Why are gay people a Christian target?

[Colorado127]

I am perplexed by fundamentalist christians that are always targeting gay people. They want to pass all sorts of laws restricting rights and privileges that everyone else has. What frustrates me the most is that they seem to be tunnel-visioned on gays. There are many things in the christian bible that they could talk about. I bet you there are more adulterers in the US than gay people and adultery is a ten commandments topic. What about honoring your parents? Can we focus on that for a while? This gay marriage thing being a religious idea only? I know of several religions that encourage gay people to find partners to marry including Unity, Unitarian Universalists and the Quakers.

I believe that gay people are the target because the christian religion, or its higher ups, have nothing else to target? They have lost the battle with alcohol and porn, they used to say black people couldn't marry white people but can't do that anymore. They try to stop drugs but you can't pass any more laws about that. Ok I'm being a bit out there, but really, Christianity has been losing its control over its flock for decades, if not centuries. Every sociologist and psychology person can easily see that when someone or some group sees its former control waning they will do anything to regain it. It's a desparate act. These fundamentalist christians have to find something to rally the troops.....wha-laa!.....gay people. A marginalized group in our over masculinized, sports culture that many people feel uncomfortable with. From history, the Nazi's for example, we know that hate is an excellent way to mobilize a group.

Isn't it blatantly unconstitutional to forbid the marriage of two people? In Virginia they want to outlaw any 'marraige like' contracts between two people of the same sex, doesn't that seem unconstitutional? The sodomy laws that Chief Justice Souter condemned was obviously directed at gay men. The 14th amendments says no state shall pass a law abridging the rights of its citizens. The only people saying I cannot marry another guy is christians? Right there we have a church-state conflict.

Ok, let me have it!

[Cephus]

Reminds me of a Christian friend of mine who lost his job. He worked with the public and he felt compelled to share the good news with members of the public that he was working with while on the job. He was told not to preach while at work. He continued. Obey God rather than man. He was let go. He is now one of those persecuted Christians who lost his job because he is a practicing Christian.

No, he lost his job because he was a jerk, not because he was a Christian. Unfortunately, the two go together more often than not.

...That was McColloch's point.

Yes, I understand that, but how McColloch put it, it seemed like he *WAS* persecuted because he was a Christian, not that he was simply a delusional jerk who is going to insist he was persecuted for his beliefs. Christians spend a lot of time playing the 'religion card' whenever they get into trouble because they can't imagine anyone having a problem with their ridiculous behavior without somehow discriminating against their religion.

If you act like a jerk, you deserve to be treated like one.

[McCulloch]

But what you really didnt know is that gays are trying to stop Christians having jobs,,,,,,now thats scary.

I've missed any evidence of this. You must prove two things. Firstly, that there is an organized effort to prohibit Christians from getting jobs. Secondly, that it is the gay community that is behind such an effort. I doubt that you can even get past the first one.

Reminds me of a Christian friend of mine who lost his job. He worked with the public and he felt compelled to share the good news with members of the public that he was working with while on the job. He was told not to preach while at work. He continued. Obey God rather than man. He was let go. He is now one of those persecuted Christians who lost his job because he is a practicing Christian.

No, he lost his job because he was a jerk, not because he was a Christian. Unfortunately, the two go together more often than not.

...That was McCulloch's point.

Yes, I understand that, but how McCulloch put it, it seemed like he *WAS* persecuted because he was a Christian, not that he was simply a delusional jerk who is going to insist he was persecuted for his beliefs. Christians spend a lot of time playing the 'religion card' whenever they get into trouble because they can't imagine anyone having a problem with their ridiculous behavior without somehow discriminating against their religion.

If you act like a jerk, you deserve to be treated like one.

My point is that the Christians who so disparately wish to show that they are the ones being persecuted, will point out examples like this one and blame it on the persecution of Christianity rather than the rude intolerance of certain individual Christians.

[Cephus]

My point is that the Christians who so disparately wish to show that they are the ones being persecuted, will point out examples like this one and blame it on the persecution of Christianity rather than the rude intolerance of certain individual Christians.

Yup, and in that, you are 100% correct, as usual. Between cases like this and the parents who tell their kids to get up on their desks at school and preach over the teacher trying to teach, then get mad when the kid gets in trouble... I just don't get it. Where do they get off thinking they can act like morons and get away with it?

[micatala]

Yes, it has most certainly been my observation that Christians who are opposed automatically assume they are opposed because they are Christian. They also confuse opposition with persecution.

I would point out that it is the most vocal and extreme who tend to get the most noticed. Many Christians, I would argue the vast majority, do not behave this way.

I would also point out that this dynamic is not unique to Christians. It has been my observation that this happens with respect to race and ethnicity as well, for example. Person A of race X is opposed/persecuted/arrested/ etc. and makes the claim that the action was because of his or her race.

