Nada

2007-05-11T19:04:00.000-07:00

The Problems with Mitt Romney's Religious Opposition to Gay Marriage

Mitt Romney, a candidate for the Republican nomination for President, has made his opposition to marriage for same-sex couples the centerpiece in his claim to Conservatism. And this Sunday he set himself up as a Man of Faith by using Scripture to justify his advocacy.

In an interview with Mike Wallace, he introduced the notion that his civil principles may rest on his religious doctrines. And that, I suspect, may not ultimately play out to be a wise choice. Although I believe this may have been an attempt to showcase his shared values with conservative Christian Republicans, I think his statements contain elements that could instead give rise to concerns for those who are leaders in conservative Christianity.

"This isn't just some temporary convenience here on Earth, but we're people that are designed to live together as male and female and we're gonna have families," he tells interviewer Mike Wallace, according to an excerpt CBS released Friday. "And that, there's a great line in the Bible that children are an inheritance of the Lord and happy is he who has or hath his quiver full of them."

There are, as I see it two problems with the above quote.

Although the first statement may initially seem to refer to commonly shared faith, it does not. While Mormons do believe that marriages consecrated on Earth may be bound in Heaven and that spousal relationships can carry beyond the grave, this is not a belief of orthodox Christianity. And one reason Christians do believe that marriage is, indeed, temporary and here on Earth could be something that Romney would prefer to remain undiscussed – second marriages. Introducing this conversation can quickly trigger anti-Mormon sentiments and doom his chances.

Another reason that orthodox Christianity dismisses post-death marriage relationships is because Christ specifically said they did not exist. Though non-Mormon Christians may sing about their loved ones waiting for them in the sweet by-and-by, their priests, pastors, and other religious leaders remember Jesus’ words in Matthew 22:23-30:

That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. "Teacher," they said, "Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him. Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. Finally, the woman died. Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?"

Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.

So while this message about non-Earthly marriage may appeal to fellow Mormons, or even seem comfortable to many sentimental lay Christians, I doubt that conservative Christian leaders were much comforted by this reminder that Romney is not, really, one of their own. And I do not believe that Romney can win the nomination by emphasizing those doctrinal points in which his faith differs from traditional Christianity.

While I personally believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is within the family of Christianity, only about one third of the population are certain that they agree with me. On CNN this week the former executive director of the Christian Coalition, Ralph Reed, was unwilling to say that Mormons are Christians.

The second part of his statement suggests either a shaky familiarity with Scripture or some rather disturbing theological notions. The “great line in the Bible” that Romney quoted comes from Psalms 127:3-5:

Sons are a heritage from the LORD,
children a reward from him.
Like arrows in the hands of a warrior
are sons born in one's youth.

Blessed is the man
whose quiver is full of them.
They will not be put to shame
when they contend with their enemies in the gate.

Even a casual reading of this Psalm clearly illustrates the militaristic nature of the writer’s world. Male children of one’s youth are valuable and a blessing because they can fight with you against your enemies. This is not exactly the Norman Rockwell ‘happy man with a quiver full of children’ image that Romney seems to joyously use as his justification for discrimination.This selection troubles me.

Although I do not seek to criticize Scripture, I do believe in cultural context. I sincerely hope that we, as 21^st Century Americans, do not view male children as preferable to female children. And I hope that we don’t see any of our children as military advantages.

I doubt many will read much into Romney’s Scriptural selection. But it should concern the citizenry that a man seeking to be Commander in Chief in the midst of a less-than-successful war uses sexist and militaristic imagery when talking about marriage. And it should concern conservative Christians that Romney may not be fully aware of the passages he quotes. And to the extent that his principles are based on his faith, it may concern conservatives who insist that public policy be based on their faith alone.

2007-03-28T18:03:00.000-07:00

The Heresy of Albert Mohler

It has long been the belief of Christians that salvation comes by the grace of God through faith in the redemptive sacrifice of Jesus Christ. That criterion is the sole criterion in Scripture and, indeed, throughout the New Testament much caution is given that works or other criteria not be raised as a barrier between God and man.

However, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary President R. Albert Mohler Jr. has found a new standard: heterosexuality.

