Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Real Christians Fight Intolerance

By Rev. Jim Rigby, AlterNet. Posted July 14, 2006.


A reverend declares that gay bashing is an attack on the gospel -- and that real Christians don't participate in any form of discrimination.
Advertisement

Progressive Christians tend to be nonjudgmental and to feel that challenging the intolerance of others is itself intolerant. For that reason we often sit by silently when Fundamentalist Christians criticize homosexual persons. We tend to think of this as being open minded.

Not that long ago, it was considered consistent to be a Christian, and yet, hold slaves. The day came when slavery was understood as an affront to the gospel itself. I want to suggest that the day has come when Christians must declare that gay bashing is an attack on the gospel and that real Christians do not participate in any form of discrimination.

Several years ago, I was asked to do the funeral of a gay man who had been beaten to death in a hate crime. At that time, I had never thought deeply about the danger many gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people face in this culture. That week as I worked on the service, I kept hearing a local "Christian" radio station blaming gay and lesbian people for everything wrong in America. By the end of the week I understood the link between religious hate speech and the funeral I was performing.

I know that critics of homosexuality do not consider themselves to be hateful. They would say they "love the sinner but hate the sin." If the shoe were on the other foot, however, and someone were attacking their families, trying to take their children away, and constantly working to pass legislation to deprive them of basic civil rights, at some point they would understand that "homophobia" is too mild a word for such harassment. "Hatred" is the only proper term.

I was raised in Dallas, Texas and had classmates who were in the Klan. I remember that they did not consider themselves to be attacking other people. They perceived themselves to be defenders of Christian America. Their "religion" consisted of an unrelenting attack on people who were black, Jewish or homosexual. If anyone challenged these views, these Klan members considered themselves under attack and believed that their right to free exercise of religion was being threatened. In other words, they felt that harassing other people was a protected expression of their own religious faith.

In the Gospel, biblical literalists and judgmental people were the negative example in many of the stories. The point of those stories was to teach us the hypocrisy of judgmental religion. When a woman was caught in adultery, the Biblical literalists lined up to protect family values. They pointed out that the Bible literally says that adulterers are to be stoned. If Jesus took the Bible seriously, they claimed, he would have to participate in the mandated biblical punishment of an adulteress.

Instead of following scripture, Jesus tells the woman to get her life together and tells everyone else to drop their stones of judgment. The only way to take this story seriously is to conclude that real Christians don't use the bible to condemn other people.

It violates the teaching of Christ to say that God will get angry if America does not confront homosexuality as a sin. Jesus did not mention homosexuality and it is a lie to say he did. Furthermore, Jesus said "Judge not or you will be judged." These false prophets are saying "Judge or else you will be judged."

Jesus was kind and understanding, but he was not silent about those who abused the vulnerable. He called them "wolves in sheep's clothing." Christians must follow the example of Jesus and confront those vicious predators who use the Christian religion as a camouflage for bullying. We must be as understanding and kind as we can be, but to be tolerant of the oppression of others is not true tolerance.

I believe the time has come to say that genuine followers of Jesus Christ do not participate in discrimination against gay and lesbian persons. Is it intolerant to challenge intolerance? Are we doing the same thing as those we are challenging?

Gay bashing is not just an opinion, it is an assault. Just as the Klan did, religious fundamentalists have a right to believe that homosexuality is a sin. They even have a right to preach a message of hate. But when they harass people in public, it is time for Christians to rise to challenge their intolerance. We have an obligation to protect our neighbors from harassment and slander, especially when it is done in our name.

It is time to say that gay bashing is not only wrong, it is unchristian. If Christianity is grace, then judgment is the ultimate apostasy. If Christianity is love, then cruelty is the ultimate heresy.

Digg!

The Rev. Jim Rigby is pastor of St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church in Austin, Tex. He can be reached at jrigby0000@aol.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Hear hear!
Posted by: Aussie Kim on Jul 14, 2006 12:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well said - we need more Christians like this!

