Obama's Hot and Cold Moments on LGBT Rights
Published January 07, 2009 @ 09:14AM PT
To paraphrase Katy Perry, President-Elect Obama’s got a bit of a “he’s hot and he’s cold” history with LGBT rights. Given that we’re now less than two weeks away from an Obama administration, let’s take a look back at the LGBT rights highs and lows when it comes to everything Barack Obama.
He's Hot...
5. The Advocate Interview. In April 2008, PE Obama sat down with The Advocate for what may have been the most expansive interview ever between the landmark LGBT publication and a Presidential candidate. Obama talked with Kerry Eleveld about his first encounter with someone who was gay (a Professor at Occidental College), why he felt that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) needed to be repealed, and how he thought that within his first term as President, he could envision overturning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and signing a federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) that included sexual orientation in its protections.
4. The Gay Prince Fairy Tale. It was a blip during the campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, but the top three contenders for the nomination (Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards) all came out during a New Hampshire debate and said that they would be completely comfortable with their children being read “King & King” in elementary school. The book has been a lightning rod of controversy for anti-gay parents who don’t like its storyline depicting a prince who falls in love and marries another prince. During the debate, Obama mentioned that he and his wife had both already talked to the now First Daughters about same-sex marriage, and the rights of LGBT people.
3. Ebenezer Baptist Church, MLK Day 2008. It was in the midst of a bruising race for the Democratic presidential nomination against Hillary Clinton when Obama took to the pulpit at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta to commemorate Martin Luther King Jr. Day. With several quick but forceful sentences, he challenged churches – especially African-American churches – to follow through with the commandment to love their LGBT sisters and brothers. To quote Obama himself, “If we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll acknowledge that our own community has not always been true to King’s vision of a beloved community. We have scorned our gay brothers and sisters instead of embracing them. The scourge of anti-Semitism has, at times, revealed itself in our community. For too long, some of us have seen immigrants as competitors for jobs instead of companions in the fight for opportunity.”
2. One reason why Oprah may have cried on Election night. Again, one sentence managed to catapult Obama into the hearts of LGBT people and straight allies around the world, especially given eight years of ballot initiatives championed by our outgoing Prez. On that night in Chicago, Obama simply included gays and lesbians in his victory speech, mentioning them as part of the fabric that makes up the greatness of the U.S. One supporters said that “the fact [Obama] mentioned gay people in his speech slightly took the edge off the vote in California.”
1. Nancy Sutley and Bradley J. Kiley. Though they are not Cabinet-level positions, Obama has already appointed two openly lesbian and gay officials to serve in high-ranking positions within his White House. The first was Nancy Sutley, a Deputy Mayor in Los Angeles, and an openly lesbian woman who will serve as the director of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. This position advises the President and Vice President on national and international environmental policy matters and works to ensure that federal agencies operate efficiently and in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. The second came just this week, with the announcement that Bradley J. Kiley, an openly gay man will serve as the White House’s Director of the Office of Management and Administration. Essentially, it means that Kiley will run much of the day-to-day administrative operations of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue – a high profile administrative post, indeed.
And He's Cold....
5. Wither the gay press. I know, we’re praising him for speaking to The Advocate above, but calling him out on his inattention to the gay press during the campaign – especially in contrast to Hillary Clinton, who spoke with numerous LGBT press outfits. Up until the April 2008 Advocate interview, in fact, Obama had only done one interview with the LGBT press – and it was to address the controversy surrounding our number four entry below. The Philadelphia Gay News called Obama out on his avoidance of the LGBT press, publishing a full interview with Hillary Clinton and a giant blank space under a photo of Obama where an interview with him would have gone had he agreed to speak with the influential paper.
4. Singing in South Carolina. In the build up to the South Carolina primary, Obama’s campaign launched a Gospel music tour to reach out to predominantly African-American churches. One of their headliners? Donnie McClurkin, a controversial singer who sang at the 2004 Republican National Convention and who once said that homosexuality could be cured through prayer. An “ex-gay” himself, McClurkin even told concert attendees that “God delivered him from homosexuality.” Yikes. Seems like Obama has a natural tendency to get a little too close to controversial religious figures.