Earlier this week Mohler was subject to a protest in his office by SoulForce, an organization of devout persons - mostly Christian - who use non-violent means to bring about an end to anti-gay discrimination. Reading the testimonies of SoulForce volunteers, one cannot help but note their devotion to God. But Mohler has declared that because they are not heterosexual that therefore they are unsaved.

"The only way we have come to Christ is that we have come to desire something far more than we desire our sin," Mohler said. "We need to pray for their salvation, not merely their salvation from homosexuality, but their salvation from sin and death, the salvation by God's grace that we have come to know -- a salvation from sin equally as ugly, equally as deadly."

Mohler thinks those who challenge his bigotry will be barred from the kingdom of God. But according to the Bible that I read, Mohler's eternal soul is in much greater danger for rejecting these young people and pushing them from God.

2007-03-27T15:10:00.000-07:00

YSD's (Here's Your Burden - Let's Make it Heavy)

In an article today about how some African-American preachers are having to requestion their traditional anti-gay attitudes in light of the realities of their families and friends, one comment caught my attention

Mr. Hill said he agreed with Mr. Meredith that God loves everyone, including gay men and lesbians. “But God corrects you because he loves you,” he said, explaining that for gay Christians, such a correction would probably mean lifelong celibacy or eventually being with someone of the opposite sex.

Mr. Hill is probably a nice man and well intentioned. But he, like most evangelical Christians, is quick with the YSD's. He's ready to tell you what You Should Do. Not having any knowledge, experience, or desire to know or empathize, he nonetheless has his handy YSD's ready to tell gay Christians what the Law has for them.

Hill's attitude is neither unique nor new. The week in my devotions I was reading in Luke where Jesus dealt with this exact same thing. The religous leaders of his day had perfected the fine art of the YSD and Jesus had put up with enough of it.

Jesus replied, "And you experts in the law, woe to you, because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not lift one finger to help them."

Todays 'experts in the law' are all ready with a lifetime of celibacy. "Here's your burden", they say. "And we all have burdens too, so it's just too bad for you. Now I have to run, it's my anniversary and the kids are at the babysitters."

2007-03-23T09:28:00.000-07:00

The Samaratan or the Priest

Part of my daily ritual is a morning devotion. This morning's reading took me to the 10th chapter in the gospel of Luke and the very familiar story of the good Samaritan.

Reading this story again, it seemed so relevant to the recent events surrounding Mike Jones' efforts to raise funds for an AIDS meals charity and the counter-effort by preacher and ex-gay activist Karen Booth to halt that contribution. For those unfamiliar, Mike is the gay masseur whose witness exposed Ted Haggard's secret life and Mike was trying to auction his massage table on eBay to raise funds for Project Angel Heart. Karen led an e-mail campaign to stop the sale because it was "reprehensible" and "inflicted more pain and humiliation on Ted Haggard, his family and friends."

This inspired the following paraphrase:

"A man was living in Colorado, when he fell victim to a virus. It stripped him of his ability to work and care for himself, leaving him half dead. A preacher happened to be hear about an organization that would feed the man but she passed by on the other side. So too, fellow participants on her website, when they heard about him, passed by on the other side. But a gay prostitue, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He set up to sell an item through an online auction, something of value which he had purchased himself, and pledged the proceeds to a charity to feed the man. Hearing this, the preacher rushed back and lobbied the auction to withdraw the effort. She rallied those who agreed with her and they bombarded the auction with protest.

"Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"

2007-03-22T15:11:00.000-07:00

Another Bomb in the T-Shirt Wars

The ADF has found another poster-child in their campaign for the right to harass gay students on campus. This time they have Heidi Zamecnik, a young lady who in April 2006 wore a t-shirt to school on the National Day of Silence:

In response to a Day of Silence event at the school in April 2006, Zamecnik wore a shirt that read "MY DAY OF SILENCE, STRAIGHT ALLIANCE" on the front and "BE HAPPY, NOT GAY" on the back, according to the suit filed Wednesday.

Although the ADF says it is trying to "enable Christian students to express a contrasting viewpoint on homosexuality", that expression is not evident in the content of the T-Shirt. Zamecnik made no visible connection between her faith and her opinion.

Anti-gay activists such as ADF continue to draw no distinction between efforts to support students, such as Day of Silence, and efforts to condemn students, such as Zamecnik's T-Shirt. They pretend not to understand that "I support Black History Month" has a significantly different impact on the well-being of the student body than "Blacks are Inferior". In the community and country at large both ideas are protected, but in a publicly mandated institution such as a school, these are not equal positions.

