Re: Christians Protesting At Pride


Where is the outrage about wearing mixed thread clothing? This is an absolute abomination of god's law. Those who wear cotton and wool together are to be put to death immediately according to the old testament bible.
However, if I were a youth in the parade go-go dancing in my undies and had a suuuper six-pack and all eyes were on me and I had taken enough E, then I probably would hop off the float and go hug the homophobe for the cameras. But that's just me, fantasy me.
the troll is always right....
Sigh. That's disappointing.
Dan doesn't believe homosexual acts are a sin.

And so,
in the Qunited States of Gaymerica,
neither can you.

All religious beliefs must pass muster with the
Secular Humanist HomoLiberal Belief Police.

This means You.....

A disingenuous Christian who says he loves me but his actions don't match his words???

Dan also doesn't believe adultery and fornication are sins.
Cause, we're- you know- skipping to Gommorah....
Religion is bullshit. It was bullshit yesterday. It's bullshit today. It will be bullshit tomorrow. And it will always be about dividing people.
Wow. The same guy who made the apology shirts which helped bring tears to your eyes is the same guy who appears to be a villain here. Fancy.

Also fancy: Dreger becoming a rock star. I'm sure she's loving it.
The only good religious person is one sitting in a very very hot oven.

We're all thinking it, let's just say it already.

The religious want us gays DEAD. DEAD DEAD DEAD!!
Irritating, but no big surprise. Having spent many years in the evangelical climate (including getting my undergrad at Northwest College of the Assemblies of God), I know this crap - you don't 'clean the fish until you catch 'em.' Bleh.
What's wrong with burnt offerings?
Also, there's nothing in the Bible (in the Old Testament, at least) about masturbation.

@7: "Gomorrah". Learn it. Spell it, you ignorant know-nothing Jesus freak.
@10: Oh, I don't know about that. I've met some very cool Quaker theologians who sort of put that notion to shame.

But your current avatar, though goes without saying, is a marque of great taste.
@11, I went to Whitworth and yeah, they were all for praying for me when I came out on campus.
@12, regarding masturbation, read the bit in Genesis about Onan, the alleged inventor of one of the greatest exercises humankind has ever known.
@10...I'm religious, and I don't want you dead. And I don't think you're sinning, and I'm sorry that people keep saying that to you. And I'm working on my religious friends who DO think that, trying to get them to open their minds and realize that they're wrong.

I was raised with all the homophobia, right-wing conservative stuff, but I grew up and grew out of it. I'm sure I'm probably still more politically conservative than most of the commenters here, but I'm "fighting the good fight" to get religious people to own up to their fear and give up their hatred and to quit voting for bullshit measures that discriminate (I'm in California).

I'm just not an attention whore about it--I'm trying to influence the people that actually know me and respect my opinion. That's how my own opinion got challenged and changed, and I'm convinced it's the only way that works in the long run.
I guess I've become cynical and jaded in my "old age". I called BS on this in the previous post.
I was sad because when I saw the full text of this article,
I thought it was about a Christian group that got it. But really, they are just sorry we are gay. Reconciliation is not them making amends to us for the trauma Christianity has inflicted on gay people but rather all of us reconcilling our lives back into the luvin harms of Jebus by denying who we are.

I have to say, I SOOO wanted it to be for the right reasons, but it wasnt. and that horrid feeling in my stomach and sense of disappointment is the reason Chrisitianity will never win this one.

We will never forgive you when you keep abusing us.You fucking bastards. go to hell..

Well, I guess I have some feelings about this.
This makes me pretty sad. At first it reminded me of a chapter from the book Searching for God Knows What (I'm pretty sure it was that one, and not Blue Like Jazz) where this group set up a confessional at Reed College's Renn Faire. When people went in, though, the "priests" were the ones confessing for things like the child molestation scandal, the Crusades, blatant homophobia, etc. Too bad this story isn't real.
I am completely okay with christians thinking I'm a sinner and I'm going to hell... provided that they don't discriminate me in the workplace, and allow me to get a civil marriage license, and basically have all of the civil rights that they do.

