Christian Reasons to Support Gay Rights

[micatala]

I offer this thread as a Christian who supports gay rights as an admittedly forward challenge to my brothers and sisters in Christ.

In Acts Ch. 14 and 15, Luke describes James and the other Apostles discussions which led them to exempt Gentiles from well over 99% of the Law of Moses. The main reason they did so was to avoid putting an excessive burden on Gentiles. Implicit in their decision was the issue that expecting everyone to follow these traditional rules, rules that many saw as outdated, would be a drag on the new movement.

Today, we see polls like this one that indicate many young people leaving the church or the faith because of the negative attitude displayed by many religious people towards gays and lesbians.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/2 ... ign=buffer


1) Would it not make sense for Christians to lay aside anti-gay rhetoric, including quoting of Biblical verses that are claimed to condemn homosexuality, if for no other reason than it is counter-productive to evangelism?

2) Does not Jesus' own ministry, and the actions of the Apostles as described in Acts 15 give ample precedent for laying aside Biblical verses that seem to allude to homosexuality?


I will note that Christianity has by and large already set aside many precepts now seen to be archaic, including the idea that women should never speak in church, and that we should simply accept any and all governments as instituted by God and worthy of our obedience. The Declaration of Independence, in particular, repudiates this notion, outlined by Paul in his letters.

I will note that Jesus is quoted in the gospels as explicitly laying aside aspects of the law, and that he was criticized by many of his fellow believers, especially those who were arguably most religious, for doing so.

I will point out that the faith of those conservative believers rather quickly became a small minority as compared to Christianity.


It really comes down to this:

3) Is non-acceptance of homosexuality so central to Christianity that Christians should cling to traditional notions against homosexuality, or can we lay those aside as tangential to the central message of the gospel?

[YahDough]

Micatala, you have done a good job of summing up what is probably the strongest argument in favor of the church saying that homosexual actions should not be considered a sin. I don’t have time for a full response right now, but I wanted to ask why you put this in politics sub-forum. You have made an essentially theological argument. Why are you phrasing it a political question?

His argument still fails because homosexual actions are a sin.

Lev:20:13: If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

It is poor politics to promote freedom at the expense of truth. It may lead to the loss of both.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to YahDough]

I am not saying atheists don't have standards I am saying I hold people to the standard of their belief. If you proclaim something as a truth that you believe in then you are beholden to that belief structure.

Romans 13 is quite clear if you do not agree with it. Then you do not agree with Paul. So I guess there could be more options

such as you only agree with part of what Paul proclaims and portions of it you do not agree with. But that would relegate you to picking and choosing would it not? If we are not accepting something as a whole and merely only things we agree with are we not just fabricating our own gods? Merely your idea of what god is is merely a reflection of your beliefs irregardless of the christian beliefs in the first place.

[YahDough]

[Replying to YahDough]

I am not saying atheists don't have standards I am saying I hold people to the standard of their belief.

Good for you. What "standard" should we hold you to?

If you proclaim something as a truth that you believe in then you are beholden to that belief structure.

I believe Jesus is the Truth personified. I am "beholden" to Him.

Romans 13 is quite clear if you do not agree with it. Then you do not agree with Paul. So I guess there could be more options

I love every bit of Romans 13. It gives grace to vengeance. It is scripture that justifies bearing the sword. It gives God's people the right to stand up for the truth and help God in the cause of justice and judgment.

such as you only agree with part of what Paul proclaims and portions of it you do not agree with.

I am in full agreement with Paul. Here's what Peter said about Paul: See if the shoe fits regarding your understanding.

2Peter 3
15: And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16: As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

But that would relegate you to picking and choosing would it not?

I do not pick and choose what is the truth, The Holy Ghost teaches what the truth is to believers baptised into Christ. Choosing to believe homosexual acts are acceptable to God based on the fact that the government supports it is an example of what you are talking about: picking and choosing scriptures to try to justify sin.

If we are not accepting something as a whole and merely only things we agree with are we not just fabricating our own gods? Merely your idea of what god is is merely a reflection of your beliefs irregardless of the christian beliefs in the first place.

Is that your problem? It's not mine.

Jn:8:32: And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

[WinePusher]

I'll offer some thoughts as to why we should support gay rights along with some arguments (that I consider legitimate) opposing gay rights.