I would support Zamecnik wearing a shirt that promoted her faith such as "Day of Christian Pride" but one that attacks other students has no place on campus.

And Zamecnik and ADF have both participated in yet another example to the students on her campus that Christians are hostile, litigious, vindictive, and hateful. And for that they should both be ashamed.

2007-03-21T14:20:00.000-07:00

Episcopalians Stand up to Exclusion

In other church news, the Episcopal Church has denounced the demands made upon them by the Global South to set up a parallel authority to defy the Church's authority and to represent the rogue churches who have disassociated themselves due to the Episcopal Church's inclusionary position on gay and lesbian Christians.

Responding to an ultimatum from the leaders of the worldwide Anglican Communion, bishops of the Episcopal Church have rejected a key demand to create a parallel leadership structure to serve the conservative minority of Episcopalians who oppose their church’s liberal stand on homosexuality.

The church has not yet responded to demands that it stop ordaining gay Bishops or blessing same-sex couples but the language within their first response suggests that they will not be receptive to demands that are viewed as rejection of "all God's people".

2007-03-21T12:52:00.000-07:00

What About Scandanavia?!?

That is the cry often heard from those who oppose marriage equality. Then comes some claim that recognition of gay couples has irreparably destroyed marriage in those countries and some garbled "statistics" that frankly don't make sense.

So what do those closest to the issue think?

Sweden, where same-sex couples have been able to register partnerships since 1994, is ready to make a change. Having looked at the consequences of recognition of same-sex partners, they are ready to throw them out. And replace them with marriage.

Sweden took a step toward allowing gay marriage Wednesday when a government-appointed committee proposed expanding the rights of same-sex couples.

Having spent 12 years with this system, 71% of the population favors converting the partnerships to full fledged marriages.

And what is the response of the church in Sweden? The Church of Sweden indicates they will perform same-sex marriages while the Lutheran Church says they will perform them but call them something else.

Anti-gay activists have cried, "what about Scandanavia?" Scandanavia heard and answered.

2007-03-19T17:20:00.000-07:00

Greetings to any new readers

Some of you may have known me by my writing on Ex-Gay Watch. I am no longer writing at that site. I wish only the very best for all of those who write, administer, and otherwise participate at XGW and hope that site thrives and prospers.

I am at present uncertain where or to what extent I will continue to blog. I will no doubt do some posting here and perhaps elsewhere.

I also have other non-blog related projects with which I will be participating and hope that some of those will be able to be discussed in due time. But only time can tell.

I hope you enjoy what little there currently is at this site along with anything new that wanders through my head and makes its way onto my page.

Timothy

2007-01-19T16:19:00.000-08:00

Too Many Degrees

There is a saying that everyone on the planet is linked by no more than six degrees of separation.

For example, suppose I wanted to link to writer/director/actor Christopher Guest - I know that my friend James (1 degree) knows Daniel Zingale (2 degrees) who works for Arnold Schwarzenegger (3 degrees) who worked on True Lies with Jamie Lee Curtis (4 degrees) who is married to Guest (and done in 5 degrees of separation). If I asked around, I could probably get that linkage down by a few degrees.

Amongst gay people, the joke is that there is only 2 or 3 degrees of separation. And if you live in a cosmopolitan area that is also a vacation destination, that seems even more true. Some links are obvious - everyone has met at least one of the Fab Five from Queer Eye - and some are just rumors - we all know someone who knows someone who slept with Tom Cruise. But - for the most part - gay folk do know each other.

Which raises a question:

Why is it that there are so many "former homosexuals" whom nobody knows?

Now, one of the traits of a "former homosexual" tends to be that he has some sordid history that he's overcome. He was a hustler or a drug dealer or a plain old garden variety tramp. Stephen Bennett, for example, was a houseboy in Provincetown and had over 100 lovers.

But nobody gay has heard of him.

Now I'm not saying that Bennett is not same-sex attracted. Nor am I saying that he never acted on his urges. I really don't know.

But I am saying that it's rather odd for someone to live in a gay resort town that is the tourist destination for tens of thousands of gay men each year and have nobody remember that you exist. And considering his self-promotion, it seems strange that not one of those 100 men he slept with - or any of their friends - have said, "hey, look. It's that slutty Steve guy. I always wondered what happened to him."

