- Punishment from God (which is imagined, not real)
- Condemnation for even considering tolerance and acceptance from God (imagined) and man (imagined or real).
- Embarrassment in association from man (imagined and real)
- They are gay though cowardly.
- They are ignorant and just follow what is told, but don’t reason themselves (summing up everything above).
Hi AUniversalist
I’d agree with all you say here. But I guess your last point is the one I would highlight. I think most prejudice derives in large part from ignorance and fear. And for some strange reason, a lot of people, including a lot of Christians, seem to want to remain in that state.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Cheers
Johnny
I’ll take a stab at it. At some point (I don’t know exactly when because I was either too young, or too young to care, but sometime in the 80’s), Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, etc., began sounding the call for Christians to become active in American politics. It worked and the Christian Right became very powerful and influential. Political activism was nescessary to keep God’s Hand on America. All were encouraged to get involved in politics. And, we did. It was taught that open homosexualty was the downfall of all great societies. Greece, Rome, Sodom and Gomorrah. The Godly family was the pillar of society, etc. and homosexualty was said to destroy that ideal. Fundimentalist Christians absolutely, positively see the acceptance of homosexuality as the last barrier between God’s blessing and all Hell breaking loose on America. THEY REALLY DO. They believe with sincere hearts that they have a God-given mandate to stand against homosexuality and even homosexuals themselves. This is an ECT crowd remember, and they believe it’s better to be hated and seen as bigots than to let someone go to Hell without standing in the way. To them, to accept a homosexual is akin to sending him to Hell. They think they stand against homosexuals for the homosexuals own good. Not to say there aren’t true bigots, etc., of course that’s true also. Many of these people don’t really KNOW any homosexuals though! If they did, they may see it’s not quite that simple. Sass
Hi Sass
Thanks for stepping up to the plate. (That’s what you guys say isn’t it? Hey, I’m bad, I’m down with the kids. Sort of. 
Actually, American English and English English share quite a few sporting idioms. If I stand up to support somebody, you might say I was “going in to bat for them” - a cricketing metaphor here in Blighty, and, I presume, a baseball one over your side of the pond. But I digress.)
You make an interesting case, which seems entirely credible to me. It does not, as you don’t need me to tell you, paint the Christian Right in a very fkattering light. But then I’m afraid to say that the shadows seem to me to be that particular ‘branch’ of Christianity’s permanent dwelling place. They make a show of occupying the moral high ground in their oppostion to homosexuality, when one might opine that they’d be better off shining a light onto their own sexual mores. I mean, they dont’ seem that bothered about ‘ordinary’ sins like adultery - despite the bitterly destructive nature of infidelity (and like Pilgrim, I’ve seen the damage infidelity and divorce can wreak on a person). I have heard and seen gay men and women denounced in the nastiest, most vindictive language by some, I daresay minority, groups - God hates fags etc - but I don’t hear Pat Robertson condemning adulteries to the flames. (But then I don’t pay much - any - attention to Pat Robertson or his ilk. Except my buddy Mark Driscoll of course!)
Does the Christian Right’s oppostion to homosexuality really only go back to the early 80s and Falwell and Robertson? Mustn’t it go much deeper and further back than that? I don’t really know.
I do know, though, that there are plenty of right wing Christians here in Britain who think God hates gays too. And as far as I can tell, a lot of them are just bigots, plain and simple. There’s no evangelistic altruism behind their beliefs. They just hate gays.
Great, as always, to speak with you, my fellow Ramone!
Cheers
Johnny
Hi Johnny. Yes, your use of idioms is perfect! 
I am sure that the story goes back much farther than the 80’s. Some credit Francis Schaeffer’s writings as being most important. I was only giving my opinion on what I have seen in the past years. I remember Boy George did a high profile interview here…Mid 80’s, maybe with Barbara Walters. He admitted he was gay, or maybe it was bisexual at the time. Anyway, he then quipped: “America’s having a heart attack!” And, America WAS! Religious hard-liners have always had heavy influence on American politics…Remember that whole Prohibition thing we tried?! 
As homosexuality became more acceptable, the push-back from the Right grew. It’s possible that this actually gave rise to the Christian Right as we know it on this matter.
