Many people believe Christians have a disproportionate focus on homosexuality and homosexuals over and above other sins, even other sexual sins. As anyone who talks with Christians about morality will tell you, eventually, the focus will turn either to abortion or homosexuality. When the discussion turns to homosexuality, there seems to be not simply a passive acknowledgement of believing homosexual sexual behavior to be sinful, there is a sense of passion and contempt behind the condemnation of homosexuality. This is one accusation levied at Christians that I can admit is true. The question is whether the extra focus on homosexuality is warranted, or if it’s more an isolation because of ickiness.
I think it’s safe to say the Christian also believes incest, adultery, and promiscuity are all sinful. But there is one distinct difference between these and homosexuality. Homosexuality is the only one that is foisted upon the Christian and society, it is the only sexual sin that we are inundated with.
There is an overt antagonism coming from homosexual activists toward Christians. This is the foundation for the resistance to homosexuality, there are activists. These activists have created a hostile atmosphere (pot calling the kettle black, says the activist). What I mean is, vocal opposition to homosexuality is shouted down and the Christian is labeled hateful and bigoted. Name-calling is the go-to response. Don’t support same-sex marriage? you hate. Think public displays of actual or simulated sex acts during public parades or protests are inappropriate? you’re a bigot. The problem is disagreement is not an option. Nor is tolerance for that matter (see: Haters, Haters Everywhere). So the Christian worldview is under constant attack and ridicule from homosexual activism.
Christians face no such antagonism from adulterers, or the promiscuous, or those who act on any number of sexual sins. Moreover, there is no push for social endorsement of adultery, or promiscuity. There is no such thing as an adultery pride parade. We are not asked to accept incestuous or adulterous relationships.
Christians are also not forced to have their children taught these other sexual sins in elementary schools.
(Fox News) — A group of parents in a California school district say they are being bullied by school administrators into accepting a new curriculum that addresses bullying, respect and acceptance — and that includes compulsory lessons about the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community that will be taught to children as young as 5 years old.
(GLSEN.org) — GLSEN’s Education Department offers free curricula and lesson plans for educators to use with elementary, middle and high school students. These resources provide a framework for facilitating classroom discussion and engaging students in creating safer schools for all.
(Healthiersf.org) — Lesson plan for elementary school grades K-3.
(Dailymail) — lesson plans are designed to raise awareness about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual issues and, in theory, could be used for children as young as four.
They will also mean youngsters are exposed to images of same-sex couples and books such as And Tango Makes Three, which tells the story of two male penguins raising a chick.
(Fox News) — An honors student in Fort Worth, Texas, was sent to the principal’s office and punished for telling a classmate that he believes homosexuality is wrong.
[…]
Dakota was sentenced to one day in-school suspension – and two days of full suspension.
Whether you disagree with the Christian perspective on homosexuality is irrelevant to this particular issue. Christians have a more pronounced focus on homosexuality because we are bombarded with it. We are forced to react to it by having it constantly put to the fore like no other sin. For example, Fox’s popular show Glee is set to show gay teen couple, Kurt and Blaine, will lose their virginity to each other in an upcoming episode, according to The Dailymail.
It should really be no surprise that Christians have gay-on-the-brain. We aren’t allowed to forget it. If homosexuals are uncomfortable or offended at the attention they receive from the Christian community, I suggest they relax on the confrontation. There are no adultery pride parades. Adultery and promiscuity are not taught as an acceptable practice to children — and if you don’t accept it you’re just a hateful Christian bigot. In fact Christians are told that their God is also hateful and so is their Holy writ; whereby actually attacking the very foundation of the Christian’s being. So homosexuals force Christians to be vocal about the issue, it is not just selective. I’m confident that if homosexuality weren’t so ‘in your face’ the issue would find its way to the back burners with Christians.
Sifting Reality 
John, I don’t agree that homosexuality should be freighted with the heavily denunciatory baggage of “sin,” but your analysis of comparative intensities in discussing the issue is spot on.
Kendrick
The thing many commenter to this post will get hung up on is whether the Christian is right or wrong about whether homosexual sexual behavior is a sin is irrelevant. The complaint is about Christians and their view, so ot has to be taken from their view. Christians view ot as a sin, and a sin that is championed and protected, and are persecuted for not joining in the acceptance.
Like slavery, homosexuality needs to expand to in order to thrive. But, like the infestation of cockroaches, the sin of homosexuality will even survive a nuclear holocaust, as it has been around nearly as long as prostitution. But, in order for people who behave homosexually to “constitute their identities” they must win or coerce public approval.
The way for homosexuality to expand is through recruitment. Those who practice homosexuality cannot reproduce so they have to proselytize. They have to convert confused people to join their ranks. That is why they target young children, like the boy who wants to join Girl Scouts.