Cate Clinton, a lesbian commedian, has made similar observations:

For years I asked audiences if anyone there had dated Ann Paulk, the ex-gay poster child. No one ever had. I figured if we didn’t know her, she wasn’t a lesbian.

Perhaps these ex-gays feel that they need to spice up their testimony with connections that never existed or a presence in the gay community that they never held. Or perhaps the whole story is a fabrication to give substance to a profitable ministry.

2007-01-18T16:22:00.000-08:00

I received some feedback recently from an ex-gay individual that complained (fairly, I believe) that sometimes those of us who criticize ex-gay ministries lump all ex-gays together in our criticism. He said that this makes him feel as though we just want to shut down all ex-gay ministries, regardless of whether they engage in the practices that we criticize.

As this is the beginning of a new year, I think it might be a good time to remind our readers that I do not oppose the existence of ex-gay ministries. Nor do I seek to diminish those who seek to live in accordance with their religious values or even to seek to change the direction of their attractions.

Personally, I am not convinced that orientation can measurable change in the vast majority of gay persons. Yet each of us is ultimately responsible for the direction in which we take our lives and it would be arrogant of me to insist that all persons with same-sex attractions happily embrace their orientation.

So for those ex-gay ministries that seek to operate in an atmosphere of honesty and accountability and do not engage in the practice of objectification, demonization, fear mongering, and cultural and religious arrogance and who see their mission as religious and shun politics, to you I say “thank you”. And I hope that more ex-gay ministries will see your example and emulate you.

2006-12-29T12:46:00.000-08:00

Ovine Salvation

I've been reading the comments at the website for Revolution, Jay Bakker's church. Because of the very controversial stand he's made during the documentary One Punk Under God, the site has been getting a lot of attention and much of it is harshly judgmental.

Jay's chuch is "about grace" and while all the Christians who show up at the site to attack Jay say that they believe in grace, I wonder if they do. I wonder what they think that Jesus' sacrifice was for. What did it redeem?

Before Christ there was the Law. And since no one could follow the law absolutely (or was really expected to) there was Sin and Sacrifice. A good Jew brought an offering, generally a sheep or some doves, for sacrifice to God to cover his sins.

Then Christ came and died to offer Himself as a sacrifice.

But what does this mean in a practical sense? To many conservative Christians, the Law is still in effect and so is Sin. The only difference - from a practical point of view - is that they no longer have to bring a sheep. They can just pray instead.

But that seems odd to me. If that's all he came for, Jesus didn't die for men at all, just for the population of rams and ewes. Christ's sacrifice brought ovine salvation.

I think there must be more. I think Jesus must have finalized and accomplished the whole Sin and Sacrifice equation. He pushed aside the Law of Sin and Death that Moses had put in place and gave us direct access to the Creator. His sacrifice was for the human race and benefits us. And not just by the price of a sheep.

2006-12-28T12:13:00.000-08:00

Not Under My Roof, You Aren't

That seems to be a far too frequent attitude among parents who find out their children are gay. Responses can range from strict curfews and constant monitoring to insistence on counseling or ex-gay therapy to "get the hell out!".

This week a woman wrote to Between the Lines, a gay weekly in Michigan to tell her story about what happened when she said "get out".

It will break your heart.

2006-12-18T17:12:00.000-08:00

WHAT WE CAN LEARN ABOUT MARRIAGE FROM THE BIBLE

From Adam we learn that there is not need for a marriage.

From Seth we learn that procreation with your sisters is OK.

From Abraham we learn that a man can marry his sister – and lie about it. We also learn that if your wife is barren, she can give you her maid to impregnate.

From Lot's daughters we learn that if you don't have a man and you want a child, you can always just get your father drunk and have sex with him.

From Jacob we learn that a wife can be purchased by seven years of labor. We also learn that it is acceptable to deceive a groom into marrying the wrong woman and the marriage is valid. We also learn that having two sisters as wives is a blessing.

From Onan we learn that a man is obligated to impregnate his brother's widow. We also learn that when having sex with your sister-in-law, you are not supposed to pull out before ejaculating (it's wicked in God's sight).

From Salmon we learn that your son born of a prostitute will bring recognition and honor to your name for millennia and your descendant will be the Messiah.

