Friday, April 16, 2010

Getting In On The Controversy

I didn’t participate in Day of Silence this year, though I wanted to. My mother is coming into town to visit me and while she is very supportive of gay rights, she is not so supportive of me not speaking to her. Also, I had my big law discussion class and it was inconveniently scheduled that today would be a “speaking” quiz in which we all had to put forth an opinion to get a grade, and while I do believe that equal rights are more important than whether or not I get an A, it was kind of just an icing-on-the-cake reason not to.

Despite all that though, this is a little story/quote thing I wanted to share in support of this day. I’m sure you’ve heard it before, but in case you haven’t, take a read. It’s short.

An engineering professor is treating her husband, a loan officer, to dinner for finally giving in to her pleas to shave off the scraggly beard he grew on vacation. His favorite restaurant is a casual place where they both feel comfortable in slacks and cotton/polyester-blend golf shirts. But, as always, she wears the gold and pearl pendant he gave her the day her divorce decree was final. They’re laughing over their menus because they know he always ends up diving into a giant plate of ribs but she won’t be talked into anything more fattening than shrimp.

Quiz: How many biblical prohibitions are they violating? Well, wives are supposed to be submissive to their husbands (I Peter 3:1). And all women are forbidden to teach men (I Timothy 2:12), wear gold or pearls (I Timothy 2:9) or dress in clothing that ‘pertains to a man’ (Deuteronomy 22:5). Shellfish and pork are definitely out (Leviticus 11:7, 10) as are usury (Deuteronomy 23:19), shaving (Leviticus 19:27) and clothes of more than one fabric (Leviticus 19:19). And since the Bible rarely recognizes divorce, they’re committing adultery, which carries the rather harsh penalty of death by stoning (Deuteronomy 22:22).

So why are they having such a good time? Probably because they wouldn’t think of worrying about rules that seem absurd, anachronistic or – at best – unrealistic. Yet this same modern-day couple could easily be among the millions of Americans who never hesitate to lean on the Bible to justify their own anti-gay attitudes. ~Deb Price, And Say Hi To Joyce

I’m a Christian. But I support gay rights.

See, we have this concept in the US of separation of Church and State. It’s why we’ve only had one Catholic president — we don’t want the Pope, or anyone or anything else — trying to dictate our lives. So, why should we let a book, a book that only 76% of Americans believe as truth, dictate the laws governing what 100% of Americans are allowed to do? I’m not a math major, but that must mean that 24% of Americans are not Christians. As of July of 2009, the US population stood at 307,006,550, meaning that Christians who try to force everyone else to live by the Bible are forcing 73,681,572 people to live by a standard they don’t believe in. Because, yes, homosexuals, bisexuals, transexuals, whateversexuals are people too.

Maybe I’m naïve, with my whole idea of fair and allowing everyone to enjoy the same freedoms they’re supposed to be guaranteed by this nation, but it seems really fucked up to me that we (yes, I’m including myself here because I am a Christian) think we get to tell other people what the “right” kind of love is and discredit their’s.

And before you say this nation was founded by conservative Christians and should be run by conservative Christians: No, no it wasn’t. It was founded by liberal-extremist DEISTS who were basically agnostic and believed that there might be a God maybe, but Christ was not His son. Just saying.

img cred.


  1. I've been reading your blog as la aventurista as a long time...sorry I've been such an absentee commenter, I've had a ridiculous homework load this semester. Anyway...

    As far as weighing in on the controversy here, I am a Christian. I believe that everything in the Bible is the truth. And while I don't really know how separate I think church and state should be, I do know that there are many things in the Bible that are cultural, contextual, etc. and need to be treated as such. Cultural laws like the types of food that can be eaten, which were later repealed are a lot different from a biblical mandate on a wrong and sinful action, such as murder, adultery, and yes, homosexuality. The passages that talk about cultural laws and customs previous to the coming of Christ are not treated the same way that the Bible's mentions of homosexuality are. Note--this does not mean that I hate gay people, although I personally disagree with that kind of lifestyle. I'm aware that most Americans disagree with this opinion, and certainly it is their right to do so, but as Christians we should be careful to compare different passages in the Bible without taking them out of their intended context.

  2. This is precisely why I don't align myself with any major political party. Both parties believe in opposites but not anything in between. The two party system says You have to think either this way or that and there is no middle ground, because you can't elect that middle ground as the two parties dominate politics too much.

    The same goes with churches. As a Catholic, everyone think that I follow everything the Pope says because he says it. But I don't. I'm fine with Gay Rights and Gay Marriage. Just because I align myself with one group or another does not mean I follow that group's principles.

  3. Michelle -- I've found that arguing the same point you do with other Christians has been the quick route to a long lecture. That being said, I agree to some extent. However, technically those things -- eating, shaving, etc -- are rules in the Bible. And disobeying them is a sin. And all sin is equal in the eyes of God. A lie and murder are the same to Him, even if *we* think one is less severe than the other.

    Travis -- I think that's a super healthy way to look at it. Everyone should think for themselves and be given the chance to do so.


Commenting? How lovely. Please try not to talk about dead cats.