3. Silence is (not) golden. With less than a week to go until Prop 8 was put in front of voters, Obama remained pointedly silent on the issue of marriage equality in California. That silence hurt, because LGBT leaders and supporters could have used his moral voice on this issue. The thought was also that Obama’s voice could have helped reach out to African-American voters, who ended up supporting Proposition 8 when the time came to vote. Was the issue of marriage equality in California above Obama’s pay grade during the campaign?
2. That sticky word ‘marriage’. Days before the Election, Obama appeared at an MTV forum where he felt the need to reassert yet again that he did not support gay marriage, though he’s against amending state constitutions to ban it. Many saw it as a moment of appeasement to conservative-leaning voters that were still undecided, but LGBT rights supporters saw it as a “throw them under the bus” moment, especially with voters in four states gearing up to vote on LGBT rights initiatives.
1. Pastor Rick. The fact that Rick Warren will be delivering the invocation at Obama’s Inauguration in two weeks is still one of the sorest spots of tension between the President-Elect and LGBT rights supporters. Warren campaigned actively for Prop 8, and has compared homosexuality to pedophilia and polygamy. There has been some effort to engage Pastor Rick in dialogue on LGBT issues – especially by Melissa Etheridge, of whom Warren is a fan (at least of her music, if not her sexual orientation). Still, his leadership role at the Inauguration sent a tone-deaf message to LGBT persons disappointed by the passage of Prop 8, and has been called insensitive by a host of organizations and allies. It would be one thing to have Warren stand alongside a minister or religious leader that supports marriage equality; but instead he’s got his own slot, in effect drawing national attention and prominence to a man that sought to tear down LGBT rights in 2008.
Share this Post
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
EmailRelated Posts
Comments (16)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Michael is the Communications Director for the Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School, and previously was Communications Director for Pax Christi USA, a progressive Catholic human rights organization.
Featured Gay Rights Actions
-
-
Help Repeal the Defense of Marriage Act!
12172 People
-
Help Repeal the Defense of Marriage Act!
-
Lawyers parse their words and apply socratic syllogism to define what they define as logic or fact.
The President of the Harvard Law Review is expert at stating his support or lack of support by use of subjunctive mood. We all read it and upon review, can arrive at different conclusions reading the same text.
We often listen to that piece that placates us. You would rather hear that he supports the rights of states to define what if any rights we should be given....including marriage, such as in CA, CT, or MA to start with.
He tells AA conservatives and Saddleback churchgoers that he believes that marriage in the heterosexist definition is his irreversible position.
When they are discussing your human rights, rather than a philosophical, legal or theological issue, your emotional investment is highly leveraged. You hear what you need to hear in order to support him on this and a host of other issues.
When Barack Obama triangulates and he is caught, he uses the Clinton strategy. He decides which group he can betray, throw under the bus, and still rely upon their support. Political Darwinism defines the realpolitik of Barack Hussein Obama II.
I always knew this. There were outright proofs during the campaign. I knew Hillary would have done the same. I know that all neo-libs are pragmatists, centrists, and socially moderate.
I was assured with the invocation by Warren. Warren delivered some theocratic neocons to the mix, while making everyone whol voted for him in California think that Obama supported " them".
Whether Obama - a man who was considered illegitimate at birth in most of the USA - either swallows his hypocrisy by mouth or takes it intraveinously is moot. I have personally lost all trust in his words, and still hope that his actions will both surprise and please me to a greater degree than it will surely anger me.
Posted by A B on 01/07/2009 @ 10:34AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
IM LOOKING FOR HELP ON A SITUATION THAT NEEDS TO BE SHED TO LIGHT. I WAS FIRED FROM A JOB THAT ALL THE MANAGER DID WAS DEGRADE ME, AND CONTINUED TO MAKE COMMINTS, AND SUGGESTIONS ABOUT MY SEXUALITY, THEN LATTER FIRED, I BELIEVE IT WAS RETALIATION B/C I WOULDNT PLAY ALONG WITH HIS SICK GAME, HE TOLD ME SEVERAL TIMES I QUOTE, ''ARE YOU A FAG? IF YOU ARE WE DONT LET THEM NASTY BASTERS WORK HERE, THIS IS A NO FAG WORK ZONE'' END OF QUOTE, PROBLEM IS, IM BISEXUAL. IS THIS VIOLATION CALLED FOR? I HAVE BEEN WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM THE AREA MANAGER, AND OWNER OF THE PLACE, ITS BEEN 4MONTHS NOW, ALL THE AREA MANAGER, AND OWNER DID WAS CALL ME A LIER, AND BLEW ME OFF LIKE WHAT I HAD TO SAY DIDNT MATTER, I REALLY NEED HELP THANK-YOU FOR YOUR TIME J
Posted by JAMES N on 01/07/2009 @ 12:36PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Well James unfortunately i don't think there is much you can do about that. If you want to hire a lawyer he might be able to help you. i think it all really depends on the state that you live in. i do know that where i live (texas) they can fire you due to your sexual orientation who knows maybe where you live that isn't so. but my recomendation to you is to hire a lawyer
Posted by Charlotte Mcknight on 01/08/2009 @ 11:05AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/19616
rick warren's "support" in the hiv/aids battle is finally seeing the light of day...and it isn't pretty, folks.