The preachers of homosexuality will not tolerate apostacy. They use pernicious methods to indoctrinate children in schools (which is one reason why we homeschool). They also silence opposition by either shaming them or getting them to live in the Suburbs of Sodom and Gomorrah with sympathetic characters in movies or T.V. There are also the “lipstick lesbians” to titillate the fancies of immoral men. http://americancreed.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/suburbs-of-sodom-and-gomorrah/
One way of shaming is the “homophobic” label. An aspect of that label, as recognized in the definition you posted above, is they say “homophobes” lash out at homosexuality because they are afraid or embarrassed at their own homosexual tendencies. It is an illogical argument but it reinforces the accusers attempt to suppress his own guilty conscience over acting homosexually.
Notice how I never used the noun “homosexual” because homosexuality is not about who someone is, but about how someone behaves. There are no “homosexuals” only people who act homosexually.
Your post hits the nail on the head as to why Christians react to homosexuality. Not only is it a disgusting, unnatural behavior, but it is pushed in our faces. We are called bigots as if we are discriminating against someone’s skin color. What they are trying to do with making homosexuality about identity is to get the full weight of government to prevent people from disassociating with their choice of sexual behavior. They want to force businesses to hire or churches to ordain people who behave homosexually or make it into a protected classification of people to guarantee certain special privileges.
So far they have been successful in changing the debate from behavior to identity. But, as we continue to speak the Truth, the lies of homosexuality will crumble.
K.M.,
Your personal preference not to burden homosexuality with the label of sin has no biblical basis. You are replacing the inerrant Word of God with your own secular humanistic moral code. You are making God into your own image.
DogTags, I understand where you’re coming from — and this is a tricky space. I’ll never convince you that the multiple scriptures of the world were written by human beings, hundreds or thousands of years ago, and not by God. And you’ll never convince me that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, with no latitude for different interpretations, no accounting for culture-specific norms, and not even the possibility that God might speak to people in different ways in vastly different eras.
And by the way, not to open up another can of worms, but I think we all routinely make God into our own image.
Yep. It isn’t like there was gay marriage in atheistic and religious cultures, including Christianity, for thousands of years and then we came along as buzzkills to put an end to the fun. Christians are really quite tolerant of what people do behind closed doors, and even more so when compared to Islam. As you noted, we just oppose teaching it to children as normal, the oxymoronic “same-sex marriage” issue and other in-your-face actions of the Left.
But the root cause is that the LGBTQ movement thinks that if it silences the church then they’ll be fully accepted and feel good about themselves. But even if they could silence us they’ll still have the same issues.
Homophobia is a foolish pejorative that sadly works to silence wimpy people. The real homophobes are those so scared of the gay lobby that they renounce their religion, common sense and the well being of their children and society rather than hold a position that is true yet politically incorrect.
Having said all that, I do think we err if we grandstand on homosexual behavior just because that sin isn’t a temptation for us. I just noted that when teaching Leviticus 18 in Sunday School last week. We are all sinners in need of a Savior every day. We should teach the truth about homosexual behavior, but not to the extent of pretending that we don’t have plenty of sins of our own.
John, I take your point about beginning with the premise that Christians (or most of them) view homosexuality as a sin — but I didn’t want to applaud your excellent post without at least noting my dissent on that premise.
what you described about the school system is just ONE of the reasons we homeschool!!
you made some good points!
Hi Cindy
I wish I had the ability to homeschool my kids. Not really for this reason, surprisingly even here in New England, my area doesn’t really push the issue as hard as other places. I’d just like to. I have seen stats that HS kids score higher on standardized tests and enjoy learning more which helps motivate to higher education.
K.M.
For him that has an ear to hear let him hear. If no amount of evidence will convince you of the Truth then your hang up is not one of intellect, but one of will. You will not hear, therefore you can not hear.
In the end, when you stand before the Great White Throne of Judgment, you will have no excuse. I pray that you do not find yourself there.
John,
A very good post. I have often taken heat for focusing on homosexual behavior as if it is not one that is organized toward forcing acceptance on all of society. As you say, there are no parades for adultery or bestiality. There are no organizations for those things pushing changes in our educational system in order to indoctrinate our kids into believing the behavior is morally innocuous. Should such things come to pass, I will surely speak out against them as strongly as I do against homosexuality.
For Kendrick, it is obvious that you don’t share the traditional view of Scripture that some of us hold. But it is not likely that you have any evidence for your position that could convince us of your view. You simply choose to deny. Homosexual behavior is indeed sinful from a Christian perspective and it is equally so from a biological one. It is a clear deviation from the intent of nature which has provided for two compatible and complimentary genders. To pretend there is anything natural about it, as opposed to it being a manifestation of some kind of dysfunction, regardless of the level of harm it might cause to the practitioners.
I’m no gay rights activist, but I have to ask you guys about one thing.
I agree that homosexuality is an action. I think that anyone can refrain from acting on homosexual “feelings”. Just as a person can engage in homosexual acts even if they’ve never found it remotely appealing (prison inmates or porn actors).
There are people who are born with a natural inclination not to be attracted to the opposite sex and inclined to be attracted to the same sex. I know they don’t account for every person who engages in homosexual acts, but they do exist. And that has become the basis for the argument for homosexuality being an identity.
Here’s the question: How should a Christian address these people?
C2c
I would say to people making that argument that not every instead natural feeling desire should be acted upon. It is man’s ability to act in a way other than his instinct pushes him. Promiscuity for example. Or having to teach children to push back against their natural selfishness and share.
To the homosexual (also to the person attracted to kids, or the one prone to violence or theft) I would say that is a natural inclination that should be resisted.
The strength or naturalness of a feeling is not what determines whether that feeling should be acted upon.
conservative2cents,
Simply put, behavior is NOT an identity. No one has to have sexual relations, regardless of the urges. Urges are not identities. As a Christian our identity is in Christ – i.e., our position in Him. Unbelievers’ identity is just that – an unbeliever and hell-bound.
I’m half playing devil’s advocate and trying to reconcile it all.
Is it wrong to say “I am a plumber”?
A person who practices plumbing?
It’s not the natural default for a human to do plumbing.
So, people choose to do different things. Christians have chosen to practice Christianity. To believe. Believing isn’t the natural default. Otherwise, we wouldn’t have the need to tell anyone about Jesus. I guess what I’m trying to say is that a Muslim could claim Islam as his identity as well.
Really, the only identity any of us really have is that of individual human beings that have free will.
As far as it is necessary to identify ourselves, can we do anything but tell people who we are by what it is that we do?
I’m a plumber.
I’m a surfer.
I’m a Christian.
I’m a homosexual.
All of these are accurate descriptions of different people, aren’t they?
I don’t think identity is the problem we have with those who practice homosexuality.
I may be wrong.
C2c, I see your point, but my occupation does not define me, it is not my identity. Certainly not in the way many homosexuals see their identity as defined by their sexuality.
C2c,
As with John, the point is there is a difference between employment and sexual behavior. When I tell someone I am an air traffic controller, that isn’t an identity – it is telling what I do for a living. But when someone identifies them by their sexual behavior, that is not the same class.
You are correct that our identity is essentially “human,” and all else we discuss is our characteristics, employment, avocation, etc. But none of those things are our identity.
There is no such thing as a “homosexual” because that is a descriptive term. They want to be called “gay,” etc, yet it they want to be known by their sexual proclivities, I prefer term “homophile” – one who loves sameness. This was the term the originally used to describe themselves in the early 20th century. But I only use that term if I’m playing their game. Otherwise they are just people who like to indulge in homosexual behavior.
C2c,
I’d say that the problem we have is indeed with their behavior. If it was just a matter of urges and desires, it would indeed be hypocritical since most of us, if not all of us, have urges and desires we be better off suppressing and overcoming. No. The issue is their intention of demanding moral respectability for that which is immoral. Anyone who struggles with sinful desires is merely a human being, and the average Christian would do well to assist such in overcoming his desires. For one who struggles with a sinful desire, though it would certainly be better if he hadn’t acted on it, the Christian should still be ready to assist.
But for the activist, the struggle is over. Those who actively seek to legislate for the benefit of all who share their desires have given in to the desires and no longer struggle, just as a person who diets has ended his struggle with food by eating with abandon. That they struggle at all means they seek to change. A Christian should be ready to help in some way those who seek to improve themselves, just as every Christian struggles with sinful desires of their own.
I guess the problem is the seeming lack of harm this particular sin carries.
All sin hurts the sinner, but so many sins hurt other people directly. Homosexuality is presumed not to hurt anyone else.
“How does it hurt you?” is always asked by gay people and their defenders.
And as far as I can tell, they have a point. I know gay people who are otherwise great folks. People I am glad to know. Some of whom I love dearly.
I doubt they’ll be swayed by any argument I make as to their sinfulness. Is it my duty to confront them and risk alienating myself from them?
