Another great piece by Chicago Sun-Times columnist Neil Steinberg:

Ignorance is the great engine of human misery, the fertile field where its fruit, hatred, grows in all its awful forms, from the first human, crouching on a dark savannah, screeching terrified defiance at a shape silhouetted on the horizon, to Rep. Ronald Stephens, rising to his feet in the Illinois House, blaming “open homosexuality” for the fall of Rome. “If you look at the sociological history of societies that have failed,” said Stephens (R-Greenville), “what are some of the commonalities? One of those is that open homosexuality becomes accepted.”

A common idea: Mighty Rome toppled because it allowed those light in the togas to prance unchallenged through the Forum. We’re on our way to ruin, too, not because of ascendant China or a collapse of political discourse, but because we allow gays and lesbians to live their lives with only moderate harassment.

That’s funny. Not ha-ha funny, but ironic funny, and demands we shine a light down this well of ignorance.

First, the Roman Empire—even lopping off the first 700 years, from Rome’s founding to Julius Caesar—lasted 500 years. We should only fall so quickly.

Second, such a swath of land—the empire stretched from Britain to Egypt—had, over half a millennium, various views toward homosexuality. Yes, at times Romans would chat about their catamite lovers with an ease strange to our ears. But other times they’d be put to death for it.

If tolerance didn’t topple Rome, what did?

Let us consult Edward Gibbon, whose classic The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire isn’t read in high schools, at least not Downstate, apparently, the way it once was. Gibbon puts the blame—and this really is too delicious—not on homosexuality, but on Christianity, which he says made the Roman population more worried about their place in heaven than about barbarians at the gate. “I have described the triumph of barbarism and religion,” Gibbon concludes, famously, in his epigram.

Go read the whole thing.

And for what it’s worth: Even if gay people were to blame for the fall of Rome—and I’m not saying we were—why would that be a problem for crazy fundy Christians? The Romans weren’t particularly kind to Christians—the Romans fed Christians to lions and tigers and bears, remember?—so you would think that Christians would be grateful. The enemy of my enemy, right? And even with what little history I had in high school, I managed to arrive at Gibbon’s conclusion as a sophomore back at St. Gregory the Great: the rise of Christianity correlated so strongly with the decline of Rome—at least the Western Empire—that the two had to be related somehow.

And if persecuting homosexuals makes a society rich and powerful—if it strengthens empires and brings God’s favor—then why are the most intolerant places on earth such steaming shitholes? I mean, who do you think enjoys God’s favor: tolerant, liberal, gay-marryin’ Canada or intolerant, illiberal, gay-executin’ Uganda?

Back to Steinberg:

This inversion—where gays are found culpable for something actually the fault of their oppressors—is par for the course. Look at gay adoption, long opposed by the faithful on the premise that gays shouldn’t be allowed around children, even their own. Where did all these kids in need of adoption come from? Oh right, that would be from heterosexual couples who so completely failed their children that they were seized by the state.

42 replies on “Rome Started Falling Right About the Time The Romans Stopped Feeding Christians to Lions, Right?”

  1. Its true that Gibbon didn’t hold Christianity in high regard but even that seems like kind of a shallow reading of Decline and Fall. I’ve read all six volumes and it seems to me that Gibbon stops looking for causes of Rome’s fall and instead comes to look at the ways that it transformed over time – Empire as a process and not as a thing.

    If you want a cause for the fall of Rome it was that the world changed but the Empire’s institutions did not. And eventually those institutions didn’t fit with the world any more and so they collapsed. And in that respect, its very relevant to our condition today.

    Anyhow. People with a taste for 18th century prose stylings should read at least Volume 1. Its pure pleasure.

  2. Dan I think you miss the point of Rep. Ronald Stphens. He would probably rather live in Uganda than Canada. As a rich white heterosexual (maybe?) man he would do just fine in the upper class of Uganda. He would however be taxed to hell and back in Canada.

    So maybe he is right in a way. A theocratic bigoted state really is the ideal state for him and he wants to bring that to America.

