The Gay President of a Christian Athletes Group

I don’t know how any GLBT person (or straight ally) can support evangelical Christianity. The church has done nothing but cause harm to and spread misinformation about that community.

Amen, Hemant. It bothers me greatly that a homosexual really thinks the fellowship (or whatever else s/he receives from the church) is worth keeping oneself hidden. The self-loathing has got to stop.

I know it’s not easy to break the shackles, but it is the only honest thing to do. Even “dumbing down” one’s faith (e.g. switching from fundamentalist to Unitarian) is hardly better.

Break free, my brethren! You are honest enough with yourselves to know you are different, and it really IS OK. You don’t need the church.

Although most evangelicals are conservative quasi-fundamentalists, there are some who are not, so it’s not out of the question that a gay person could find some relatively tolerable evangelical church somewhere. (Evangelicalism is really more of a “style” of Christianity that focuses on the personal aspects and bringing the emotional/moral aspects of religion strongly into one’s daily modern life, rather than a specific set of beliefs or doctrines.) Obviously Francis Collins is not a complete literalist, and I’ve seen an “evangelical” defend gay marriage (admittedly one, ever, out of dozens I’ve heard comment on the issue, and everyone else thought it was wrong to be gay period).

But yeah, even if they were provisionally supportive of his coming out, it would likely be contingent on them being able to overlook it. Unfortunately, to talk about a gay relationship in the same way as straight people talk about straight relationships, is often considered “flaunting” it or inappropriate even by moderate Christians who want to see themselves as tolerant; the idea that the gay community or being gay is in opposition to “true Christians” is too entrenched.

@Troglodyke

The self-loathing has got to stop.

Why is it whenever someone gay does something that another disagrees with – the default response is call them “self-loathing”?

Its a cowardly and superficial response.

I’m sorry, but the Bible plainly states that gay people will not enter the kingdom of Heaven. So, even if you’re a tolerant Christian, you can’t possibly believe your gay brother, sister, friend, etc., is going to Heaven – it goes against the Holy Book, after all.

I’m with Hemant on this one – how any gay person can darken the doorstep of ANY religion, political party, etc., that states they are “less than” continues to amaze me.

Paul E.

I completely misread the first part of your post. I though you were saying “The bible says it, I belive it, that settles it” but you were saying (accurately IMO), don’t bother with those that use the bible to beat people.

I completely agree with your post.

Rover.

“I’m sorry, but the Bible plainly states that gay people will not enter the kingdom of Heaven.”

It does? Where? There are a half-dozen biblical verses used to argue the anti-gay position, but to the best of my knowledge every single one of them requires ignoring context or losing something in translation.

OK, I’ll bite.

Why is it whenever someone gay does something that another disagrees with – the default response is call them “self-loathing”? Its a cowardly and superficial response.

Are you the person who Hemant was blogging about? If you are, then your argument has merit if you are not indeed self-loathing.

Or, maybe you are not that person, but you are a gay person who is affiliated with a church. Is this why my comment bugs you?

Is it possible that gays can be part of a lifestyle (the church) that says they are going to hell, and that they are pedophiles, and all manner of other horrible things, and not actually be self-loathing?

I suppose it is possible. But it has always seemed very odd to me.

If you are one of the folks I mentioned above, why don’t you enlighten me as to why anyone would want to actively be a part of an enterprise that believes lies about them?

Personally, I think living a lie is cowardly. And Xtians who steadfastly preach anti-gay rhetoric are cowards, too.

Furthermore, how do you know my comment was a “default response”?

I have asked many gays (nicely–they are my friends) why they stay in the church, and none can give me an answer that doesn’t smack of, well, *some* degree of “I can’t live without it” or some other excuse.

There is a whole Evangelical Left movement. While Evangelical churches might, in general, be no friend of the LGBT community, there are Evangelical churches (not just individual Christians) that are.

As you all are aware, the OT and NT teaches that basically, if you are not a Christian, you should die, and the more you are harmed for your beliefs, the better it is for us all. The most famous folks of our day are not a “fringe” group, they actually act the way their bible tells them to: http://www.GodHatesFags.com

Just like all religions, when their “books” are taken literally, they do nothing good for the human race. When taken literal, this makes those who do this, the ones who are living their lives the way their religion tells them to.

“All,” whether you’re stating it or implying it, is an extraordinary claim. Don’t say it unless you’re ready to present your extraordinary evidence.