Thank you!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hear hear! Posted by: gmknobl
» RE: Hear hear! Posted by: Arolem
» RE: Hear hear! Posted by: Aussie Kim
Thanks
Posted by: kenhymes on Jul 14, 2006 3:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks. This Lutheran music leader deeply appreciates your article. It's time Christians stopped making excuses for hatred purveyed in the name of faith, and started challenging it.

There will probably be lots of posts in response to your piece from people reciting the litany of crimes in the name of God... and they are right. I know it's not the Holy Spirit acting when people "hate for Jesus," but it shouldn't be surprising when we get judged for the sins we tolerate, when we should be confronting them with strength and grace.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Thanks Posted by: wwarner
The Flea
Posted by: TheEnigmaticFlea on Jul 14, 2006 3:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jesus' message
Posted by: paulaH on Jul 14, 2006 4:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've always said if the majority of Christians actually followed the teachings of Jesus, I'd have absolutely no problem with them. There are Christians out there that are what I call true Christians, which I define as those who not only ask "What would Jesus do?" but they actually answer the question. If they go by what Jesus taught, intolerance would not be the answer they would come up with.

Unfortunately, and sadly, true Christians are a rare breed, few and far between. The majority are those who ask "What would the Bible do?" then proceed to find a passage that would support whatever THEY wanted to do. Which of course, no matter what their position, they will find.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Jesus' message Posted by: aussidawg
Without hatred were would a Christian like Bush wind up, President maybe?
Posted by: deo508 on Jul 14, 2006 4:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"I know that critics of homosexuality do not consider themselves to be hateful. They would say they "love the sinner but hate the sin." If the shoe were on the other foot, however, and someone were attacking their families, trying to take their children away, and constantly working to pass legislation to deprive them of basic civil rights, at some point they would understand that "homophobia" is too mild a word for such harassment. "Hatred" is the only proper term."

Hatred is a Conservative Evangelical Value.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Finally!
Posted by: ChristopherLL on Jul 14, 2006 5:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I appreciate the article and those who support it. What I must say is "it's about time!" Christ said, and this is not an interpretation, "I am my brother's keeper" and "turn the other cheek." This is exactly opposite to what I have watched and heard from "Christians" in America for many years. My question is just how much more damage are they going to do before the real pricincples of Christian living are practiced, not preached.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hierodule
Posted by: Hierodule on Jul 14, 2006 5:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The real "sin" is trying to be something other than that which God intended, i.e., trying to be straight when one is not. Gay and Lesbian men and women are not "intrinsically disordered," as the Pope would have it.
Right-wing Christians have yet to learn this truth; that homophobia is the sin.
As I have written before, women are not "cursed," Blacks have souls, and being Gay or Lesbian is not a choice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» "Gay" is the New "Jew" Posted by: AdamSelene40
The difference is between real Christians and Christianists
Posted by: xbj on Jul 14, 2006 6:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's time to recognize that there is a vast difference between a real Christian Pacifist, that follows the life teachings and life (and death, to the cross, if necessary) example of Jesus Christ, and their diametric opposites, Christianists, people who use Christianity for the accumulation of wealth and political power. One could say that the first (and current) bastion of Christianism, as opposed to real Christianity, was the Catholic Church. Luther knew the difference between Christianity and Christianism, and loudly pointed out and proclaimed the difference. The Reformation was the result.

A very hard lesson apparently completely forgotten by the Fundamentalist Evangelical movement (mostly in the South) as they moved into televangelism and the massive amounts of corrupting money that generated. With that money came power, and they've misused it no end, to the point of even creating Presidential candidates (Pat Robertson) and ORDAINING them (George Bush).