  3. Christianity didn’t “rise” as Rome decayed.
    “Christianity”, if it is defined as the religion founded by Jesus Christ that followed His teachings, had gone sour and been co-opted by Rome. The ‘Church’ did not defeat the Empire, the Empire swallowed the remnants (in name only) of the church and used it for it’s own political ends.
    The Emperor became the Pope, and for another thousand years ran things, under the guise of religion rather than empire.
    The ‘Christian’ Church?
    That didn’t outlive the apostles.

  6. Gibbons has long since been discredited in academic circles. Not to say that the conclusion is wrong. The real question is, “so what”?

  8. Of course Christianity destroyed Rome. It destroyed reason and reason is what empires are built on. Jesus was anti-Rome and so were his followers who did everything they could to bring the empire to ruin. Just as they will bring America to ruin by commanding the abandonment of reason. You see it clearly in their erecting museums and a Noah’s arc that make no logical sense whatsoever. That is one of the reasons I believe they must be resisted in any way.

  9. Stephens’ point is actually pretty insightful.
    In recognizing broad societal acceptance of homiosexuality, rather than the homosexuality itself, as significant in the decline of a society.
    And Dan highlighting his point-
    That’s funny. Not ha-ha funny, but ironic funny.
    Cause our own Danny is poster fag for what Stephens’ is pointing out.
    Danny isn’t really going to be happy just to have Gay Marriage. For Gays to be able to marry to live their lives with only moderate harassment.

    No.

    Not by a long shot.

    Danny insists that society buy the whole HomoLiberal Package.

    Your kids?
    Teaching them abstinence is the most relaible way to avoid STDs and pregnancy?
    Like the CDC recommends?
    no no no…..
    Danny knows better.
    Teach your kids that “Anal Sex, Oral Sex, GAY SEX!” (google it…) are 100% safe foolproof methods of birthcontrol and disease prevention. (the same “Anal Sex, Oral Sex, GAY SEX!” that homosexuals use to achieve that stellar 20% AIDS infection rate… if it is good enough for the faggots it is good enough for the children of America!)

    Monogamy after marriage?
    Like the CDC says is the best way to avoid STDs?
    no no no…..
    Not in the HomoLiberal Qunited States of Gaymerica.
    Danny knows that Marriage only works with a strong dose of infidelity. To keep it, you know, “special”….

    Religion? Only if it teaches that homosexuality is Normal, Natural and God-sanctioned. You won’t (even) be allowed to believe that homosexual behavior is immoral in the Brave New HomoLiberal World.

    Oh- don’t forget that we have to legalize pot, too.
    Three-ways.
    Unwed motherhood.
    One-night-stands.
    And remember Dan’s sweetheart Peggy!

    What does all this buy us?
    Lots and lots of children conceived and raised under really shitty circumstances.
    Children who grow up to be maladjusted undereducated minimally competent noncontributing burdens on society.
    Societies that crumble under the dead weight.
    Too bad there aren’t more homosexuals out there to provide perfect homes for all the children……

    So, can America keep it’s Traditional Family Values but just let homosexuals in? Big tent and all?

    Sorry.

    No.

    It’s a package deal.
    Homosexuality.
    PreMarital Sex.
    Adultery.
    One for All and All for One.

    So, yeah, embracing The Gay requires quite a big jump down the road of deviancy, depravity, perversion….

    The road to Gommorah is the Road to Societal Ruin.
    Hop. Skip. Or jump. It doesn’t matter.

    The End result is the same……

  12. It wasn’t homosexuality that destroyed Rome, but (and I’m no fan of American Christianity) it wasn’t Christianity either. That is, if you accept the premise that the Roman Empire slowly became the Byzantine Empire rather than ending with Romulus Augustulus in 476 CE.

