Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, June 24, 2009
Religion What If I Don't Want To Be "Welcomed" By the Anglican Church, Joel?
Posted by Dan Savage on Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 3:05 PM
What if I want to be left alone, Joel?
Of course I'd rather be proselytized by a "gay-affirming" church than attacked by an anti-gay church. But what I'd most like—what many of us non-religious types would like—is for religious people and institutions to leave us alone. Don't attack our families, don't march under our windows waving banners "welcoming" us. Leave us alone. I'm aware of the Anglican church, thanks, and I know that I can get my gayness affirmed at some locations. I'm still not interested.
As for the "copious coverage" of anti-gay preachers in the Stranger and on Slog: we take swings at "anti-gay rights pastors" because they're taking swings at us. If they left us alone, we'd leave them alone.
And speaking of religion...
2
"Leave us alone."
Alone, you're screwed, Dan.
Look, we all know you don't like religious people.
We also know you don't like Joel Connelly.
But are you projecting your various personal hatreds on potentially sympathetic allies?
Really. That sort of cynicism is over the top and a disservice to the community you clamor to represent.
Alone, you're screwed, Dan.
Look, we all know you don't like religious people.
We also know you don't like Joel Connelly.
But are you projecting your various personal hatreds on potentially sympathetic allies?
Really. That sort of cynicism is over the top and a disservice to the community you clamor to represent.
3
I don't know about "murdered his soul," but the poor kid in that video. He's probably willing to do anything to get the whole ordeal over with: "You want to writhe around and vomit and then I'll be straight and you'll leave me alone? OK." That church is pretty twisted, and I hope they get shut down for child abuse.
5
Right on Dan! I happen to be straight and not religious. If I were religious, I would only go to a gay affirming place of worship, but I'm not going to any of them. I'll be happy to be welcomed if I decide to go, but until I do, don't try to talk me into it.
6
The issue of "fixing" the common Christian stance on homosexuality is not one blemish on an otherwise perfect philosophy, it is a symptom of an imperfect philosophy. In other words, if you fix the homosexual issue in Christianity, you haven't fixed the problem, you've merely put a bandaid on it.
The problem with Christianity is that it is an authoritarian religion that does not recognize nor grant basic individual and human rights. It changes its mind on the whims of a few powerful leaders who pretend to interpret the ideas of a singular, authoritarian God.
It is erroneous thinking on the part of so-called liberal christians that they can win over the gay community or any other freedom and rights-loving individuals by fixing this singular issue.
The problem with Christianity is that it is an authoritarian religion that does not recognize nor grant basic individual and human rights. It changes its mind on the whims of a few powerful leaders who pretend to interpret the ideas of a singular, authoritarian God.
It is erroneous thinking on the part of so-called liberal christians that they can win over the gay community or any other freedom and rights-loving individuals by fixing this singular issue.
7
I wish gay exorcisms were done with white greasepaint and wire hangers.
"WHAT DID I TELL YOU?! What is dick doing in your butt when I told you: NO DICK FOR YOU EVER!!! We pray and we pray 'till we're half dead, and what do we get?"
"WHAT DID I TELL YOU?! What is dick doing in your butt when I told you: NO DICK FOR YOU EVER!!! We pray and we pray 'till we're half dead, and what do we get?"
8
I frankly would prefer if religions stayed bigoted, hateful, and closed off to outsiders. That would make their demise so much the quicker. These churches that feel that they HAVE TO change in order to acquire more monetary donaters are only dragging on the inevitable. Let all the gods join Zeus, and put them back into the fantasy land from whence they came.
10
I'll arrange a nice dinner of spaghetti and meatballs for you instead, Dan. Then you'll be right as rain and the FSM can ennoble your marriage ... pirates optional of course.
11
@4 I don't get how that would look... How is a march of "welcoming" not really a march of "imposition" or "judgement"? Please take pictures if it ever happens.
13
Dan,
I agree, that you shouldn't be "welcomed" against your will. I'd be turned off if they tried to "welcome" me, too. Still, it is good to know that progressives are trying to become more vocal in response to the fundamentalists. Thank them sweetly, but firmly, and then show them the door.
I agree, that you shouldn't be "welcomed" against your will. I'd be turned off if they tried to "welcome" me, too. Still, it is good to know that progressives are trying to become more vocal in response to the fundamentalists. Thank them sweetly, but firmly, and then show them the door.
14
Agreed, Kim. But if the local gay-affirming Anglicans are going to march on anyone, they need to march on Hutcherson and Discroll. Go tell the bigots who claim to speak for all Christians that they're wrong. Leave me out of it.
16
The Anglicans don't have any plans to hold a "welcome" march at the stranger, do they? It's just some weirdo columnist saying they should.
The Anglican church is 99% little old ladies writing letters to Amnesty International- you don't need to feel threatened by them.
The Anglican church is 99% little old ladies writing letters to Amnesty International- you don't need to feel threatened by them.
17
I agree, Dan. They should leave you alone. They should be addressing the bigots directly, you shouldn't be used as an example, a conversation piece, or anything else. If they wanted the Stranger to report on their march, they could approach it better. I don't know what goes on in peoples heads, or why involving you would seem a good idea to them. I'm sorry, and sorry isn't the right word, but I'm at a loss for a better one.
18
Be careful about the pot calling the kettle black, Dan. You lump "the religious" together just like many people lump "the gays" together. It's close-minded behavior. Just because someone seeks comfort in religion doesn't mean they're a bigoted homophobe.
19
Joel Connelly's writing is an indication of how smug, self serving, and self-important religious organizations are, gay-affirming or not.
21
I don't see how you can accuse me of lumping all religious people in together where gays are concerned when the post you're bitching about draws distinctions between gay-affirming and gay-oppressing religious groups.
The only way I've lumped all religious people together is by classifying all religious people as... religious people. That's kind of hard to avoid.
The only way I've lumped all religious people together is by classifying all religious people as... religious people. That's kind of hard to avoid.
22
"If they left us alone, we'd leave them alone." Don't you think they could say the same thing? Grow up. Oh wait, that doesn't generate page views or ad revenue. At least come up with something new and interesting to say on the topic.
23
Joel is a smug, self-serving asshole, but he sure did call you out on gaps in your coverage. Stings, don't it?
25
Dan, you and Joel Connelly just need to have a big public slap-fight like the indignant howling ninnies you are.
Sell tickets. Split the revenues and donate to your respective charities of choice.
Sell tickets. Split the revenues and donate to your respective charities of choice.
26
Does anyone else think a lot more would be accomplished if the secular left and the religious left stopped arguing about specifics and instead used their energy to argue the abject bullshittery of the right?
Also, Dan, again, you're an asshole. All the credit I gave you for curing me of my Catholic-school induced sexual hangups is flying out the window.
Also, Dan, again, you're an asshole. All the credit I gave you for curing me of my Catholic-school induced sexual hangups is flying out the window.
28
I totally agree with you Dan. You should be left alone.
I'm actually an Episcopalian (we call it "Anglican" here) and I wouldn't dream of welcoming anyone into the church unless they had voluntarily walked in the front door themselves. And I spend a lot of time arguing with others in the church not to do so.
But it's easy for me because I'm a "progressive". I don't believe in heaven or hell. I don't believe that Jesus "died for our sins", or that he was God's son, or that he was born of a virgin or that he rose from the dead. I don't believe in the church's proscriptions about sex, or prescriptions about guilt. And I don't believe in proselytising.
Nor do I get offended when people want to run a mile because they find out I go to church, or rant against the church, or religion etc, because us church folk - we've got it coming. I just wish "we" would leave every one else alone... So sorry from me.
I'm actually an Episcopalian (we call it "Anglican" here) and I wouldn't dream of welcoming anyone into the church unless they had voluntarily walked in the front door themselves. And I spend a lot of time arguing with others in the church not to do so.
But it's easy for me because I'm a "progressive". I don't believe in heaven or hell. I don't believe that Jesus "died for our sins", or that he was God's son, or that he was born of a virgin or that he rose from the dead. I don't believe in the church's proscriptions about sex, or prescriptions about guilt. And I don't believe in proselytising.
Nor do I get offended when people want to run a mile because they find out I go to church, or rant against the church, or religion etc, because us church folk - we've got it coming. I just wish "we" would leave every one else alone... So sorry from me.
29
Fuck Anglicans. I despise all fucking religionists. They are from a time when mankind was ignorant and desperate. It's the same God fantasy of flying around and born of virgins that have been told for thousands of years. The reason they are compelled to push it on others is because it drives them crazy jealous when someone sees through their nonsense and lives their lives freely. Nothing good ever comes of religion.
30
For those of you who didn't click on the article:
Curiously, the Seattle newspaper that reports copiously on the gay and lesbian community - The Stranger - said almost nothing about the Robinson visit. It dealt a similar cold shoulder to Dean Taylor.
The Stranger has, however, given copious coverage to Hutcherson and Gary Randall of the anti-gay Faith and Freedom Network. Editorial director Dan Savage writes blog entries, called "Youth Pastor Watch," detailing sexual indiscretions of clergy across the country.
Perhaps the banner, "The Episcopal Church Welcomes You," could be carried across Capitol Hill and paraded beneath offices of The Stranger."
I think Dan's reaction is rather restrained and more respectful than that sort of statement should warrant.
Curiously, the Seattle newspaper that reports copiously on the gay and lesbian community - The Stranger - said almost nothing about the Robinson visit. It dealt a similar cold shoulder to Dean Taylor.
The Stranger has, however, given copious coverage to Hutcherson and Gary Randall of the anti-gay Faith and Freedom Network. Editorial director Dan Savage writes blog entries, called "Youth Pastor Watch," detailing sexual indiscretions of clergy across the country.
Perhaps the banner, "The Episcopal Church Welcomes You," could be carried across Capitol Hill and paraded beneath offices of The Stranger."
I think Dan's reaction is rather restrained and more respectful than that sort of statement should warrant.
31
@26 You are not alone in that perspective. The one regarding the secular left versus the religious left.
You're not alone on the part about Dan acting like an asshole, either.
It is far easier to find comrades in hatred than it is to find allies in acceptance.
You're not alone on the part about Dan acting like an asshole, either.
It is far easier to find comrades in hatred than it is to find allies in acceptance.
32
I should point out there are two types of Anglicans (lets call them Catholics and Protestants).
The "Catholic" Anglicans are the ones who hate gay marriage, quote Peter all the time, and hate women having rights - and they're leaving the official Anglican/Episcopalian church for the most part.
The "Protestant" Anglicans, actually aren't the "born-again" types but the ones you grew up with. They tend to use the whole bible, not just the freaky parts.
The "Catholic" Anglicans are the ones who hate gay marriage, quote Peter all the time, and hate women having rights - and they're leaving the official Anglican/Episcopalian church for the most part.
The "Protestant" Anglicans, actually aren't the "born-again" types but the ones you grew up with. They tend to use the whole bible, not just the freaky parts.
33
So did the exorcism work? Is that Homosexual spirit (they have them TOO?) gone and replaced with a Heterosexual one? How does one tell the sexual orientation of a spirit?
34
Dan, relax. I'm sure they have no plans to march on your office. It's obvious to me that they were being facetious.
That said, you've now given them plenty of coverage, so maybe they'll be happy and shut up.
That said, you've now given them plenty of coverage, so maybe they'll be happy and shut up.
35
The religious left has an image problem. We want people to know we exist and that Fred Phelps and the late Jerry Falwell don't speak for all people of faith. On the other hand, those who are out in your face look just as much like obnoxious proselytizers as the fundies. It's sad that the secular left doesn't trust the religious left as an important group of allies in battling the bigotry and stupidity of the right, but it's understandable.
The message from progressive and gay friendly churches is, basically, "We're here for you if you want us." Unfortunately, finding the right way to get that message across while not appearing too aggressive is a difficult balance. I agree that organizing a march at the Stranger office is a silly idea. Religious leaders have a lot of silly ideas--I know from experience. But I think the average person sitting in the pews of a progressive church has their heart in the right place and wants to do the decent thing.
The message from progressive and gay friendly churches is, basically, "We're here for you if you want us." Unfortunately, finding the right way to get that message across while not appearing too aggressive is a difficult balance. I agree that organizing a march at the Stranger office is a silly idea. Religious leaders have a lot of silly ideas--I know from experience. But I think the average person sitting in the pews of a progressive church has their heart in the right place and wants to do the decent thing.
36
@35
Yes, I'd agree with you that the average person in a progressive church has their heart in the right place... AND might even be gay themselves (gasp!). Many people seek comfort in religious institutions - even the gays.
So for chrissakes, enough with all the religious bashing. If it's not for you, fine, let it be. And don't judge an entire group of people based on a couple nutso bigoted stereotypes - that makes you as bad as the fundy bigots who judge the 'depraved homosexual lifestyle.' Different strokes for different folks. The more close-minded you are about religion, the less progressive and liberal you actually show yourselves to be.
Yes, I'd agree with you that the average person in a progressive church has their heart in the right place... AND might even be gay themselves (gasp!). Many people seek comfort in religious institutions - even the gays.
So for chrissakes, enough with all the religious bashing. If it's not for you, fine, let it be. And don't judge an entire group of people based on a couple nutso bigoted stereotypes - that makes you as bad as the fundy bigots who judge the 'depraved homosexual lifestyle.' Different strokes for different folks. The more close-minded you are about religion, the less progressive and liberal you actually show yourselves to be.
37
I tolerate religious progressives just fine, but I really don't understand them. Have you read the bible? Fred Phelps is absolutely right -- god does hate gays and women. I'm just glad he's wrong about the "god exists" part. Perpetuating the bible seems about as conservative as you can get.
If you consider yourself a progressive Christian and thus don't believe in the bible or Christian traditions, why in the world are you Christian? Are you running for office? Don't want to lose your inheritance? Bored on Sundays? Scared you'll go to hell if you check "atheist" on Facebook? Honest question.
If you consider yourself a progressive Christian and thus don't believe in the bible or Christian traditions, why in the world are you Christian? Are you running for office? Don't want to lose your inheritance? Bored on Sundays? Scared you'll go to hell if you check "atheist" on Facebook? Honest question.
38
@37, that's a fair question Lizzie.
For me there are 2 reasons. Firstly I believe in a luminous, spiritual and creative force. I call it God - many other people call it something else, which is fine. Secondly I'm Christian because I find inspiration and replenishment in a life philosophy centred on humility, forgiveness, justice and compassion. The Christianity I want to believe in is the Christianity of Martin Luther King Jnr, or Desmond Tutu, or Oscar Romero.
You certainly don't need to be a Christian to focus on those ideals - most Christians are terrible at all of them most of the time - but it honestly does speak to me (not for you or anybody else necessarily).
Honest answer.
For me there are 2 reasons. Firstly I believe in a luminous, spiritual and creative force. I call it God - many other people call it something else, which is fine. Secondly I'm Christian because I find inspiration and replenishment in a life philosophy centred on humility, forgiveness, justice and compassion. The Christianity I want to believe in is the Christianity of Martin Luther King Jnr, or Desmond Tutu, or Oscar Romero.
You certainly don't need to be a Christian to focus on those ideals - most Christians are terrible at all of them most of the time - but it honestly does speak to me (not for you or anybody else necessarily).
Honest answer.
39
Thank you, Aussie Steve.
Now tell me this, liberal/progressive Sloggers, is #38 the sort of person you want to bash? Sounds to me like a pretty quality person who happens to be Christian at the same time. Imagine that! No Jerry Falwell there *at all*.
So please open your minds juuuuust a bit, will you??
Now tell me this, liberal/progressive Sloggers, is #38 the sort of person you want to bash? Sounds to me like a pretty quality person who happens to be Christian at the same time. Imagine that! No Jerry Falwell there *at all*.
So please open your minds juuuuust a bit, will you??
40
I completely agree with the leaving homosexuals alone to live their live as they see fit part, but that goes both ways also. Meaning that homosexuals should also leave us people of faith alone, stop lobbying politicians for implementing programs in our schools to teach our children about homosexuality, stop lobbying renegade politicians and harassing our President to redefine an institution of such importance like marriage which is something very sacred for true people of faith. If people like Mr Savage did that and left us (people of faith) alone, we wouldn't feel compelled to defend our selves from those types of attacks against our families and our social institutions. Gays have freedoms in this great nation of ours, and so those of us who value our faith. The sooner gays can understand that, respect it, form their own institutions, and stop with the onslaught and bombardments on our judicial system against Christians who truly adhere to word of God, their values and morals, the sooner they'll stop hearing about us, cause we as children of the Almighy are called to live in harmony and peace with all of God's creation even those that reject him and his word.
I'm just wondering if Mr Savage is going to advocate now to restrict and dictate which church practices are appropriate and which are not? Is that the new agenda he and people like him are going to take on now?
Also, I'm curious as to why is it that Mr Savage chose this specific video of an exorcism? Surely he knows that exorcisms of this sort are also done by Catholics and other white Christian denominations, all done with the consent of those who wish to rid themselves of the spirits that are keeping them in bondage.
I'm just wondering if Mr Savage is going to advocate now to restrict and dictate which church practices are appropriate and which are not? Is that the new agenda he and people like him are going to take on now?
Also, I'm curious as to why is it that Mr Savage chose this specific video of an exorcism? Surely he knows that exorcisms of this sort are also done by Catholics and other white Christian denominations, all done with the consent of those who wish to rid themselves of the spirits that are keeping them in bondage.
41
#28 - Aussie Steve, I can't help but wonder - if you don;t believe in any of the central tenets of your religion, why do you still consider yourself a Christian? Why not just be done with the whole thing?
43
@41
"Humility, forgiveness, justice and compassion" sure sound like Christian ideals to me. Pretty sure that's what the whole Christ thing is ultimately about.
Not exactly sure why you'd want to convince him to be "done with" that. ...That is, unless you are trying to prove to yourself that YOU are right. And to that, I say - grow up.
"Humility, forgiveness, justice and compassion" sure sound like Christian ideals to me. Pretty sure that's what the whole Christ thing is ultimately about.
Not exactly sure why you'd want to convince him to be "done with" that. ...That is, unless you are trying to prove to yourself that YOU are right. And to that, I say - grow up.
44
@ 37,
I have read the Bible, multiple times and co-wrote Bible studies. I lack no confidence in God, and his impact on my life. I do not have the same confidence in fallible humans to translate the scripture accurately or without bias. Nor do I have the same confidence in leaders of the church and their interpretations of the scriptures. I want to be like Christ, gentle, humble, forgiving, compassionate, and just. I believe in God, because my heart decided it, and I lack the proper words to explain why.
I'm going to agree with Aussie Steve, you don't have to be a Christian to focus on the ideals I ascribe to or to do good in this world.
Hope that explains it.
I have read the Bible, multiple times and co-wrote Bible studies. I lack no confidence in God, and his impact on my life. I do not have the same confidence in fallible humans to translate the scripture accurately or without bias. Nor do I have the same confidence in leaders of the church and their interpretations of the scriptures. I want to be like Christ, gentle, humble, forgiving, compassionate, and just. I believe in God, because my heart decided it, and I lack the proper words to explain why.
I'm going to agree with Aussie Steve, you don't have to be a Christian to focus on the ideals I ascribe to or to do good in this world.
Hope that explains it.
45
@ lovesdunce: "all done with the consent of those who wish to rid themselves of the spirits that are keeping them in bondage."
you should know there are many heterosexual demons out there that are into the bondage thing, and not a few kinky bi spirits as well. it's sort of a mixed bag with demons, seeing as how they are fucking generated by and merely by-products of the human mind.
you should know there are many heterosexual demons out there that are into the bondage thing, and not a few kinky bi spirits as well. it's sort of a mixed bag with demons, seeing as how they are fucking generated by and merely by-products of the human mind.
46
more with 45:
there is nothing spiritual about it, biology + conditioning = fucked up excuses to damage and ram into peoples minds a feeling of guilt and shame. I'd say it's sad for you to defend it, but you know, you're kinda loopy too.
there is nothing spiritual about it, biology + conditioning = fucked up excuses to damage and ram into peoples minds a feeling of guilt and shame. I'd say it's sad for you to defend it, but you know, you're kinda loopy too.
47
@40 "our schools"??? - the schools are ours too.
Granting me my equality under the law in NO WAY infringes on your right to live your faith as you see fit. No one is attacking your families. Just because you claim a faith does not allow you to deny me my rights to equal protection. It almost sounds like you want "people of faith" (which is, by the way, totally a matter of choice, unlike my gayness) to be some special protected class. If only "people of faith" left their craziness in their churches, instead of letting it spill out all over the public sidewalk where other people are trying get on with their lives, we'd all be better off.
Granting me my equality under the law in NO WAY infringes on your right to live your faith as you see fit. No one is attacking your families. Just because you claim a faith does not allow you to deny me my rights to equal protection. It almost sounds like you want "people of faith" (which is, by the way, totally a matter of choice, unlike my gayness) to be some special protected class. If only "people of faith" left their craziness in their churches, instead of letting it spill out all over the public sidewalk where other people are trying get on with their lives, we'd all be better off.
48
@44:
Perfect. There's a lot more to the bible and Christianity/religion than fundamentalists would have you believe - both textually and contextually. I wish Dan would admit that that's the case, too, even if he doesn't want to go to church. Kind of like how I recognize that NAMBLA isn't the only gay group out there.
Perfect. There's a lot more to the bible and Christianity/religion than fundamentalists would have you believe - both textually and contextually. I wish Dan would admit that that's the case, too, even if he doesn't want to go to church. Kind of like how I recognize that NAMBLA isn't the only gay group out there.
49
Dan, I've seen you say that you wish that liberal Christians would stand up and say that we exist. That we don't all think that homosexuality is a sin. So the Episcopalians are doing so. And yet you still complain. Can't win for losing.
50
@37 and 41: You have asked a good question, one I have asked myself many times. Right now I am actively involved in a progressive church but there have been times in my life when I have taken a break from all things religious.
My own definition of God has evolved over the years and will continue to evolve over my lifetime. I don't see God as an external being off in the clouds but as the inner voice inside all people that helps us to love and do good to others. One certainly doesn't have to be religious to hear and follow that voice and, sadly, many religious people ignore it. I stay in the Christian tradition because I see Jesus of Nazareth as one who heard that voice and understood it. He is no more divine than anyone else, but he's the example, one of many examples like the people Aussie Steve named above, I would like to follow.
Finally, I attend the church I belong to because as a group it stands for the same progressive values I stand for. I have also developed strong friendships with many people there that have gotten me through some difficult times.
I doubt if I would be considered a Christian by some since I have abandoned most traditional theology. That's OK; my own journey is personal and I would never try to force it on anyone else.
My own definition of God has evolved over the years and will continue to evolve over my lifetime. I don't see God as an external being off in the clouds but as the inner voice inside all people that helps us to love and do good to others. One certainly doesn't have to be religious to hear and follow that voice and, sadly, many religious people ignore it. I stay in the Christian tradition because I see Jesus of Nazareth as one who heard that voice and understood it. He is no more divine than anyone else, but he's the example, one of many examples like the people Aussie Steve named above, I would like to follow.
Finally, I attend the church I belong to because as a group it stands for the same progressive values I stand for. I have also developed strong friendships with many people there that have gotten me through some difficult times.
I doubt if I would be considered a Christian by some since I have abandoned most traditional theology. That's OK; my own journey is personal and I would never try to force it on anyone else.
52
While it's nice that churches are starting to be more friendly to gays, I can no more believe in the Bible than I do Greek mythology. I just can't force myself to believe in fairy tales. You might as well try to convince me that there are Leprechauns. The Bible, with all it's contradictions, and silliness, was written by men who just made crap up and it doesn't make a lick of sense.
53
Pfft. I don't want to be a part of lots of groups in my community, sacred, secular, commercial, and otherwise. Book clubs, yoga classes, martial arts schools, new business open houses, what have you. They still go around advertising and that's just fine with me because hey, they don't know who's going to be interested, and lots of times, I *do* bump into something I want to be a part of.
Don't be a baby. If they're being aggressive, that's one thing, but if they're just putting it out there, they have a right, and plenty of homos will be thrilled to see them. I'm always glad to see it because I'm a musician and it tells me which churches I don't have to refuse to be hired by.
Don't be a baby. If they're being aggressive, that's one thing, but if they're just putting it out there, they have a right, and plenty of homos will be thrilled to see them. I'm always glad to see it because I'm a musician and it tells me which churches I don't have to refuse to be hired by.
54
"Did you read Joel's post? He suggests that the Anglicans march on the Stranger to "welcome" me. "
*facepalms*
Uh, yeah, that would have been some good context to include in your post, there, Dan. Some of us only come here to read your blog and could give a shit about the rest.
*facepalms*
Uh, yeah, that would have been some good context to include in your post, there, Dan. Some of us only come here to read your blog and could give a shit about the rest.
55
@29 You know what, Vince? As much as it can be discerned in this forum, it sure seems like the progressive Christians here on Slog like Kim in Portland, RainMan and Aussie Steve are a hell of a lot happier than you are. At least they offered thoughtful responses to this post; all you ever do on Slog is prattle on about how much you hate religion. Being that consumed with hatred, about anything, is not healthy, and using stereotypes and generalizations to describe any group of people is the true mark of ignorance.
56
Jocelyn @ 26 and Ackham @ 31,
You make a good point about the secular left and the religious left working together. I think like any other relationship, it will take time to build the trust, to become secure in the intent of each group. It'd be easier if you could discern right from left, if we had some outward and confirmable appearance, but we don't. The left will bear the burden of being linked to the right, and the mountains of pain the right has produced. For many in the secular left, there are real and valid reasons to distrust religious people, and the more the religious left can distance themselves from the right the better, but there are still wounds to be healed. Love and sincerity will take time to cultivate between the two sides. That's my $0.02.
You make a good point about the secular left and the religious left working together. I think like any other relationship, it will take time to build the trust, to become secure in the intent of each group. It'd be easier if you could discern right from left, if we had some outward and confirmable appearance, but we don't. The left will bear the burden of being linked to the right, and the mountains of pain the right has produced. For many in the secular left, there are real and valid reasons to distrust religious people, and the more the religious left can distance themselves from the right the better, but there are still wounds to be healed. Love and sincerity will take time to cultivate between the two sides. That's my $0.02.
57
@55: I used to get upset about his ranting, too. But the thing is, he grew up gay in a very conservative religous family. I don't know what was like. You don't know what that was like. Clearly he went through some bad shit and he's got a lot of anger and hurt left over from it. Maybe he just needs to vent for a while. And it's not really our place to tell him he needs to see a therapist, but maybe that would help him.
58
@44
Ok, Kim in Tries-To-Be-Reasonable-Land, maybe you can finally be the Christian who gets this through my thick skull.