Now Christianism has reached the eventual dubious pinnacle of achievement; the complete perversion of Christianity and the misleading of millions of American Christians down the path to perdition, by turning Christianity into Christianism, a militant, hateful intolerant religion of righteous and Holy War Crusade against Islam, with its Pope and Warrior Knight George Bush. This King, made out of an alcoholic cokehead ne'er-do-well loser who swore alliegance to Lucifer in a coffin in a Skull & Bones ceremony at Yale and never once changed, was sent by Lucifer himself to insure the death of America and the stranding of Israel in the Middle East without allies, so they would have to rely on his Antichrist, the one George Bush merely sets the stage for by suiciding Amerika.

Christianism has brought the entire planet to the brink of WWIII and beyond, to Armageddon. By ordaining this person, this little wannabe antiChrist as the sainted King of this "godfearing, good Christian country" in return for a few paltry crumbs of a promise to end abortion and fight gay marriage, America has achieved Empire and is hurtling exponentially toward the final end result of all Empires; absolute death (this time, nuclear) at the hands of the rest of the world piling on the schoolyard bully, one, who in this case, just happens to bomb babies, rape young women and boys and kill their families, torture innocent people in horror camps, and leaving a trail of death, destruction, and radioactive so-called "depleted" uranium everywhere it goes, to the extent of poisoning its own disposable cannon fodder.

Amerika learned nothing from its own past, from the history of the world, and most sorrowfully of all, NOTHING from the history of the Rise of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Empire. If they had paid any sort of attention, they would have realized that Hitler himself SAW HIMSELF AS A CHRISTIAN WARRIOR, ORDAINED BY GOD, DOING GOD'S WILL TO REMOVE THE WORLD OF CHRIST-KILLING JEWS.

This time around, it's another "Christian" Hitler, with another group of "Christian" Nazis, only this time it's a truly American equal-opportunity phenomenon, not based on racial purity, but based on religious differences and "If you're not with us you're with the terrorists."

I live for the day I see the look on every Christianist's face when God tells them their gods, George Bush and his crew, planned and implemented 9-11 to rip them off. And not a Goddamned (literally) thing more.

ChristiansAgainstBush.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

otto
Posted by: otto on Jul 14, 2006 6:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jens Soering, a "lifer" prisoner in Virginia who has been turning out religious books on prayer for years, has made this point well. In THE CONVICT CHRIST he speaks of the humnanness of other prisoners, and how many of them are either innocent or victims of a judgemental and hypocritical society. He reminds us that the woman taken in adultery could be stoned to death by Jewish Law; Jesus didn't dispute the Law, but the authority of the attackers - whom he shamed into submission.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jerks for Jeezus
Posted by: Blanktivist on Jul 14, 2006 6:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In other words, they felt that harassing other people was a protected expression of their own religious faith.

The Brittany McComb case, from all I've been able to gather about it, was a low-key version of that. (For those of you who don't remember the names in these cases, or who are lucky enough not to get Mallard Fillmore in your local paper: she's the girl out in Nevada who, at her valedictorian speech, put back some specifically Xian references that the school's high sheriffs requested she remove, and who is now being touted by the Noise Machine as the latest victim of the Lib'ruls' War on Jeezus. Le sigh.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I read in my Bible recently...
Posted by: Nigelthebriton on Jul 14, 2006 6:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...that a bad tree cannot yield good fruit, neither can a good tree yield bad fruit. How advocating the killing of homosexuals (or whoever else doesn't fit it) is supposed to be Christian is beyond me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Beautiful
Posted by: Taurus on Jul 14, 2006 6:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is well-argued, and I love how it uses Scripture against those who distort it. As a Jew, I deeply resent the hijacking of Torah by Christianists who wave it in the air and talk about God condemning homosexuality and make it sound as if the Hebrew Bible is obsessed with the subject. It actually is nothing of the sort. Looked at from the period's perspective, prohibitions on same-sex behavior simply weren't important enough to make it into the Ten Commandments. Looked at from our perspective, the lines in Leviticus are not only time-bound, there's dispute about what they mean, since they contain an unattested idiom--that is, something not used elsewhere in Torah, so we can't be sure what the meaning is. But more importantly, Leviticus contains the Golden Rule--now which lines are more lasting and offer more guidance for living life?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Beautiful Posted by: jpramelis
Happy to hear this
Posted by: Gravitas on Jul 14, 2006 7:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am so happy to read an article like this on Alternet. It is important the left knows that there are some Christians still trying to live Jesus' true message of tolerance, unlike those hypocrites who have distorted His message beyond belief for their own agendas. REAL Christians indeed do not judge anyone. They are not the old guard that bring terror to those whose religions or lifestyles they disagree with. Nor are they the more progressive new wave who find new groups to target in much more subtle ways, like size discrimination.