Just so you know where I’m coming from: I’m not a hard-core holy roller, but I’m trying to get there.
c2c
an argument can be made that in fact homosexuals hurt eachother. The instences of std’s in the homosexual community is exponentially greater than any other demographic. Even their lifespan is 10-15 years shorter. so that homosexual sexual behavior doesnt hurt anyone is false.
http://cdc.gov/nchhstp/Newsroom/msmpressrelease.html
http://www.advocate.com/Health_and_Fitness/Love_and_Sex/STDs/CDC_Syphilis_on_the_Rise/
http://cdc.gov/nchhstp/Newsroom/msmpressrelease.html
http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2009/08/14/Nearly_Half_of_Gays_In_Treatment/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/03/us-usa-hiv-infections-idUSTRE7724SO20110803?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews
In addition to the health risks, as homosexuality becomes more and more sympathized with, it is to the detriment of other’s freedoms. In other countries (predictably, soon to make its way here) religious people cannot speak about what the bible says about homosexuality, it is considered hate speech. So far I remember reading about a pastor in Canada, and somewhere in Europe if I am not mistaken who have been arrested for speaking out. And exactly what this article is about. We are called names, we are stigmatized for speaking out. The kid who was just suspended for commenting to his friend, the teacher who was fired for posting on facebook. Social punishments are being doled out as Christians fail the litmus test of homosexual approval.
c2c, my two cents, which makes four, and we know how much that buys, I totally respect your impulse to find a way not to demonize gays, and respect and embrace gay Christians — even while objecting to the secular gay culture that routinely demonizes Christians. It’s a tricky balance, and has a lot to do with who we meet, who we know, and how we deal with actual human beings, as opposed to how we deal with doctrines and absolutes and hard-core presumptions about scripture. You’re doing it the human way, as befits human beings with basic compassion and a feel for how we get along in a complicated world, full of people of good will, and mightily contending ideas, and ever less to commend the strife as we grow older. Your instincts are sound c2c. Stay with them, keep your gay friends, and let them teach you as you may teach them.
I have collected quite a list of people who have been hurt – financially, job loss, jail time, required indoctrination classes, and loss of college credits – just for refusing to accept same-sex fake marriage as legitimate, or just for saying homosexual behavior is wrong.
http://sanityinanupsidedownworld.blogspot.com/search/label/Homosexual%20harm
Some other links demonstrating the harm to others in society:
Brings harm to people or society http://www.creators.com/opinion/dennis-prager/california-decision-will-radically-change-society.html
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2010/jun/10061806
http://www.creators.com/opinion/dennis-prager/california-decision-will-radically-change-society.html
http://www.frc.org/testimony/peter-sprigg-testifies-before-rhode-island-house-judiciary-committee
http://www.frc.org/brochure/the-top-ten-harms-of-same-sex-marriage
http://www.MassResistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.html
http://reasontostand.org/archives/2011/09/28/evidence-of-homofascism
To be fair, it must be stated that the issue of “how does it hurt you” is simply in reference to their sinful behavior alone and it’s impact or effect on someone not engaged in the behavior. The legal aspects don’t really enter into it, except as to where the activism and moral decline has taken it thus far. But the behavior alone doesn’t hurt me in the least, as I take no part in it. It only hurts those who engage in it, and then, those who they force to accept their desires, such as kids they are allowed to adopt, and family members who would prefer that they’re coming out never took place.
But for our opponents, they must be fair as well. The fact that we oppose their activism and the agenda that doesn’t exist has nothing whatsoever to do with how any of us would deal with a friend or family member who came out, or a co-worker who turned out to be a homosexual. We do not preach and rail against their proclivities as if it is our chance to be heard. I think I can speak for most Christians who accept the Truth that we accept them as human beings, sinners like ourselves, and like others who openly engage in sinful behavior, give our opinion only when it is solicited or when the behavior seems to be heading in the direction of harming others or the sinner himself. The idea that we would stand in judgement (we don’t have to since the behavior is clearly sinful by God’s own judgement) and glare is a stereotype from bad TV and movies. We’ve got far better things to do in our lives.
But where we have a public forum, such as a blog for example, to counter the damaging effects that the activism will continue to inflict upon society is a duty of good men (a relative term, to be sure) everywhere, just as we would speak out against other ills of society.
Is being a plumber a suspect classification of people so that they get special constitutional protection? A surfer? A chef? A Christian should get special constitutional protection based on the first amendment, instead we get rights taken away.
I want to take issue with your use of the word “Christians”. Quakers in Britain support equal marriage, and want the right to celebrate marriage in our meetings. We are Christians. Many Christians recognise that homosexuality is natural, normal and healthy.
Also, some pastors preach against homosexuality. Are you saying that none of them condone adultery, none of them have ever admitted divorced people into their churches? The difference is not the pride of the adulterers, though many are flagrant, it is the condoning by the prejudiced churches.
You may very well condone homosexual sexual relationships. But to speak as a Christian you support it runs contrary to biblical commands against it.