They think I'm a sinner. I think christianity is a mass illusion. The difference is that I don't think they should be denied rights that are supposed to belong to everyone.
Take heart though, there are an increasing number of solidly pro-queer evangelicals out there, ya'll, even if these self-serving weirdos aren't among them. And again, they're just joining those of us in the liberal mainline denominations who already have been fighting the good fight for ages (and thus have nothing to apologise for).
At Minneapolis pride, we had a number of churches with stands and floats who genuinely, actually welcome gays and will even marry them, because that's how many Christians are in Minnesota. Sorry these guys turned out to be so disappointing, but the whole "apologize for Christianity" thing is probably a demonstration technique that the *actually* accepting Christians would like to hear about. I'll see what I can do to inform them.
@10 - Fuck you. That is all.
Now I don't feel bad about thinking there's something up with these people after reading their website last night. Seemed a little to 'aren't we wonderful to be so wonderful to y'all'.
The Xtians/Catholics were totally wrong about masturbation.
[M]asturbation is an evolved strategy for shedding old sperm while making room for new, fitter sperm. It’s quality over quantity.

The article goes on to say that women's vaginas actually physically rejected sperm that was too old... too old being more than 48 hours from original production in the testes. You want to increase male side of baby-making fertility? Spank it a day before sex, boys!

Now to the more fascinating subject of female masturbation.... I think the proper question is: "Can I watch?"
Perhaps we should make the distinction between dogmatists and theists. The problem is not the deists/ weak (sorry, I don't know of a better word to use) theists - people with a belief or hope in a vaguely defined benevolent god. It's the people who are so invested in particular chapter and verse.

Oh, and @1 and others, my personal fave hypocrisy is that there are more verses in both Old and New Testaments telling women how to wear their hair (to prevent punishment in this world and the next) than proscriptions against the gheigh. No cuts, no bobs, no braids, no ornaments - and cover the head in church, or you're an abomination. So why not go lesbian?
Fuck the Marin Foundation.

I *am* sorry.

I'm sorry the Roman Catholic Church, the faith I was raised in, is using gays and lesbians as a scapegoat to shore up their increasingly outdated beliefs.

I'm sorry there are hetrosexual men and women who hate homosexuals because they're too scared too see them as human beings.

And I'm sorry that there are people so messed up in the head that they can wear "I'm Sorry" shirts, carry signs of apology to a pride parade, and *still* have the nerve to dehumanize anyone different from them, and do it in the name of God.
please don't tell Dan.
half the fun for him is thinking the bible tells him not to...
@15, venomlash is correct. Onan's infraction was not masturbation but coitus interruptus; specifically in the context of refusing to fulfill his duty as levir to Tamar. Levirate marriage refers to the taking over of a deceased man's (as-yet childless) marriage by his next oldest brother; any children produced by that union would be considered to be the children of the deceased. It had to do with property transfer. Onan's sin was therefore not so much sexual misconduct as it was failing to perform this particular social contract. The verse specifically say that he spilled his seed because he knew that any children he and Tamar had would not be considered his own.
-Religious Studies grad student
@29: Thanks. It's all an issue of following the commandment (actually the first, chronologically speaking, in the Bible) to "be fruitful and multiply". Solely by that ruling, there's nothing wrong with a wank here and there as long as you plan to have kids at some point. (I'm not saying that it's evil to not have kids; I'm not a religious fanatic.)
I knew it. I feel bad for the guy in the underwear who seems so dejected and in such need of some spiritual support and acceptance. I can totally relate.

But were not going to get it from these people. And this goes to show us, when it comes to these religious folk, you have to be vigilant and aware because they are pulling some dirty fucking tricks these day, such as their manipulative little love fest at pride.

I think we need to remember that spiritual connection, love, and community can be found in their purest form in many places, not just the churches that have judged and exiled us. They are qualities that are not religious, but are simply human, so the church does not have a monopoly.
How many of you have actually read Andrew Marin's "Love is an Orientation"? I'm looking for hands, here. Anyone?

As a gay 25-year-old Christian, I must say that no other book has inspired me more to embrace my entire self. It is a powerful text about unconditional love and asking open-ended questions. To Marin, sex is not a standard by which to judge a life. Rather, he celebrates "God’s acceptance, validation, affirmation, and unconditional love in meeting people as they are, where they are."

Remember that Andrew Marin is dealing with matters of faith and religion -- not politics. So when you cast him aside for not being a vocal Christian advocate for gay marriage, remember that he's trying to bridge the conversational gap between Christians and many in the LGBT community. One can't be a bridge and stand on one (political) side, and his mission is to pose more questions than to give answers. The more that Christians are brought to individually question their assumptions about gays and lesbians, the more they are moved -- internally -- to change their thinking. One cannot achieve this by telling them what to believe.

To those of you who think his book might take a "love the sinner, hate the sin" mentality, get ready to be blown away.
Bummer. :-(
Allow me to (hopefully) be the conservative Christian voice of reason here.

Are homosexual acts necessarily sins in the eyes of God? I believe the voice of Scripture is unequivocally 'yes'.

Are Christians called to, or even justified in, mistreating, maligning, or otherwise treating homosexual people with contempt or disrespect? Absolutely NOT.

Should the Christian stand up and act when the homosexual person is treated with contempt or violence? (eg. the gay kid is pushed into a locker at school and beat up). Yes. And I'm convinced that this is what these people are doing, and I support them for it.

In short: my conservative Christianity that leads me to call homosexual acts sin is the same belief system that tells me that homosexual people are God's image bearers and that if one of them is treated with contempt, then the image of God is treated with contempt. The Christian is called to stand against oppression wherever he finds it, and I am glad these people are doing so.
@34 That's precisely the attitude we're unhappy about. It's certainly a step in the right direction (assuming it comes with votes for full civil liberties) but frankly, we need to hear "it's not a sin" if we're ever going to get along.

It's really not sufficient to say "you're inherently wrong and somewhat evil, but we're required to be nice to you." The hook buried at the end of that is "maybe you could stop being bad too?" If your religion can't accept our immutable traits, then clearly your God wasn't sufficiently loving in his designs.

I don't see how you can somehow manage to exist with the cognitive dissonance between "God made everyone in his image," "Gay people are immutably gay," and "Being gay is sinful," all at once. Something has to give, and if you're going to sacrifice the second point, we can't be friends.
God must love the gays, because he sure made a lot of them.

@34 "God made everyone in his image," "Gay people are immutably gay," and "Being gay is sinful," means that God is evil, to make people "inherently" undeserving of paradise.

Of course, I just think God doesn't exist, so I've got it easy.
I applaud Marin for a demonstration that will hopefully open dialogue. I speak out against gay-bashing when the subject arises. Many times I see Christian-bashing in the gay community, labeling them all as gay-haters, who want them "dead dead dead." While that type of hatred exists, it is not what Jesus stood for, and it is not an accurate representation of Christianity.

There are many *practicing* Christians like myself who are not fearful or hate gays, and believe that gays should be respected in the workplace and should be entitled to civil rights like any other citizen. But that does not mean I will rewrite the Bible to say that is not a sin (Corinthians 6:9-10; Romans 1:24-29--FYI I didn't have those scriptures memorized on my Christian radar, as if they are the biggest sins of the bible, contrary to what some think Christians do). I have a problem with Christians who speak out about sexual sins but exclude premarital sex, adultery (Corinthians 5:1; 6:13, 18; Ephesians 5:3) or any sin for that matter.

It seems so much easier for the gay community to put all Christians in a box as gay-haters. I worked in a gay environment and have had gay and straight friends that were surprised that I was Christian because I was so "tolerant." I had to explain to them that just because I am loving and treat all people lovingly, as Christ taught, doesn't mean that I will reject what the bible says about sin. In my being friendly and loving to everyone, I have discovered that there are many out there gays and straight alike who are hurting and have deep sources of pain. Christians have pain too,of course, but our strength and resilience comes from the Lord.

Painting Christians with a broad brush as gay-bashers makes Christianity easier to reject, condemn and vilify. When a Christian expresses love, embraces someone gay, welcomes them in their home, gives them respect then why have the same equivocal attitude with them as they would with a gay-basher? Why take the easy road and say that Christians are all hateful? It would be just as easy for me to say that all gays are Bible-bashers.
How can we convey this in a way that makes sense.

