I cannot express this enough, cannot express it enough times, cannot capture it as fully as I would like to, but if you are gay know this: Jesus loves you. He loves you. He loves you. He loves you. He loves you.
I understand that many of His people, who are supposed to love you (because, after all, we are supposed to be known for our love for one another, as He has first loved us when we were not worthy), do not necessarily love you, and for that I cannot express to you my sorrow clearly enough. But He does love you. He loves you. He loves you.
I understand that many of His people, His very Bride, have communicated to some of you that homosexuality is an unpardonable sin, deserving of eternal flames. That can’t be farther from the truth, and for that message many of you have received I am sorry. I know they have used the Bible to try to convey that message to you, and I can assure you that nowhere in there does it say that if you are gay you are automatically destined for hell. It just isn’t true.
Whoever you are, wherever you may be, know this: Jesus loves you. He loves you. He loves you. He loves you.
Jesus loves everybody.
So why do scientists hate humans? Why must they, starting with the inventions of birth control and divorce and now with gay marriage, attack the very institution that allowed the human race to continue from generation to generation, the family?
Every time I hear “you must accept gay marriage” the message I get is “heterosexual marriage and having children is wrong”, a sin worthy of hell also.
Is that the message you’re trying to send Theresa?
No, Ted, not in the slightest. The one does not lead to the other.
Thank YOU, Theresa!
Ted,
How could you possibly glean that hetrosexual marriage is wrong from SSM rhetoric? The GLBT community simply wants the same rights we all have.
“How could you possibly glean that hetrosexual marriage is wrong from SSM rhetoric?”
The same way I gleaned that being a man was wrong back in grade school when all stereotypical male behavior was punished with mind altering drugs.
“The GLBT community simply wants the same rights we all have.”
Yep, or that’s what they claim. Until they start calling a 10% minority “normal” and denying priests the right to marry people like they have in Canada and New Hampshire.
Just wanted to say that I think the argument that SSM will somehow harm society is nonsensical. Monogamy is good for society whether it is SSM or OSM. Perhaps hearing stories of same sex couples who have been denied the right to be with their loved one when they are sick or dying in the hospital would help you to understand some of the reasons same sex couples want to be legally married. One does not have to believe SSM is “right” to understand that we shouldn’t be legislating our religious preferences – especially when it oppresses a whole group of people. I believe the stuff we hear about SSM threatening heterosexual marriage and human life are fear tactics that are put out there in hopes that speculation of such things will keep people from thinking through this issue with love, compassion and logic. Due to the lack of scriptural evidence that homosexuality is wrong I can’t imagine that God would approve of us stopping same sex marriages.
And I also wanted to say that this is the first time that I have ever heard that scientists hate humans. Is that a conspiracy theory that I have missed?
Ted said:
“Every time I hear ‘you must accept gay marriage’ the message I get is ‘heterosexual marriage and having children is wrong’, a sin worthy of hell also.”
Ted, where the hell are you getting this logic? You often make sense, but this is just… weird. Seriously… open your heart and look at what you’re saying. It might be a clue that you have a blind spot here.
Love,
Angela
“The same way I gleaned that being a man was wrong back in grade school when all stereotypical male behavior was punished with mind altering drugs.”
What the hell?
“Yep, or that’s what they claim. Until they start calling a 10% minority “normal” and denying priests the right to marry people like they have in Canada and New Hampshire.”
Ted, with all respect, this is the craziest thing I have read all day. I’m not going to dignify the red herrings you have thrown in this argument; so I’ll cut right to the chase.
This is a civil rights issue. You may be too antiquated to understand this, but I assure you that this is the reality.
awfrick, I don’t know you yet (well, maybe I do – I guess your name isn’t really awfrick… LOL) so I want to say now: HI! Thanks for joining the conversation.
I agree that a lot of what has been said here is, as awfrick said above, a civil rights issue. You can find me discussing that aspect elsewhere. But let us never forget that this is a love issue. It is so very important for the LGBT community to know that God loves them, despite what many of his people say and do, and I am willing to stick my neck out to proclaim that boldly so that some might hear. Oh that all could hear that message!
“This is a civil rights issue. You may be too antiquated to understand this, but I assure you that this is the reality.”
If this was truly a civil rights issue, then civil unions would be the solution- get government out of the marriage business entirely, separation of church and state, and we wouldn’t be worried about forcing conservatives to “love” them.
The fact that they want to co-opt a sacrament, makes it much more serious than a mere civil rights issue. Just like all that ritalin to keep boys quiet back in the 1970s and 1980s was really about good education, right?
“And I also wanted to say that this is the first time that I have ever heard that scientists hate humans. Is that a conspiracy theory that I have missed?”
If so, it’s a natural conspiracy theory that springs from the introduction of birth control drugs, thalidomide, divorce, and now the naturalization of a supposed 10% minority mental deficiency..