    Thing is, Rome had gradually split into Eastern and Western empires, and it’s only the arrogance of the Dark Ages west, along with a religious schism or two, that has led the traditional narrative of history to divorce the Byzantines from the Romans, when really the first Byzantine Emperor, also the first Christian Emperor, Constantine, was one of the greatest Roman emperors. Let’s also not forget Justinian, who was a Christian, and also one of the greatest Roman emperors.

    But the Byzantines were all armchair theologians and they likely didn’t like homosexuality. Also, their attitudes on Homosexuality were utterly irrelevant to Mehmed II and his Turkish army smashing Constantinople’s walls with his cannon in the 15th Century.

  14. @4 dammit I was all ready with a comment till I read yours and nearly dropped my coffee mug (rescued, thanks, & keyboard is safe)…

    @12 Ah yes you beat me to it. The eastern half of the original Roman empire continued on quite happily for a number of centuries past. And quite Christian, too, even if that odd “Orthodox” variety. That lasted till 15th century when the Turks overran things. That’s over a thousand years; not too shabby.

    And for that matter, the fall of Constantinople is thought to have fueled the Renaissance and marked the end of the Middle Ages (aka “Dark Ages”).

    That all said, Stephen’s a complete twit.

  17. @ 1, 6, 8 & 12
    The answer is slavery. Christianity started as a slave’s religion. Rome was built on the backs of conquered people who were then enslaved. Eventually, the balance of free vs. slave reached the tipping point, and the erosion of society was under way. There simply weren’t enough free Romans left to staff the army/navy and keep the previously enslaved peoples oppressed. So, they co-opted Christianity, and made it the means of oppression.

  18. The “Roman” Empire fell because the West was dirt poor while the East was wealthy. Rome wasn’t an important city in any meaningful way long before Constantine moved the capital to Constantinople. Ultimately, it cost way too much in lives and money to defend a huge amount of territory that contributed nothing to the empire.

  19. There was not one “single event” that caused or signalled Rome’s fall. Rome wasn’t destroyed in a day, so to speak, and as others have already pointed out, it didn’t fall all at once, but a little bit at a time and for many different reasons.

  20. I tend to think that something incredibly important was lost from Christianity long ago. Perhaps, it is rooted in the numerous interpolated/textual expanded letters of Paul, with their “end times” focus, that churches (at least in the US) give such weight to. And, perhaps the adoption of the Doctrine of Penal Substitution in the 1600s, over the Classic or Ransom Theory. The idea that human sinful immorality is the direct opposition to the justice of God has become the dominant belief. Yet, if one considers the parable of Jesus, which Biblical scholars tend to believe have an actual connection to a historical Jesus (a person, not a self-proclaimed Christ), and are ready to admit that some were “put in his mouth” years after his death, then human injustice (unjust social systems-political oppression, economic exploitation, enshrined values and cultural attitudes) is the direct opposite of God’s justice. It is fascinating to think how things would be different if those who claim their lives are devoted to seeing the Kingdom of God come to earth, focused their attention on human injustice instead. To name a few ways.

    Health Care: Enacting a system of health care for the uninsured, because the marginalized are a passion of God.

    The Environment: Biblical understanding of creation teaches that the belongs to God. And as stewards we have the job of managing the planet for the long-term self-interest of future generations and other creatures who inhabit it.

    Economic Justice: “The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof”, then everyone must have the material essentials in the distribution of the earth. The every widening gap between rich and poor must be closed-domestically and internationally.

    And, on a second note, I tend to think that Constantine the Great’s adoption of Christianity was more of an attempt to unite the Roman East and West as one unite, then it was a conversion of faith. Of course, it is just a hypothesis, but I’m inclined to think that Christianity was a movement that Constantine knew couldn’t be stopped, and in realizing it he decided to wield it as a means of allegiance. Maybe, that is because I’ve yet to see any evidence of his own life, or his personal sayings, that suggest that he was a “real” Christian.

    My $0.02, anyway.

  21. @12

    Thank you, you provided some very needed clarity to this debate.