Unfortunately, this article only deals with one issue. Real Christians would never have voted for George Bush and his attack on everything that is humane in this country. Real Christians would not keep driving SUVs and jeopardizing life for future generations. Real Christians know how to sacrifice comfort, popularity, and self for the greater good. If everyone acted as a real Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Pagan, Hindu etc. there still might be hope for us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What is a Real Christian
Posted by: Jenny on Jul 14, 2006 8:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A Real Christian, is a person who follows the Way, which was JeSus Immanuel, the Christ. And what was His Way? He ALWAYS followed the Will of His Father in Heaven. Yes, we are to love all our brothers/sisters, but that is not the same thing as to discriminate against them in places where they shouldn't be. However, most people wouldn't understand this in regard to male homosexualism because they haven't been Real Christians and turned to God for guidance and understanding. If they would they would know why male homosexuality is wrong and why it should be prevented and stopped and healed. No, we should not hate the men, nor bash them, but we should not allow their pattern to be plastered all over the visual media, the written media, etc. Male homosexuality can lead to annihilation of the human species. "With all thy getting, get thee understanidng." It's a dead end path, which is why they were stoned in the Bible. If Delamer Duverus tells us that we have ability to heal them, and should and stop preventing them in the diet, we should do this. It is wrong. It is also wrong to hate them and commit hate crimes against them, but we damn ourselves if we allow it to continue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» a Real Christian is Posted by: jackass
» RE: What is a Real Christian Posted by: Aussie Kim
More like this
Posted by: kh on Jul 14, 2006 8:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you! To me this is "the old-time religion". Gives me goosebumps of happiness to see it in public space at this time. People who rejoice at this will also be happy to see this CBS story.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: More like this Posted by: kh
What's Christianity about?
Posted by: Arvy on Jul 14, 2006 8:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In a word, SACRIFICE.

The idea is you sacrifice your own ego, desires, time, etc etc. Even your life if need be… wasn't that the lesson of the New Testament?

"Those who put themselves first shall be last", "Turn the other cheek" etc. Didn't JC even restore a soldier's ear after one of his disciples cut it off?

Do neo-cons skip over those bits when they "read" the bible? (Actually I don't believe that they even believe in christianity, it's all PR and image designed to gain the support of a gullible, frightened population).

The similarity between "terrorists" (of any religion) and right-wing 'christians' is that they would rather sacrifice OTHER PEOPLE to get their way.

We should all take a leaf out of Ghandi's book… but that would require REAL courage…

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I wish more of EACH would read this...
Posted by: Voicedude on Jul 14, 2006 9:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wish more of EACH would read this, that's Progressives AND Christians. You've probably noticed that Christianity is assaulted here in Alternet quite often, and I am quick to point out that their attitude is just like the prejudicial bashing that they usually rail against. I also bring up the old phrase "Silent Majority" which is truer now than in it's heyday. (My dad, a spiritual man, used to say that the 'Silent Majority were neither!' - meaning neither silent, nor the majority. The 'Christians' he was referring to then still exist today, only they seem to be louder!) I point out that MOST 'real Christians' are rarely noticed - they do the good works Christ asked from us as and go quietly back to the shadows - and that there are far more of them than those who give the unbelievers a negative impression of Christians. But dealing with them is another subject; Christian accountability is best discussed directly, privately, and with love.