Reasons to Support Gay Rights:
1. People have the freedom and liberty to behave however they want so long as they are not harming anybody else. Homosexuals are not harming anyone, nor are they infringing upon anybody else's rights so any criticism of the 'homosexual lifestyle' is completely unwarranted. America prides itself to be a free nation, and clearly this means that all people are entitled to freedom including gay people.

2. Marriage should not be a government matter. There is no reason why the state should legally define marriage and the definition of marriage should instead be left up to the private sector. The government should not impose a definition of marriage upon society because it ends up marginalizing and excluding some groups at the expense of other groups. Private communities and organizations should be able to define what a marriage is, and if there is a high demand for gay marriage the private sector will supply it.

3. As Christians, we must avoid judging others as much as possible. This virtue is often overlooked in many Christian circles, and it's a shame that it is. We have no right to judge others as good or bad people, and we have no right to condemn others just because we may disagree with their beliefs, lifestyle choices or theological interpretations. Yes, there is room for reasonable people to disagree about homosexuality but there is no room for judging others and condemning or chastising homosexuals.

Reasons to Oppose Gay Rights:
1. I could only think of one, and it has to do with reproduction and the family. Obviously gay people cannot reproduce while heterosexuals can. Since children can only be born to a man and a woman it only seems natural for that man and woman to raise the child, and this family form has often been referred to as the nuclear family. Obviously gay marriage and adoption undermines the nuclear family, and I see this as a negative force in society. In fact, I see all deviations away from the nuclear family as negative forces in society whether it be divorce, single parenthood, or gay marriage/adoption. So, I would like to pose a question to anyone out their willing to answer: How would a society comprised only of homosexual people survive?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 43 by YahDough]

I don't think you are probably understanding what I am trying to say.

So with romans 13 it commands not suggests that you submit to the governing authorities. To not do that is an affront to god.

With that being said. If a governing authority legalizes gay marriage. God has willed it to be so. "for there is no authority except that which God has established." & "For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good"

This does not mean that the act of homosexual behavior is not a sin. But, that you must abide by this judgment as this is what god thinks is best for your community at the time or maybe he is teaching everyone a lesson or something. Irregardless It is your duty to uphold and submit to the law.

here is the most interesting part

"If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor." it is not just taxes or revenue. If a governing authority demands you to respect then you owe respect If it is honor then you owe honor.

If a governing authority makes it a law that you respect and honor what it wants you to then you must .

This is perhaps one of the most clearest verses in the bible that leaves little to no room in interpretation. This is not to say that god is not making homosexuality a sin by having governing authorities on earth legalize their right to marry but that he perhaps is either teaching a lesson to christians or feels it is in the best interest for society to have this be the standard. After a state that you resides in passes such a law to fight it would be

"2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. "

So to clearly state my intentions minus the explanations.

If gay marriage is legalized it is god's will that this be so. It does not make homosexuality not a sin. And, you must submit to this judgment lest you bring some heavenly consequence upon yourself.

Now as far as what standard you can hold me to?

I will be honest
Respect others that earn my respect
Treat others fairly and try with the best of my ability to not let bias influence my actions in this regard.
I believe in being kind to others irregardless if they are kind back. Although I may falter.
I will not be rigid with my mindset and allow myself to change,grow, and learn.


If you see me failing in any of these areas feel free to call me out on it. I am sure there are more specific things I could point out but that would only be relevant to specific situations which could go on ad nauseam.

Sorry I can't provide you with a bible of beliefs but if you took the time to get to know me I am sure you could figure them out.

[YahDough]

Reasons to Oppose Gay Rights:
1. I could only think of one, and it has to do with reproduction and the family.

So the fact the Bible declares sodomy an "abomination" and those who do it will "not inherit the kingdom of God" holds no weight with your opinion?

How can people who say they believe in Jesus expect 'salvation' without obedience to God?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 44 by WinePusher]

thank you for your well put and organized response

On the last part as reasons to oppose. I understand that you feel that it would undermine the nuclear family. I think however, a bigger issue than gay marriage which in the united states only roughly 5-10% of the population is LGBT is divorce which actually effects >50% of marriages.

statistically with the available data we have on hand now 2% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce per annum. conversely Homosexuals end in divorce 1.1% per annum. This means that children growing up with homosexual parents have twice the likely hood of their parents staying together while they are being reared.

