It's gotta be bigotry.

[Bouncy Ball]

That statement in my title rhymes. It's gotta be bigotry.

That's the conclusion I came to last night after thinking about gay marriage/gay rights for about two hours. I was really trying to delve into the thoughts of those who are against it, see what was at work here.

It's gotta be bigotry.

There's NO other explanation. I imagined a country in which homosexuals could marry the person they love, have or adopt children togther, enjoy the same rights, benefits, protections as straight people who get married.

I tried to imagine the horrible things that would happen.

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Children would grow up not batting an eye at such a thing---does that scare conservatives?

At first, people might have to explain homosexuality to their kids a bit more. Does that scare conservatives? It's very simply taken care of---just tell the child most men fall in love with women and most women fall in love with men, but some men fall in love with men and some women fall in love with women. No judgement statements attached, just fact. That was my explanation to my then-five year old when she asked me what the word "gay" meant. It's been a non-issue ever since. She knows about it, it's no big deal.

Other than that, I can't think of a damn thing they have to be worried about. If they think it's gonna bust up their marriage, they have far bigger problems than the gay couple down the street getting married.

So what's the big deal? It's gotta be bigotry.

It can't be the Biblical thing for a few reasons:

1. Unless you can read the original languages the Old Testament was written in, you cannot be sure of the meaning of any of it. Sorry, but it's true.

2. Let's assume it's translated correctly: divorce is mentioned far more often than homosexuality. In fact, the punishment for divorce is being stoned to death. There is no punishment listed for homosexuality.

3. We do not live in a theocracy. Though some might want it that way, we don't. In fact, that's quite the opposite of what our country was framed to be. Any arguments concerning the government based on one religion's book are moot for the purposes of OUR laws.

And how Christian IS it to deny the happiness of others? To keep them as second-class citizens? Not very, I can tell you that. Jesus wasn't about punishment, control, keeping people down. He was about love.

So it's gotta be bigotry. All this stuff about box turtles and other crap is a smokescreen to hide (really pitifully) their own hatred and prejudices.

I really wish everyone would let go of the hate already, EVOLVE. (The word "evolve" has "love" in it.)

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. Christianity has been used as a cover for LOADS of bigotry in the US

whether we are talking Indians having their fingers chopped off until they claim to accept Jesus as their savior, whether it be unchaste to drink out of the same fountain as a black person or gay marriage...poor old Jesus has been a human shield for scoundrels.

[Bouncy Ball]

2. Jesus has been USED and ABUSED

for a long time, true. I just hate to see it. He never did anything to anyone. His name and his life is used to hold over people's heads, as punishment. He's got to be weeping somewhere.

But anyway, religious considerations shouldn't even come into the picture. There were people who said they had religious objections to women getting the vote and our country went ahead and did the right thing anyway.

[pelagius]

7. In fact, Jesus got in trouble for being TOO welcoming to "the wrong kind"

"And the Pharisees and the scribes murmured, saying, "This man receives sinners and eats with them."

Luke 15:2 (RSV)

[The Doctor.]

3. I thought there was a tidbit in corinthians...

Which did say one should be stoned to death for being gay.

And of course for getting divorced, commiting adultery, working on the Sabbath, eating shelfish, trimming one's hair about the temples, planting two different crops in the same field, lying... Boy! We better get started here!

"But I would not feel so all alone...."

[Bouncy Ball]

6. A LOT of people are in trouble!

LOL!

[mitchtv]

14. don't forget those scumbags wearing

cotton/polyester blend! Death!

[forgethell]

4. Could I get a reference

to the chapter and verse where divorce is punished by death? I''ve read the entire thing several times and have never seen it. Adultery? yes. Divorce? no.

[Bouncy Ball]

5. As in re-marriage after divorce.

Should have been clearer. Re-marriage after divorce is considered adultery and is punishable by stoning.

I had some friends who were very anti-gay rights and they were both divorced and remarried and I told them about that. It did give them pause, because they were arguing against gay rights using the Bible. The same book that says their current marriage is adultery.

[pelagius]

8. I often use this as an argument with Biblical "literalists"...

...and remark how Jesus specifically condemned divorce (at least in their interpretation, I hold a different view) and yet Christians have learned to accommodate that, so why are they worried about something -- homosexuality -- Jesus had nothing to say about.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[readmoreoften]

15. Oh so we're making up 'hate speech' against christians?

The verse your looking for against adultery is here:

Leviticus 20:10. And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

So...we live in a 'fantasy world' because we remind conservative christians that many of those who would put us to death with their Bible would also be subject to the same punishment if they were put under the same scrutiny... AND THAT'S ANTI-CHRISTIAN HATE SPEECH?