So, you perceive that God exists. Fine, I'm not going to argue with your perception (and I hope you can accept that, for all of us who don't perceive any such thing, it's pretty hard to accept the existence of an all-powerful invisible deity that stands before you but not before us). You admire the person that Christ allegedly was. His philosophy resonates with you. Fine, good, I get that. But I think I hear you saying that you don't actually believe that a lot of the bible is true.
Christ's philosophy doesn't strike me as particularly unique. But even if it is. . . I know I have philosophers who speak to me, historical figures I deeply admire, even fictional/mythical characters who inspire me to be a better person. I don't feel the need to take on every one of their beliefs, or align myself with a bunch of things I DON'T actually believe just because fellow admirers of one such figure feel compelled to do so.
I don't get why a rational person would be willing to identify with a religion that is based on a truly absurd book, and accept being grouped with a whole bunch of crazy hateful idiots, because you appreciate this one philosopher. Why not just be a person who believes in a god and admires Christ and the peaceful, loving outlook that he allegedly advocated, without taking on all of the ridiculous crap that comes along with the organized religion?
Help me out here.
Ok, Kim in Tries-To-Be-Reasonable-Land, maybe you can finally be the Christian who gets this through my thick skull.
So, you perceive that God exists. Fine, I'm not going to argue with your perception (and I hope you can accept that, for all of us who don't perceive any such thing, it's pretty hard to accept the existence of an all-powerful invisible deity that stands before you but not before us). You admire the person that Christ allegedly was. His philosophy resonates with you. Fine, good, I get that. But I think I hear you saying that you don't actually believe that a lot of the bible is true.
Christ's philosophy doesn't strike me as particularly unique. But even if it is. . . I know I have philosophers who speak to me, historical figures I deeply admire, even fictional/mythical characters who inspire me to be a better person. I don't feel the need to take on every one of their beliefs, or align myself with a bunch of things I DON'T actually believe just because fellow admirers of one such figure feel compelled to do so.
I don't get why a rational person would be willing to identify with a religion that is based on a truly absurd book, and accept being grouped with a whole bunch of crazy hateful idiots, because you appreciate this one philosopher. Why not just be a person who believes in a god and admires Christ and the peaceful, loving outlook that he allegedly advocated, without taking on all of the ridiculous crap that comes along with the organized religion?
Help me out here.
59
Hi Violet,
I'll try. It's a fair question.
I do believe the Bible. It is God's letter to me/humanity, perhaps love story is a better way of saying it, and I view it as a whole. By that I mean, I read it with an intent to understand it in it's original ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek, within its culture. I accept that there are literary devices, and cultural references that I am not equipped to understand, kinda like the phrase "Out in left field" would be to an individual with no understanding of American culture. In keeping it as a whole, I'm forced to keep it in context, and to view individual scriptures within the main idea, the central purpose/theme of God's love for his creation and his desire for personal relationship with us as individuals. Does a verse, or a passage, have support in other books of the Bible, if it doesn't fit then I'm prone to think it isn't of big importance, and if it contradicts then it's a likely mistranslation? I am unable to rid myself of my ability to question it as it lies upon the page, because as I said above it is translated by humans who are fallible and are biased, but also because it wasn't canonized until the 1500s, and thus a lot of the original intent of an individual scripture could easily be lost, especially as the culture is no longer available to give understanding to the meaning or word choice. Thus, I think there is an excellent chance that some of what is commonly believed by Fundamentalist (who are also often literalists) is misinterpreted. So, I don't find the Bible to be an absurd book, I find comfort and direction in much of it, and I find the words of Christ, the one I seek to be like. I also rely on the Holy Spirit, that is the Spirit of God, that lives within me (as a result of accepting Christ's death on the cross as payment for my individual sins). All that I read, all that I hear from the pulpit, has to match what the Holy Spirit is saying to me, than it isn't to be applied to me personally. (I've never walked away without finding something that is applicable to me.) I also use my own intellect, God gave me the ability to think and the free will to reject him and what is written, and it would be foolish to not apply my mind.
I can't argue that within the catholic (meaning universal) church that you don't find ridiculous crap. Ridiculous crap seems to be a common human affliction, as we are each individuals and are prone to error. Being in a church is about being in a community, a family, and we gather together to worship and work together. Yes, there are groups withing the catholic church which are a source of great shame for me, but there are also groups who are sincerely trying to live out the life of Christ. Working with those who are sincerely trying to care for the poor, even though we are all imperfect, is a joy.
My faith is deeply personal to me. I don't have words to explain it, my heart made the decision and it can't let it go. Christ came to me during the deepest, darkest period of my life. I only "saw" him, when I was ready to "see" him. To "see" him, you have to believe that he exists and that he gives a damn. It's through him, that I could truly forgive, I could truly find peace in what happened to me, and I could allow the pain to become something beautiful that could benefit myself and others. I love my faith for the joy it gives me, the peace it gives me, the comfort it gives me, the guidance it gives me, but I hate that my faith requires me to have courage and believe what I can't tangibly hold or touch. Perhaps, that is why it's called faith?
I hope this helps. I'm not sure I could explain it better, but it is how it works for me. I've never found that it works the same for all of us, RainMan's and Aussie Steve's answers, is evidence of that. There are so many differences between individual denominations, and individual difference by congregations, and then individual interpretation, that getting an answer that is cohesive for all is difficult to find.
Thank you for asking.
I wish you love, joy, peace, and justice.
More...
I'll try. It's a fair question.
