How to define a "religious homophobe"?

Post Reply New Topic

I was wondering how to define a "religious homophobe"..

my family are evangelical Christians and they would say that gay relationships are wrong, but they would not attack or hurt a gay person. However they would vote for political parties that against gay rights and if they had a gay person in their church they would try to persuade them to become celibate, and not let them join if they were having relationships. They just quietly disaprove without really causing a fuss.

In a church I used to go to, there was a gay guy who was being prayed for, they made a project of him to try to help him stay celibate, he was very shy and seemed unhappy to me.

I do hear of religious people in other countries (Africa/asia) who actually hunt them down to hurt them, but I think that is more part of culture than religion, however I do think that in communites where it is part of religion it is much more ingrained and hard to change peoples attitudes.

as an aside - When I was an evangelical christian, I felt that for me and my friends, the gay issue was the one big blocker that stopped us from really being able to engage with culture and being seen as cool and radical. Or even acceptable to consider. People used to deal with it by being vague and fluffing over it, saying "im not a fanatic, its poeple private business...but the only sex should be between male and female." But, I felt it was the biggest blocker stopping us from being socially acceptable with the alternative youth they wanted cool young christians to convert.

when you were an evangelical christian, what did you think about gays?

I couldnt feel anything wrong with it, other than distress at how it made us so controversial and hated with the world. I thought loving couples should be celebrated.

There is that verse in romans where Paul ( or whoever really wrote it) complains about men and women "giving up natual desire and indulging lust for each other" or some such. That verse specificaly complains about this (gay orgies) happening in churches, and i have heard some theologians say that Paul is silent on monogamous, loving gay relationships so he may have approved of them. I personally think it is unlikely he did given his time and his value on traditional marriage in the other books. I feel he probably did have a distaste for all gay relationships reading that verse and others. However it doesnt matter as (unlike some) I personally think he was a flawed human influenced by his own values and not everything he said was divine and god inspired.

"couldnt feel anything wrong with it" is "it" hateing gays or being gay?

I couldnt feel there was anything wrong with being gay, i had couple friends even at 16 who were in gay/lesbian relationships and i felt they had real love as much as teengers could anyway. I felt nothing but positivity with it.

How to define a "religious homophobe"?

Oxymoron

hmm, maybe that is the way it is.

Either that, or pardon the expression, "One Hell of a coincidence"

No such thing.

"Homophobe" is a gay rights movement term to slander anyone who does not expressly support the goals of the gay rights movement.

If you simply want gay people to no do their intimate dealings in your sight (and I personally think heterosexual people could learn to be a lot more discrete about their public acts of affection), that's enough to get you the label.

Religious people have teachings that expressly prohibit the lifestyle. Like it or not, that is what they believe. It is not "homophobia" to believe same sex relations is wrong. What is wrong would be efforts to do bodily violence against someone who is gay for being gay.

The problem is that people don't realize that in a free society, you have no right to NOT be offended. So, if you don't like people thinking your lifestyle is unacceptable or immoral, then your efforts to make them not think that way is ironic. You would silence them and force them to conform to your way of thinking just as you feel they are trying to do to you.

A study on homophobia
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy-7AoxFEJA[/youtube]

"Religious people have teachings that expressly prohibit the lifestyle. Like it or not, that is what they believe. "

I agree, i think people have to accept that rather than denying it or white washing it, glossing over it,

I gew up in evangelical home, i turned away from it was was negative toward all Abramic religion for years, I am now pro gay rights and interested in liberal Christianity ,

I dont think its effective to use the arguement "oh but the bible also forbids kosher food and cutting your beard and no Christian obeys that, so its picking and choosing" . Anyone who has read the bible sees that the anger against gays is much more strong than those other ritual laws. I think people who say that do not know how Christians see the bible, how it is ordered or the importance Christians put on different parts. The new testament says kosher and ritual laws dont apply for christians but still complains about gays and women who speak in church and act equal to men. I do beleive it is wrong to be homophobic, but i believe that arguement is an ineffective one.

I used to believe that there was no way to accept a non bigoted/fundie view of the bible, and that I had to reject all faith as I couldnt water it down or "pick and choose" to fit my views. However I have since discovered more theological scholarly people who have showed me how I can enjoy the bible without either accepting the bigotry or "picking and choosing". My own approach is to believe that the Bible was written by faliable humans with their own agenda and cultural views, and you have to kind of take it for what it is and filter the spiritual truth from the story. See the bigger picture.

I am sure the more literalist Christians here will see me as led astray and tricked by devilish liberal/secular theology. But i know looking at scripture that way has a long tradition. I just try to use knowledge of the background with what i "feel" the overall message is.

To be honest, the whole subject bothers and confuses me so much. I just cant see how this world can ever have a tolerant society when it would mean having to tolerate bigoted religions.

another arguement i dont get is when people say "but jesus said love one another so you should love gays" - They dont understand that "Fundie" believe that loving gays is curing them, in their mind, letting them alone to live a lifestyle they see as dangerous and sad is not showing them love.

Basically because those who claim to be "intolerant" are the most intolerant of them all.

The gay rights movement wants open acceptance of what they are, and if you won't give it freely, they want to force it upon you. That's not being "tolerant."

How are they trying to "force it upon you"?

A religious homophobe is someone who uses their faith to persecute homosexuals. The most well-known group is Westboro Baptist Church, led by Fred Phelps--in reality, it's a cult, not a legitimate religious institution.

In Christianity, the prevailing belief by evangelicals is "love the sinner, hate the sin". Mainline Protestants are more accepting, and the Anglican/Episcopal Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America now ordain LGBT pastors.