It's still hateful to call us sinful. Even if you want to hug us and vote for marriage rights afterward. We'll take the rights, but your religion is still wrong as long as you think something we can't change about ourselves is sinful.

That you've read your ambiguous religious text in such a way to paint us as inherently wrong, even if you take all the other parts to mean you have to be kind to us anyway, is still hateful.
@34, 37: Do you make it a point to avoid wearing mixed fibers? Do you believe women should cover their heads during prayer? I've heard these questions asked countless times, and the answers (if given) are almost always "no." Still, I've yet to hear a decent justification.

I have little respect for people who claim my life is a sin but cannot explain why they are exempt from any number of their own rules. Your argument is worthless if you can't explain your selectivity.
@ 39 selectivity? why do you choose to select the old testament for the purposes of your reasoning?
@40, you really should know your holy book better than I do:

1 Cor 11:2-16
mixed fibers refers to Leviticus. Paul was addressing women who shaved their hair in Corinth for the other scripture. head covering = hair. Feel free to research if you're inclined.
@42 Actually, it's been interpreted many ways. Some still interpret it to mean that the head should be covered. But yes, you are not alone in believing that it refers to the head being shaved. However, that take isn't universal so I had no reason to assume that was your belief. Most Christians I've met simply didn't bother to interpret it one way or the other.

I'm certainly not complaining, but where in the New Testament does it say that all OT law is now moot? How does that fit with Matthew 5:17-19?

Is it okay for a Christian to sue another Christian, and if so, why?

Were the first women to wear pants breaking God's law? If they were, how do you reconcile that with the fact it began as a sin, but the prevalence of the sin eventually made it acceptable (as it redefined women's clothing)?

Do you believe it's okay to call anyone but God "father?"

If you actually have answers to all these questions off the top of your head, even if these answers are a bit of a stretch, more power to you. You're a rare one and I appreciate that. Most just take what they like, give little thought to rules they'd rather not apply to themselves, and at the very best, run a quick internet search if they need to justify their position.

Still, even if you are that commendable and rare sort of apologist who has scrutinized every law and ensured he has an argument for each alternative interpretation, what makes you resistant to the alternative interpretations regarding gays?
@43, I understand and commend your interest in your concerns with the Bible that you feel do not line up. I truly believe that if your heart is seeking answers to these questions, you will find them. Just as an earlier poster said, you can't be selective in your study of the bible, if you choose to read it. I didn't comment here to debate theology or my Christian beliefs in its entirety. I certainly cannot do that within the constraints of a thread, especially given that I've been living for 32 years. There are a lot of questions that I have about life and even for God. It's allowed. He wants us to ask Him.

I just posted here because I feel quite sad about how Christians are portrayed as fear and hate-mongers. And I am sorry that there are Christians out there that misrepresent Christ and for any pain they have inflicted on the gay community or any other group. There are fringes of every religion that take beliefs out of context and do what they want for their own personal agendas. I do not pardon what religious fringes do, but when I think from a broader historical context of humanity and religion, I can't see how people who claim to be Christians would be exempt.

As far as sin goes, (this is for #38 too) I cannot redefine what it is. My faith is defined by love, not defined by sexuality, abortion, and other issues that some conservatives would have you believe (don't ask them about gun-rights or military issues though). You would not ask an American vegetarian to abide his beliefs 364 days except for Thanksgiving. Why ask Christians to change the law? That does not mean I am hateful if I recognize what sin is. Jesus died for our sins, the ultimate sacrifice, so that we do not have to do all of the sacrifices of the Old testament, to answer your question briefly. I say that premarital sex is a sin. Would straights say that I am hateful for saying that? Not too sure. Then again, that is because some Christians choose not to be vocal about that sin. That is where the problem lies--making one sin greater than the other.
Poor Christians being protrayed as hatemongers. Gotta love that christian persecution complex.

And interesting how you shove aside all the "fringe" people, like its their fault, and refuse to look at your own religion's inherent flaws. It's been said before on this post before: So long as you see us as sinners, no matter how minor, there will be no reconciliation. Sure we'll put up with you, but were never going to feel your "love" so long as it's tinged with disdain.