Ted – I do think that church should get out of the marriage business and I don’t think gay people generally disagree. However, I do think it is sad that gay people are over wanting the church to sanction their marriage because what that really means is that they are over the church in general. Many homosexuals that identify with christianity are ostracized and criticized in the GLBT community. Christians have spewed so much hate and lies regarding homosexuality and SSM that the church’s image is severly tarnished.
here’s a good post with discussion regarding the church getting out of the business of marriage: http://blog.beliefnet.com/tonyjones/2009/04/doug-kmiec-is-right-clergy-sho.html
gracerules, ironically, Ted is already on that post and had some interesting things to say there. But that was a really good one.
I recommend tony’s blog, linked to above in gracerules’ comment, for anyone who is gay and seeking the love of Christ. But you might avoid the comments, as they get pretty nasty there – surely you are no stranger to mean comments said against homosexuality. But Tony, the author of the blog, is very loving and generous to the LGBT community. His main link (since the one above is to a certain post there) is http://blog.beliefnet.com/tonyjones
Oh, and thanks for the welcome, eyesofhope! I’ll definitely add you to my blogroll later tonight. Great post.
-Adam
Gracerules- note, I didn’t say the church should get out of the marriage business, I said the STATE should get out of the marriage business.
I disagree with Tony on that point. Though the solution seems obvious- given this economy where the traditional family is not allowed to survive, it’s obvious that tax and health insurance needs to be expanded to cover non-traditional households, even polygamous households.
Marriage is a sacrament in the Roman Catholic Church- one of seven, instituted by Christ under the Holy Spirit. Sacramental marriage can be annulled, but cannot end in divorce.
Ted, I love you and you challenge me, but what do you mean by traditional family not being allowed to survive given this economy?
“Ted, I love you and you challenge me, but what do you mean by traditional family not being allowed to survive given this economy?”
Historically, in the United States at least, the traditional family was a father who went out to work and a wife who stayed home with the kids.
That started getting HARD in the 1960s and 1970s thanks to feminism and the inflation brought on by two income families and the destruction of hard money (decoupling of the dollar from Gold by Richard M. Nixon).
Now, as we enter the beginnings of the first real depression in 70 years, a two income family isn’t enough, and we’re beginning to see homelessness increase, multigenerational households, Couch-surfer households, even polygamous households return as people find any way they can to survive job losses and foreclosure.
Economically, the pressure cooker has been turned to high. So even for those of us who don’t believe in SSM, an expansion of tax laws and health insurance regulations really is becoming necessary for economic reasons.
As the middle class is exterminated (and I believe, that’s the reason behind all of this, the extermination of the middle class), this reasoning will only become more obvious that we need to expand the definition of “what is a family” and “what is a household” for true civil liberties reasons far beyond anything dealing with sex.
Ted, this is turning into a conversation about what Brian McLaren calls “the suicide machine” and Campolo referred to in another recent blog post of mine as Babylon. I do not want to continue this conversation here as this post is really focused on sharing the love of Christ with the LGBT community. We can continue this elsewhere if you like, perhaps on your blog?
http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/2009/04/forget-same-sex-marriage-civil-unions.html
And I’ll go listen to Tony & Pamela’s debate later.
Thanks for this Theresa. Simply wonderful.
I think I need to stop trying to “moderate” the firestorm and give way to Christ.
He is our only hope for peace to reign.
Loon, Thank you for your kind words. You have made my day.
If we could all, as the body of Christ, give way to Christ as our only hope for peace to reign, there wouldn’t be a firestorm to moderate.
http://www.gaychristian.net/justins_view.php
I read much of the article on gaychristian.net, and was disheartened. It seems that Justin thinks we “condemn” some things (people?) but not others. It’s nice that’s he’s decided not to “condemn” gay marriage (or married gay people) but I am saddened by his approach.
It seems to me that we’re called to love one another, and not to judge. We get to work on discerning what the right thing is for *us* to do in a particular situation, and maybe to give one another the love and support to let us *each* discern what is right for us in each moment. But we aren’t called to “discern” what is right for *other* people.
I don’t think Christ came to give us the job of going around deciding what to condemn.
Angela … It seems we condemn … we who? Christians? He doesn’t condemn gay marriage because he firmly believes God blesses it. He meticulously spells that out in the link. I can’t find info on whether or not he is married but after watching this play I don’t feel he is condemning of the GLBT community in any way at all. Elsewhere (on the Dr.Phil show) I guess he argued that Christian therapies do more harm than good. I haven’t seen the episode yet but got my info from here. Here is a copy and paste from here
“I do not believe that gay people can become straight. If they could just pray it away, if it were possible, I would have done it a long time ago,” he says. “I prayed and prayed and prayed and prayed, and I’m still gay. ”
During high school, Justin considered himself straight, but in college, he realized that he was attracted to men. “After I acknowledged that I was gay, I was so desperate to become straight.” He attended ex-gay programs, but felt that they were ineffective. “It makes me furious to hear people tell me that I must have had a bad relationship with my father. I have always had a wonderful relationship with him. I was never sexually molested,” he reveals. “I came to accept myself as gay. Through prayer and Bible study, I have a much, much better relationship with God now than when I was trying to become straight. I think that ministries like Dave’s are harming more people than they’re helping.”