I know these people (fundamentalists) though, they aren’t bad people. They just want a bright future for their kids as we all do. They just don’t question their beliefs or the ramifications of those beliefs. To question, is to question God Himself. This all comes back to believing the doctrine of Hell…Fear is the motivation for everything they do and fear can, never, never have good fruit. As per Fred Phelps and his God hates fags minions, I have NEVER met a fundamentalist who agreed with him. In fact, they are mortified. And so, Fred happily condemns them to Hell as well!
However, there is another side to the story:
“We shall sodomize your sons, We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your youth groups, Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will come to crave and adore us. All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men. Our writers and artists will make love between men fashionable… We shall raise vast, private armies…to defeat you. The family unit…will be abolished. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory…All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men. Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.” Michael Swift
This is a widely circulated quote by The Gay Manifesto writer, Michael Swift. Fundamentalists use the quote to prove the existence of a “Gay Agenda”, homosexuals call the quote “satire”. I don’t know what Michael’s true motives were in writing this, I only know it’s explosive to a fundamentalist (who is probably reading it out of its entire context because he is NEVER going to buy his book) and does nothing good for the homosexual community. Extraordinarily irresponsible on Swift’s part. Something like this only fans the flames.
Here’s another gem:
“Fisting [forcing one’s entire hand into another person’s rectum or vagina] often gets a bad rap…[It’s] an experience of letting somebody into your body that you want to be that close and intimate with…[and] to put you into an exploratory mode.”
The above quotation comes from Massachusetts Department of Education employees describing the pleasures of homosexual sex to a group of high school students at a state-sponsored workshop on during GLSEN’s “Teach-Out” Conference on March 25, 2000 held at Tufts University. Approximately 200 young teens and 300 adults attended the day-long event. Kids were bussed in from high schools across Massachusetts. "
Should pro-gay material be taught and allowed in public schools? What do you think? Sensitivity, equal treatment, yes, but THIS? The sad thing is that we can’t even have an honest discussion without being labeled a bigot here, Johnny. If I found out that someone mentioned the word fisting at a school function my kid was at…I might have made the news.
So yeah. Just as much as we have a way too extreme Right here, we have a just as extreme Left. It’s a complete mess. I know homosexuals who are mortified at what’s going on. My husband and I are making dinner plans with a lesbian couple we know. They hate this. They just want to be left alone and live their lives. They are silenced from the Left. They voted for Bush…They lost all their friends…Now they are stuck with me! 
In the end, we are all puppets. Politicians playing us off each other, keeping us distracted while they enslave us all.
MAN, I really have to stop ending all my posts on such a bummer! 
Anyway, God Bless you Brother. I’d be interested in your opinions on these matters. Keeping it civil is very important to me and I know how easily these discussions can get out of hand so I try to tread as lightly as I can without compromising my beliefs. Anyway, g’day!
Hi. I have done some more thinking on this so I wanted to post again. I think that what’s going on in America now is not just about “live and let live” concerning the gay issue that has the dander up of the Christian Right. There seems to be an element of having to accept ANYTHING the more radical wing of the gay community says or be called a homophobe, bigot, etc. What am I talking about? Google “Folsom Street Fair”, “Hunky Jesus Contest”. I dare you. Not just the homepages either, not just the front they want you to see. Dig. You will find PUBLIC nudity, PUBLIC oral sex and masturbation. The sale of sex toys depicting Christ on the cross. A “hunky Jesus” contest where the hottest Jesus is picked and crucified while sex acts are simulated between him and his disciples. All within view of police officers being told to keep a hands-off approach to this otherwise criminal (public sex and nudity are illegal, right?) behavior. Police officers paid with tax-payer money to “police” these events. I hate to bring this up, but it’s the truth, And ANYONE who DARES speak against such things and bring them into the light is labeled, stigmatized and called an extremest hater. THIS is more to the point of what’s going on in America guys. BOTH SIDES ARE WRONG. VERY, VERY WRONG. Maybe it’s just because we are Americans…We are extreme in everything. It’s how we roll. 