And fuck you for trying to tell us homo's how to feel.
I am another gay 25-year old Christian, and I had a very similar experience as @32 when I read Marin's book. I referred it to a friend who was having really had a hard time when I came out to her, and it has completely changed the way she thinks about the subject and it definitely has had a positive impact on our friendship.

Reading this post and comments brought a few tears to my eyes with all of the sheer anger I felt. I'd take a community that believes in "loving the sinner and hating the sin" any day over a community that despises my faith and my desire to be true to that faith, who would rather try and convince me of a single position rather than patiently sitting with me through the long struggle of figuring this whole thing out. Many of you want me to feel proud of my sexuality and to embrace it, but I hesitate to if you also require me to either reject my faith or to compromise both my intellectual and/or conscientious convictions.

You criticize the hypocrisy of Christians, but at the same time fail to see your own hypocrisy in the way you cry out for personal freedom, but at the same time seemingly ignoring my freedom to hold the beliefs that I do and my freedom to refrain from homosexual behavior if I so choose. I am truly happy and content with being a gay man, but I have no desire to associate with the gay community since I am not free to be myself among you. I am more than gay - can't you see that? I want to be all of me, not just one or a few parts.

The refusal of many gay people to lovingly dialog with those whom with they disagree makes me more ashamed of my sexuality than any Bible verse or preacher ever did. And your stubbornness to dialog and your malicious rhetoric are destroying the lives of many young and confused gay Christians just as much as any homophobic thing they might be hearing from the pulpit - I regularly witness it.

But I fear that in making these statements where I declare the pride I hold in my faith and my frustration with those who share my sexuality, I am going to provoke a series of more malicious statements, judging me, psychoanalyzing me, and reading things into my comments that are not there, and ultimately revealing the human tendency to see what we want to see, the vice to which we all (myself included) are so easily inclined. I've suffered greatly at the hands of well-intentioned but ignorant Christians, and many are shocked that I've held onto my faith. But that is because Christ is more real to me than anything, more real than any ignorant person. This is a point that many readers will simply be unable to comprehend, and it would require them to put themselves in the uncomfortable position of building a bridge and walking with me in disagreement in order to begin to understand what I am talking about.

We desperately need bridge-builders. I need bridge-builders. I need people who understand my Christian convictions (or wants to understand them) and also understands (or wants to understand) where my sexuality fits in with that. I'm tired of having people telling me what I must believe and what I must do to REALLY be happy.

Even though I don't personally know Marin, I feel as if he is a good friend since he is among the few who has given up everything to see that people like me have an advocate. Have any of you stopped to consider the suffering he has experienced for his stance? You have to realize that his message does not go over well with "the religious right" and many other conservative Christians. He could have lived a quiet and happy life as a straight white guy - but he gave it all up for people like you and people like me. He gave up ease and comfort to be your friend and advocate in the conservative Christian world, and you're rejecting him. Read his blog and you'll see that things have not been easy for him on every front imaginable, and he's been very transparent about his struggle with his faith in the midst of these challenges with a transparency that is quite rare among religious figures. Don't be so eager to accuse, but really think about the costs these people are paying in order to be your friends.

And if you all are letting one or two political issues define who can and cannot be your friend, you are missing out on many worth-wile friendships. If you want people to accept you for being gay, you might have to be willing to accept people who deep-down believe that marriage is only between a man and a woman. The world will never become a more loving and accepting place if you only make friends with those who are like you.

I apologize if I sounded too aggressive in any way, but I get really passionate about the need for bridge-building, and I also get deeply incensed at the way I see the refusal to build bridges effecting the many young gay Christians I know. The more you are willing to suck up your pride and make friends with those with whom you disagree, the more you're going to make the world a better place to live and provide a living, breathing witness to the fact that these kids are neither evil nor shameful for having the feelings which they do.
I just realized I may have sounded rather self-contradictory in my desire to see bridges built while at the same time tending to avoid the gay community, and should probably clarify. I do have good friends from all walks of life and all beliefs - from the closeted to the out-and-proud. From the celibate to the very sexually active. And I genuinely love them all and am not in the place to judge any of their choices or behavior.

But the turf where I engage these relationships has tended to be at church, school, and work. I'm a quiet introvert who thrives best in one-on-one situations, not in bars or clubs, and certainly not in places where I'm only going to be hated and no one has any interest in seeing life from my perspective. My friends know where I stand and what I believe, and we're all cool with that and they still feel free to tell me just about anything, and vice-versa.