    I’ve always held the theory that the Western Roman Empire didn’t “fall,” it simply transformed into the Roman Catholic Church. Yes, the political and social architecture in the West was dismantled by the Germans, but the cultural structures remained intact, and eventually took over the Germans. The RCC has been the most politically-active religious organization in the world, and it’s only rivals are the western christian sects which sprang from it. And today, they remain the wealthiest organization on the planet.

  22. I wanna know what the fuck a “failed society” is. Or a non-failed society. There is no such thing as a fixed, stable society; human cultures continuously undergo a process of flux, transition, evolution. If a “failed society” is one that changes into something else, then ‘American Society’, or the snapshot of it yesterday, just “failed”. And again. Etc.

    Is it a change in the formal structure of government? In that case, Rome “fell” a number of times. People run around using these terms as though there were stable, universal definitions/understandings of them…

    If it’s the transformation thing, well then, duh, of COURSE a society “fails” if it becomes more-accepting of gay people, as that is by-definition a change, which is the used definition of “fail”. Finally, why bring Rome up at all? Do we wish we were still living under the Roman Empire or something? So the fuck what if it “fell”, for whatever reason?

    All these people are saying is “If society changes, society has changed! Oh Noes! Change is terrifying!” Change is also inevitable, which is why Conservatives (in the sense of people who fight against any change) are just plain wrong to invest their energy and resources in a losing battle.

  23. John, you’re trying to say that “change is okay” to a group of people who are still bemoaning the loss of kerosene as the dominant fuel…

  24. @3 – “”Christianity”, if it is defined as the religion founded by Jesus Christ “

    I’ll bet you money that Jesus did not “found” Chistianity. That was done by his followers, much later on.

    Also, apropos to this nutter Rep. Stephens… another similarity to some failed nations, like Rome, is that Christianity was the state religion. Hmmm…

  25. “You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts”

    Canuck, I’ve been looking for one more small Christmas present for my son, and a T shirt with that on it, is it. If you’re ever up in Edmonton and see a very big, very blonde, very hairy young man wearing that T shirt, say hi.

  26. @20: Excellent explanation, as usual, Kim. There’s some good stuff about caring for the poor in Leviticus 19, too.

    @9: I googled that phrase. The only hits from The Stranger were where you were ranting about that phrase in a few threads. Not a single peep out of Dan. Clearly, you talk about Teh Ghey Buttsecks more than Dan Savage. You must be one fabulous flaming queer faggot, no?
    Also, Period Hive Drone, you really should learn to spell “Gomorrah”.
    Also, Dan just advocates healthy, cautious sexuality. Teaching ONLY abstinence, like the Christians prefer, won’t stop people from having hot steamy premarital sex; all it will do is make them entirely uneducated on how to not get preggers or The AIDS when they DO get some. (Don’t be daft; wrap your shaft, kids!)
    Monogamy after marriage is all fine and good so long as the two people are sexually compatible. If they have entirely different sexual tastes, then the relationship is doomed unless they go elsewhere to get their rocks off. Premarital sex, so as to test the waters, is an excellent way to prevent this.
    Also, your “20% AIDS infection rate” line is demonstrably false, and I have demonstrated its falsehood more than once before. Also, you can’t be infected with AIDS. AIDS is a disease; HIV is an infectious agent.

  27. There is a valid argument to be made that the worldviews of classical imperial Rome and Christianity were incompatible. In any event, however, the cause of Rome’s collapse were many and complex, and had exactly zero to do with homos.

  30. @26- Ah Venom: trying to engage the ignorant(trolls) in logical thought again, are we? ^ never has anything to say worth engaging, being Hateschild’s offspring.
    I miss the old girl- where has she gone?

  31. @14, 15, 21: Thanks 🙂 It’s not an easy subject to condense into a paragraph or two, since it covers 500 years, but it bugs me how the popular perception of the Roman Empire is actually still colored by the anti-Eastern propaganda during the religious schisms. I would argue that the mere concept of the Renaissance is misleading and western-centric too, as it ignores that the Western artists (not denying their genius one bit) were simply incrementally building on what had been going on in the East for centuries already.