i'm saddened that such high hopes for "change we can believe in" has been abdicated before PE Obama even takes office and i say this as a Christian who just happens to be:
gay
living with aids
and
in an "illegitimate", but monogamous, 15 year relationship
i will continue to support Obama, but it will be with great caution and skepticism until he's regained my confidence.
(anyone besides me find it irritating that the word "Obama" gets flagged when spell checking?)
Posted by David Greer on 01/08/2009 @ 03:00PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
David - this was an especially difficult day for me with my 95 year old mother, that I was glad to read your story. Rest assured that gay and gay-affirming Christians pray for your health and happiness this coming year. My partner of 33 years and legal spouse of five years have a son who will celebrate his 7th birthday this next week. What a family we represent !!
I know this. It would not be the inclusive family that Saddleback Church would honor and respect. However, many mainline Christian churches do so !! Mr. Obama should be ashamed of his calculated betrayal of those who, like his own parents, married despite the fact that the fundy Church called it a sin, and 16 remaining states called it illegal.
For a bi-racial man born a bastard in 16 states, I wonder if Obama takes his hypocrisy orally or by IV?
Ri
Posted by A B on 01/08/2009 @ 03:17PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I find your total abandonment of hope for Obama over him being inclusive to be completely despicable and hypocrital. You want to be listened to and included, but when someone who has a very different opinion than you is listened to and included you completely freak out?
I've donated money and been a big part of promoting GLBT issues for years, but now that I see how close minded the community can be it makes me feel like I wasted a lot of time. You can't engage others and bring them around to understanding by spitting in their face and not listening to them. If you can't see that Obama is trying to bring people together and let yourself be driven apart by things like this, I have little hope for you.
You can be hurt by the setbacks of Prop 8, and the difficulties presented to you across the country. But don't redirect all that anger towards a man that mostly agrees with and respects you. Unless you want to drive a wedge between yourself and the rest of us who mostly agree with and respect you. And the last thing we need in this whole situation is less understanding and listening.
Posted by Drew Schwetschenau on 01/09/2009 @ 06:33PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Mr. Schwetschenau -
Unfortunately, I am never surprised when heterosexual neo-liberals are "offended" by criticism of Barack Obama. BTW, we donated the maximum allowable for both his primary and general campaigns, and aside from the obvious, volunteered and worked for him. We also helped to bundle other donations to his campaign.
President-elect Obama is a neo-liberal and a pragmatist. He is neither liberal nor conservative. He will compromise with neo-conservatives, as evidenced by the many neocons appointed to his administration.
IDEALISTS BELIEVE THAT IT IS WHAT IS RIGHT THAT WORKS.
PRAGMATISTS BELIEVE THAT WHAT WORKS IS RIGHT.
It appears that Mr. Obama's strategy is to anger both his base and reward his opponents on whatever issue you want to discuss . His economic plan, his war strategies, his defense policy about torture and rendition, his war criminal absolution, etc. Triangulation is not new.
Neolibs and neocons are first cousins. They both support an international Corporatist state.
Neolibs tweak to the centre left, and neocons to the centre right on social issues. They never offend the other side too dramatically.,
Again, I am not surprised at your reaction. Many neolibs spew cold or love us "with hooks" that is, when we behave like good little minorities. You are discussing my life, my three and a half decades of committed spousal state, and my child.
Obama asked for criticism. He is getting it from many quarters ON THE SIDE OF THOSE WHO VOTED FOR HIM IN NUMBERS NOT SEEN FOR A DEMOCRAT IN DECADES.