So while some have the ability to build bridges in very big, public ways; others like myself do so exclusively on an interpersonal level.

And again, I deeply apologize if I came off in any way hateful in my earlier comment. I do not feel hate, but was rather feeling hurt and rejected by the hate I was hearing in the comments, as well as feeling frustrated by the short-sightedness I was observing and the blindness to the challenges and suffering of those who need and deserve our support. My passionate language was intended primarily to get people to wake up and see that they're hurting people also, and they need to be careful. If anyone felt hatred from me in what I said, I offer my deepest apologies.
Damn, I was excited by your original story, but worried that it sounded too good to be true. The difference between you and me, though, is that YOU ARE A JOURNALIST. I would have had that same impulse to (how did you put it?) refrain from digging into the story, for fear of learning that it wasn't as rosy as I would hope. But it's this reticence to investigate that is not a luxury in which you should indulge! You put yourself in a position of disseminating propaganda, just because you liked their spin.

Next time your heart wants to linger in those fields of fantasy, but red flags get pushed up through your better sense, PLEASE INVESTIGATE! We (your fans) expect better from you.
These are the same assholes who literally believe burning bushes can talk, so I don't hold them up as a paradigm of intellectual honesty and integrity.

If queerness is soooo bad, how is it that the books selected to be included in the Bible do not portray him uttering a single word about queerness? The simple fact is that these assholes are insecure about their own manhood and sexuality, and refuse to evolve, because they have the power to make other people change through fear, abuse, and intimidation.

One can only hope this "Rapture" of theirs comes soon, or they decide to make their special kool-aid and rapture themselves.
Looking through the comments on the original article by Nathan Albert, he does not say whether or not homosexuality is a sin. I think it's a step in the right direction. Although whether this is just his opinion or the official position of the group is unclear. A "come as you are" kind of attitude is a good thing in that Christians believe ALL are sinners. Each person's definition of "sin" varies, but it's not anyone's place to point and judge.

I do believe there are an increasing number of churches that accept and welcome lgbt people without trying to "cure" you.

As a straight Christian, I do not think homosexuality is a sin. I never really did, but I admit I didn't totally get it at first. My ignorance was just that, and not based on anything the Bible says. I don't represent the position of my denomination, so it's just my opinion, for what it's worth.
I find this all very frustrating and sad. The best thing I can do is raise my daughter to love all people.
Christians cannot "like" gays because their bible tells them what to think. As does the bible teach to rape, molest, beat and kill. Most likely a bunch of closet cases.
I would like to echo a comment earlier in this discussion, that there are certainly Christian churches and congregations that are utterly welcoming of LGBT folks and who are not apologizing for anything, other than agonizing over how many Christians and Christian bodies have behaved and are continuing to behave toward our community.

I am in Cleveland and am a member of a small United Church of Christ congregation in a conservative suburb. We revel in being the liberal outpost in this town. We are what is called "open and affirming" - meaning at a point in the past, the congregation voted, almost unanimously, to welcome LGBT folks and include them (us) in the full life of the church. This was in 1991. It took them a while to figure out exactly how to "live" that designation, but we now have an openly gay pastor, a gay music director, and I was, for two years, moderator of the church council. You can't get much more welcoming or affirming than that.

We have not "taken over" - far from it. The church is a mix of kinds of people - young families, including gay families, and people of all ages, single and married or partnered. The members who are gay are actively supported and appreciated, but our sexuality is just no big deal. We are simply full members of the church family. For me, it is precious and life-giving. Our message is completely Christ-centered. We don't debate scripture. We focus on being the church for our members and in our community.

I personally reject the conviction held by many that the Bible condemns homosexuality. There are just a few passages these people cite, and in every instance, there are reasonable interpretations of them that completely refute the bigots. I am so sick of that discussion that I pretty much refuse to participate in it, but I'll be happy to if anyone insists on it.

It's a big part of my life - don't know what I'd do without it - my church, that is. It makes me very sad that so many of my gay brothers and sisters are so filled, justifiably, with anger and hurt and are missing out on what can be a wonderful thing. It makes me sad that alleged Christians are caught up in rejecting us and have done such a good job of turning millions of people away from God. They are missing out, too. I think that's something they will answer for before it is all said and done.

