Baffle Them With Logic . . . I Guess

My tag surfer has been popping up with a lot of christian posts decrying us gays.  While I wish they would believe differently, I pretty much leave them alone and go on with my life, hoping to lead by example.  Having lived in a bible-belt city with over 700 churches for 13 years I’ve found that fundamentalists are very sure of their so-called truth.

I did feel compelled to comment on one post that came up though.  There is a blog called Gay Christian Movement Watch.  Their sole purpose is to “expose” and therefore force out any Christian pastors or ministries that dares to preach any tolerance or love for the LGBT community.  They profess a need to preserve “sound Christian doctrine” and there in lies the whole point.

This particular post called out a pastor at a bible college for signing a letter supporting gay rights.  As an initial response, I included a link to the “No On 8” musical video I put in a previous post here to make the point that to truly live according to strict Biblical law, you have to accept it all.  You can’t quote Leviticus to rail against us gays then say that Jesus did away with Old Testament law when you want to chow down on that Christmas ham.

GCMW’s response?  They deleted the link to the video because they found it offensive.  No biggie.  So I responded with the following comment:

It was not my intention to offend. The video simply pointed out that if we are really that concerned about upholding sound Christian doctrine, why don’t we also bring back such things as slavery as long as it’s regulated Biblically or follow every law in Leviticus?

Every Christian sect has chosen which parts of the Bible they choose to abide by and which to ignore, which parts to stress and which parts to downplay. There is no such thing as a universally sound Christian doctrine. The Charismatic movement itself has historically de-emphasized rigorous religious and historical scholarship in favor of a more personal spiritual expression.

An interesting profile of Charismatic churches can be found at The Christian Post

GCMW responded a short time after with the following:

True only if your hang-ups are about people and organizations. Personally, I trust in the Living God and his word and I find both to be universally sound.

This statement proved my point exactly so I left it at that to let future readers understand the irony.  Here’s a blog that persecutes other Christians for being gay-inclusive based on the argument that they are preserving “true” Christianity from a dangerous deviation.  Yet, when presented with their own doctrinal inconsitency, they use the old fallback of personal faith and belief and denounce biblical scholarship.

This this is just one more glaring example of how you can only go so far when arguing with bigots.  Bigotry is not rational.  It is a deep-seated emotional state based in fear and proplagated through misunderstanding.  At some point you can’t worry about what a bigot thinks, you can only deal with how their actions affect you and act accordingly.


  1. Thoughtful post. I wondered, do you consider a bigot to be someone who (say) believes that homosexuality is a bad thing, or just someone who believes something for little reason, or is very pushy with their beliefs?

    I say that because I myself am a Christian, and believe homosexuality to be, in some sense, immoral (though I would vote no on Prop 8), but I don’t think that the word bigot rightly applies to me in any sense because I think I have some sound reasons for thinking the way I do, and don’t go around mocking or abusing gays.

    What do you think on the issue?

  2. IMO, a bigot is someone who thinks that another person is somehow inferior or less deserving for whatever reason. Just because you’re not “pushy” about your beliefs doesn’t negate your bigotry.

    For instance, just because you are aware enough not to shout the N-word in the middle of Harlem while goose-stepping in a white hood doesn’t make you less of a racist if you’re thinking racist thoughts.

    However, I would not attempt to dictate how people should think. The best I can do is offer an alternative viewpoint for them to consider and fight for my rights to equal protection and rights under secular law.

  3. There seems to be a difference between thinking someone is doing something morally wrong and thinking that someone is inferior to you though. You seem to think that, because I think homosexuality is immoral, that I think homosexuals are somehow subhuman or less valuable as people than I am, and that’s just not the case at all.

    Rather, it seems like you can both a) think someone is inferior to you without being a bigot, and b) think that someone is morally wrong in doing something without being a bigot.

    Take a child rapist. I believe that child rapists have devalued their own lives such that they might not even deserve to live any more. I am certainly more valuable to society than they are, but that belief doesn’t make me a bigot. I also think that child rapists are morally repulsive, but that probably doesn’t make me a bigot either, does it?

    I think the best use of the word bigot is to use it to refer to people who have unfounded, malicious prejudices against people. Does that sound reasonable to you?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: