I love you Bret.
Sassā¦ wow, now that you have me in tears (literally), thank you so much, youāve made my day, hell, youāve made my week and month!! And for what itās worth, I love YOU too! 
Thank you so much, youāve made a REAL change in MY life by the way YOU conduct yours. Canāt see to type. 
But I AM so happy, tears of true JOY!!
Again, I love you too and admire your sensitivityā¦ what a blessing. 
Bret
And Johnnyā¦ how could I EVER forget YOU and ALL your contributions on this topic!!! 
Sorry mate, definitely NOT intentionalā¦ YOU have brought so much to the table, and especially speaking so openly and honestly about your brotherā¦ so Iām sending you across the pond a huge thank you Johnny. And I apoligize for leaving YOU outā¦ brain fade for sure. And Iām sure Iāve missed someone else, so forgive me in advance? 
Blessings to each of you!
Bret
Hi Bret
Thanks for that, youāre so kind. Your friendship means the world to me.
But thereās really nothing to apologise about, honestly mate. Iām just glad that together **all **of us here have been able to have such a good and honest and worthwhile discussion about something really important - sharing the love of God with all our brothers and sisters, regardless of our superficial ādifferencesā. Because when all is said and done we are **all **Godās children. I hope that conversations like this one will help to reinforce that wonderful truth.
Bret, itās so great to hear you sounding so happy and positive, for I know that youāre facing a tough time in your life. Weāre all with you mate, always remember that.
Every blessing
Johnny
Dear Bret and Sass lovely to read you both āI feel a bit voyeuristic, but thatās so heart warming to us all! And warm greeings to Drew and Johnny.
Dear Bob
I think ā because this is a potentially emotive topic itās best to take thing slowly, with time for reflection. So Iāll take a few days to ponder the links youāve kindly posted to me, and to read Ruthās article about Sodom Then Iāll give a proper response towards the end of the week (an informal one, but a āconsideredā one). Iām completely affirming of gay relationships and actually have not been an evangelical for thirty years. However I reckon I am a sort of āconservative liberalā on ethical issues ā so I can see the concerns of the āother sideā, and feel respect and understanding when the other side is moderate and compassionate. OS I ondāt mind doign the reasearch for a discussion that takes place in stages.
I see what you mean by the term āgay lifestyleā being used purely pejoratively and negatively ā and therefore being irrelevant. I agree. It doesnāt necessarily have such negative the connotations in the UK. Iāve heard some people, including gay people, use it just to mean something like what gay people share in a general way ā an interest in a common history, the āgay iconā cultural phenomena, a certain style of tolerance that is often more inclusive and accepting than that found in straight society etc. But Iām already aware from surfing the net for research how it is used purely negatively to stereotype rather than make more benign generalisations.
I know there are books by gay Christians that talk about Gay vocations in life ā which is something different from ālife style choicesā. Of course a gay vocation will be informed by gay culture ā as is right. I guess itās about a conversation between gay people ā who have often been persecuted, killed or at the very least excluded by straight Christians ā about how they can work out their own way of following in the Way.
What has impressed me about the story of the rather conservative evangelical who has been affirming of his daughterās lesbian relationship is that the man is concerned for his daughterās health, happiness and well being āthis strikes me an authentically Christian attitude. Iād contrast this to that of Ayatollah Khomeni who once said to one of his children ā āI love you because you love Allah. But if you were to do that which was displeasing to Allah and to stop loving Allah I would gladly hand you over to the executioner. To Khomeni ā who was in no way representative of all Muslims but strikes me as similar in attitude to some Christians I have met ā Allah is Compassionate because he preserves the righteous in a world of clear cut and simple āpurityā ā hence Khomeniās 'compassionateā initiative (and I am being ironic) to make sex change operations available to homosexuals so that they can ābecomeā women ā or else be killed to tidy up the world. For me God is compassionate because he reaches out to those on the margins and calls his lovers to be involved in the messy ambiguities of the world.
I think there are really twisted ways of being heterosexual which cannot be squared with a religious vocation. For example I think of the sheer misogyny that I have often witnessed among some Christian men. I hear that some gay Christian men can be misogynist too ā Iāve not met any of them but I have heard about vociferous opponents of Womenās ordination nit e Church of England sometimes being gay. However, it strikes me that an authentic part of the vocation of gay men has often been to show real sensitivity and empathy to women, not muddled by sexual desire. This has to be a gift from God ā because Iāve witnessed its goodness from time to time in loving friendships I have seen flourishing.
Blessings
Dick
i love how even with this āhotā topic, there is a huge amount of love being shown on this thread.
Bret can i say i love your attitude. it seems to me to be very Christlike. i think i can learn alot from you!
Well, it took me awhile, but I read through the whole thread.
I concur with James, the amount of love being shown here despite the controversial nature of the topic is very encouraging, not to mention beautiful.
Thereās so much good stuff here that I donāt know if I can comment on all of it, but I would like to throw in my two cents on all of this, as it is an issue that I too think is very worthy of discussion, and is close to my heart as wellā¦
Like Johnny and others here, I started out somewhat ambivalent about homosexuality, though I have never been, or at least cannot recall ever being, violently opposed to it.
Growing up, my dad was slightly homophobic (at least I think), but my mom on the other hand, who I must admit (and not saying this to bash on my dad) has had a bigger impact on my life and the way I think overall, has always been very supportive of gays, gay relationships, gay marriage, etc.
For instance, sheās a big admirer of the famous Olympic swimmer Greg Louganis (even read his biography), who tragically died from AIDS, and of Freddie Mercury, the lead singer of Queen (awesome band, by the way, been getting into them more lately), who also tragically died from AIDS, among others, and has had a few gay friends throughout her lifeā¦ she says she thinks she partly developed this attitude towards gays because of her adoptive mother, who had many gay friends that would often hang out with her in their home while my mom was growing up (much to my momās adoptive fatherās chagrinā¦ like my dad, he was mildly homophobic 
ā¦ but I guess he put up with it, and didnāt protest too much, which is good ).
So my mom has had ample impact on my sister and I concerning our attitude towards homosexuality, I should thinkā¦
But even though I never felt hateful towards homosexuals, that didnāt keep me from feeling uncomfortable about itā¦ and when I became a believer, like Johnny and others here, for a long time and up until recently I just assumed it was wrongā¦ my stance on it was pretty similar to Scottās, I think, which was basically that being gay wasnāt wrong, but acting on it was, and like Timās stance, that one should hate the sin and not the sinner, and that we should be compassionate towards those who are struggling with these thingsā¦
Iāve struggled since I was a boy with my sexuality. I confess Iāve had fleeting thoughts about the same sex, and even more than that have been curious about what it would be like to be a woman (never dressed up or anything, just been curious especially about what it would be like to be pregnant, for some reason thatās always fascinated meā¦ sorry, donāt mean to weird out the ladies here 
), but other than that Iām very much straight, and I have always a very strong attraction towards the opposite sexā¦
But I have struggled with controlling my desiresā¦ Iāve wrestled since an early age with pornography addiction, and probably more so than yourself Scott (I can really relate to your struggle though brother, if youād ever like to talk about it, feel free to private message me anytimeā¦ itās good to know weāre not aloneā¦), and though itās not as bad now as it was growing up, itās still something I wrestle with, and have been wrestling with more lately than usualā¦ also in my early twenties, sometime after my parents split, I went and lost my virginity, outside of marriage of course, and began going from relationship to relationship, some of them lasting months, some weeks, a couple only a few daysā¦ but all of them, at least in my mind, were pretty much built around sexā¦ 
With my fiancee, Kaylyn, things are way different, because weāre not sleeping together and weāre waiting till marriage (and itās been a long wait, almost six years now, and it may be two or three more years, since Kaylyn is planning on going to collegeā¦ just hope I donāt end up like the famous poet Alfred Lord Tennyson, having to wait ten years or more to actually get married to my mate ), but it has by no means been easy for meā¦ I mean, Iām 29 going on 30, a young healthy viral male in his primeā¦ needless to say, I have strong hormones.
Because of my lifelong struggle with sexual desire, or more frankly, with lust, I have always felt sympathetic with others who struggle with sexual issuesā¦ so even though I assumed that homosexuality was wrong, I didnāt think of it as any worse than what I was wrestling withā¦
So I guess you could say I had something of a more moderate conservative view for some timeā¦
And I did feel uncomfortable with it sometimesā¦ especially when gay men would āhit on meāā¦ now, not trying to puff myself up here ( ), but I think Iām a fairly attractive guy ( ), but alas, this has drawn the attention of some whoās attention, well, I didnāt really wantā¦ including a few guys.
There was one guy named Alex on the bus one time who kept trying to convince me to come to his place so he could ātake care of meāā¦ I mean, I was flattered in a weird way, but, um, yeah, noā¦
Another time there was a tall blond guy who asked me for change for bus fair at a bus-stop, and I gave him some, then he looked really intently at me and asked me if he could take me somewhere and give me a BJā¦ I was floored, and said no rather firmly, and then we parted waysā¦ again, flattered in an odd way, but I do think coming up to a random stranger and asking for change is one thing, but coming up to a random stranger and asking for a sexual favor is quite another.
So in that I can relate to how Sass feels on that front, where sometimes there are those who go way overboard and behave rudely and badly with their sexualityā¦ but then again, there are heterosexuals who do that sort of thing just as much, if not more (I know I have had my moments ) so certainly none of this is a knock at homosexuals in general, least of all wonderful Christlike people like Bret hereā¦
Itās just to say that I think if those guys had asked me out on a date or something along those lines instead of trying to get directly into my pants I might have not been made as uncomfortableā¦
My answer would have still been no, but I might have been less weirded out.
I think Ruthās points about fornication were really challenging and thought-provoking. I think one of the things that convinces me that pornography isnāt good for you is because it objectifies people, especially women, which at least subliminally can lead oneās thinking to do the sameā¦ I know I have often struggled with seeing women more as objects then as persons, to my shame, and I believe exposing myself to pornography so much over the years has played a part in thatā¦
I pray often that God would help me to love rather than just lust for women, including Kaylynā¦
But I think the point that Ruth brought up connects with something that Scott said, about homosexuals defining their identity almost exclusively around their sexualityā¦ now, I donāt agree that all homosexuals, or even most, do that, but there are some who do, I knowā¦ there are also heterosexuals who do this as wellā¦ I know I have done that to some extent at times in my life, letting my sexuality and desires define and control pretty much my whole life, and I donāt think that kind of thing is healthy, whether youāre gay or straightā¦ our sexuality is a very important part of who we areā¦ but then it isnāt everythingā¦ and when we objectify those that we are attracted to, or donāt love and accept them as a whole person, but only focus on their body and what pleasure they may give us, we are devaluing them, and not following Christās most basic commandment, which is to love our neighborā¦
And this applies to both homosexuals and heterosexuals, I believe. I believe what made me uncomfortable about those guys hitting on me wasnāt so much that they were guys hitting on me (though I confess that did make me a little uncomfortable), but that in their forthright approach they made me feel kinda devalued as a personā¦ I was flattered in a weird way that they found me physically desirable, but then that seems to be all they were interested inā¦ so I think that more than anything is what put me on the defensiveā¦ but then again, I have to admit that it was like a taste of my own medicine, as I know Iāve sometimes seen, and even treated, women in that way.
So thank you Ruth for your great thoughts on this. I agree with Johnny that what you had to say was wonderful and very important and relevant to this discussion.
When we make our sexuality, whether that be gay or straight, or otherwise, the defining center of our existence, we pretty much turn sex into an idol, for lack of a better word, and when we base our view of others on our sexual desire for them alone, regardless of whether weāre gay or straight or otherwise, then weāre devaluing them, and failing to love our neighbor as Christ calls us to doā¦
This is really important, and hits very close to home for me, struggling with lust and mixing it up with love as I have and sometimes still do, so it is something I will continue to pray about, and I would appreciate all of your prayers in this as wellā¦
Anyways, I digress (I like your use of that word, Johnny ).
Back to my storyā¦ what really got me to start thinking more about all of this was when I made friends with one of my co-workers a few years ago, an openly gay man named John Kindle. John was a fun-loving, warm and friendly guy in his late 30s, who would sometimes flirt with me, but I didnāt mind, because I liked the guy, as his personality was endearing.
He was also a Christian, or at least said he was. He said he attended a gay-friendly church in downtown Portland, where we worked, and I wonāt question his sincerity, and the more I think of it, though he wasnāt perfect, and had his flaws, he still portrayed more Christlike love than most other people Iāve knownā¦
But another thing was John also had AIDSā¦ His partner cheated on him and picked it up from someone elseā¦ then passed it on to John without him knowing. John himself was faithful in the relationship, but even that didnāt keep him from getting AIDSā¦
My heart went out to him despite my somewhat conservative views (which we debated about occasionally), and whenever he got sick or his white blood cell count went down I would worry about him, and I prayed for himā¦
At some point John got fired for some stupid reason, and I lost track of him, and havenāt talked with him or heard about him since thenā¦ so I donāt know where he is or how heās doing, or even if heās still alive, but Iāll never forget him and how knowing him affected and challenged the way I felt about homosexuality and homosexuals in generalā¦ I was always sympathetic, but knowing him made me even more sympatheticā¦
But thatās where I was at up until recentlyā¦ very sympathetic towards gays, but still assuming homosexuality was wrongā¦ until I came to see and believe in UR last yearā¦
Soon after that I made a couple Universalist friends (I wonāt name names because thatās for them to share) who turned out to be gay and lesbian, respectively, and they have both become very close friends of mineā¦ at first I was kind of taken aback by this, but then over time I guess it just dawned on me that maybe just like I was wrong in assuming that hell was forever, maybe I was also wrong in assuming that homosexuality was wrongā¦ and just as Iāve seen that there is strong biblical support that UR is true, I am starting to see that there is also biblical support (though perhaps not quite as strong as there is for UR) that thereās nothing inherently sinful about homosexualityā¦ and as time goes on, I see myself leaning more and more in that directionā¦ itās like Johnny said, itās like a paradigm shiftā¦ once you question one thing, then itās only natural for other questions to ariseā¦ and I agree with James that we should look more deeply until all of those controversial issues that divide us, and not just the heaven/hell questionā¦
But really, itās not all that surprising. Just as I always deep down had a problem with everlasting hell, and longed for and prayed for and leaned in the direction of UR in my spirit, for years, so too I had a problem with homosexuality being considered wrongā¦ on the one hand, I sometimes wondered how eternal torment could be right, and on the other, how homosexuality could be wrongā¦
I remember there were times, in thinking about John, when I asked God how homosexuality could be wrong, because it didnāt seem to really be harmful to anyone, including me, just as there were times that I asked Him how eternal torment could be right, because it seemed to be harmful to many people, if not everyone, including Himā¦
And I think I am beginning to see that He is answering both of those questions by showing me that what I assumed before just isnāt true, and that His plan all along as been to reconcile all people, throughout the world and throughout history, from beginning to end, to Him, and that all people, at rock bottom, whether black or white, young or old, conservative or liberal, gay or straight, are my brothers and my sisters, and He loves them and cares for them and wants them, just as He loves and cares for and wants meā¦
And that is a beautiful thingā¦
I would be interested seeing a careful reading of all those passages in the Bible that may concern homosexualityā¦ planning on reading more of Michael Woodās research when I have more time, and maybe ordering his book, Paul On Homosexuality, so I can learn more about the biblical support for this.
And Iām glad to see that our own beloved Professor Sobernost is planning on digging into this.
Great discussion here everyone
Like Johnny and Sass and Dick and others here I think actually knowing and caring for gay people in my life has challenged and affected me the most concerning all of this, and I agree with Andrew (WAAB) that all those who are opposed to homosexuality should, if they havenāt already, get to know and maybe make friends with at least one gay person, and listen openly to how they feel about this,so at least their judgment about homosexuality and homosexuals can be more informed, and, more likely, sympathetic and lovingā¦
And Bret, blessings to you brother. You strike me as a rather fine human being. But most importantly, not only do Sass and others here, including me, love you and care for you as much as we are able in our imperfect humanity, but God loves you even more, and perfectly, and most of all
Blessings to you all, and peace, and I look forward to further discussion on this.
- Matt
1. Am I a bigot if I speak out against homosexuality?
Wikipedia defines a bigot as āa 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 genderā.
Well, I guess that makes me a bigot. I am utterly intolerant of all sorts of opinions and political views ā fascism, racism, homophobia and Calvinism are four that trip off the tongue. Iām also resolutely intolerant of people who traffic women for sex, or abuse children, or carry out ethnic cleansing, for example. And I donāt 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 Iām bigoted about transgress those standards.
āātruth is the new hate speechāā as the saying goes and it seems it is applicable āāeverywhereāā
that being said I do believe there may well be some gays who shall make it through those preverbial pearly gates before some christians do !
Hi Matt
Just wanted to say thanks for your long, heartfelt and bravely honest post. If more of us were as honest and open about these things as you have been, there wouldnāt be half the prejudice and misunderstanding there are.
And you illustrate a profound and important point. Which is that for many of us, our sexual orientation is not 100% nailed on one way or the other. Iām not talking about bisexuals, I mean people who are ābasicallyā or āessentiallyā straight or gay, but who have nevertheless had some sort of same or opposite sex experience or feelings at some point in their lives.
I include myself in that category. I went to an all-boys school, where the general atmosphere was vaguely and unthinkingly homophobic. There were a handful of gay teachers but only one, as I recall, who was āoutā. He was a lovely man, probably only in his late twenties at the time. and he got fired for entertaining sixth formers in his rooms. That was literally all he was doing ā having some young men (age 17 or thereabouts) round to his rooms for tea and cigarettes. There is no suggestion that he ever overstepped the bounds of propriety. But when the school authorities found out he was duly banished.
There was another teacher, a single man in his fifties who was also a housemaster for a small group of 2-13 year-olds. I have heard personal testimony from one of the boys in his house that this teacher regularly used to expose himself in front of the boys. He never touched any of them, as far as was known, but even so ā¦
But then we had a young female teacher who was having sex with two or three of her older pupils. Apparently one of the pupils who she refused to have sex with shopped her to the authorities, and she got fired as well! (It all happens in English public schools ā¦)
Anyway, I had a very brief, mild, and all rather innocent, āencounterā with another boy when I was about 15. Nothing came of it, and ever since then I havenāt had any further excursions outside of my heterosexual orientation, of which I have long been certain. Although I have, of course, been on the gradual journey of understanding, through my brother, that I have documented in previous posts.
My point is that most of us have a degree of same-sex attraction within us. Maybe you knew this already, but according to the famous Kinsey reports published in the 40s and 50s, roughly one in four men and one in five women have at least some tendency to develop romantic attachments towards other men or women. One can dispute Kinseyās figures, but however you look at it itās definitely a sizeable chunk of the population.
I think for some men, particularly, facing up to the fact that they are not exclusively 100% red-blooded blokes can be very difficult. Their uneasiness about their own sexuality can often manifest itself in violently aggressive homophobia. (Have you seen the movie American Beauty, which touches on this issue?)
I also think this might be one of the reasons why Christians who believe homosexuality is a sin can sometimes be so unloving towards gay people. Not understanding gay men and women at all, perhaps they worry that their children (or they themselves even) might somehow be āseducedā or āenticedā or āpersuadedā into becoming gay if they mix with gay people, or if true equality in sexual relationships is taught in schools and churches.
Which is ridiculous, of course. Yes, for some of us our sexual orientation is somewhat elastic when we are young. That to me seems like a normal part of growing up. But no amount of propaganda one way or the other will ultimately change what is innate in us ā innate as a gift of God, I might add.
Great to hear from you, as always ā our resident prophet!
All the best
Johnny
Matt and Johnny, really nicely stated, and your frank honesty is challenging and beautiful.
again, how often is it that such a divisive issue can spawn such loving discussion?
surely God must be behind it?
Wowā¦ what an amazing and thought-provoking thread! Given the topic, the genuine spirit of fair-mindedness and courtesy expressed is truly extraordinary! I think Bret was led by the Holy Spirit to quote our Lord that āout of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.ā For what itās worth, Iād like to share my thoughts on the matter.
My own view is similar to what Ruth (forgive me if I have her confused with another!) mentionedā¦ that most of the sin we reflexively label as fundamentally sexual in nature really isnāt sexual at all. While it may (or may not) **express **itself in a sexual way, giving in to our hedonistic desires isā¦ at its essenceā¦ the failure to love our neighbor as oneselfā¦ to put our own selfish gratifications ahead of the well-being of our neighbor. You donāt have to be a homosexual or a heterosexual to do thisā¦ you just have to be a human being who has selfish wants and needs. In other words, it seems clear to me that we are all in this same boat of carnality together. And itās equally clear to me that a big part of being a Christian is doing our level best, with Godās help in Jesus Christ, to live out the two greatest commandments. Not to earn our salvation by some work, but to be ambassadors of the One who saved us.
Iām not physically attracted to men, and I never have been. Is this some moral victory on my part? Is it the result of good parenting or proper religious instruction? Heavens no. For some reason, Iām just naturally attracted to women. It involved no choice or action on my part. And I donāt know any gay person who chose to be gay. Indeed, Iāve met many who resisted their sexual orientation for years and years and would have given anything to be āstraightā and to āfit inā and have a ānormalā life. But the fact is, they had no more choice about their sexuality than I did. I never had to give much thought to my what my sexuality was. As for the normal worries and fears of adolescence? I had easy access to advice and wise counsel from my father and oldest brother. I benefited even from the not-so-wise counsel from other boys at school and the neighborhood, at least insofar as it reinforced the universality of my adolescent angst. Our gay friends had none of that socializing comfort and affirmation of the normality of their emerging physical identityā¦ just lonely and unhealthy fear and trepidation at the very best, and derision, ridicule and violence at the worst. Were I in their shoes at that young stage of my life, honestly, I donāt know if I would have been able to bear it! So I ask myself, who am I to condemn? Nobody; thatās who.
Far be it from me to tell anyone here how to think or what to do. The best any one of us can do is walk by the light weāre given. And I am not claiming to have any more light than any other. My best guess is that I have less to see by than most! But as for me, I can see no downside to gay people getting legally-recognized marriages and making life-long, loving commitments to serve one another the same as heterosexuals are able to do. Given our divorce rates here in the U.S., even among believers, they canāt make a bigger mess out of marriage than we heterosexuals have routinely made of it.
I did not always feel this way. I suppose, like our president, my views have āevolved.ā Prior to the AIDS crisis and in the era of the notorious bathhouse and bar scenes of San Francisco and New York City, my view of homosexuality was that it was the epitome of hedonistic, dehumanizing, selfish excess. But what I now understand I failed to realize at the time was that it was no more representative of gayness than the āfree loveā of the 1960s, or prostitution or the brothel industry in Nevada is representative of heterosexuality. And if gay people were in reality the wanton hedonists I believed them to be, then why in the world would so many of them want to get legally married? It defies common sense. The desire to legally marry, which is necessarily as self-sacrificing as it is self-fulfilling, is to run headlong in the very opposite direction. Thatās a desire that I believe should be encouraged, not condemned!
I confess that I still struggle with this issue in many ways. You canāt erase a lifetimeās worth of conditioning overnight. Would I want my pastor to marry gay people in my church? Honestly, I donāt think I can really answer that question at this point. But there are some things I **can **do. I can take a stand for basic fairness and for tolerance of people who I am convinced have no wish to do and are doing neither me nor anyone else any harm. And I can hold out the hand of friendship and love in Christ Jesus as best as I am able and with His help. Iām not sure what more I can do, but I donāt feel I can do any **less **than that.
Anyway, I think that about covers it.
Love in Christ to all,
Andy
The last few posts by Matt, Johnny and Andy bring up an interesting point. As Johnny said, MANY have at some point during their youth had same-sex attractions. Andy on the other-hand says he never has and wisely states that this was not the result of any moral victory on his part. So this begs the question: COULD THERE BE MANY IN CHRISTIAN CIRCLES WHO HAVE HAD SAME SEX ATTRACTIONS THAT DIDNāT REALLY AMOUNT TO ANYTHING (like Johnny) BUT *DO THINK THEY HAVE ACHEIVED A MORAL VICTORY? And that this actually perpetuates the āChoiceā argument?
Still not getting into this, Sass
Hi Sass-thatās a fair point my friend (conservative liberal speals to liberal conservative ). Well I never felt same sex attractions myself ā but I know lots of boys, and girls do go through an indeterminate phase when hormones are raging. However, the people Iāve known who are gay ā most of them had felt that way from a very young age, way before adolescence. There is a spectrum of human sexuality ā and a spectrum of all things human; but it seems to me that most gay people are so by birth rather than having a bit of a wobble in adolescence and choosing one way or the other. I wish we had a scientist onsite to tell us about the genetic evidence and what we can learn from this ā Iāve read some articles but donāt want to hold forth beyond my competence. The only point for me is ā can gay relationshipsā be places for human fulfilment and growth in love (it seems to me that they can, just as much as heterosexual relationships - although like heterosexual relationships they can also sometimes be destructive).
One of these days Iād like to do a post about the early Christian cult of virginity - I think the victory of virginity to the early Christians meant something very different to fitting in to the received sexual roles of the heterosexual family. I donāt think we shoudl or even could try and return to their way of looking a the world - but it still challenges some of our certainities, in my view. Will do a post on this before looking at Sodom if I have the time - and if you think it would be useful.
Hi all- good discussion going on here; so I just thought Iād spoil the fun with some hard headed thoughts!!! But do continue as before after this post, and jump over it if you like. (Perhaps my hard headed stuff will give some pointers for new directions in intimate personal reflections and sharing, perhaps not)
So letās get boring! When discussing any distinct group of people as a general category there is a common logical fallacy that we all need to be aware of in the interests of truth (me included!). Many of you will know of it but Iāll describe it just because itās often good to not take things for granted. It has some high faulting technical term like āthe fallacy of the undistributed middleā but I think of it as making the mistake of over-generalising ā in other word of referring to āallā when what we should be speaking only of āsomeā.
First example
For example, there is a famous right wing controversialist in the UK who is keen to link any concern about global warming etc. with fascism by using a low and dishonourable sleight of hand ā
Hitler was a vegetarian
(True)
Hitler was a āgeniusā of evilā
(Trueā if we can imagine the opposite of real creative genius)
Therefore all vegetarians (and by extension through innuendo - all people with environmental concerns) are geniuses of evil - or at the very least tainted by association).
(Balderdash and piffle!!!)
Now this is a ridiculous argument; but Melanie Phillips of the UK Daily Mail (known affectionately as Mel P. ā very scary Spice to the unconvinced 
) employs this very ālogicā in her attacks on the green movement.
Now Iām sure there are technical, algebraic ways of demonstrating why this argument is false (āall Aās are Bāsā and what have you).However, Iām bad at maths but can just about visualise those Venn diagrams from my school days. If I draw a circle representing vegetarians and one representing geniuses of evil the overlap of the two circles is very small ā the subset including only āAdolf Hitlerā. If I obtained evidence to demonstrate that Pol Pot, Stalin, and Attila the Hun were also vegetarians, the overlap would be a little bigger, but not much.
**
Second example**
Pat Robertson was a homophobe
(This much seems true based on the evidence of his speeches ā although he may have been more charitable in his personal dealings)
Pat Robertson was a conservative Christian
(True was a conservative Christian of a sectarian kind, but not all conservative Christians are sectarian or even remotely extreme ā so over generalisation is creeping in here even before the conclusion)
Therefore all conservative Christians are homophobes
False. There is no reason why this should be true even of all conservative Christians of a sectarian kind ā Iāll bet if you polled women and men how would broadly align themselves to the Christian Right youād find distinct shades difference in attitude between the genders, thatās my hunch anyway ā but I could be wrong. (I read about a high profile American evangelical. I donāt know who they are but the husband is opposed to gay relationships while the wife affirms them. The writer mused that despite their difference this couple obviously still fancy each other and share the same bed āwhich struck me as an encouraging point to make rather than being unnecessarily crude. And take a look at Phillip Yanceyās account of his friendship with a gay evangelical in āWhatās so amazing about grace?ā if you get a chance. Philip Yancey is obviously a man of deeply conservative sensibilities. He has found his friendship challenging. But he even went as far as to go on a Gay Pride March with his friend ā although the experience obviously disturbed him)
Third example
With a less underhand intent someone might say of a camp male friend (if being ācampā is something they find funny rather than worthy of righteous fury)
A friend of mine is camp
(True if they are being honest)
My friend is also gay
(Again true if they are telling the truth)
Therefore all gay men are camp
(Untrue)
Again this is an over-generalisation from a specific instance. Iāve e known men who are very camp but are heterosexual. I also know that there is a type of humour and sensibility shared by some gay men which is known as ācampā (with a particular style of delivery and self mockery rooted in gay experience). There was a very funny camp gay man with the stage name āGay Gordonā who used to paper on āLondon Tonightā giving hints on what was āinā on the London gay scene. I only saw him once; but I remember he was enthusing about certain supermarkets in the City where you could shop with dinky mini shopping trolleys instead of the industrial sized ones that were then the only choice in most supermarkets. He recommended going to these supermarkets and zipping around jauntily shopping with the mini trolleys as a splendidly gay thing to do. (I thank God that funny and sweet kid lives in England ā in a theocracy heād be executed for this exercise of personal preference or forced to have a sex change). However, I know at least one gay man who would be absolutely mortified if in any way associated with āhigh campā ā itās just not his thing; and he prefers to be a āmanās manā in style and outlook while still being gay and proud of it. And most of the high profile gay figures in politics and the arts in the UK are just not at all camp (while the comedian Eddie Izzard ā who is heterosexual ā is very camp)
You get my drift ā it is important to avoid over generalising in a discussion of this nature (and I too am prone to it ā and expect to be pulled up short if I do it).
Of course some generalisations are justified.
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered people affirm solidarity as people who have a shared story of persecution and marginalisation by mainstream straight society. That seems a true and just as a self determined generalisation. However all three very general categories of people have different histories too. For example, as a matter of history within Christianity and Judaism lesbianism has often been ignored and gone unnoticed ā while gay homosexuality has been singled out for special condemnation and persecution.
The wide spectrum of people that make up the LGBT āsubsetā of human sexuality, may in some ways chare a common culture (ācultureā being an experience of life leading to ways of being, acting/reacting and creating in the world). But there will also be huge variation. For example, some LGBT people may be fixated upon LGBT āsingle issues ā often those who have been most hurt and disadvantaged. Many, many others will feel very differently ā seeing the issue of rights and sexuality as part of a far wider spectrum of compassionate concerns that reach way beyond LGBT issues. (I think of James Alison the gay Catholic whose writings Drew and I both give high marks. Heās a distinctively gay voice but he writes in a way that he masks his particular concerns of relevance to all people. His book āOn Being Likedā is a real classic that should be treasured by Universalists.
And for those of us in the straight community who dismiss some LGBT people who really are fixated on the big single issue, I think we have to ask ourselves how much of this is our fault. When LGBT people are fully welcomed and accepted into the human family as the sae as the rest of us while different (as we are all different in our own ways, but the same in our humanity) this should be a balm to the sort of resentment that can fuel the single issue mindset (and the single issue mindset is not confined to LGBT people).
Life is weird ā we begin thinking that we are reaching out to people on the margins ā but then find that the real grace of the situation is that they are reaching out to us in love and forgiveness, despite the fact that we represent everything that has rejected them. That has been my expererience.
Blessings
Dick
Hi Dick. I still have some more left of your last post to read, but I did want to make a point. YOU ARE RIGHT when you say gay people know their orientation very young and itās not a āwobbleā in adolescence where they choose. My point is: STRAIGHT PEOPLE DONāT ALWAYS KNOW THIS. Especially Christians. To THEM as per their OWN same-sex attraction experience, it IS just as you said: A wobble and a choice. And, itās pretty easy for a straight person who may have a slight same sex attraction in adolescence to choose ānotā. Hope I am making myself clear on what Iām trying to say here. Iām a much better speaker than writer.
Sass
Maybe a better way to say is: Could a STRAIGHT person with some same sex attractions (which I agree are rather common) actually THINK they made a choice to be straight?
Hi Sass ā
Well if speech is your metier thatās good to know ā but you do pretty well with the written word (which is all weāve got to express ourselves with on site, but it gives the verbal windbags an unfair advantage, ill grant you).
Iāll have a think about your specific question and get back to you tonight on the thread.
(And can I just say that dear Sass is prepared to reach out in friendship to all sorts of outsiders and even riff raff ā like eccentric middle aged Englishmen such as me!!! ).
Hi All ā
Do post over my previous post āit doesnāt need answering as such. Please donāt let the discussion grind to a halt 
.
I think Matt, and Johnny did some very thought provoking and truthful in recent posts, and James has given some great pithy reflections.
I think Stuartd from Tasmaniaās post is worthy of comment.
I think you are a really good guy Stuartā and see your post as affirming your opposition to all intolerance and prejudice ; and, I discern a mischievous irony in your conclusion that at least some gay people will be getting into heaven ahead of the righteous, which reminds me of something our most excellent Teacher once said.