Ouch, no comment other than I’m sure one COULD google just about ANYTHING on ANY population and find whatever it is they want to find. “We” do not have a monopoly on bad behavior and guess what?? Some of “us” EVEN love, worship, and sing God’s praises. Maybe no one is “looking” in OUR direction because we aren’t causing an uproar. But, we are here.
Hi Bret… Where you been?! 
You are absolutely right when you say homosexuals don’t have the monopoly on bad behavior. And again you are right to say anyone can google anything and find fault. This doesn’t mean said bad behavior shouldn’t be called out for what it is. You and I have had a few conversations. You KNOW how I feel about gay people. I LOVE THEM. I don’t care if 2 people want to have a committed relationship. I don’t even really care if they don’t! BUT, when things like I mentioned are brought out into the public arena, it’s a different story. NO ONE should be having sex in PUBLIC. EVER. And to say I HAVE to accept that because they are gay or be called a homophobe is pretty crazy to me. Do you see what I am getting at here? Bad behavior is bad behavior. I shouldn’t have to worry about calling it that because someone is gay.
I’d have to agree with you Sass that you shouldn’t have to accept bad behavior. Period. OR be called names. MY point is that I have no intention of plucking the splinter out of someone else’s eye when I DO have a log in my own. And to your point again, YOU should NOT have to tolerate name calling whatsoever for ANY reason as we are ALL the children of The Most High. I’m so sorry for you that that has happened. For me, I just rather stay out of “other” peoples lives because as we have already said, one CAN find bad behavior anywhere they want, which does NOT make it necessary to condone. I guess I see it as “the human conditon” as my good friend BobX3 calls it. As a gay man, I don’t want sympathy however, I sure would like to be able to worship with like minded Christians, and I don’t mean “gay” Christians… I mean Christians period. I would like MY focus to be on (like you mentioned in the thread you deleted) on the REAL issues of this world, starvation, the broken hearted, those in prison, the widows, unemployment, etc. THESE things seem to me so much larger than this particular area. I would much rather work ALONG side YOU stamping out hunger than you and I and Johnny and Tim having THIS discussion is all. So take it for what it’s worth, just my HUMBLE opinion is all.
I read this in the Bible this morning and I don’t know how it relates to this, but it sure got me thinking about WHAT “I” say.
Matthew 12:34 “The mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart.”
Oh, and one last thing, sorry for not getting back to you have been in the bed pretty sick as of late AND I actually could NOT get on this forum until today!!! UGH. Guess server problems???
Blessings Sass.
Hi Bret. I am so sorry to hear that you are still so sick. I have said a few prayers, I’ll pray some more. I do think most gay people are just trying to make their way in the world. However, just like Fred Phelps on the Right, there are also those extremists on the Left who ARE causing an uproar and Christians ARE reacting (quite clumsily and rather badly) to that. And, somewhere in the middle, completely left out of the conversation altogether is you and me. Blessings on you my brother…
Just a FYI for the board members who are reading this particularly difficult topic, Sass and I (well, I can’t actually speak for her ), are friends. We may not see eye to eye on everything, however, we do share a common bond of love through Jesus Christ. Just sayin’…
Yes. We ARE friends. Your opinion is the ONLY opinion I really care about on this topic Bret. Your perspective is unique and not just an opinion from someone standing on the sidelines…Like mine is. I DO want you to see it from my perspective in an effort to generate a serious dialogue on a subject where serious dialogue rarely happens. It’s kinda like during the last election. No one could question anything about Obama without being called a racist and no one can question anything about the homosexual community without being called a bigot. And, probably, no one can question Christianity without being called a heretic. It’s extremely frustrating. I laid my cards out on the table concerning what I see on this topic. I love gay people, but I am not willing to say that the things I mentioned in my other posts are OK. They are not. And if ever there was an event where straight people were teaching wrong things to kids or having public sex, I’d be all over that too. Porn? I HATE IT, all over it. Adultery? All over it. Fornication? All over it. Divorce? Not really all over that one because I have a friend who was told to stay in a marriage by the church when her husband was beating her face in. She finally left that %&@#*&% and I GLADLY drank a beer with her that night. Anyway, love you brother. Stay close…THE BRITISH ARE COMING!