This article reminded me of an opportunity I had to hear a Christian coach speak at a COIN [Coaches of Influence] dinner. He was a revered basketball coach in a Midwestern University who gave a radio interview where he was asked about gays. He said that the Christian community has done a disservice to these people, that instead of attacking them, we should be loving them back to Christ. He went on for some time about the Christian world failing in this arena. 'However, make no mistake' he added, 'it's a sin, along with other sexual indiscretions'. Well all the media seemed to hear was the last line and heard it all as 'bashing'. Well, a storm brewed and people were outraged, he lost his job, a top ten school offer withered away and he was persecuted for a stance he did not take. He reminded us that Christians were told to expect persecution, that we would suffer for our faith. So he asked himself outloud: 'What took me so long?' - If standing up and saying the right thing would bring this suffering upon me, then what took me so long to get suffering? In context, I was very blessed by his story and his willingness to go through it all again in the name of Christ.

But where, I wondered, were the Christians in his community, and why did they not come to his defense? Maybe the only ones who did were those judgemental ones he was trying to separate himself from....

Such is the story with just about all Progressive Christians. If we speak up for what is right we may get attacked from both sides; both of the sides that we are supposedly 'on'! It's often happened right here in these pages. It happens frequently at my church, where many have signed up to be Bush's sheep. Sometimes I have views based solely on scripture that are attacked and condemned by BOTH sides, by Christians and by Liberals. But if I am sure that my views are based on the Word, then all I can ask is: 'What took me so long?'

Thank you for this wonderful article.
I ask that we pass it along to all our Christian brothers and sisters.

I also pray that any non-Christians reading this might also pass it along.
They need to know that George W. Bush and others of these claiming to be 'Christians' (as the bible predicted) are NOT good examples of our faith.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WWJD vs. WDJD?
Posted by: Gisele on Jul 14, 2006 9:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think we need to stop asking, "What Would Jesus Do"...the phrase supposes that we have the same wisdom, compassion and right as Jesus did, to make a "judgement" about a particular issue. We don't.

If we were as wise as we'd like to think we are, there would be no war, no hunger and none of the strife that we face every day.

There would be no such thing as child abuse, (what you do to these,the least of my brethren ye also do unto me), there would be no spousal abuse (love one another as you love yourself)...there would be true compassion when dealing with those less fortunate in circumstance, and those who dance to a different tune.

None of us have nail holes in our hands, or a scar on our sides...not a single one of us has the right to judge anyone else. For anything. If we judge anyone at all, let it be ourselves...our own conscience. Test our beliefs.

Maybe what we ought to try when asking ourselves WWJD in a given situation...is instead ask ourselves...WDJD. What Did Jesus Do? Then read to find out...and apply it.

Just my thoughts on a bright and sunny Friday morning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

At last: TROLL FREE thread!
Posted by: AdamSelene40 on Jul 14, 2006 9:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I’m impressed: here’s a thread on a ‘religious’ topic … which have been prime Toll-bait in the past … but 25 comments into the thread -- we’re virtually Troll-free. What’s more the overwhelming majority of the posts are obviously good faith effort to share a point of view.

This creates a moment of relative calm in which to get a word in edgewise about TROLLfestation.. The rumor is that there’s a Right Wing media company paying people to disrupt Liberal Blogs with offensive and provocative postings. If true, the genius of the scheme is that Trolls are not paid for what they write, but by how much is written in reply. Since Liberal Bloggers do tend to ‘pile on’ a single troll can invest a small number of keystrokes and a few stock insults getting a large volume of thought and effort in return. Think: It’s a ‘Troll-food for Troll-Droppings’ Program.’

So, I propose a Constructive Programme for Toll Management:
First understand the Troll: he is hard headed and thick skinned. Nothing you say makes him feel bad or changes his opinion.

Short answers are best.

Use tit-for-tat game strategy:
a Troll post merits only (1) Blogger post of similar length. The Troll scores and earns based on how little he gives in return for how much he gets. “Attaboys and MeToos directed at fellow Troll Whackers only add to the Troll’s score.)