I am a liberal Christian clergyman - and disagree theologically with many evangelical Protestant brothers and sister clergy who are NOT DOMINIONIST THEOCRATS. They may disagree in whole or in part with my sexual theology, but they do not describe my family as synonymous with PAEDOPHILIA, INCEST OR BESTIALITY.
Why not invite David Duke and the KKK to speak? Why not invite every right winger to speak? The Reverend Dr. Joseph Lowery may not agree with Coretta Scott King or me, but at least he does not offend my very humanity, and I respect him.
I will watch Mr. Obama very carefully. I am concerned about many neocons in his administration. I am interested in seeing him succeed against the new Depression. I want him to bring torturers to justice before the International Tribunal does. If he says that we will abide by the Geneva Convention, they will if we won't. I want, no I demand my rights, as Martin Luther King Jr said to Lyndon Johnson. All of them, and like Canada, NOW!!!
Posted by A B on 01/10/2009 @ 04:55AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Jeez, life is tough for so many --
transgender prostitute with drug problem and mental illness
Posted by julia murray on 01/10/2009 @ 05:07AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Mr. Schwetschenau,
First of all, allow me to state my bona fides. I voted for him, and gave him the $4K in both primary and general election. I supported him because he was seemingly the brightest of the neo-liberal candidates able to win. Mrs. Clinton, along with the former president, represented DOMA and DADT. The latter provided him with Congressional support, and the former with a second term.
Neo-liberal heterosexuals, ally or not, especially the low information supporter, seem to gloss over the fact that both the neo-liberal and neo-conservative represent his new Cabinet and administration. Congress is led by a majority of neolibs and neocons in both houses. Obama has signaled the fact that the policy will be compromise between the two wings of the Corporatist party. He is the Pragmatist-in-Chief. He is not an idealist.
IDEALISTS BELIEVE THAT WHAT IS RIGHT WORKS.
PRAGMATISTS BELIEVE THAT WHAT WORKS IS RIGHT.
Proposition H8 was such a politically pragmatic strategy. Both YES and NO voted Obama because he told Saddleback that he was a heterosexist on marriage without explanation, and told the LGBT community that he supported a NO vote. He won both ways, and the Supreme Court decision was rescinded by popular vote.
Rick Warren is a DOMINIONIST THEOCRAT. Like Dobson, he believes that we "engage in conduct like paedophilia, incest and bestiality." Why not invite David Duke of the KKK? Where is your open-mindedness. Women's Rights groups hear Warren call abortion akin to the Holocaust....read femi....nazi.....
As a liberal clergyman for over thirty five years, I am deeply offended by giving him the premier pulpit to inaugurate this administration. Or is this exactly what human rights advocates should expect? Bait and switch all right. I will hold my breath....my "baited" breath. Rt. Rev. Dr. Raymond Sawyer.
Posted by A B on 01/10/2009 @ 05:10AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Sorry for the double posting. The site had difficulty and my original reply went " lost and found".
Posted by A B on 01/10/2009 @ 05:17AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Focusing on these narrow things and generalizations is how we lose sight of the big picture and how we become so divided in our minds. How we start to hate people even the slightest bit different from us. Which is what we are all here to fight against right?
There are corporatists that get things done and that have things to offer to our government in terms of policy. I don't like that corporatists they often forget individuals in their narrow focus on the bottom line or the primacy of renewing economic momentum
I don't like those comments that Rick Warren has made. But listen to the man sometime, and not just the quoted and often drastically twisted into overstatement 'hate lines' that circulate in your communities. Don't get me wrong, I find him somewhat obnoxious and misguided certainly on lgbt issues. You are getting all your view of the man from people that hate him, just as he got his view of you from people that hate gays. That doesn’t mean that everyone that people think about him is true. Just like Gays don't engage in bestiality, incest and pedophilia - that's just what people thought for a long time.
YOU are making broad generalizations of that EXACT sort that have made the road to LGBT equality so incredibly hard. Obama is still an idealist because he believes we can take the best of what works in our country and its ideologies and then combine it and make it understand itself. It's something we lose hope in far too often, the hope for understanding. The hope for united purpose. And its what he promised from the beginning. He hasn't changed. You just weren't listening.