I think these ARE their 'true and obvious faults'. Wow, you seem really sympathetic to the people who are trying to destroy our lives, did you make a wrong turn on the way to a RW site? The nonsense about gays using 'hate speech' against christians is a real right wing talking point....

[forgethell]

16. No, you misunderstand

I want the verse about death for divorced people remarrying. There isn't one, and you live in a fantasy world if you think that there is. Besides, I don't know of any Christians who advocate death for adultery. Muslims, now, is another story.

Yes, lies about Christians is hate speech.

[readmoreoften]

17. are rhetorical mistakes about christians hate speech?

I didn't miss your point at all. Bouncy's point WAS that most divorces are unbiblical (divorce not caused by adultery being unbiblical) and THEREFORE, if you remarry or fornicate after divorce you are as much in violation of Leviticus as is a homosexual. And the penalty for ADULTERY is death, and that's the point.

To call the lack of a full rhetorical explanation 'hate speech' is to minimize the calls for murder (as in Swaggert's recent remark during a sermon "If a homosexual steps to me I'll kill him") of the christian right.

No gay leaders are calling for the deaths of christian leaders. No gay senators are calling for the deaths of 'activist judges' (like Cornyn) so really... HOW DARE YOU accuse bouncy ball of 'hate speech' for making a logical leap in a christian argument.

And there ARE Christians who advocate death for adultery and homosexuality, they're called Christian Reconstructionists and they are supported by the Rushdoony family and Chalcedon Institute. See theocracywatch.org for more info.

I just can't believe you're using freeper talking points (any criticism of Christianity is hate speech) on the GLBT discussion board and expecting us to swallow it.

[forgethell]

18. Don't expect you to swallow

it. Don't care whether you do or not.

And you are wrong about what some gay leaders are calling for. The logical leap, of which you speak, is not there. I'm pretty sure that Jewish women who remarried after divorce were not stoned. One standard is Old Testament, one is New. And the NT does not command death for adultery.

I will agree, most divorces are unbiblical. But nobody cares about Leviticus. The New Testament, if we are going to get technical about it, has it's own verses condemning not only homosexuality, but all sex outside of marriage.


King James Version (KJV)
For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
Matthew 15:19

Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Romans 1:29


I know nothing about the Christian Reconstructionists whatsoever. But they are not the Baptists, they are not the Catholics, they are not numerous other Christian organizations. So why conflate them with them except to beat the others over the head? Hate speech is why.

All that being said, I don't necessarily disagree with your position. But there is a lot of sloppy thinking going on at DU, and it offends me. So does bigotry, of which there is also a considerable amount on this board. I intend to point it out when I see it.

People that are ignorant of what the Bible, or any book for that matter, says, shouldn't discuss it. People that can't tell the difference between Baptists and Methodists, let alone Pentecostals and Catholics, shouldn't be conflating Christian Reconstructionists, Christian Identity, or the Ku Klux Klan with orthodox Christian denominations.

I dare anything for the truth.

Thanks for the link. I'll check it out.

[readmoreoften]

19. Correcting sloppy thinking starts at home...

You have obviously not properly investigated the problem caused by the right wing of your religion and I refuse to waste my day compiling links for you.

According to People for the American Way, Antonin Scalia does not believe that a homosexual should be able to approach the court *as a homosexual* because it is an admittance of a crime. Where does he find the rationale for this? Try 'our judeo-christian heritage'. He was on C-Span spouting this two weeks ago.

Unless you consider such organizations as Focus on the Family, Coral Ridge, the Chalcedon Institute, and the AFA 'fringe' organizations, than anti-gay bible thumping is at the core of mainstream Christian politics today and only a myopic apologist would even *try* to argue against this.

It's funny that you call others 'sloppy thinkers' and then you set up a straw man argument. Bouncy's point was not that divorce was a capital crime, it was that unbiblical divorce was considered de facto adultery which was a capital crime. If you can extrapolate (which I'm not sure you can) Bouncy's main idea was that Christians who follow this line of thinking are often hypocrites.

You take offense at those who aren't biblical scholars quoting the bible (and in that case you may want to patrol your own christian people, who always seem to know less than the unbelievers who must defend themselves against hateful bigots who use the bible as a weapon). Well, I take offense to sloppy thinkers who come around DU spouting right wing talking points and outlandish arguments about how the miscalculation of an argument is equivalent to hate speech. Talk about a illogical leap. To outline a point in less than academic terms is not hate speech. Hate speech is when you say, "If a homosexual steps to me I'll kill him" and the audience cheers. That's what Swaggart said and that's what his congregation did when he said it and THAT is hate speech.