Use the nested-reply structure of AlterNet.
This feature was invented back in the dial up BBS days to allow ‘private conversations’ to continue without disrupting the main on-topic thread. By: eplying to a Blogger’s REPLY to a Troll, rather than eplying directly to the Troll’s post, moves the thread inexorably toward the right hand margin – which is the direction the conversation is moving anyway. Who isn’t interested, passes on untroubled.

Practice Troll Spotting:
It doesn’t take a PhD in literature be recognize the work or the same author under different names by his tropes and themes. Some Bloggers keep lists of Toll aliases and screennames. It’s rude to post a TROLL ALERT to the Trolls FIRST post on a thread… but it’s a kindness put one up after a couple of REPLIES. The SUBJECT line is always ‘TROLL ALERT’ … the content could be a single ‘X’ … or a cut and paste of your Troll Name List.

Ideally, none of us would feed trolls or eat meat. But human nature being as it is, better to set small achievable goals in the right direction than to do nothing to help ourselves at all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» cool! Posted by: harris
» "L.A.'s invisible riders' Posted by: harris
» STEAL THIS POST: Posted by: AdamSelene40
what Jesus really said
Posted by: moshejp on Jul 14, 2006 9:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great article Reverand.

One line that I keep hearing over and over again but have never understood is how "...Jesus never mentioned homosexuals...".

Well, he didnt mention rapists, kidnappers or the KKK did he? Does that make these crimes ok?

My point is that this weak argument should be avoided.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: what Jesus really said Posted by: fool-on-the-hill
» RE: what Jesus really said Posted by: moshejp
» What Gayness really is ... Posted by: AdamSelene40
Defending violence in the name of our Lord?
Posted by: Roverton on Jul 14, 2006 10:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. Are you brave enough to address the hatred within your own ranks, or do you secretly enjoy and even appreciate the result of such cruelty?

2. When we face our judgement, do you think out Lord God will tolerate the dogmatic excuses for harm done to one of his own children?

NOT WHY CHRIST DIED!

Who then, makes such demands?

Who indeed?

TRUE CHRISTIANS NEVER TAKE ARMS AGAINST ANOTHER! THEY NEED NOT FEAR, FOR THEY ARE SURROUNDED BY POWERFUL ANGELS.

Truly, the armed and anxious "Haters" know not what they do.

Pity them for they are following the False One.

They will find out whom they have served, but too late. They are the ones who will pay forever. Their "Just Reward" will be long and tragic.

For these poor souls, Hell will look like the hatred they had sewn in life. Doomed forever.

Heaven is the reward for those who were kind to all. It reflects the good deeds we've done unto others.

Pity the haters, for they have been hammered into this demonic form with years of physical and emotional abuse.

VIOLENCE IS FOOD TO THE DEVIL.

AND THEN THERE'S THIS LITTLE DETAIL...