As far as your being an implacable opponent of Calvinism as one form of bigotry among others, I can see just where you are coming from. In fact since joining this site Iāve often got very puffed with peevishness about Calvin and all his works. However ā and here is another sign of grace for us ā I see from the Introductions that one site member is actually a Gay Universalist Calvinist. So itās back to the drawing board for the lot of us
Andy said some great things in his post last night (as far as Iām concerned)
***Far be it from me to tell anyone here how to think or what to do. The best any one of us can do is walk by the light weāre given. And I am not claiming to have any more light than any other. My best guess is that I have less to see by than most! But as for me, I can see no downside to gay people getting legally-recognized marriages and making life-long, loving commitments to serve one another the same as heterosexuals are able to do. Given our divorce rates here in the U.S., even among believers, they canāt make a bigger mess out of marriage than we heterosexuals have routinely made of it.
I did not always feel this way. I suppose, like our president, my views have āevolved.ā Prior to the AIDS crisis and in the era of the notorious bathhouse and bar scenes of San Francisco and New York City, my view of homosexuality was that it was the epitome of hedonistic, dehumanizing, selfish excess. But what I now understand I failed to realize at the time was that it was no more representative of gayness than the āfree loveā of the 1960s, or prostitution or the brothel industry in Nevada is representative of heterosexuality. And if gay people were in reality the wanton hedonists I believed them to be, then why in the world would so many of them want to get legally married? It defies common sense. The desire to legally marry, which is necessarily as self-sacrificing as it is self-fulfilling, is to run headlong in the very opposite direction. Thatās a desire that I believe should be encouraged, not condemned!***
Youāve hit the nail on the head here about a number of issues in my view. Respect!!! And your thoughts are really worth pondering upon.
Blessings
Dick
Dick
Agree with all you say here. And *love *the verbal windbags line!
But to answer Sassās question -
Well I can only speak about my own experience, which was this:
Grew up in a conservative Christian household, eldest of four brothers. Homosexuality not much of a live issue in my family church or life generally. Never questioned my own heterosexual orientation - had girflriends etc. Aged about 15 had, as described earlier, a fleeting and rather āinnocentā same sex encounter at a party. Didnāt come to anything, didnāt happen again, didnāt really cause me to question my āfundamentalā straight orientation. Forgot about it, grew up, got married, here I am. (David, my gay brother, is 7 years younger than me, and didnāt come out until he was 22, so his sexuality didnāt figure at all in my teenage thinking.)
So for me, no there was never any question of āchoosingā to be straight, or achieving any sort of āmoral victoryā. But of course, I recognise that for other people the same sex attraction or encounter or whatever may run much deeper, in which case perhaps there may well feel like there is an element of choice involved in finally going one way or the other, as it were.
I *can *tell you what David told me, which is that as a teenager, even though he knew he was gay, he tried to behave like a straight guy. He āgot offā as we say in England with a couple of girls at parties, but he knew he was acting a lie, and soon abandoned all such pretences. But not until he was in his early 20s was he able to openly express his God-given sexual orientation.
Interestingly, gay marriage has hit the headlines today in Blighty, with the Church of England coming out against in rather a scaremongering sort of way, saying it will lead to the collapse of civilisation, earthquakes, tidal waves, meteorite showers, plagues of locusts, unlimited and uncensored Russsel Brand broadcasts on all TV channels simultaneously, doom disaster and general tragey all round. Or something like that.
All the best
Johnny
Thanks Johnny. I do believe that same sex attractions are common and even normal. A person going through puberty could easily have sexualized feelings for someone they look up to. So, I wondered if many people subconsciously believe the experience is the same for everyoneā¦That they simply chose not to follow those feelings whereas gay people did.
I do this think view is wrong because the gay people I know have agonized over their sexuality, but still, I bet there are a lot of straight people (such as many Evangelical who donāt KNOW any gay people) walking around thinking this way.
God Bless,
Sass
did the church of england say that? i expect it was maybe one or a few vicars/bishopsā¦afterall, the CoE is a huge church accomodating a huge variety of beliefs on a vast array of issues. itās actually quite amazing itās a cohesive church at all
under the CoE umbrella, we have gay friendly churches, happy clappy churches, somber churches, conservative churches, universalist churches (to a degree), women being ordained, opponents of gays and women in ministry, advocates of the sameā¦
Bishop Spong is a member, and i donāt think he believes in a literal Christ!!!
so we might want to be careful, as just because one churchman comes out with a statement doesnāt mean they all follow it.
i thought the pope said something about homosexuality being a threat as well though recentlyā¦and thatās a far more monolithic organisation.
sorry iām not trying to be hard to get along with, but felt i needed to stick up for the Anglican church. i am good friends with some very gay friendly people in the clergyā¦one of whom may even be a universalist though iāve not cornered him on it yet.
Hi James ā
Well there are at least two gay friendly Universalist Anglicans on this site .
I think we need to be careful when talking about the Church of England debate about gay marriages to listen and strive for accuracy ā Iāve still got my eyes and ears open as this debate develops and think it is worth returning to after a few weeks of reflection.
Andy ā who is American ā has brought this issue up. And I think we have to understand the American context of gay marriage is different and Brits need to listen hard to understand this ā and vice versa for our American brothers and sisters. (And Iām sure there is also a different context for the debate with our Antipodean sisters and brothers).