By the way, Bret. I did get your e-mail. I’ll send a reply back ( you said some great things I want to respond to) when I have some more time. My husband is on his way home and I can’t have him thinking I just sit around on the internet all day… Love you, Brother, we’ll talk more soon.
Hi Sass
The British are coming! Heh heh. Dear old Colin Welland, brandishing his Oscar for Chariots of Fire, and heralding a British invasion of American cinema to rival the Beatles’ storming of the Billboard chart in 1964. Never happened. Oh well.
This is just a ‘placeholder’ to let you know I’ve clocked your latest series of posts. But as I fear we are moving into very deep waters, into a minefield in fact, I want to make sure I’ve got my mental minesweeper in full working order. I started composing a reply last night, but it needs more work to get it right. This is such a sensitive subject that I don’t want to blunder in half-cocked and say something that might upset somebody.
As you so wisely point out, Bret is the man best placed to voice an opinion in this debate, and his opinion is of the utmost importance. However, I don’t think that precludes you or I from voicing our opinions – and we’re not totally on the sidelines, you as a somebody who has gay friends, I with my gay brother and friends.
So if you’ll bear with me, I will give you my considered response a bit later.
But in the meantime I just wanted to quote a brief, satirical sketch from the British TV show Not the Nine O’Clock News, broadcast on the BBC back in the late 70s and early 80s. In this sketch Rowan Atkinson (probably now best known for playing Edmund Blackadder on TV, and, er, Mr Bean in the cinema), plays a ‘trendy’ young CofE priest:
I think this fairly gentle satire, poking fun at the Church’s confused attitude towards gay people, pretty much sums up the way people outside the Church – in Britain at least – see it. They see a Church which proclaims the message “Jesus loves you”, but behind its back, as it were, adds “but not if you’re gay”. Because of course, as we know, God doesn’t ‘hate’ anyone, especially not on the grounds of their sexual orientation. God loves us all equally.
The Anglican Church leaders – including the Archbishop of Canterbury – have made such a pathetic fudge of the whole issue of homosexuality, trying desperately to find some way of supporting and being loving towards gay people without endorsing gay sex (which is of course an absurdity), that gay people are staying away from the Church in droves, homophobia remains rampant within its ranks, and the bigots can go on being bigoted. Unless and until the leadership comes out and makes an unequivocal statement that homosexuality is not a sin, that it cannot be ‘cured’ by prayer, and that gay people are to be treated just the same as straights, homophobia will continue to flourish.
Anyway, I seem to have written more than I intended for now, sorry.
More soon.
All the best
Johnny
Johnny the Sage!!!
You are so smart, oh wise one! You seem to be getting the same vibe I do and that is we ARE entering a minefield. I’d agree and the last time around… well, let’s just say that whole minefield exploded. That being said, I am going to gracefully bow out of this conversation. It hits entirely too close to home and I have a real tendency to get my feelings hurt. I don’t know how else to say that other than be vulnerable and admit my weakness. So y’all, God speed and many blessings to each of you as I bid you farewell on this topic.
Blessings,
Bret
Hi all. I did want to say one thing. It wasn’t my intention to give my OPINION on this matter. Johnny had asked if Americans might be able to shed some light on the fundamentalist perspective. (Which is NOT my perspective, obviously I’m HERE so a fundamentalist I am NOT right out of the gate) I did that, but after doing so, I let my opinion seep in and I’m not sure if I was perfectly clear on WHAT EXACTLY I was giving my opinion about. Mostly it’s the instances I cited where Christ and the cross are being derided that is especially bothersome to me. THIS IS NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH HOMOPHOBIA. IS IT? It’s an ENTIRELY different subject altogether. And this IS what’s happening here in some cases…Some are just plain and simple antagonizing Christians and deriding Christ and calling anyone offended homophobic bigots. THAT is infuriating. That was my point.
Hi Sass
Thanks for your trenchant comments on this thread. As I said earlier, I am apprehensive that we are starting to get into deep waters here. And I’m not a very good swimmer … (Can’t find an emoticon for ‘somewhat apprehensive irony’. Never mind.)
You make so many points I wish to comment on. But I will restrict myself to just a few, for now.
But before I do, I think it only polite and politic to issue a warning to anybody coming to this thread anew, that they may find some of the things I will be discussing offensive. If frank talk about human sexuality offends you, perhaps you might want to give this post a miss.