From Ruth we learn that a woman belongs to her husband's family even after his death. We also learn that premarital seduction is honorable.

From David we learn that marriage (to one of your several wives) is for establishing connection into the royal family. We also find that if you kill a man to take his wife, she’ll provide you an heir who will be both wise and wealthy.

From Solomon we learn that a man can have as many wives as he can afford - along with twice as many concubines.

Paul tells us some very interesting things about marriage: It's better never to marry (unless you can't control your passions). And if do have a spouse and they are not a believer, then if s/he leaves you, let them go.

Even Jesus had some opinions about marriage: be sure to have enough wine at the ceremony and second marriages are adultery (even if the ex-spouse is a non-believer).

Yes, there is so much we can learn about marriage from Scripture. But one thing is clear: The idea of "one man, one woman" marriage may indeed be "traditional" but it certainly isn't Biblical.

2006-12-18T16:46:00.000-08:00

Gay Retirement Living - A Review

In Boston there's a big bruhaha about retirement centers for elderly gay men and lesbians. "It's discrimination" the gay-haters cry.

Of course, straight people are welcome in gay retirement centers, just like they are welcome at gay parties, gay clubs, gay restaurants, gay neighborhoods and pretty much anywhere else that is "gay".

While the idea of gay retirement centers is fairly new, I do have a first person (well, ok, second person) review. My roommate's (straight) grandmother moved into a gay retirement center in New Mexico this year. Her opinion?

It's beautiful and she always wanted to live in a place like that.

The food is just too fancy for her. The chef isn't from the southwest and doesn't know how to fix eggs. (We have to take that with a grain of salt. One of the reasons she went to the center is because her family was worried that she wasn't eating and had lost too much weight. She's starting to regain some.)

Everyone is nice... but she really didn't want to go to the seminar on lesbian empowerment.

2006-12-18T16:17:00.000-08:00

Strange Boat-Fellows

From the New York Times yesterday:

“The Episcopalian ship is in trouble,” said the Rev. John Yates, rector of The Falls Church, one of the two large Virginia congregations, where George Washington served on the vestry. “So we’re climbing over the rails down to various little lifeboats. There’s a lifeboat from Bolivia, one from Rwanda, another from Nigeria. Their desire is to help us build a new ship in North America, and design it and get it sailing.”

From the New York Times today:

Two large and influential Episcopal parishes in Virginia voted overwhelmingly yesterday to leave the Episcopal Church and to affiliate with the Anglican archbishop of Nigeria, a conservative leader in a churchwide fight over homosexuality.

Who are these Anglicans in Nigeria and Rwanda?

From a December 12 AP story

Lawmakers in Nigeria are debating a bill that would ban same-sex marriage and any form of association among gays, even sharing a meal at a restaurant.

Few in Nigeria's deeply closeted gay community have publicly opposed the legislation, which proposes penalties of up to five years in prison and is widely expected to pass. Engaging in homosexual acts is already illegal in Nigeria, with those convicted facing jail terms in the mainly Christian south and execution in the mainly Muslim north.

"This meeting, right here, would be illegal," said activist Bisi Alimi, stabbing the air with a French fry for emphasis as he sat at a table with three gay friends and a reporter.

Other activities prohibited under the proposed law include belonging to gay clubs or reading books, watching films or accessing Internet sites that "promote" homosexuality.

In his Message to the Nation, THE MOST REV. PETER J. AKINOLA, D.D., endorsed the bill saying:

The Church affirms our commitment to the total rejection of the evil of homosexuality which is a perversion of human dignity and encourages the National Assembly to ratify the Bill prohibiting the legality of homosexuality since it is incongruent with the teachings of the Bible, Quran and the basic African traditional values.

As for the Anglican Church in Rwanda? Human Rights Watch tells us

Far from condemning the attempt to exterminate the Tutsi, Archbishop Augustin Nshamihigo and Bishop Jonathan Ruhumuliza of the Anglican Church acted as spokemen for the genocidal government at a press conference in Nairobi. Like many who tried to explain away the slaughter, they placed the blame for the genocide on the RPF because it had attacked Rwanda. Foreign journalists were so disgusted at this presentation that they left the conference.

It would appear that the conservative Episcopalians don't much care who or what is in the lifeboat with them as long as it's anti-gay.