So hereās some really boring stuffā¦
In brief - The Church of England only refers to the English national Church (not sure about the Church of Wales and Church of Ireland that are certainly closely connected with the English Church, but I know the Church of Scotland is actually Presbyterian)
Jack Spong is an Anglican but heās not Church of England. Heās an Episcopalian ā the American independent Province of the Anglican Church that has a filial connection with the Church of England but only recognises the authority of the Archbishop of Canterbury as a sort of pastoral peace negotiator ā indeed the Archbishop of Canterbury does not have the Popeās authority even in England. Anglican provinces with a gentle link to the English Church exist in most of the former British colonies.
David Cameron ā our conservative Prime minister, wants to provide a statue for gay marriages in English Law. Iām sure he is sincere in his gay friendly stance ā he says he is pro gay marriage because he is a conservative and not in spite of this. (Individual Rights is certainly an honourable part of a Conservative libertarian agenda ā even if it grates with a Conservative traditionalist agenda) But David Cameron is also in coalition with the Liberal party ā and needs to woo Liberal voters (I reckon heās probably got his eye on them too in sticking his neck out ā which is fine, heās a politician after all!)
The Church of England has recognised Civil Partnerships for gay couples for seven years without any problems. Even traditionalists in the Church of England have come to terms with modern development sin human rights. I donāt think too many want to recriminalize homosexuality ir feel that is right that a devoted partner of whatever sexuality should not be protected by inheritance law when their other half dies.
However, gay marriage presents a different set of problems.
The problem for the Church of England is that it is an established Church ā so civil law in the UK and the ecclesiastical law of the Church although separate are closely linked and have an impact on each other. The Church of England is a very, very broad Church - and thatās part of its beauty. There is a strong religiously conservative wing of the Church. The tensions between the hard conservatives and the rest of the Church have grown more and more intense as the tensions between hard line conservatives and the rest have increased in the world wide Anglican Communion. (On the gay rights issue I note that in the recent past a suffragan (assistant) Bishop of the Church England ā from the fundamentalist elements was on record as sting he believed homosexuality is caused by an infestation of demons in the anus; I hope his career trajectory was slowed down by this)It is the job of bishops to try and keep the Church together. They are probably very concerned to listen to conservative opinion at the moment ā the fear being that vicars who refuse to conduct gay marriages might find themselves subject to lawsuits under European human rights legislation. This fear is probably groundless ā but we need to look at how it has worked in Denmark and Sweden where the established Lutheran Churches ā which contain strong conservative elements Iām sure ā have faced the same issue without schism.
The traditionalist right wing press has been in a furore about this. Theyāve whipped up a frenzy about the prospect of conservative Christians being persecuted in their own country by being forced to conduct gay marriages which they see as contrary to their faith. Iām sure this will not even remotely be the case in reality ā but they do have a point in my view, beyond the histrionics. Liberty of conscience has to be applied to all inasmuch as is possible ā and the working out an appropriate āfudgeā, if this is possible, will take time and diplomacy and cannot be forced by a Prime Minister anxious to display his liberal credentials
Iām so fond of the Church of England. Once it had huge political Power and was a religious monopoly. This changed gradually over the centuries, and for the good, in my view. I remember reading an article by a secular journalist on the death penalty in the UK. He noted that although through the centuries the Church of England Bishops in the House of Lords had unanimously voted for the death penalty in this country ā including in the eighteenth century when 300 offences, most of them petty, were punishable by death in a way that oppressed the poor ā the Bishops who eventually unanimously voted for its abolitions were Anglican Christian gentlemen, who cared about the whole of society, and were deeply anxious about miscarriages of justice on Christian principles. The same writer then noted that a purely secular state might in the future reintroduce the death penalty to cut crime without seeing miscarriage of justice as a problem.
Just at this moment the Church of England is a servant Church rather than a Church of Power - if you die, not matter what your faith or lack of it, your Church of England parish priest will bury you with a service that sates confidence in your resurrection to life ā for example. And there are many other examples of the universal Church of Englandās willingness to serve all, regardless of sect or party.
Another thing I really love about the broad Church of England is the way it conducts its politics. Itās all about trying to find an inclusive balance. The Church has strong Ecumenical connections to the Catholic and the Orthodox churches ā so there is an innate conservatism about it and many Church of England people want to preserve the traditions of the Ecumenical Church ā but the Church is on the whole, as well as being keen to preserve the traditions of the past, is also open to the present and the future ā so it also has radical elements (and even gives a home to radical conservatives). I know progressive Catholics sometimes see at as āa workshop for the spiritā that can take risks that the more traditional ancient Churches are loath to but may eventually follow the lead if things work out OK in the Church of England.
But The heart of the politics of the Church of England is a certain brand of liberalism ānot the ābecause Iām worth itā kind but rather a liberalism that simply tries to be realistic about the human condition. We all have weaknesses, we all have limitations - so it is foolish for any persons, sect or party to think they have a monopoly on truth or to want to impose their truth on others. Therefore the public sphere, even in the Church, should be a place where peace is the priority rather than the sort of truth that sectarians believe in being the priority. If peace is established and respect built up in this sphere then people can explore truth sharing their limited perspectives together. This form of liberalism - sometimes called ā the politics of human frailtyā - also protects the rights of minorities because it realizes that human beings are imperfect, and so the state will be imperfect and prone to injustice, as will the Church; therefore the state has no right to impose uniformity in behaviour or belief, and the Church, while holding to its traditions, needs to be open to the need for repentance and thinking again.
I think there probably will be a split and disestablishment of the Church of England coming, because of the gay marriage issue and lots of other issues too. The protestant schismatic elements are strong at the moment. But as a conservative liberal Iām keen on patience ā and I can think of at least one gay man and fellow Anglican, now dead, who would have agreed with me. However, if schism does come. I will feel loss, but Iām sure that the Church of England will reinvent itself in its best traditions.
Blessings
Dick (the old stick in the mud )