“I don’t think Christ came to give us the job of going around deciding what to condemn.”
And yet, He did. Quite often in fact. I don’t see Christ’s example in the gospels being one of tolerance for the divorced or for the Pharasees or for the Money Changers in the Temple, do you?
Oh yes, I sure do! He loved the tax collectors, the whores, the killers, everybody. He told the truth, even when it meant turning over tables, but his grace never falters.
“Oh yes, I sure do! He loved the tax collectors, the whores, the killers, everybody. He told the truth, even when it meant turning over tables, but his grace never falters.”
One can condemn the act and still love the individual doing the act. I was afraid you would do what so many in this debate are tempted to do- and fail to tell the truth. In an earlier message you wrote:
“We get to work on discerning what the right thing is for *us* to do in a particular situation, and maybe to give one another the love and support to let us *each* discern what is right for us in each moment. But we aren’t called to “discern” what is right for *other* people.”
To me, the truth isn’t situational. An act is either moving towards God or moving towards Evil, it can’t be one in some situations and something else in others. Situational Ethics is one of the great challenges and temptations secular humanism presents Christianity with, and we can’t take the bait.
If waterboarding was evil enough to execute Japanese officers in WWII for, for instance, then you can’t support President Obama in giving a free pass to the Bush Administration just because al Qaida didn’t follow the rules.
That doesn’t mean you can’t welcome in a gay couple, encourage the state to get out of the marriage business and into civil unions that are wider than traditional marriage, etc. But it does mean, that if in your heart you see homosexuality as something equal to birth control or divorce, you can’t go around saying it’s “normal”.
“To me, the truth isn’t situational. An act is either moving towards God or moving towards Evil, it can’t be one in some situations and something else in others.”
What I’m saying is that it’s not my job to decide what you should be doing. We all fall short in our own unique ways, all the time, and we are all forgiven. In many cases, there is not clear answer, and we compromise. It’s not my job to judge whether you’ve weighed things correctly.
I get to work on ways that I can be closer to God (like by loving people) and things I can change about myself to avoid pushing God away. You get to work on your stuff, knowing I love you, God’s grace covers you, and you are treasured and forgiven in his eyes.
Ted, I am sorry but I had to delete your last comments. Think of it for a moment. We can talk privately later if you want on why I did that. You know where to find me.
No problem. If I could have commented on the site that had Tony relating that story, I would have.
Thank you!
You have no idea how many people need to hear what you just wrote.
It is a simple message, but in my years of working with the GLBT community it is the message they need to hear the most.
I hope that the people who have responded to your posting will understand that this is not about politics or science. This is about people.
People who are trying to live their lives the best way they know how. They want to be productive members of society and happy in their personal lives. I ask you all to consider their desire for peace and reconciliation when you pass judgment on how they live.
Thank you again! You are a blessing to the world!
Peace to you all,
Mel White
Mel, thank you so very much for taking the time to come comment on my post! And thank you so very much for your kind words! My heart sings as you tell me I am a blessing. I desire that all will hear this message, and hope than many will hear it through me!
I agree that this issue is about people. I am finding that many people who engage in this conversation with me elsewhere (primarily facebook right now) disagree with my belief that we have misunderstood the original texts supposedly condemning homosexuality as a sin, yet they concede that the Church must do better with this awesome group of people. Jesus’ love transcends every political affiliation, every scientific discovery, every opinion and even every experience. He is there through it all, desiring to be known and loved by us, His creation. I get so excited when I have the chance to share His love with those who need it the most! And I am learning how to do that without imposing my opinions on them, nor the opinions that I have been handed by well-meaning followers of His.
Specifically- while I’m on the utter other side of this issue than Mel and Theresa, I don’t see why homosexuality is any more special of a sin than divorce, sex before marriage, extramarital affairs, artificial birth control, or abortion.
In fact, it’s a lot less damaging than that list above- so why aren’t fundamentalists concentrating on that list FIRST?!?!?!?!?
And if we can accept the sinners from that list in our churches, why the hell can’t we accept homosexuals?
Ted, you said: “And if we can accept the sinners from that list in our churches, why the hell can’t we accept homosexuals?”
Amen. ‘Nuff said. Even if we don’t agree to the nature of the orientation, the people of Christ must share Him with everyone.
[...] and other ‘deviant’ behaviors.” (Disclaimer: for those who don’t know me, I don’t believe it is a sin to be gay, nor to pursue a gay relationship [...]