I have even seen this happen with gays. "I was fired because I was gay." If this person was hitting on his or her fellow employees in an inappropriate manner, then maybe there was more to it.

Now, I am not saying that actual persecution of individuals for any of these reasons never occurs. In any individual case, the devil is in the details.

[Cephus]

Yes, it has most certainly been my observation that Christians who are opposed automatically assume they are opposed because they are Christian. They also confuse opposition with persecution.

The same thing happens with minorities who automatically assume that they are opposed because they are minorities. I have a friend who had to fire a black worker who didn't show up to work for 3 days (job abandonment) and the guy had the gall to say that he was being fired because he was black.

No, stupid, it's because you didn't show up to work!

[Greatest I Am]

It is not unusual to find that in the animal world of which we all ar a part of, to find gay's praticing and exercising their natural tendancies.
Nature has not lost the ability to make natural things that do different things.
To suggest that Gay's are somehow unnatural is wrong.

Man' strongest instinc is to reproduce. No question.
It is not ssurprising tha the issue of homosexuality is in the forfront of our thinking.

In a universe where God loves all souls, all souls must be looked upon with the same reverance we give to other souls. How can we justify this in light of Go out and reproduce. Hard to do.
I would suggest that the writers of the bible were looking for a way to reverse the trend in sexuality that they were seeing at that time.
The trend in those days were certainly different i than today.
Some of the customs of the day incude adult males havin free access to thier own young with impunity etc.... no need for details here, suffice it to say that maleness and femaleness were loosing thair meaning in sexual practice.
Not good.
The bible is full of retribution for a number of practices that are "legal" today.
That is about in line with other discrepancies of the bible.
We pick and choose freely, from the verces and what not in the bible to justify our position on various issues, why not this one.
Having said this our, only recorse then is to useour own lgic and inteligence to resolve this issue.
To condem any gay's or their practices, we need to firdt figure out what God would do when these souls get to heven.
God, to deny these souls heven, would have to admit to a failure in producing a perfect soul.
A perfect God can not admit to a failure, this is suposed to be imposible for a God.
We see then that it is only our own failure to percieve the perfection of these souls
that make us dislike them. This indicates that any believer must by force of the phylosophy of our bible, accept these souls because the benevalence of God would override all other aspects of this issue.
We need to assume that God allows gay's and lesbians toexist for a reason, that reason may be to teach us something about descrimination.

Any that discriminate agaist these groups still have yet to learn that lesson.

Thank God for gay,s and all others on this earth who have been chosed by God to teach us this lesson.

Regards
DL

[palmera]

We need to assume that God allows gay's and lesbians toexist for a reason, that reason may be to teach us something about descrimination.

Any that discriminate agaist these groups still have yet to learn that lesson.

Thank God for gay,s and all others on this earth who have been chosed by God to teach us this lesson.

Regards
DL

Good post. In general I agree, but not with this conclusion. Taken at face value, this is extremely arrogant. To assume that G-d allows people who are different than we straight normal people to exist so that we can learn a lesson functions to do little more than mock other human beings whom you otherwise seem to view as equals. The problem with your conclusion is that it views other human beings, in this case LGBTs, as means to an end (your end) rather than as unique human beings. This is one of the worst kinds of discrimination because it builds a facade of tolerance around a self-righteous, inherently discriminatory world-view- by saying this you're only using LGBTs as a means towards your own salvation and not recognizing them as of "perfect souls."

[Greatest I Am]

I appreciate your remarks. I have tried to explain logically why some souls can be different while maintaining their perfection. The truth of this issue if not as stated illudes me and I would be happy to hear of a better hypothesis. I too seek knowledge and wisdom and do not mind being shown wrong but until I hear a better explanations for this phenomena I must retain it.
The systems God put in place must need a balance between good and evil.
If we are to say that this type of discrimination is evil then someone or something must exist to show us the way.

Regards
DL

[melikio]

The systems God put in place must need a balance between good and evil.

I believe that LOVE (1Cor13) surely addresses that "balance".

People will NEVER BE PERFECT in this reality, so I don't see why anyone would EXPECT that to be the case.

If love weren't a reality, we might as well be like just about every other animal on the planet (where it comes to the attitude of survival). Love is the greatest gift we possess, and in a world of clearly-imperfect people we need it as much as anything else; otherwise, I think we are sure to destroy ourselves and the planet upon which we live.

-Mel-

[Greatest I Am]

You are right about love.
I notice that you deny the perfection of man.
Perhaps you can tell me when God lost His ability to produce perfection.
All that is was created by God. He can only produce perfection. It is up to us to see it.
Regards
DL