MrVisible: I honestly did read all your post, including the part you just quoted. I must have misinterpreted the post, because I assumed when you said “be assured they count you too,” you were referring to the fundies who are attempting to show that Christians are all united behind them. I was taking exception to that.
I’m curious as to how you can unilaterally claim that donations to any Christian church are being used to keep people disenfranchised. You got a cite for that? I can tell you, I know of many churches who use donations to fund the salaries of the staff, perform upkeep on the buildings and grounds, and provide a few local social services (such as a food closet or a soup kitchen). They don’t have any extra money to fund disenfranchising activities.
In addition, there are many churches (mine is one of them) where homosexuality is not even a topic for a sermon. There is no bigotry pouring from the pulpit.
Ashtar, would you please label your posts “[strawman]. . .[/strawman]” so I don’t waste my time reading them?
gobear isn’t generalizing about all Christians. He’s speaking about a carefully defined subgroup, and criticizing a central tenet of that subgroup. I doubt you’d find many people who label themselves Christian Fundamentalists who would deny that they have negative feelings about homosexuals–as a group.
As long as your terms are carefully defined, certain generalizations are appropriate in certain discussions. Christians tend to believe in the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth; homosexuals tend to be more attracted to members of their own gender; Christian Fundamentalists–defined as that subgroup of Christians who believe that the Bible is a literal document and is an appropriate blueprint for behavior and belief in the modern world, and who subscribe to the tenets of Christian Fundamentalism, including a harsh judgment of homosexuals–tend to condemn homosexuals. (Litmus test: if it’s close to being tautological, it’s possible that it’s an appropriate generalization.)
AS MrVisible said, that’s bullshit. Would you tell black men protecting their homes that they are as bad as the KKK? Would you tell the Jewish warriors of the Warsaw ghetto that they are no better than Nazis? Would you tell a rape victim who hits the rapist that she is on the same moral plane as he? The religious right wing in this country are a pack of vicious bullies who are determined to roll back advances for gay rights as a concomitant result of turning America into a theocracy. THEY are the aggresssors, and standing up to them is the right thing to do.
Ok I finally caught up. Stupid job keeps interfering
Ok all you christians that are offended by gobear and MrVisible lumping you all together with the fundies think about this:
THey didn’t lump you all together. They have repeatedly said they have no problem with liberal christains that are pro-gay rights.
Say you are a christain. You attend a christain church and give money to said church. That church in turn donates money to anti-gay groups. Your personal opinion on the gay rights has no bearing as you have now become a contributor to the anti-gay cause. You are part of the fucking problem even if you are pro-gay rights.
[QUOTE=lissener]
Ashtar, would you please label your posts “[strawman]. . .[/strawman]” so I don’t waste my time reading them?
gobear isn’t generalizing about all Christians. He’s speaking about a carefully defined subgroup, and criticizing a central tenet of that subgroup. I doubt you’d find many people who label themselves Christian Fundamentalists who would deny that they have negative feelings about homosexuals–as a group.
[QUOTE]
I didn’t use the word “Christian” at all. I said he was generalizing about fundamentalists. Not Christian fundamentalists.
As has been pointed out to you many times in this thread, not all fundies are homophobes, just as all homophobes are not fundies.
The reason I compared you with Dobson is because, like him, you are making broad, unsubstantiated generalizations about a group. He says all gays are constantly changing partners. This is not true. You are an excellent example of this. You say all fundies want to shove Leviticus 18:22 down your throat. This is not true. There are several examples in this thread alone which proves this.
I obviously can not completely understand what you are going through, seeing as I am a hetero. However, I am pissed off that there are a lot of people out there spreading hate in Jesus’s name. I want to help you combat this obvious hatred and ignorance. But you will make zero progress by yelling at the wrong group of people.
Claiming all fundies are going to be challenged by the subtitles because they can’t read is just as bigoted as a homophobe saying that all gays are perverts. Can you not see this?
One poster said that his cnurch gives to this and that, but not to anti-gay agendas. But if part of that church’s weekly take goes to the diocese (or whatever they call it) and THEY spend it on anti-gay activities, you’ve contributed to it.
And to those Southern Baptists who have posted here, this is an honest question and I’m interested in hearing your answers. Don’t you get tired of having to defend yourself as the lone voice of reason in a sea of ignorance? If you disagree with the leadership in your church, why don’t you find a different church? If you don’t believe in what your church preaches, it seems rather pointless to continue to be affiliated with them. There are many other churches where you could express your love for god and not compromise such an important belief. What makes you hang on?
If I understand the question, I think that the answer is a qualified yes here. If the case is that your church is sending money to anti-gay causes, the fact that you may prevent your specific money from directly supporting this is irrelevant. By participating in and supporting this any organization that is doing this you are lending them validity and therefore still a part of the problem. Sort of like the difference between aiding and comforting the enemy and directly shooting someone. While one is arguably less bad than the other, both are still part of the problem.
