I’m spending the week in Athens, Georgia where liberalism runs deep. I’ve been flipping through issues of the University of Georgia’s student newspaper, Red & Black, only to find opinion article after opinion article which would make any Christian conservative shake his/her head in disgust.
On August 20th, Katie Andrew “celebrated sexual orientations” by writing an article on Renee DuBose who is a lesbian church pastor. She wrote:
Holy documents such as the Bible, the Torah and the Qu’ran have listed homosexuality as an “abomination”; an “unnatural temptation”; or a “perversion.”
Rev. Renee DuBose is an active pastor and lifelong Christian with a master’s degree in religious education from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. She is also a lesbian.
“I believe I was born gay,” DuBose said. “I believe with all my heart that God creates diversity; my being gay is a mark of God’s diversity.” DuBose is a pastor at Our Hope Metropolitan Community Church in Athens, which specializes in the spiritual needs of the gay community.
Wait, wait, wait. The Bible calls homosexuality an abomination yet a “preacher” of that same Bible says, “My being gay is a mark of God’s diversity.” There seems to be a small conflict here. Either the Bible does NOT call homosexuality a sin or homosexuality is NOT a part of God’s handiwork.
Romans 1:26,27 says “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.”
Any questions as to what the Bible says on the matter?
I know this has been a topic of discussion so I’ll address it further. The liberal dissenting voices will say I have no place to impose my beliefs on anyone else so I should not oppose legalized marriage between same-sex partners. Of course, most of these voices will oppose prayer in schools and Ten Commandments in Government buildings. I suppose their tolerance of diversity has a limit.
Here’s what this particular conservative believes on the subject. I use the Bible and my God-given common sense to discern what is right and wrong. When it comes to homosexuality, the Bible clearly teaches it is wrong and common sense should tell us that God did not design men to be with men or women to be with women.
All people are born into this world with an evil nature, but what particular evils we commit are ultimately dependent upon our own beliefs and self-discipline. Of course, we will always be influenced by our surrounding environments. This is where my firm stance against legalized homosexual marriage comes in. The nation as a whole will always be affected by every law or bill that is passed or not passed.
Ezekiel 7:27 says, “The king shall mourn, and the prince shall be clothed with desolation, and the hands of the people of the land shall be troubled: I will do unto them after their way, and according to their deserts will I judge them; and they shall know that I am the LORD.”
I know people debate whether or not God still judges nations, but either way, we know that sin has the ability to grow and consume a nation. Remember that event most commonly known as “the flood”?
My point is this: Homosexuality is wrong. I will not protest the funerals of gay soldiers or participate in those kinds of insulting practices, but I will stand against it and every political or judicial move to legalize and accommodate it in this country.
I’ve often heard that varying religious denominations can take the same scripture from the bible and interpret it differently than other denominations. And, I’ve seen some of that proved in my experience.
I can see no way the above statements from Romans can be interpreted any differently than it is stated.
Homosexuality is wrong. Period.
I agree; however, let’s remember to hate the sin, not the sinner!
I’m with Aunt Shirley.
Hi, Aunt Shirley,
I…more than most…appreciate the distinguishing between sin and the sinner. People I love have drug addictions. I hate the drug. I love my people. And, in the above scenario, I love the sinner.
You will stand against the “gay agenda”, but yet you want to force your beliefs on others by having prayer in school and the Ten Commandments and whatever else that suits your “Christian agenda”. Not everyone in the country believes in the Bible, so any scriptures you can quote just sound like mindless babble from a book of fiction. You don’t seem to understand that you are forcing your beliefs on people who don’t want any part of it — just as you complain that the liberals do to you. You only think you are right because you are backed up by the very book that millions don’t even believe in.
I thought I explained that but maybe not well enough. I did rush through this one last as I was growing very tired.
I will stand against the “gay agenda” because I believe it’s wrong and it hurts the country to embrace this kind of immorality. My reason is that simple. That’s also why debates like these will never get anywhere. We’re all approaching the issue from different starting points. I have biblical and spiritual reason while others do not.
Before anyone else responds with arguments, I welcome all of your comments, but keep in mind that you will not likely change my opinion.
I might add that I agree whole-heartedly with Aunt Shirley. I despise the sin of homosexuality but consider those guilty of it no better than myself or anyone else. Whether it be murder or a little white lie, evil is evil. I don’t believe God grades on a curve.
I am reminded of a song I wrote recently…
I just think that whoever you are if you were to show yourself to us,
you would do it in a way that would bring us closer together
I just feel in my heart that whoever you are, you are full of love
And if we truly found you, we would truly love one another
Some call me crazy,
maybe they’re right, but all I know is I’m tired of the fighting
So many differences that we could be enjoying,
but instead we want to prove who is better
I just think that whoever you are if you were to show us how to live,
You’d make sure we understood how to really care for each other
I just feel in my heart that whoever you are you want peace for us
and to watch us embrace all the differences that you have given us
Some call me crazy,
maybe they’re right, but all I know is I’m tired of the ignorance
You gotta have the right skin, the right faith, the right orientation
to fit in
I just think that whoever you are if you were to build a church for us
we’d never find it in a building where only certain kinds of people go
I just feel in my heart that whoever you are you’re in each of us
It’s in our hearts that we will find you,
not in some religion
Some call me crazy
Maybe they’re right, but all I know is I’m tired of tradition
People passing judgment when it is none of their business
and so rarely taking time to look within
I just think that whoever you are if you were to speak to all of us
You’d say to see what is important and and that we’ve lost our way
We’ve lost our way
I think Eric has a good point. What if people think the Bible is wrong or immoral? You would still have no problem having them pray or being regularly exposed to the 10 commandments. Yet, because you think certain things are wrong, you think they should be forbidden.