I do believe the Bible. It is God's letter to me/humanity, perhaps love story is a better way of saying it, and I view it as a whole. By that I mean, I read it with an intent to understand it in it's original ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek, within its culture. I accept that there are literary devices, and cultural references that I am not equipped to understand, kinda like the phrase "Out in left field" would be to an individual with no understanding of American culture. In keeping it as a whole, I'm forced to keep it in context, and to view individual scriptures within the main idea, the central purpose/theme of God's love for his creation and his desire for personal relationship with us as individuals. Does a verse, or a passage, have support in other books of the Bible, if it doesn't fit then I'm prone to think it isn't of big importance, and if it contradicts then it's a likely mistranslation? I am unable to rid myself of my ability to question it as it lies upon the page, because as I said above it is translated by humans who are fallible and are biased, but also because it wasn't canonized until the 1500s, and thus a lot of the original intent of an individual scripture could easily be lost, especially as the culture is no longer available to give understanding to the meaning or word choice. Thus, I think there is an excellent chance that some of what is commonly believed by Fundamentalist (who are also often literalists) is misinterpreted. So, I don't find the Bible to be an absurd book, I find comfort and direction in much of it, and I find the words of Christ, the one I seek to be like. I also rely on the Holy Spirit, that is the Spirit of God, that lives within me (as a result of accepting Christ's death on the cross as payment for my individual sins). All that I read, all that I hear from the pulpit, has to match what the Holy Spirit is saying to me, than it isn't to be applied to me personally. (I've never walked away without finding something that is applicable to me.) I also use my own intellect, God gave me the ability to think and the free will to reject him and what is written, and it would be foolish to not apply my mind.
I can't argue that within the catholic (meaning universal) church that you don't find ridiculous crap. Ridiculous crap seems to be a common human affliction, as we are each individuals and are prone to error. Being in a church is about being in a community, a family, and we gather together to worship and work together. Yes, there are groups withing the catholic church which are a source of great shame for me, but there are also groups who are sincerely trying to live out the life of Christ. Working with those who are sincerely trying to care for the poor, even though we are all imperfect, is a joy.
My faith is deeply personal to me. I don't have words to explain it, my heart made the decision and it can't let it go. Christ came to me during the deepest, darkest period of my life. I only "saw" him, when I was ready to "see" him. To "see" him, you have to believe that he exists and that he gives a damn. It's through him, that I could truly forgive, I could truly find peace in what happened to me, and I could allow the pain to become something beautiful that could benefit myself and others. I love my faith for the joy it gives me, the peace it gives me, the comfort it gives me, the guidance it gives me, but I hate that my faith requires me to have courage and believe what I can't tangibly hold or touch. Perhaps, that is why it's called faith?
I hope this helps. I'm not sure I could explain it better, but it is how it works for me. I've never found that it works the same for all of us, RainMan's and Aussie Steve's answers, is evidence of that. There are so many differences between individual denominations, and individual difference by congregations, and then individual interpretation, that getting an answer that is cohesive for all is difficult to find.
Thank you for asking.
I wish you love, joy, peace, and justice.
60
56 - Kim, you make an excellent point. But I would counter with saying that we (the religious left) are no less under attack from the right than the secular left. In my experience, we have people on one side telling us what we believe isn't correct because we are picking and choosing, and we have another side telling us that what we believe isn't correct because we are picking and choosing. In not claiming to be fundamentalists, and in taking the Scripture with a grain of salt, we convince those to the right AND left of us that we're just half-assing it. It gets pretty annoying.
But then there's the fact that while the left will aggressively question what we believe, the right will try to deny us our rights, or even kill us. Look at Dr. Tiller. He was murdered in his church. It made no difference to the man who killed him that he was Christian because, in the murderer's mind, he wasn't really Christian. The secular left might have thought it was weird that he was going to church in the first place, but they likely wouldn't have killed him there (or anywhere).
The point is, we have as much to fight on the right as our less religious ideological brethren, so it'd be nice if they could get over the fact that we believe in God. It's not like we're trying to make them believe in Him too. After all, I agree with Violet: it's all a matter of perception.
But then there's the fact that while the left will aggressively question what we believe, the right will try to deny us our rights, or even kill us. Look at Dr. Tiller. He was murdered in his church. It made no difference to the man who killed him that he was Christian because, in the murderer's mind, he wasn't really Christian. The secular left might have thought it was weird that he was going to church in the first place, but they likely wouldn't have killed him there (or anywhere).
The point is, we have as much to fight on the right as our less religious ideological brethren, so it'd be nice if they could get over the fact that we believe in God. It's not like we're trying to make them believe in Him too. After all, I agree with Violet: it's all a matter of perception.
61
Jocelyn @ 60,
Agreed, we has as much a reason to stand against the right. It would be nice to work together. I'm hoping we will, but I think it will come slowly for some. I think our fellow less religious ideological brethren are going to have to see by our actions, that our intent is clear and that we aren't going to force our beliefs on them.
Agreed, we has as much a reason to stand against the right. It would be nice to work together. I'm hoping we will, but I think it will come slowly for some. I think our fellow less religious ideological brethren are going to have to see by our actions, that our intent is clear and that we aren't going to force our beliefs on them.
62
@58, I'll have a stab at this too Violet.
Firstly, I want to make a point about the Bible. Part of the problem is thinking of "the Bible" as one book. It's not - it's a collection of writings written over an incredibly long stretch of history by an enormous spectrum of communities, all with different contexts. I don't believe that it was written by God any more than you do. It was written by men who were trying to express their experience of God. Quite a lot of it is poisonous bile, but not all of it is. Some of it is magnificent, and it speaks to me in a way that a lot of transformational art does. Inspired by God doesn't mean written by God, so I have no problem cherry picking the bits that resonate with me and discarding the rest as the vile nonsense it is.