My hope is stronger than ever. I only wish this communities' hope was. Sorry, I know I am seeming especially harsh. I completely understand how you could feel the way you do - it has been a long hard fought battle and we feel like we are so close, so setbacks are that much more painful.
But seriously... listen openly to what Warren has to say on inauguration day, think about all the people that normally might not watch the things that go on and that have been feeling disenfranchised with the new government, just as you have felt disenfranchised. And wonder, maybe this was the right thing, at the right time. Maybe we do all need to be united, even though some believe different things. Obama is one of the staunchest supporters of pro-choice rights - Somehow Rick Warren didn't say, 'no-way baby killer, I'm not helping to inaugurate you.' He sought to come together. And that is all I hope for.
Posted by Drew Schwetschenau on 01/10/2009 @ 07:56AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Au contraire, Mr. Schwetschenau-
You and I must be speaking about two different Rick Warren persons. The person that I describe accurately said that abortion is no different than the Holocaust. He described same sex coupling the same as paedophilia, bestiality and incest.
The Rick Warren whom I describe said that he is a Dominionist in the mold of Kennedy, and that he has no difference in theological perspective than James Dobson.
Just visit the video section of his website. We have. We know what a paedophile is. We are parents and take utmost offense. We know what bestiality is, and what incest is? We know what Dobson believes in. We know the medical quackery that psychosexual orientation is "choice" and ergo, you choose to sin and live an "aberrant homosexual lifestyle".
Please try to petal your iron fist within a silk glove homophobia somewhere else where the information and awareness level is lower than you perceive it is here.
All I have seen is one neolib and one neocon after another appointed to the Cabinet and West Wing. I have seen the proverbial " walking the cat backwards" on many issues. Rick Warren is not the person - even an evangelical Protestant with a different sexual theology - that should have been chosen to inaugurate this administration.
The only controversial voice allowed to speak at the inaugural offended this community who from billionaire David Geffen down to middle class guys like me, gave treasure and support and volunteerism, to be gobsmacked like that.
Posted by A B on 01/10/2009 @ 08:14AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
drew, i can be a bit more succinct than raymond:
you might share our outrage if you were in the last minority group left to be denied full civil rights...furthermore, you might have a little more understanding if, like me, you were living on "borrowed time" and would like to have full civil rights before passing away.
not one person here has said they are abdicating their support of obama. for criminy's sake, why else would we bother voicing our concerns here, at an obama-supported web site?
Posted by David Greer on 01/10/2009 @ 09:31AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
David AND Raymond -- both of whom would be speaking at the inauguration if I were in charge of the event -- have beautifully encapsulated what's happened here. Note to Drew... spare us your patronizing support. It is not only disingenuous, but also not helpful at all. With friends like Drew... well you know the rest. It also has a smack of sanctimonious and forced tolerance, as in, "What do the Gays want? They get their parades! They're all over TV and movies! They can get married in MA and CT. They ought to just be happy they aren't getting beat up on the streets anymore!" Except that we are, literally and figuratively.
The Warren selection is all the proof we need that despite his flowery, all-inclusive rhetoric, Obama also believes gay people to be "less than" and unworthy of basic human respect. "Change for straight America. Short change for Gay America." Rick Warren is a social atrocity and a spiritual phony. Jerry Falwell in a Hawaiian shirt (BTW has anybody noticed the spooky facial similarity and the same smug smile?) Jim Jones without (so far at least) the Kool-Aid -- preaching to misguided, undereducated, unenlightened, confused "Christians" who lack the most remedial understanding of the true teachings of Jesus -- in exchange for cold hard cash.
A known, on-the-record racist or anti-Semite or xenophobe or anti-feminist would never have been considered for a nano-second to participate in America's celebration of change! But a proud, vocal, vociferous bible thumping homophobe on a mission to deprive millions of Americans their basic human dignity, not to mention their rights under the Constitution? Perfect! Let's get HIM! The hypocrisy and treachery this move represents is, in a word, demoralizing. Time will tell as to whether or not it's unforgivable, but it will remain unforgettable in my mind. I know I will never fully trust Obama's motives, and the only thing I can say about him now that can even pass for support is -- at least he's not GW Bush. Not exactly high praise.