    @16: Constantine cited the night before the Battle of the Milvian Bridge as the date of his conversion, early in his life, when marking his soldiers with the Chi and the Rho helped him defeat the other claimant to the Empire. The deathbed part you’re thinking of is that he wasn’t BAPTIZED until he was on his deathbed, as it was though that by doing this you invalidate all the other sins in your life and you die with a clean slate. He was definitely the first Christian Emperor through pretty much all of his reign. (There is a lot of evidence though, that he didn’t have a firm grasp on Christianity’s concepts though, and that he may have mixed things up with earlier Sun worship traditions. Also, he had his wife and son murdered, which one could argue wasn’t very Christian of him.)

  32. Hi agony! I’m up in Edmonton quite a bit, hanging out with my margarita-loving buddies and drooling at the Gravity Pope store. If I see your son, I will by all means say hi!

    saxfanatic, sheesh, whale oil smokes something fierce, and takes forever to heat the bathwater.

  37. @33: I don’t see that phrase anywhere. 0/10, Period Hive Drone. Epic FAIL.
    And just a reminder; if you (heavens forbid!) READ what Dan wrote, he’s not advocating that everyone go out and do all this kinky stuff. He’s just saying that people can be intimate if they want to without risking pregnancy, and that Bristol Palin is an idiot for insisting that there isn’t.

  38. If we’re looking for proximate causes of the fall of the Western Empire–barbarian mercenaries? There was also rapid debasement of the currency, impoverishment of the peasantry, and (as 18 noted) far too much territory to protect.

    Of course, America in its wisdom has avoided all of these things.

  40. @37

    no problem, Junior.
    we’ve got some time on our hands, we’ll be glad to help you with your homework-

    let’s see; you were looking for ‘Anal Sex’ ‘Oral Sex’ ‘GAY SEX’ in Dan’s post to America’s teenagers and you don’t see that anywhere (whaaaaa…)?

    was that it?

    lets paste Dan’s post then we’ll see if we can find and highlight your words…..

    “posted by DAN SAVAGE on WED, MAY 6, 2009 at 2:27 PM
    …..speaks to America’s teenagers:
    Right off the top of my head: oral sex, anal sex, GAY SEX—there are lots of “foolproof” ways for teenagers to be sexual, without risk…. It’s possible for a teenager to have fulfilling and low-risk sex….”

    can you find them?

    let’s try this-

    “posted by DAN SAVAGE on WED, MAY 6, 2009 at 2:27 PM
    …..speaks to America’s teenagers:
    Right off the top of my head: oral sex, anal sex, GAY SEX—there are lots of “foolproof” ways for teenagers to be sexual, without risk…. It’s possible for a teenager to have fulfilling and low-risk sex….”

    there-
    that’s probably cheating but do you see the words now?

    btw, we find it irresponsible for Dan to describe behavior that gives 20% of homosexuals that practice it AIDS “foolproof” or “low risk”.

    Just how many American kids is Dan willing to infect with AIDS before he finds the risk high enough to consider?

    There are 30 million teenagers in America,

    If they follow Dan’s advice and engage in “foolproof” and “low risk” oral sex, anal sex, and GAY SEX and 20% get AIDS that would yield 6,000,000 American teens with AIDS.

    And Dan is OK with that?…..

  41. @39: My, my, my. You’ve really outdone yourself this time, no? The stupidity is off the charts.
    One, I Googled the phrase like you told me to. There were no hits apart from your rants because Dan phrased things in a different order.
    And oral, anal, and Teh Ghey Secks ARE FOOLPROOF…for the purposes of not getting preggers, which is what Dan was saying. He made no claims about STDs; you’ve got to watch out on that front no matter what kind of Secks you’re having.
    Also, you really need to stop spouting that rubbish that 20% of homosexuals have The AIDS; it’s patently false, and I’ve proven it to you over and over again using the CDC’s own numbers.

Comments are closed.