Dude, you are the only person who thinks that was meant as a sober statement of fact. If you can’t tell snarky, over-the-top insults from factual assertions, you ought to go back to the kiddie pool and stay away from the diving board. (No, I’m not saying we’re really in a swimming pool, it’s a metaphor.)
An excellent question. Speaking for myself, I have attended services at churches of other denominations, but for me a Southern Baptist service is the most comfortable. I was raised attending a Southern Baptist church, and that has become my blueprint for worship.
Now, having said that, if our church’s pastor (for whom we are currently searching; our previous pastor just retired a couple of months ago) ever got up in the pulpit and preached a sermon on gays and claimed they were all going to hell, I would voice my displeasure. (Well, actually, I’d probably just stand up and walk out. I’m not terribly confrontational in person.) Our former pastor tended to pound on alcohol and pornography more than anything else.
I seriously doubt there is any denomination out there that corresponds exactly to my own internal belief system. I’m more of a deist than anything else. I recognize some inconsistencies in the Bible, and do not think it is the literal word of God.
Contrary to what some folks might believe, there’s not a raging tide of opposition to gay rights in many SB churches. I can tell you that the majority of people my age in my church share my overall view on gay rights. My wife, the lovely and talented Aries28, specifically raised the question a few months back, when a thread pitting the Southern Baptist Convention was current in the Pit. The most conservative person in my Sunday School class, a man in his early 40s, said he was disgusted by homosexual behavior, but he thought people should be allowed to marry whomever they want.
Obviously it was meant as an over-the-top insult. Just as your comment about all Southern Baptists having piles of beer cans around their trailer was an over-the-top insult. I get that. Doesn’t make it right, though.
Well, I’ll have to take your word on that, as far as your church is concerned. But it doesn’t let the religion, as a whole, off the hook. I liken your situation to a guy walking around in oversized shoes, a rubber nose, and a rainbow wig, saying, “I’m not a clown! I’m not a clown!” Who’s going to believe you? The religion has repeatedly gone over-the-top public with their opinions, their mean-spirited prayers, and their political powerplays. It’s difficult to separate the good from the bad when the bad are “SO” bad.
If it appeared to me that the SBC was actually gaining more acceptance and clout, rather than less, I would have to think long and hard about remaining a Southern Baptist. But everything I see indicates to me that their clout is slowly dying. That may be the reason for some of the recent ham-handed efforts they’ve put forth – they see their power base eroding, and they know if they want their “vision” to last they need to do it now.
I think they’re doomed, regardless; although Alabama isn’t exactly renowned as a hotbed of liberal thinking, many of the Christians I know here are much more tolerant than is commonly believed. Another ten years, tops, and I think the SBC will have been forced by its member churches to alter its stance on many issues, or the existing power brokers will have retired/died and people with more tolerant views will take their place.
It still bugs me when someone automatically equates “Christian” with rabid right-wing zealot, but I can understand why that happens.
Do you vocalize your dissatisfaction at church? Do the powers that be know what your (and other parishoners’) opinions on these matters are? If so, how do they respond to dissention in the ranks?
I have to split. But I’d like to see your answer on Monday.
OK, I engaged in some hyperbole of my own, and I apologize. However it’s obvious just by reading this thread that some of your comments are easily misinterpreted.
As I mentioned earlier, Aries28 broached the subject of gay rights in our Sunday School class a few months back, based on a discussion on this message board. We anticipated some negative reaction, but overall it was extremely positive. The main feeling in the room seemed to be “live and let live.” We also discussed the (at the time) recent initiative recommended by the Southern Baptist Convention – befriending gay people in an attempt to “convert” them to heterosexuality. When Aries28 began her question with “I’ve got a problem with the Southern Baptist Convention,” every single person in the room (about 12 to 15 people) made a “pshaw” noise. Clearly, our group of average 30- to 40-year-old Southern Baptists in the heart of the Bible Belt had little or no use for the SBC.
When the SBC announced its theme for the annual Vacation Bible School (a week-long event in June aimed at schoolchildren), we approached our church’s Minister of Education with some concerns over the stereotyping that was inherent in the materials. (They’re using an Oriental theme, but they’ve got a hodgepodge of cultures all mixed together, and they obviously didn’t think through some of the stuff very well.) Our MofE said he had the same concerns, and that our church was going to “pick and choose” the materials we would use to avoid any possible insult.
I don’t deny that there are many churches, particularly in the Southern Baptist denomination, who are fundamental in their beliefs – to the extreme. I know of a couple of churches about 1 1/2 hours away from us who handled snakes as a regular part of their worship service no more than five years ago. However, there are a relatively large number of churches, both in the South and elsewhere, who are more mainstream and/or liberal than one would believe.