Nobody who isn't Gay can fully understand the hurt, or comprehend the anger that accompanies this -- as Raymond calls it -- "gobsmacking." After all the LGBT community did, and gave, to support Obama, and how thrilled we were that he won, and how proud we were that it looked like America had finally overcome it's bigotry! And what we get in return is a less than gentle reminder that Gay people were left out of Obama's equality equation, and snubbed and insulted on inauguration day. And THEN, to add insult to injury, (apologies for the cliche but it is too apt to fore go) he asks us to sit on our hands, nicely and politely, and listen to a hate spewing, intolerant christian bigot -- who equates us to the most depraved elements of humankind -- pray for our country! And all in the spirit of reconciliation and discourse. No minority in America would be asked to tolerate or suffer such an indignity, no minority except gay people that is. After the joy and celebration that followed his election, I can only equate this insult to something akin to slapping a laughing child... We trusted him, and he deceived us. Period. His inability to conjure up some modicum of empathy is particularly mind-numbing, for this reason:One person who would undoubtedly fully understand what it feels like to be discriminated against, ridiculed and reviled by society for who they loved and chose to be intimate with -- would be Barack's deceased mother. The empathy gene is clearly recessive. Don't you just love irony?
I will be watching -- juggling detachment with skepticism -- to see what Obama ultimately does to advance the cause of equality for the millions of Gay people he now presides over. But I will not be watching, or participating in any way, with his inauguration, making this a Trifecta! Three in a row I've refused to even acknowledge. The shame is that I had never been more excited about watching an inauguration in my life.
Gay Americans have got to stand up against the warrens and the dobsons and the robertsons -- and every last one of these charlatans who corrupt and contort the loving lessons of Christ to use as weapons against us and to line their own pockets with more money and power. We need to shatter these insidious, intolerant, mock-christian snowglobes these lunatics live in and rise up! And BTW I have a few choice words for anybody who wants to quell my indignity -- none of them I choose to put into print. The Sisters of St. Joseph taught me better than that. I do plan to put my indignity into action though, as all of us should and need to do. We have our voices, and we have our wallets. Let's pledge to use, and not use them in concert from now on.
Unfortunately, unlike the civil rights movement, or the farm workers movement -- who had so many white people also supporting, fighting for, and demanding equal rights -- my own mother included -- we don't have that luxury. We are not paid that respect. Gay people and Gay rights simply do not matter to straight America as a whole and they will not fight on our behalf And now we have a president who has echoed that sentiment, and who has chosen to do so on inauguration day. Well done Barack.
This fight is ours, and ours alone. Now lets get busy! And sorry David, but I am abdicating my support of Obama. I'm out. Once bitten, twice shy. I am now a devoted political agnostic. My new motto: Franken 2012... It's all a joke anyway.
MV ByrneLos AngelesBTW... No, the red squiggly line under Barack or Obama does not bother me. I think it's appropriate. There will always be a red squiggly under him for me, as in, incorrect and/or questionable!
Posted by m b on 01/13/2009 @ 02:00PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I AM THANKFUL THAT BARACK IS WISHY WASHY ON THIS IDEA THAT BEING GAY IS THE WAY TO LIVE. IT IS NOT A MORAL WAY TO LIVE IF YOU LISTEN TO THE CHRISTIAN BIBLE. KEEP FOOLING YOURSELF ABOUT WHAT IS MORALY RIGHT AND YOU WILL BE NOWHERE WITH THE LORD. JUST BECAUSE YOU THINK ITS EXCEPTABLE DOESN'T MAKE IT RIGHT.
Posted by jennifer pokorny on 02/04/2009 @ 02:06PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Jennifer,
With all due respect, I will not argue theology with you.
I would highly suggest you go back to our Christian Bible and read it very closely, taking particular care to pay very close attention to the "red letter" portions (the actual words attributed to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ). Once you've read every one of those red words, get back to us with what JESUS had to say about homosexuality.
The Bible was written 2000 years ago and more (Old Testament). The "interpretation" we have come to rely upon (not until some 500-600 years after Jesus' death and resurrection, by the way) isn't an accurate translation because there was no word for what we think of as "homosexuality" today. Biblical scholars widely concur that where homosexuality is mentioned in the Bible, it is generally referring to the acts of pederasty and prostitution.
Thanks for your concern for our souls.
Posted by David Greer on 02/04/2009 @ 04:14PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.