I’m afraid you’re wrong on this one with respect to the situation. No, every single person in the organization may not be a homophobic bigot, but anti-homosexuality is written directly into the FCA’s policies. From the Sexual Purity portion of their official guidelines: The Bible is clear in teaching of sexual sin including sex outside of marriage and homosexual acts. Neither heterosexual sex outside of marriage nor any homosexual act constitute an alternative lifestyle acceptable to God. To go against that and NOT be an anti-homosexual bigot is to directly defy their own rules. It also says that “FCA expects all paid staff and volunteers, in every aspect of their involvement with FCA activities and programs, to exhibit exemplary language and conduct, consistent with FCA’s ministry purpose, Sexual Purity Policy and moral and theological beliefs.”, so this person would most definitely be removed from his position were the other leadership to find out that he’s gay.

So Nicole, were you coming to this site for a daily affirmation of your religious beliefs, and a “friendly” pat on the back? Maybe you should change your expectations.

Not all Christians are anti-homosexual bigots, but Christianity as it is codified in the statements of faith of most of the major Christian denominations includes direct anti-homosexual statements, therefore any Christians in those denominations who are not anti-homosexual bigots are still actively, with their money, time, and efforts, supporting organizations that practice and preach anti-homosexual bigotry. There. Is that better?

“I’m sorry, but the Bible plainly states that gay people will not enter the kingdom of Heaven.”

You’re assuming, of course, that all Christians believe that the explicit declarations of the bible are the last word on current moral standards. That isn’t the case.

—

On the subject of this particular card, however, the FCA’s statement of faith does declare that the bible is infallible. And, like many evangelical organizations that is their top clause, before even belief in God. To that extent I think the original tone of Hermant’s post (without the update) is justified. This guy isn’t talking about nice east-coast gay-accepting methodists. He’s talking about the FCA.

Carlie,

I’m afraid you’re wrong on this one with respect to the situation. No, every single person in the organization may not be a homophobic bigot, but anti-homosexuality is written directly into the FCA’s policies.

I’m not speaking specifically to the FCA, and even if I were, there is almost always a difference between the stated policy of an organization and the actual attitudes of individual members. “All of them think that way” is still an unwise leap, regardless of what’s on paper.

What I’m addressing is the trend I see here on this site and elsewhere where people are letting their anger, hurt and frustration make them sloppy in their statements and arguments. It’s completely legitimate to feel those emotions and to express them, but it is not wise to make impulsive blanket condemnations that erode our credibility as careful thinkers, and therefore erode our persuasiveness. The dismissal by some people that “atheists are being just as rabid as the fundies” is beginning to get more evidence in its favor, and I would like to reduce that.

So for instance when people complain that Hemant is not very friendly any more, I can support him in expressing his increasing anger, hurt and frustration, while with the deepest respect, remind him to keep his remarks fair, measured and reasoned. He can display his passion wonderfully and still remain rational and equitable. I’ve seen him do it many times.

My own anger, hurt and frustration with the very same issues are building and building, and I sometimes come close to boiling over. But I must not lose my discipline or get careless with my principles. I must treat others fairly as individuals if I’m going to be demanding the same treatment of me and my friends. I must not become exactly like my enemy. If I do, then there is no point in opposing them.

I see the real enemy is bigotry itself, rather than people. It’s contagious, and when you fight it, you have to be careful not to catch it.

Yes, sure, there might be a tiny handful of evangelical Christians who aren’t anti-gay bigots. There’s also the odd two-headed calf out there. Some neo-Nazis may not be deep-seated anti-semites, but am I really out of line if I tar neo-Nazis with a braod brush? Being a gay evangelical is just as whacko as being a Jewish Neo-Nazi, of which there have been a few (the guy who organized that infamous Illinois march comes to mind). The Bible is very, very clear in both the Old and New Testaments that gays (especially gay men) are vile and outside of God’s laws. I can at least sort of respect the anti-gay bigots for being honest about what the book says; the liberal apologists, who pretend there’s some kind of missing context and you can be a gay evangelical (or for that matter, gay Catholic, or gay Muslim, or gay Orthodox Jew) without massive tension and suffering, are really really odd to me.

I have no problem saying to someone “Look, you personally aren’t a bigot, so why are you part of this bigoted organization?” I also have no problem with saying “As long as you’re on the membership rolls, as long as you support it both materially and socially you are a part of it, and you share responsability”. I’m not sure why it’s my job to split hairs and continuously say “Well, of course not ALL members of your anti-human, vicious organization are themselves anti-human and vicious.”

I went online looking for “dirt” on the FCA being homophobic, but couldn’t find any.  My niece had friends in both her school’s GSA and FCA, and she was not aware of anyone in FCA being homophobic–so maybe if it’s an “official” policy of FCA many of them aren’t aware of it, and FCA will change officially just as Christianity is changing and becoming non-discriminatory.