Actively protest in the numbers you claim to have? That would be nice. When these hate-filled jerks get more than their share of TV interview time, demand equal time with enough supporters behind you to make it stick? That would be a nice change of pace.
I can see you’re deeply outraged by megachurches and their homophobic stance. I suggested this get moved to IMHO because it seems to me you’re expressing that outrage more than you are proposing a debatable topic. Perhaps you can clarify what specific, debatable topic you’re proposing.
Are the church organizations that claim to have greater numbers doing enough with the numbers they have when it comes to LGBT rights?
Is anyone? Why single out church organizations? Is Google doing enough? Is the YMCA or IEEE doing enough? How about the Better Business Bureau? What about your employer or a social club you belong to?
Can you provide an example of an organization you feel is doing enough?
Maybe we should just be happy they’re not doing more in opposition to LGBT rights.
If you don’t mind, I think I’ll not settle for that low a level of “happy”.
Why NOT “single them out”? They have the supposed numbers, unlike all the other groups you’ve mentioned, and the supposed purpose of support, unlike the groups you’ve mentioned. The BBB? really? That has got to be the worst case of “Why aren’t you taking about them over there??” I’ve seen in a long time.
Maybe I just wanted to focus on a group that has the best chance of doing good in this arena, instead of mentioning every other possible group on Earth and making this a mess of a multi-directional conversation.
Who exactly defines “doing enough”? Or perhaps the most direct question would be, why would any church organization be expected to do anything when it comes to LGBT rights?
Perhaps it should be looked at this way. Jesus did specifically say that his followers should give food to the hungry, so we would expected any church organization to do so. Jesus did specifically say that his followers should give clothing to those who have none, so we would expect any church organization to do so. Jesus did specifically say that his followers should treat the sick, house the homeless, work for an end to war and violence, and many other things, so we would expected any church organization to do such things. But at no point did Jesus specifically say to take a particular stance on LGBT rights; in fact, in the Gospels, he mentioned homosexuality or transsexuality a grand total of zero times. So why would any church organization be expected to affirm something that Jesus did not mention at all? For sure, some do so, but I don’t see any grounds on which anyone could declare that a certain number of affirmations towards LGBTs from church organizations is expected.
Frankly, as an LGBT person myself, I’ve long since said “Fuck 'em” and I have no real outrage. Who cares if churches do or do not affirm LGBT rights? They’re not in charge of those rights, so I don’t really care. I’m sure, in time, as they have for 2000 years, those churches will eventually come to adopt a more tolerant attitude as their ancient members die off and they notice their attendance numbers dropping.
Speaking as a member of a UMC congregation which recently elected to become an Reconciling Congregation (“openly welcomes persons of all sexual orientations and gender identities to fully participate in all aspects of its congregational life”)…this is by no means a done deal in the UMC.
The UMC’s Book of Disciplinecurrently states:
At the church’s 2016 general conference, addressing (and possibly changing) these statements was hotly debated. Many Methodists from the US and Europe were in favor of removing this wording, but this was opposed by many from Africa and the more conservative wing of the UMC in the US. The general conference wound up assigning a group to research the issue, to report back in 2019, but there are those who believe that the issue may lead to a schism within the church.
Ethical progress is made when we reject the false assumptions that old ethics are based on. One is that secular laws should be based on unsupported religious claims. (Like God said homosexuality is sinful.) Another is claims that certain actions lead to bad results that have since been shown to be false - such as children with same sex parents come out worse than children with opposite sex parents.
The case of slavery was similar. Some churches were for it, with Biblical justification, some were against it. And claims about the supposed inferiority of one race were shown to be false. And we certainly saw that many people had problems keeping up with contemporary ethics - and joined the KKK.
So maybe it is time for those with the old ethics to re-examine them. And if God supposedly tells you to do something unethical, either decide that whoever wrote about what God said was lying or abandon belief in this immoral God all together.
That’s interesting. It makes me wonder how many of those not part of the 100 megachurches that were previously listed actually support LGBT Rights, how many are still arguing about it, and how many are like the “good” cops that don’t do wrong…but look the other way in silence at their wayward brethren? I also wonder who else agrees with ITR champion that, because Jesus never brought it up, it shouldn’t concern the churches at all?
I disagree with ITR champion. It seems to me that Jesus and others mentioned loving thy neighbor and all others as yourself, or something to that effect.
Far be it from a atheist like me to argue about what a Christian should do, but Jesus was all about helping the “least among us” and the outcasts (lepers and adulterers) of the time. I have not idea if Jesus would be OK with gay sex, but he would almost certainly want gays to have some protection against persecution. If not legal protection, then protection from within the community and not hatred, which is what we see from a lot of the more traditionally religious folks.
Just because you don’t hear it, does not mean we are silent (I despise that argument - it basically says that unless I act like an asshole and get media coverage, I am somehow complicit). The media likes loud mouthed bigots. Us calm Christians who march in the parades, who welcome gays into our congregations, who marry them in beautiful ceremonies, who ordain them as ministers, who ordain them as elders, who ordain them as deacons - well, I guess we just are not loud enough for your liking.
Washington Post when the PCUSA changed our rules to marry LGBT
I’m not engaging in “whataboutism” and the seeming irrelevance of the BBB is my very point.
Some churches are full of homophobes. I got it. And because of that you think that churches which aren’t full of homophobes have something to answer for?
Some bowling teams are full of homophobes, too, does that mean every non-homophobic bowling team should now go gangbusters for LGBT activism to make up for it?
Just because some assholes happen to be engaged in a similar hobby to non-assholes doesn’t mean the non-assholes have some duty to “balance the scales” or something. They can just continue on with not being assholes. Only the assholes have something to answer for.
The analogy with good cops/bad cops just doesn’t work. “Good cops” work alongside bad cops, supporting them and defending them and covering up their crimes. “Good churches” have literally nothing in common with homophobic churches, at all. It’s like asking all white people to answer for the KKK. Why should people be held accountable for the crimes of others who are only superficially like them? What end does that serve?