Further more studies in Australia and other countries that have better long term statistics on Gay parents have found that children of LGBT couples out perform their peers scholastically and with jobs out of college.

They cite that gay parents are better prepared to have children because they by virtue of being homosexual cannot have an unexpected pregnancy and typically are better off financially and emotionally on average.

The data would therefore suggest that the negative societal impacts of gay marriage have yet to manifest yet unforseen benefits have arisen.

In conclusion it is better for a society to legalize gay marriage on the grounds listed above.

How would a society comprised only of homosexual people survive?

Elephants are a good case use. Virtually 66% of sexual encounters among elephants are homosexual in nature yet aside from poaching they can easily maintain their population sizes.

In regards to humans genetic studies have shown we have or had a polygynous sexual reproduction model early on.

the study done in Europe found large genetic diversity from genes carried down from women but far fewer diversity among the males. suggesting 1 or a few males reproducing with many females leaving lesser or more submissive males without partners.

now to answer your question specifically there is no such society in nature of 100% homosexuals. In human the highest known percentage in a given population is 17%
You are making the assumption that people would choose to be gay well this simply is not the case. It is likely a resultant anomaly from environmental factors(hormones in the womb) as well as genes. on average we see about 10% globally. This has not effected our population in any way. Your hypothetical is just that a hypothetical. It has no real bearing or possibility of occurring in a human population.

[YahDough]

[Replying to post 43 by YahDough]

So with romans 13 it commands not suggests that you submit to the governing authorities. To not do that is an affront to god.

I have no major trouble with that. But I realize Christ Jesus is the highest "governing authority". Disobedience to the LORD's will is met with the judgment and/or vengeance of God. That's something I don't think you understand. Consider history.

With that being said. If a governing authority legalizes gay marriage. God has willed it to be so. "for there is no authority except that which God has established." & "For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good"

I disagree. the American people willed it to be so. And it conflicts with God's will that all would be saved. Do you think God wants us to make laws that help bring people to damnation. I guess that could be a possibility but it doesn't sound right.

This does not mean that the act of homosexual behavior is not a sin. But, that you must abide by this judgment as this is what god thinks is best for your community at the time or maybe he is teaching everyone a lesson or something. Irregardless It is your duty to uphold and submit to the law.

I think you are mixing up the god of this world with the Lord of heaven and earth.
I realize I have to submit to laws, but I also realize the judgment and wrath that comes upon a nation that rebels against the truth with bad behavior and bad laws.

If gay marriage is legalized it is god's will that this be so.

You do well to use a small "g". That would be the god of this world's will, not the LORD of heaven and earth.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to YahDough]

So are you polytheistic?

that is sort of what I am getting out of your response with multiple gods and stuff.

or is god of this world figurative?

If a governor who is an appointed authority by God signs a gay marriage bill into law it is God's will that he commit such an action.

as per Romans 13. It is God who appointed him/her there to be his servant and to do what he wills on this earth. Unless you think the will of the people is greater than the will of god?

[WinePusher]

Reasons to Oppose Gay Rights:
1. I could only think of one, and it has to do with reproduction and the family.

So the fact the Bible declares sodomy an "abomination" and those who do it will "not inherit the kingdom of God" holds no weight with your opinion?

How can people who say they believe in Jesus expect 'salvation' without obedience to God?

The Bible does carry a lot of weight imo, and I regard it as a holy and sacred text that I have the utmost reverence and respect for. However, interpretations of the Bible differ depending on the Christian you're speaking too and I'm no different. I take the Bible seriously, not literally. Those portions of the Bible that do not corroborate with modern evidence and modern thinking need to be re-thought and re-interpreted. Now don't get me wrong, I do consider many parts of the Bible to be literal transmissions of history including the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. However, I consider stories such as the global flood to be fictional allegories that are meant to convey an abstract message as opposed to literal history. Similarly, I do not put any stock in biblical teachings and laws found in the Torah that commanded the Israelites to kill adulterers, or homosexuals, or people who work on the Sabbath. To take these Old Testament laws (meant specifically for the tribes of Israel) and apply them in today's society is completely absurd.

As for salvation, I am a universalist, meaning that I believe all people (regardless of their beliefs and actions) will one day achieve salvation and union with God.