SATAN HAS NO RETIREMENT PLAN FOR HIS FOLLOWERS.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm sorry to have to say it but....
Posted by: riffraff2001 on Jul 14, 2006 10:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Christian progressives deserve this problem by just going along with it for years. And everyone here is missing an important point. People tend to want other people to agree with them. And when people feel threatened, the desire to persuade others to their point of view becomes that much stronger in order to basically create a gang for purposes of protection. The real problem then is religion itself because in order for people to not feel that their beliefs are ultimately going to end up being threatened is to eradicate all other beliefs. That is why most Muslims hate Christians and vice-versa. People will argue, but in my mind there is no doubt that the world would be a much more peaceful place if there was no religion. And pointing out that conservative Christians are hypocrits is going to do absolutely nothing to stop them from trying to create a theocracy in this country. In their mind all the people thanking the good reverand here today are going to hell along with all the homosexuals so none of this is going to do any good. If you really do believe in the Christian god, and you are a liberal, then you're pretty much SOL on trying to have a voice in the debate. The only real way to combat the conservative Christians in this day and age is with logic, not with doctrine. They have too many think tanks and TV shows displaying their interpretations of the Bible for Christian liberals to win a theocratic debate. And sorry to say it, but logic pretty much destroys any real notion of spiritualism in the religious sense. And of course, Christian liberals stand right along side their conservative counterparts to attack atheists all the time so I'm sorry but it's a little too late for them to call foul. You've slept in the bed of Christian dogma for a very long time and now you have to live with the consequences of the ultra-religious coming into power. That's what you get when the main thing a Presidential candidate has to be is Christian. Forget whether or not the guy has any advanced knowledge of science, or an IQ over 80. A Christian moron has more of a chance of winning the Presidency than a genius atheist. And that is what all religious people in this country deserve for letting it get to this point.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You're kidding right? Posted by: riffraff2001
So tired of religious crap...
Posted by: Franco33 on Jul 14, 2006 10:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Blah blah blah. Real christians beleive this, real jews belive that. It's all horseshit. Religious crackpots believe whatever their emotional makeup leads them to believe. If you're a sadist at heart, you love religion's sadist side. If you're a benevolent type, you like the love and peace message.

Religion basically just echoes your prejudices back at you - it's like babbling to yourself in the mirror.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Taking Back the Name
Posted by: Joycelyn on Jul 14, 2006 10:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The extreme right has been acting like they are the only ones who can be called Christians, while in actuality many of them are far from Christian. As an atheist, I am cheered to see a true Christian reclaiming the name for the followers of Jesus.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is really brave
Posted by: Burton on Jul 14, 2006 11:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
want to suggest that the day has come when Christians must declare that gay bashing is an attack on the gospel and that real Christians do not participate in any form of discrimination.

It's easy enough to say this today, since most forms of discrimination against homosexuals have been lifted in the US. But where were these people 30 years ago when the government was actively repressing homosexuals?

Now that it's OK to be "gay" a lot of people are jumping on the bandwagon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What about other sexual minorities?
Posted by: Burton on Jul 14, 2006 11:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...that real Christians do not participate in any form of discrimination.

Fine, then is he going to advocate legalizing sex work in the USA? Roll back all laws against pornography, strip clubs, massage parlors, prostitution?

Or is this the usual hypocrisy of supporting one kind of sexual freedom and not another?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Adulteress .. actually Posted by: AdamSelene40
» RE: Adulteress .. actually Posted by: Burton
ThesaurusRex
Posted by: thesaurusrex on Jul 14, 2006 11:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bless you Rev. Rigby for a well stated essay …
but It's hard to turn the other cheek to the Religious Right when both cheeks are bruised and bloodied.
How about we do bring back stoning for adultery and start with the House and the Senate. Think of all those empty seats that could then be filled with decent people!
Sigh!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

READ MORE RIGBY AT HUFFPO
Posted by: oakgroveinn on Jul 14, 2006 11:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com

Title: "Christians Who Want Democracy Must Stop Bowing to a Dictator Christ"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

here we go again....
Posted by: Michelle on Jul 14, 2006 1:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... with the some self-congratulatory Christian trying to find define "real Christian" in favor of his particular interpretation of some text.

I am a lesbian and a Jew. This kind of "analysis" does me no favors. You Christians are all constantly trying to out-interpret each other in public. It looks like abstract egotistical one-upmanship academic game-playing to me.

All Christians think they (or their pastor or their demonimation or whatever) understand scripture best, that they have the best line to and understanding of Jesus and the texts.

Maybe it makes the author feel good to be the magnanimous liberal Protestant who claims an inside line on "understanding Jesus," but looking at from outside his limited Christian world, I see this abstract theological wrangling as almost entirely useless in any effort for real systemic change of anything that is wrong in this society.

And also, now that I think about it: I wonder if the liberal Christians who do this kind of public analysis are really concerned about hatred -- or whether their primary concern is protecting, defending and defining Christianity to make it seem palatable in the face of what it actually does.

[« Reply to this comment] [