So, into the minefield we plunge. Heaven help us.
1. Am I a bigot if I speak out against homosexuality?
Wikipedia defines a bigot as “a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own or intolerant of people of different political views, ethnicity, race, class, religion, profession, sexuality or gender”.
Well, I guess that makes me a bigot. I am utterly intolerant of all sorts of opinions and political views – fascism, racism, homophobia and Calvinism are four that trip off the tongue. I’m also resolutely intolerant of people who traffic women for sex, or abuse children, or carry out ethnic cleansing, for example. And I don’t feel in the least bit guilty or ashamed feeling that way. In fact I feel pretty good about it. Because I believe that there are absolute, objective standards of right and wrong, which come from God. And I believe that all the things I’m bigoted about transgress those standards.
Some supposedly more enlightened thinkers will tell me I’m wrong, that there are no objective moral standards – only those we make for ourselves in our societies. Personally I think that’s bunkum. I think moral relativism is a dangerous fiction, and even those people who profess to believe in it probably spend most of their lives doing their best to live up to the absolute Judeo-Christian moral standards they claim don’t really exist.
There are particular minority human behaviours (eg the polygamous subjugation of very young women as practised by Warren Jeffs) which pretty much everybody outside of the minority in question (in this case Jeffs and a few of the elders of his ‘church’) are instinctively repulsed by. Jeffs might feel justified in calling me a bigot because I’m intolerant of his opinion that he ought to be allowed to sleep with all the young women in his church. But everybody else would probably just tell him to stop being such a creep. And send him to prison. Hooray.
My point is that we’re all bigots, judged by somebody or other’s standards. Bigotry *per se *isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
But is there a type of bigotry that is unacceptable? And if so, how do we define that? To cut to the chase, if we speak out against homosexuality, does that make us ‘bad’ bigots? Are fundamentalist Christians ever justified in singling out gay people for condemnation? Does the fact that they (the fundies) are acting out of some misguided concern that gay people are going to burn in hell justify their bigotry?
The answer, surely, must be no.
Even if we accept that homosexuality is a sin (which I do not), we are nevertheless commanded by Jesus to love gay people and treat them just the same as we do straight people. Far right fundies don’t do that. They campaign to deny gays the same basic rights (eg adoption, or marriage, or being a priest) as straights. They vilify gay people in hateful language. Some of them advocate, or even practise, physical violence against gays.
(My brother has been ‘queer bashed’ – beaten up in a pub for no reason other than his being a gay man. I don’t know what the religious beliefs of his attackers were. I wasn’t there to ask them. And had I been there, I doubt I’d have been having discussions about faith with those cowards. But I do know that the anti-gay rhetoric of the Christian Right only legitimises this sort of nastiness.)
But does this mean we should ‘live and let live’, no matter how offensive we perceive other people’s – be they gay or straight – behaviour to be? You mention the Folsom Street Fair and the Hunky Jesus Contest as examples of offensive behaviour, something that you clearly feel you ought to be free to speak out against without being labelled a bigot.
This is a tough one, Sass. And I hope you will think carefully about what I say about it before condemning me for my views. Because personally I do think we should ‘live and let live’. Now that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t speak out against criminal or harmful behaviour – things that oppress or hurt others. It doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t protect our children from things that have the potential to hurt or deprave or corrupt them. And it doesn’t mean we’re not allowed to find certain types of behaviour offensive. But are we bigots to feel that way?
Perhaps. (See my first point above.)
I might loathe a particular movie, say; and I should be free to voice that loathing – just as those who enjoy the movie should be free to watch it. Freedom of speech cuts both ways. As enshrined in the First Amendment, it is one of the most basic and most important of human rights, wouldn’t you agree? As Voltaire said, “I do not agree with what you say, but I defend to the death your right to say it”.
From what I’ve gathered through the magic of the internet, Folsom Street is a BDSM festival. BDSM isn’t everybody’s cup of tea, to be sure. But it is surely very popular, practised by both gay and straight people, and as long as it causes no harm, seems to me to be a clear case of ‘live and let live’.