And you say your reason is because you believe you are right. Well, people who do not believe in the Bible also believe they are right. If believing one was right was reason enough to force one’s opinions/beliefs onto others through legislation, then, no one would ever be allowed to do anything.
By the way, I see no problems with prayer in school that is student initiated.
I believe what I believe. If what I believe means legalized homosexual marriages hurt the country as a whole, why would I abandon that without contrary biblical proof? No one has to listen to me. No one has to read what I write. No one has to agree.
First, I just want to say that I hope no one thinks less of Athens and my Dawgs, who are ranked #1 in the preseason polls, just because of this “minister” and her misguided stance on homosexuality. That being said… WOW! She’s really out there isn’t she? To honestly think that she can be teaching from the word of God and simultaneously be living in a sin that is outright and fully condemned in the Book she is teaching out of. That’s like a history teacher telling his class to ignore the part in their history books that says George Washington was the first president of the United States because it isn’t true. I’m not even gonna try to make an argument on morality or ethics. I can’t convince anyone that homosexuality is wrong. What I can say, however, is that this woman has lost credibility becasue she contradicts the Word of God. Many different religions interpret the Bible in different ways, but you can’t claim to be a follower or a teacher of the Word if you deny it or any part of it.
As for the accusation that Christians try to impose their beliefs on others, the Ten Commandments in government owned buildings is not an imposition on those who do not believe in God. No one has ever held anyone’s face in front of a copy of the Ten Commandments and held his eyelids open until he read them. Give me a break. Separation of Church and State is not a Consitutional concept. I challenge anyone to find those words in our constitution. It simply bans the federal government from creating a state sponsored religion and restricting the free exercise of whatever religion a person chooses to believe in.
That’s absolutely right. Go Dawgs!
The subject of homosexuality cannot be lightened; however, I do want to point out to you, Jeremy, that you have lived in Indiana for many years now. It is time to get this Dawg thing out of your head. How far do you live from Notre Dame (or even Purdue or, God forbid, Indiana University)? Perhaps you could at least consider one of them (probably not IU) as on the same par (or better) as those Georgia teams! And, back to the subject at hand, I have a very precious friend who is gay. We have talked about this, prayed about this. I have watched him struggle with this. But he still claims to be gay. He has compassion that I have not known in many “straight” people. And I love him. He has been, is, always will be my friend. I will continue to love him and continue to pray for him.
It’s so strange that so many fundamentalist Christians insist that God’s laws be written into civil law. Yet they do fully understand the need for “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s.” How many of the Ten Commandments actually have civil and criminal penalties under our laws? When was the last time a kid was thrown in jail for not honoring his father or mother? Why is there no fundamentalist Christian outcry to stone the cheating wife? Even those fundamentalists who believe that life begins at conception and believe abortion is “murder” don’t advocate corresponding penalties (no woman has been hung for that yet). By their lack of action, these Christians speak volumes.
Yet, here we are, justifying our legal opposition to homosexuality with the Bible. How stupid! That being said, I acknowledge the cultural abhorance to homosexual acts. However, this is NOT a religious argument that anyone can win. Marriage is NOT a religious institution, it’s CIVIL! Even the Pilgrams understood that! The minister didn’t perform marriages, the governor did.
The decision America must make is whether to hold onto the the simple and ancient reason for marriage. Is it still to be for the upbringing and benefit of children? All of today’s studies still support the benefits of both BIOLOGICAL parents raising the child. More recently, governments have provided benefits for spouses (usually wives) who presumably need the protection and stability of the marriage contract for economic security they forego for the sake of raising children.
The question before us now is: Do we want to change the definition of marriage and the basic reason for marriage from that of, “a union between a man and a woman for the stability and benefit of the family produced by such a union, recognizing the benefit to society” to that of, “a union between two people who profess love for one another.”
Since the various state and the federal governments have all addressed the need for marriage based upon the first premise, and very few homosexual unions have such social benefits, do we want to redefine marriage because of the very few homosexual unions which may benefit children or their caretaker? Do we give “unearned” benefits now granted to wives and children to homosexual partners who neither raise nor sacrifice for children? Will such a redefinition trivialize and weaken the tattered bonds of modern heterosexual unions further and thus weaken our society?
It may be well argued that the government is not in the “love” business, but in the business of “social” security.
Let's be honest.
When the after church collection of fatties are bellying up to the buffet bar on Sunday afternoons (soliciting a business on the Lord's day of rest?) they're none too worried about the section of Leviticus about eating shellfish…
"But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you." (Leviticus 11:10)
Or any pork byproduct for that matter, another old testament no-no. Same section of the bible as that nonsense about homosexuality. Judging from the heart attack rate in the Bible belt we all know this is true.