OK - enough already. Just putting in my two bits.
thanks, jon t! it's nice to know i'm not alone:-)
What's wrong with Figs in the bible?
I found a scary quote on this site linked to in Dan Savage's article…

Early in June, Michael Allen of Uptown Baptist Church wrote an open letter to area pastors calling on them to respond to the Gay Games. "Our gay and lesbian fellow citizens embody our own most extreme, most impassioned defiance of our Creator," he wrote, "who lovingly designed us in his own image, male and female. Our homosexual friends typify our own stiff-necked, fist-waving, God-cursing, me-loving selves."

This is the problem with evangelicals. For a large percentage of them it is not enough to think homosexuality is a sin, the see it quite literally as a slap in the face to that god of theirs. just leaving us alone is not an option. Many fell the same way about atheists, it is not a private matter to them it is a personal insult to their best buddy.
I know this thread is old, I know no one is reading it, I know this comment will go out into the ether. But I'm typing it anyway.
To TreeHugger03 and Anon1984: Thank you for coming to the defense of Andrew Marin. Your fierce defense of him inspired me to get his book Love is an Orientation out of my local library and read it. I just finished the first read and will likely read it again.
I've also read Michelangelo Signorile's blog post from July of this year. Michelangelo is the guy wrote a piece on AM for the Advocate in 2006.
To TreeHugger- you are right. Love is an Orientation is an amazing book about moving beyond the binary right/wrong fight that the US legalist fundamentalists and the LGBT community are embroiled in. I particularly found his ideas on how to read the bible, and his treatment of the Big 5 passages that are so argued over, to be very insightful.
To Anon1984- (I am assuming you are male. If I am wrong, I apologize.)
Brother, I felt your pain and your solitude through your post and my heart goes out to you. Please realize, if you see greatness in another, it is because it is also in you. You are the bridge builder you are looking for.

Now please, both of you, follow the link below. Don't read the article, don't listen to Dan Savage or me or Michelangelo Signorile or anyone else. Follow the link, scroll down to the embedded sound bites, and listen and judge for yourself.…
But being gay is a sin!
This whole thing you are in a huff about is nothing when you realize what sin actually is. Everyone is a complete sinner it is who we are you can't get away from it. Doesn't matter what your sexual orientation is, you're a sinner! That's the whole beauty of Jesus, he came for us all because we are all sinners, its love and grace in a perfect epic sacrifice. If you think you're not a sinner and are so upset by being called a sinner then you will miss out on the best thing in life because you don't even think you need it. If you are gay or not, you're no more or less of a sinner. And even if you stopped being gay after being gay of course you are still no less of a sinner! And if I turned gay I'm no more of a sinner. The whole concept of sin is totally twisted in this whole issue. The more I recognize that I am a sinner the happier I am, the more at peace I am because it is no longer about ME. It's so much bigger than me, and thank goodness for that!
I think it's silly to be mad about this guy's personal opinions. So what if deep down he thinks what your doing is a 'sin', he's preaching acceptance, not hate. I don't approve of everyone's lifestyle, I think some are morally misguided (which I guess is an nonbeliever's version of a sin?). It's my right to have those opinions and beliefs, but to hate people for their opinions and beliefs and to preach that hate at a parade, or in a newspaper, or on the radio is just breeding more hate. So I hope you see the hypocrisy in condemning him as he's spreading acceptance......
This is all about sin, we are all sinners, we all are made in God's image and we all have Christ as our saviour. As a christian, we don't want you to listen to people and their view on God's word and how we should live. We don't have the right to tell people what we think their own sins are when we have plenty of our own to deal with. Jesus came because everything was screwed up and how hateful and judgement mankind became. If you look to the ten commandments and what the fruits of the spirit are, then what we were meant to be doing and how we are meant to be living becomes very clear and so simple. God will sort everything out in the end, in the meantime we just need to love and live a life that embraces love of our fellow man. We come from a history of hatred and both sides need time to forgive and allow the baby steps to happen, it is a hard road for some to escape the house of hatred.