The Hunky Jesus Contest is a different kettle of fish. It is clearly a ‘gay’ thing. And it seems to be a deliberate bit of provocative nose thumbing to the Christian Right from a particularly militant ‘wing’ of the gay community. But should you be allowed to speak out against it freely? Yes, of course. But without being called a bigot? I don’t know. The fact that I happen to agree with you, and find the whole concept highly offensive, doesn’t change the fact that by the standards of those who enjoy the Hunky Jesus Contest, *I *am a bigot.
Now you might argue, as I sort of tried to do earlier, that ‘my’ bigotry is legitimate, because it has the sanction of the Almighty. But the people who attend the Hunky Jesus Contest would, I daresay, reject that argument, most likely because they reject God as well. And why are they rejecting God, we might ask? Is it because they feel rejected, marginalised, or oppressed by Christianity?
And of course, being offensively anti-Christian is by no means the preserve of the gay community. There are any number of straight comedians or writers or rock bands (mainly of the crap heavy metal variety ) whose stock in trade is to mock, ridicule and be offensive about the Christian faith. Try Googling ‘Cradle of Filth Jesus t shirt’ if you want proof. (But be warned, you *will *be offended.)
As for sex in public, well, if it’s illegal, then the cops ought to arrest anybody they catch doing it. Whether it *ought *to be illegal is another debate.
So, on to your second main point I want to discuss –
2. The Gay Agenda and the Gay Manifesto
I’m sorry, but I think this is a total red herring. A couple of clicks on Google will tell you the truth about the so-called ‘Gay Manifesto’. Which is that Michael Swift’s original article, published in *Gay Community News *back in the 80s, is clearly a satire. The religious right have appropriated it as evidence of the so-called ‘Gay Agenda’ through the simple, and utterly dishonest, expedient of quoting it without the sentence that prefaces it:
“This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor.”
Read that one line, and everything that comes after becomes clear, pierces right to the heart of the homophobia that has poisoned American society for, one might guess, centuries – decades certainly. Omit it, and you are left with a tasteless rant. I wonder why all those right wing Christian senators and rabble rousers choose the latter course …
Now, I don’t put Michael Swift in the pantheon alongside his more famous, and far more literate, namesake Jonathan – Dean of St Patrick’s Cathedral in 17th and 18th century Dublin, author of Gulliver’s Travels, and a man who has been hailed (on Wikipedia at least) as the greatest ever satirist writing in English. But he is a satirist, in the best iconoclastic tradition of satire.
Jonathan Swift, you may recall, penned the notorious pamphlet popularly known as A Modest Proposal. In it he suggested that poor Irish folk might improve their lot by selling their children as food for rich people. Even today such seemingly bad taste satire might raise an eyebrow; one can only guess at what sort of reaction it elicited from Jonathan’s readers 300 years ago!
So I do not agree that the ‘Gay Manifesto’ is “extraordinarily irresponsible on Swift’s part”. Provocative, yes. Tasteless, perhaps. But irresponsible? Definitely not. The ‘Gay Agenda’ is a myth, pure right wing propaganda, I would say.
So, on to another, perhaps even more tendentious question:
3. Should pro-gay material be taught and allowed in public schools?
Well, that depends on what you mean by “pro-gay”. If you mean material which asserts that a homosexual orientation is preferable to a heterosexual one; if you mean material which teaches that gays are superior to straights; if you mean material which encourages young people, confused about their potential sexual orientation, to ‘choose’ to be gay because being gay is somehow ‘better’ than being straight – then no, pro-gay material should not be taught in schools.
But if by “pro-gay” you mean material which teaches that homosexual orientation (and practice) is just as normal and healthy as heterosexual; which teaches that we should treat gays exactly the same as we treat straights, which teaches that if you are gay, it’s not a sin or crime to be that way, and that you can be gay and also live a completely ‘normal’, happy, Christian life – then yes, pro-gay material should definitely be taught in schools.
For me, all this is actually not tendentious at all, it’s a no-brainer. It’s just basic equality, basic human rights. Basic Christian love.
Your quote about fisting is another red herring, I’m afraid. Okay, so you personally may find certain sexual practices abhorrent. Or at least, you don’t want your children to be taught about them in school. Fair enough. But surely this is a question about sex education generally, not about specifically ‘gay’ sexual practices?