Secondly, although I call myself "Christian", I only use that word for want of a better description. "Christ" is a religious title - meaning the messiah. I don't talk about "Christ" because I don't buy into hebrew prophesy about a messiah, or Christian elevation of Jesus to divine status. I'm a Christian because I try to be a follower of Jesus - a 1st century Palestinian jew who taught some fairly revolutionary ideas about justice for all. I follow Jesus in a religious context because I believe in God and I believe that Jesus experienced God's presence and understood God's justice, and I draw nourishment from meditating on that experience. So again, I have no trouble drawing what warmth I can from the church and leaving or even opposing the rest. I certainly don't think Jesus was the only such figure. There have been many others through history, many of whom are represented in other faiths, and many through no faith at all. But Jesus is the one that I've grown up with and the one that is more intimate to me.
Finally, although I believe in God as a loving and creative force, I see no evidence of God's intervention in the world in the sense in which many religious people perceive it. Hence I don't believe that God answers prayers, or cares whether I or anybody else believes in him or not. But that's not the point for me. The point is that in meditating on God and God's justice, I draw the inspiration I need in order to try (being the operative word here) to be an actor of good in the world. I find that the church helps me to achieve that focus. But that's my personal experience. I'd never dream of foisting it on anyone else.
More...
Firstly, I want to make a point about the Bible. Part of the problem is thinking of "the Bible" as one book. It's not - it's a collection of writings written over an incredibly long stretch of history by an enormous spectrum of communities, all with different contexts. I don't believe that it was written by God any more than you do. It was written by men who were trying to express their experience of God. Quite a lot of it is poisonous bile, but not all of it is. Some of it is magnificent, and it speaks to me in a way that a lot of transformational art does. Inspired by God doesn't mean written by God, so I have no problem cherry picking the bits that resonate with me and discarding the rest as the vile nonsense it is.
Secondly, although I call myself "Christian", I only use that word for want of a better description. "Christ" is a religious title - meaning the messiah. I don't talk about "Christ" because I don't buy into hebrew prophesy about a messiah, or Christian elevation of Jesus to divine status. I'm a Christian because I try to be a follower of Jesus - a 1st century Palestinian jew who taught some fairly revolutionary ideas about justice for all. I follow Jesus in a religious context because I believe in God and I believe that Jesus experienced God's presence and understood God's justice, and I draw nourishment from meditating on that experience. So again, I have no trouble drawing what warmth I can from the church and leaving or even opposing the rest. I certainly don't think Jesus was the only such figure. There have been many others through history, many of whom are represented in other faiths, and many through no faith at all. But Jesus is the one that I've grown up with and the one that is more intimate to me.
Finally, although I believe in God as a loving and creative force, I see no evidence of God's intervention in the world in the sense in which many religious people perceive it. Hence I don't believe that God answers prayers, or cares whether I or anybody else believes in him or not. But that's not the point for me. The point is that in meditating on God and God's justice, I draw the inspiration I need in order to try (being the operative word here) to be an actor of good in the world. I find that the church helps me to achieve that focus. But that's my personal experience. I'd never dream of foisting it on anyone else.
64
Thanks, Kim and Steve. You're made out of different stuff than I am in some way. I appreciate being let into your heads. . . I do try to understand.
65
17
18
Dan is one of the bigots.
His religiophobia is as hateful as any gaybasher ever hoped to be.
18
Dan is one of the bigots.
His religiophobia is as hateful as any gaybasher ever hoped to be.
66
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-new…
You gotta read this. It's long, but it explains important events in simple terms. It's applicable to the non-church goer - as well as - the parishioner. It looks at the issues bedevilling the Anglican Church - that does have an effect on our gay communities. It's from a Canadian perspective and relates to how we are still being treated. First, there's an interview with Elizabeth May (who's Federal leader of the Green Party) which dates back to 2007. She also happens to be studying to be an Anglican Priest, no less! Then; there's a pretty deep analysis which follows the interview outlining the issues which are still outstanding as a result of a cowardly June 2007 Synod meeting of top-brass Anglicans.
You gotta read this. It's long, but it explains important events in simple terms. It's applicable to the non-church goer - as well as - the parishioner. It looks at the issues bedevilling the Anglican Church - that does have an effect on our gay communities. It's from a Canadian perspective and relates to how we are still being treated. First, there's an interview with Elizabeth May (who's Federal leader of the Green Party) which dates back to 2007. She also happens to be studying to be an Anglican Priest, no less! Then; there's a pretty deep analysis which follows the interview outlining the issues which are still outstanding as a result of a cowardly June 2007 Synod meeting of top-brass Anglicans.
67
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-new…
3577925-in-these-troubled-
religious-times-anglicans-with-hearts
The URL got cut off when I posted the last comment.
3577925-in-these-troubled-
religious-times-anglicans-with-hearts
The URL got cut off when I posted the last comment.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
Dear Huffington Post... by Dan Savage
-
The Rick Santorum Rally in Tacoma Probably Could Have Gone Better by Paul Constant
-
Because Guns Make Us More Safer by Goldy
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Prospecting Science by Charles Mudede
-
Google Briefly Acknowledges the Existence of Gay Couples—and Princess/Frog Couples—on Valentine's Day by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (68) RSS