So pluck the plank out of your own ability to formulate logical theses before you pull the splinter out of Bouncy's eye....

[forgethell]

22. Right then.

Christians must follow your (faulty)logic to the points that you want to make. If they don't, they are hypocrites. If they do, they are hate-mongers. The Hebrews did not consider remarriage after divorce to be adultery. The New Testament did not demand capital punishment for adultery. Even the best logic fails if the assumptions are faulty, and yours are.

I don't think you have to be a biblical scholar to have an opinion. Only that it should be tolerably informed.

Unwarranted attacks on Christians are hate. Further, even if your opponent is a hater, that does not necessarily obsolve you of being a hater. Doesn't mean you are one either.

We all get offended by something. We'll just have to learn to live with it.

[Misunderestimator]

34. You minimize the bigotry we suffer at hypocritical Christians who DO

listen to those many who quote Leviticus. You minimize it by calling it offense ("We all get offended by something.") Well, ok, yes, I do get offended by people hating me who do not know me. I do get offended by Christian groups using this hate to rob me of any chance for equality. And I do get offended by people who turn this justifiable offense into some sort of hatred of the people who are offending us.

I don't hate them, I don't know them, I don't want to know them, I would prefer not to hear anything about them, I would prefer that they have NO influence on our democracy, and I believe that they have the right to the same access of benefits and protection that I do. I only wish they would afford me the same level of respect.

[readmoreoften]

20. And that was precisely the point you missed...

"I will agree, most divorces are unbiblical. But nobody cares about Leviticus."

Right. That's the point: no one cares about Leviticus unless it has to do with homosexuality, then it has sudden validity.

[forgethell]

23. No, no.

I think they use some New Testament passages. Paul, I think, was against it.

And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet. Romans 1:27

But it doesn't matter. I'm not defending their interpretation of the Scriptures. Just their right to have their own interpretation. There is a right to be wrong, you know.

I'm not defending Swaggert, either, who is an embarrassment to the human race, let alone Christians.

I'm just saying that there are numerous branches of Christians, with various ideas. It is hate speech to lump them all together to make a rhetorical point.

OK, some Christians think gays are sinners. So what? Nothing says you have to agree with them. I drink. Some Christians think drinking is a sin. I do it anyway. It's a free country.

[readmoreoften]

24. Are you GLBT? Or are you just baiting us?

After all, there was some scripture used to validate segregation too. I guess black people should have just ignored Jim Crow laws because Southerners had a right to their opinions of African-Americans.

So we have hate speech against Christians in the GLBT forum of DU. Why? Because we criticize them for demonizing us. I suppose we also perpetrate hate crimes against whites (for pointing out instances of racism) and men (for pointing out sexism) and most of all, we at DU must really perpetrate crimes against freepers.

You're a waste of my time. I'm done talking to you. Go pray for me.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

28. "But nobody cares about Leviticus." ?????? WTF ???????

WHO lives in a fantasy world now?

[The Magistrate]

29. Dominionism And Reconstruction, Sir

Are very real. This movement for imposing "Biblical Law" on the United States needs to be better remarked outside Chjristian fundamentalist circles. Adherents of it do, in fact, dominate the organizational councils of the Southern Baptists and several other fundamentalist sects in this country, and wield a remendous influence within fundamentalist circles, though not always openly. Through these, they wield an uncomfortable degree of influence within the Repblican Party today, and hence with the current regime.

Their proposals do amount to a theocracy, in which even the ordinary principles of democracy would not apply, as if the people wished to do something contrary to the Law of God, that could hardly be permitted. Death penalties for blasphemers, idolators, as well as sexual offenders, would suffice to ensure the people would obey, whether by weeding out, or sheer terror, and allow some forms of democratic rule to be preserved as window=dressing for the dictatorship of the preacher....

[Zhade]

26. So Bouncy Ball is a liar?

Who the hell do you think you are, judging her intent? How very un-Christian of you.

[MountainLaurel]

30. No, it's very Christian of them

At least, Christianity as it exists in this country today -- it's all about judging others and has been since the days of the fire and brimstone revival meetings.

I once asked my grandmother why she didn't attend church. Her respose: "Why should I go over there and sit with those hypocrites who care more about what you're wearing than they do about the word of God" when I can talk to God right here?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

27. It's the logical conclusion.

Divorce and second marriages not recognized (JESUS said so!) -> remarriage is actually adultery -> silicon-rich minerals approach you at high speed.

[Zhade]

25. Man, you're a genius.

"I love the little fantasy worlds than anti-christians dream up."