The practice of fisting is, as you make clear in your quote, not confined to gay men or women. Would you, for example, feel equally uncomfortable if your children were taught about blow jobs or cunnilingus at school – practices which, I am quite sure, many faithful, loving, married, heterosexual Christian couples enjoy?
Maybe so. And I would support your right to be that way. As the good and loving parent I’m quite sure you are, you are best placed to know what to tell your kids about sex, and when. But if you accept that children should be taught about sex at school at all, at the appropriate age, then you should not rule out *a priori *discussion of practices that you personally find unacceptable.
(Not that I’m defending fisting, or any particular sexual practice. In truth, fisting sounds rather dangerous and unpleasant to me. 
But then I’ve never tried it, so what do I know?)
Anyway, Sass, I hope I haven’t offended you by anything I have said here. I *love *your posts, I really value your opinion, and I do actually agree with a lot of what you say. But I also feel very strongly that all forms of prejudice ought to be stamped out as firmly and as quickly as possible – even those we sometimes find ourselves in sympathy with. And too, that as Bret so wisely points out, we should look to the plank in our own eye before we look to dislodge the speck in our brother’s.
All the best to you, sis.
Shalom
Johnny
Hi Johnny. I’m not offended…BUT, someone else was. Not by you but by MY posts and some of the things I brought up. The conversation I THOUGHT we were having was your question: “Why does the Right hate gays so much?” Well, I gave you several answers and thought I was qualified because I was a fundamentalist for the first 15 years of my walk and I still know MANY. SO, I am quite familiar with what they think and where they get their information.
I gave 3 EXAMPLES of things I KNOW regularly circulate on Right-Wing homosexual watchdog websites. These are the Folsom Street Fair, The Michael Swift quote and what is known as “Fistgate”. ANYONE ON THE RIGHT who has an interest in this topic has run into at least one of these examples. They are WELL KNOWN EXAMPLES. I guess this was too much for some people. I have inadvertently offended. I can’t and won’t have a conversation about “WHY DOES THE RIGHT HATE GAYS SO MUCH?” and not be allowed to give the specific examples of WHY.
I was also informed that the information I provided could be used against gays and I am VERY SORRY for that. That never even occured to me. Maybe I was wrong to assume that anyone reading this thread was a logical, fair-minded person. Of course, it would be criminal to broad-brush all gay people and say they are all what was depicted in my examples. They are not. In fact, ALL the gay people I know are NOT like that. They are just normal, everyday people…BUT THAT WASN’T THE QUESTION WAS IT? Again, what I posted is WHAT THE RIGHT-WING THINKS and WHY.
So, I’m sorry Johnny, but this will be my last post on this thread. You bring up excellet points, but AGAIN, I was giving you examples of what the Right is saying, these aren’t things coming from me (except I did express my outrage at the deriding of Christ and my frustration with people being called bigots for being offended at that).
Signing off…Sass
These conversations always end up like this, even if the people agree with each other.
Hmmmm. That does indeed seem to be the case. But why?
Sass says:
And I understand why she says this. We might ask, how can we discuss *anything *properly if we have to pussyfoot around, not voicing our true opinions, because we’re scared we might hurt somebody’s feelings?
But the problem with this particular debate is the back story. The historical context. Which is centuries of oppression. Centuries of bigotry and prejudice and hatred and violence towards gay people. And given that context, we have to tread *incredibly * carefully.
For that prejudice, that hatred, that violence is not confined to our disgraceful past. It is a live fact of our society today. Even today, in 2012, gay men and women around the world are subject to mockery and persecution and violence daily. There are still countries - thank the Lord only a few, but there are some - in which it not only is it illegal to be homosexual, but homosexuality is punishable with the death penalty!
And the Church, to its eternal shame, adds fuel to this fire through its pathetically equivocal stance on the subject. As I said before, until Church leaders the world over have the guts to welcome and embrace human sexuality in all its varieties of glory, there will continue to be hatred and oppression and violence against anyone who is not part of the straight majority.
God help us all, and forgive us all.
But thank you, Sass, for your honest and heartfelt contributions to this debate.
All the best
Johnny