I don't really argue with people about the existence of God. That isn't what bothers me about religion. Ironically, I most often find myself arguing online with Christians, on behalf of Christians--with anti-equality Christians, on behalf of gay Christians.
I wanted to put many of my thoughts on this subject in a convenient article form, so that I or others could link to it in a debate, or sum up the points made here. Or so that others could share their thoughts, if I've missed something or even if they have good arguments against my position. Remember that in addition to the article, every comment will be seen by those reading this, so feel free to contribute.
A Problem Of Definitions
First, I have to correct their false notions of what the word gay actually means. Anti-equality Christians (because that's what they are, when it comes down to it!) seem to think that "gay" means the exact same thing, to put it bluntly, as "gay fucker."
Heterosexist Christians like to say that there's no such thing as a gay Christian. Well, yes, of course there is, just like there is such a thing as a straight Christian. Does the fact that they're straight mean that they're banging every girl (or guy) that they can? Of course not; they at least try to abide by the standards they believe God has for them, which is all anyone (including God) could reasonably expect. Likewise for gay Christians.
There is a website called the Gay Christian Network, and from them I learned that there are two sides to pro-equality Christianity, Side A and Side B.
Side A believes that marriage is for everybody: That you may have to wait to have sex until getting married (or having the equivalent marriage ceremony, where it's not legal yet), but that marriage is for everyone, that God doesn't play favorites.
Side B believes that celibacy is a gift from God, and that that's what He's called gay Christians to practice. Some Side B gay Christians date or enter marriages or "covenants" with other Side B gay Christians, but without any sex at all.
My concern here would be making sure that it actually is THEIR choice, and THEIR beliefs, and not what they feel like they have to do because other people (including their partners) might expect it, or because they're afraid of God's wrath. I also hope that it's totally voluntary, what they truly want, and they don't end up subconsciously, involuntarily, resenting God for making them gay and putting such a heavy burden on them (as I would, in that position).
Anyway, when I talk to anti-equality Christians, I often ask them about Side B Christians who are in completely chaste marriages--if they would deny rights to their brothers and sisters in Christ who aren't even "sinning."
All of these homophobic (yes, I called them that, on purpose, because they are adverse to everything and everyone gay, not just "sin") Christians whom I've talked to don't even understand the question. One person went on a long rant about "sodomy" and how it's bad and a sin. I told him to please answer the question as I actually phrased it, and to stop talking about the sex that was not even happening in this scenario. Would he deny legal rights to his brothers and sisters in Christ who weren't even "sinning"?
He said that he thought God had said that marriage had to be people becoming "one flesh," and that that could only happen between a man and a woman.
"So your brothers and sisters in Christ can't even visit each other in the hospital because you think that marriage automatically equals sex?" I asked. "Why would God create YOU for the sacrament of marriage, and another of His children for something inferior?"
He had no answer for me. The discussion ended with that.
Another guy said, "Let's cut to the chase: Homosexual activists want to destroy Christians." He then elaborated on the "gay agenda," which I always thought included terrible things like happiness, physical safety, and legal and social equality.
I asked him to please "cut to the chase" and answer my question, which I then repeated. No reply.
This all baffles and frustrates me. If homosexual sex is supposed to be the great sin, then why is "being gay" a sin, when "being straight" is not? Why all the fixation on sex? And why do they think that there's only one type of gay person, when there is clearly not only one type of straight person?
When bigots (because that's what they are, whether they know it or not--bigots don't know that they're bigots!) hear the words "I'm gay," what they really hear is "SEX SEX SEX SEX SEX PORN!"
Even from their brothers and sisters in Christ! It's one thing to degrade me as an atheist, but if they don't even give their fellow Christians the benefit of the doubt, something is truly wrong here!
They also degrade their own Savior by this attitude, because the bible says that Jesus was "tempted in every way like as we are, but without sin..." So their savior didn't "sin," but He most definitely WAS (according to the bible and atheist (?) writer Frank Schaeffer) partially gay (bi- or pansexual)! Otherwise (and this is my take on it), how could Jesus be tempted in every way? Or is temptation the same thing as sin now? Because if it is, then these ignorant Christians themselves would be sinning in some way almost constantly, and they might as well just give in to temptation and actually do the deeds, because they're already sinning.
Created Inferior
They would say, of course, that all Christians are children of God, much loved, and created with equal worth. But their version of God does not treat his children equally.
Their version of God creates some for the satisfaction and companionship (and lovemaking!) of marriage, while others he forces to choose between a lifetime of loneliness, and an eternity in hell. He punishes them with this terrible "choice," in fact, because of the way he himself created them! Does that sound like love to you? Because that sounds like abuse to me.
I have never seen any CONVENIENTLY straight Christian address my "lifetime of loneliness, or eternity in hell," choice. They don't have an answer for me. I ask them to give me an actual reason why God would do that, other than "holiness," which basically means that God thinks it's icky (as if he's five years old), so he's going to burn people in hell for all eternity, just for his own preferences. I've only been arguing about this issue for almost a year, but I think that their silences are very telling.
If I Can't Force Celibacy On You, Why Can You Force It On Others?
In the last section, I called these people "conveniently straight." Conveniently, their god doesn't force celibacy on them, only on others. Conveniently, they have always had the option of marriage, love, companionship, children, and sex, and others have never had those options and never will. Conveniently, the rules only apply to others, whom they are free to bludgeon with these so-called rules. I like to remind them of this.
"What if I demanded that you commit to lifelong celibacy, because of MY beliefs that you'll burn in hell otherwise?" I ask. "If it's too much for me to ask of you, then why are you asking that of others? And why do you think God does?"
And conveniently...no reply.
That Is NOT A Light Burden And An Easy Yoke!
Jesus said that "my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." But is this a light burden and an easy yoke that straight-supremacists (because they are!) want to impose upon others? Conveniently, this is not a cross that they have to carry at all, only others.
Or is their behavior more like that of the Pharisees, who put burdens upon people that they could hardly carry, and didn't lift a finger to ease them?
Celibacy is described as a gift from God, not something that fallible, sinful humans can force onto other people. Christians are called not to judge others, and it's not just me, an atheist, saying that. Only God can judge who is right with Him and who is not.
In this article, a loving Christian says that we are not to take the place of Jesus in the story of the woman caught in adultery--that that is not our place, to play god. We are all either the woman or the ones who want to stone her. Only Jesus has the authority to say, "Go and sin no more." I would highly recommend reading the article, or anything on the Christian, pro-LGBTQ Patheos blog Freedhearts.
I have so much more to say on this subject, but for the sake of brevity, and my own emotions, I will leave it for now. I hope I've given anti-gay Christians something to think about, and Christian and other allies more ammo, to give others something to think about. Whether you agree or disagree, or think I've left something out, feel free to leave a comment.
What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourneys
I also have a Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Atheist-Journeys/1543588489197291?ref=bookmarks
No comments:
Post a Comment