You DO realize Bouncy Ball IS A CHRISTIAN, right?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[MuseRider]

9. Exactly Bouncy

exactly. I have been going over those same issues forever and can come up with nothing else. I(we) will fight this forever it seems. The really funny thing is that after our crushing defeats Tuesday for both Tiffany and the Marriage Amendment it was my gay friends who were consoling me. They were very rational about it but I was not. The people I worked with are the best people I know, some gay some not, but they have not once ounce of bigotry toward the people who do this to them and I can't seem to be that good. It seems I have much to work on. The anger is there though. We all need to brainstorm and come up with something that will crack through because you can't even have a decent, rational conversation with the people who are promoting the bigotry. Nothing, the conversation stops the moment they open their mouths because none of it is rational. I honestly have no clue at this point.

[atreides1]

10. For Its Time

The Old Testament was probably the best that men of wisdom could come up with, but it has very little place in the modern world.

Would Bush give his daughters up to be put to death for their disrespect towards him. Their college antics could be considered
disrespectful towards their parents.

Which farmers in this country would submit themselves to punishment for planting two different crops in the same field?

Which banks or credit card companies are willing to forgive a debt after seven years?

These are questions that we all have to ask of those who think that a country where the laws come from the Bible would be a better place to live.

[sui generis]

11. thank you Bouncy

It is funny from my perspective to be an American, to be a taxpayer and a capable person who participates in the greater community and cares what happens to other people regardless of their political affiliations, sexual orientation, or religious practice to wake up every morning realizing that much of America thinks I'm not as real and valid as they are.

We hear these messages our whole lives - that we are mentally ill, or that we are innately immoral, or worse, as broken and evil as a pederast or someone who gets off on bestiality.

As children and teenagers we are either hopelessly broken by this emotional bullying and these messages and by the very people who claim to "love" us or else we somehow miraculously get past those messages and either find our own pride and our own strengths through unimaginable personal pain and anguish. It's a miracle any of us make it to adulthood on our own, much less flourish, and when we have a "pride" celebration, it means we have surmounted obstacles in our lives that we wouldn't wish on our enemies. It means we have come into our own and we're not ashamed to be who we are. It means the bigots have failed. When idiots have "straight pride" celebrations they are being utterly thoughtless and shameful - not the tiniest concept of human decency in those tiny little minds.

And when we do grow up and come out and flourish, we find that society still wants to tell us that we're not "really" adults capable of making our own decisions, capable of managing our own estates and affairs and lives. It wants to make sure that the happiness that some of them found in marriage can never be offered to someone not like them for reasons not altogether different than deciding that people with blue eyes or green eyes or people who eat oatmeal for breakfast shouldn't be allowed to marry, to have a family, or to even be happy.

I want civil unions - for everybody. Marriage should be an institution of the church. I don't want to intrude on anyone's religious beliefs and "get married" if that means that I need to convert wahabi islam or babtists or catholics to agree, but I don't want their religious beliefs in government either. If the government has a prurient interest in stable family units, whether or not they have children, then allowing anyone who is in love and committed to be in a civil union that guarantees mutual fiscal responsibility is the only logical and fair thing a government can do for its constituents.

But for some people to THINK they have the right to tell me how I need to live my most personal life is the deepest kind of moral outrage one so-called free American can possibly perpetrate on another American.

It's good that we have people like you Bouncy, and many others who feel the same way. It's not a gay rights fight. It's a fight about fairness and human decency and what we believe being an American is truly about.

[Bouncy Ball]

12. Your last lines are especially true.

It's not just about gay rights. It bothers me that ANYONE would be ok with this. It's about human rights, equal rights. An injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, and all that.

That's why I encourage every straight person I know who supports gay rights to stop being quiet about it, stand up and be counted, because it's gonna take ALL of us to make this happen.

[xchrom]

21. conservative christains of all stripes have done to jesus

what the pharisees and sadusees could not.

they've killed him -- and they've killed the spirit of the resurection.

i don't know if it can ever be regained.

[sundog]

31. sigh

I love you BB :)

:hug:

[foreigncorrespondent]

32. Bouncy...

...I really appreciate your semtiment, but I have one small request: Would you kindly refrain from using the word "homosexual" as a noun? Those of us who are LGBT are reduced to our genital function by it. Thank you!

[NMMNG]

33. It is about bigotry

People just couch it in religion to make it feel and appear acceptable.

Conservatives hate the fact that schools are teaching tolerance because it makes them have to take an extra step. So many times I've heard the stupid argument of "What do I say when my kid comes home from school and says Mommy, we learned about gays in school today ?"

Quite simple. You can say "Many people believe that homosexuals are just like everyone else. Your daddy and I are bigoted fools who believe that gays are degenerates who should be treated like dirt, if not killed, and we want you to be the same."

Why is that so hard? :shrug: