Seed to Tree

There are many ways that people chose to express their negative opinion about homosexuals and homosexuality, ranging from the superficially polite (homosexuality is inconsistent with Christianity) to the brutal (God hates fags). People who employ the more polite appearing language frequently defend their position while vigorously rejecting the more brutally phrased variations.

But all of it, from "inconsistent with Christianity" to "God Hates Fags" are derived from and express the same basic concept, one developed from the same assumptions and interpretations of the same handful of texts ripped from their context.

Fred Phelps, progenitor of the "God Hates Fags" meme, employs Romans 1 as key element of his theology of hatred for GLBTQ human beings. Any person, from any denomination, who believes that Romans 1 condemns homosexuality, has that key foundation in common with Rev. "God hates Fags".
Fred insists that the story of Sodom is about homosexuality, though it is not according to Jesus and Ezekiel, so anyone who believes Sodom is about homosexuality, shares that belief with these people.

Fred and his congregation use both of the Leviticus verses, though Fred at least has the honest to quote Leviticus 20:13 completely, while others conveniently ignore the second half: "they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Anyone who quotes Leviticus Leviticus 18:22-23 and Leviticus 20:13, together or separately, and interprets them as a condemnation of homosexuality, is teaching the same thing Fred Phelps teaches, basically.

If you use these passages, and Romans 1 24-32, 1 Corinthians 6:9, to construct a condemnation of homosexuality, you are in the same school of belief that Fred Phelps is.

Fred is just using the most dramatic and blunt language he can get away with.

At one end of the continuum of condemnation, "inconsistent with Christianity" or "is sin";

at the other end, "God hates fags". And no amount of sugar-coating or good intentions will change the fact that both are expressions of the same thought.

Not that Fred Phelps is the only person to arrive at horrendous ways of expressing the traditional interpretation derived from these same passages. The Catholic church declares that same-sex parents do violence to their children just by being same-sex couples.

The Catechism describes homosexual acts as "intrinsically disordered": "They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved."

Intrinsically disordered is really not that far from from Fred declares:

Fags live filthy, unhealty, dangerous, unhappy, and in many cases, violent lives.

Just slightly more clinical. And the charge 'do not proceed from a genuine affective complentarity' is just polysyllablic way of saying that our love for each other is not real.

Dr. Mohler, who writes,

"And that compassionate truth is this: Homosexual acts are expressly and unconditionally forbidden by God through His Word, and such acts are an abomination to the Lord by His own declaration. - - - Essential to understanding this reality in theological perspective is a recognition of homosexuality as an assault upon the integrity of creation and God's intention in creating human beings in two distinct and complementary genders. - - -The biblical witness is clear: Homosexuality is a grievous sin against God and is a direct rejection of God's intention and command in creation. All sin is a matter of eternal consequence, "

Is not saying anything that is essentially different from Fred Phelp's message, and Dr. Mohler's position is the standard Southern Baptist position on homosexuality. Dr. Mohler inflicts on humanity the same message as Fred's, couched in less brutal language but with the same brutal consequences.

Christian denominations, churches, clergy and laypeople who teach any expression of 'homosexual lovemaking is sin' are teaching the exact same concept that Fred Phelps is.

The consequences of that teaching are horrific for GLBTQ people. I've covered some examples in past posts here. But the very idea itself is intrinsically violent and horrific.

Much of Christianity, especially its conservative or literalist sects, teach that the 'wages of sin is death', that all sins are equal, that even one sin is sufficient for damnation. The prevalent understanding of damnation is, in essence, eternal torture and torment.

So, to declare, in one phrasing or another, that the lovemaking between two people of the same gender is 'sin' - is to declare it deserving of death, damnation, eternal torment. Eternal consequences, Mohler declares.

That is what it means to declare 'homosexuality is sin' : deserving of death, damnation and eternal torment.

There is no love in such a thought.

Think about what that really means, on a gut, personal level.

If you are heterosexual, really imagine what it would be like to be told that your most intimate, beautiful, loving act of intimacy, vulnerability, is, in the opinion of other people, something so horrible, so vile and disgusting, that you deserve to be put to death, and suffer eternal torture thereafter.

That is what some heterosexuals have been saying to GLBTQ people, for centuries. If you really take that in personally, apply it right to your life, it is uglier than any quote I've yet provided from Fred Phelps.

Here's another source of hate.

"God doesn't recognize these so called "gay" marriages. They are an abomination to Him and a putrid stench in His nostrils."

Yeah, it is from a couple of years ago - but watch and see how it syncs up with current events.

I'm kinda curious just how it is that Stephen Bennett decided that he speaks for God. The Bible says nothing about same-sex marriage, for or against. But that is not the most interesting part:

"America has arrogantly declared war against the God of all creation and I'm sure it will draw a quick and appropriate heavenly response. "

Stephen is writing on behalf of the American Family Association. He makes many, many false claims that bear refuting, lies for which he owes millions of people repentence. One more quote from Stephen Bennet on behalf of the AFA:

"Now as a prideful America thinks we are different in some way from the rest of these defunct civilizations, it just goes to show how true the biblical proverb is - "...a dog returns to his own vomit."

Considering then all of the above, please take a look at this video from Fred Phelp's congregation:

This declaration, from Fred Phelp's congregation, is derivable result from their belief that homosexuality is sin. It just isn't that big a step from condemning millions of people for making love, to condemning the entire creation.

In IT, it is called scope creep. Fred Phelps, Pat Robertson, Stephen Bennet all have manifested it. What starts out as hatred of one group of people, and a voiced desire for those people to be destroyed, grows and grows, including more and more people. For Fred, its the whole world that he wants to see punished.

This is important, because it indicates that the root cause is not some response to homosexuality, nor is it Scripture.

Another example:

"A religious group that staged a protest at Kutztown University today drew hundreds of angry students after members of the group told them they would burn in hell if they were gay, Jewish or Catholic."

Seek dominance by harming others for personal gain

Whether the target is GLBTQ people, or women, or people of color, Jews, etc - it is all the same phenomena. The fact that anti-gay groups will openly turn on other decidely anti-gay gay groups, like the Catholic church, demonstrates how little it really has to do with anyone's life or afterlife.

It is about domination.

The question then is, who wants to be part of a continuum of belief that leads to "God hates the World"?

Not Jesus Christ, for He said:

John 3

16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[f] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.[g] 19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."[h]

I think it would be great to see a couple hundred congregations and choirs and just groups of friends post their own videos to YouTube, videos of people singing "Jesus Loves Me" or "He's Got the Whole World In His Hands" or the one I guess Fred and Stephen and Albert et al never learned,

"They'll Know We are Christians by Our Love".

The Sin of Deception

It is always sad to see the lengths that conservative Christians will go to in order to deceive people about the consequences of their condemnation of GLBTQ people and our lives.

Like this quote from David Brody from the LA Times:
"Whatever stereotypes people have of Christians as hateful, intolerant — all those words — I'm here to say, 'You have a totally wrong perception. Totally wrong,' " Brody said. "Maybe people will realize that Christians are not so bad after all."

Totally wrong. Hmmm. Let's look at that.

The dictionary defines 'totally' as "wholly; entirely; completely". For Brody's claim to be accurate and honest, there can be no example, whatsoever, of any Christians ever who have done hateful things, intolerant things, or espoused hateful or intolerant ideas. Christianity, completely, entirely, wholly, must be free of anything hateful, for Brody's statement to be accurate.

Let's look first at some history.

There's the Inquistion. This remains synonymous with torture, including:

"Men had their genitals cut away, crushed or burnt off with balls of flaming brimstone.
Woman had their nipples torn out with cold or red hot pincers; or their entire breasts sliced off with shears.
Vaginas and rectums were mutilated with the "pear" - a device that, on insertion, was expanded by means of a screw causing the cavity to rip apart, often with fatal results. "

More about "the pear"

"Used during Medieval Times, the Pear of Anguish was an extremely painful device used to punish homosexuals, witches and women accused of inducing a miscarriage.The Pear of Anguish had the shape of a pear; As a handle was turned, the spoon-shaped lobes opened; increasing pain. - - - Causing severe pain, after this torture was employed on the mouth; the victim's teeth would get destroyed; making blood pour out of the victim's mouth often causing death. - - - The Pear of Anguish was rarely washed, thus causing infections very frequently. If the victim didn't die by an infection however, he would die by other diseases caused by the severe damage of his or her intestines."

Maybe I'm too kind-hearted, but that sure sounds like hate to me. The Inquisitions targeted Jews, "heretics" and "witches" and homosexuals - fitting the definition of intolerant.

But there's more. Conservative Christians denominations have a long history of torturing and killing homosexuals, among others. I want to draw particular attention to this passage from the linked essay:
"Laws criminalizing homosexuality may also encourage law enforcement officials to disregard the humanity of the detainee whose very identity is criminalized. By institutionalizing discrimination, they can act as an official incitement to violence against LGBT people in the community as a whole, whether in custody, in prison, on the street or in the home. By stripping a sector of the population of their full rights, they also deprive lesbian and gay victims of torture or ill-treatment of access to redress and allow their torturers to continue abusing others with impunity."

Emphasis mine. I'mgoing to return to this particular concept shortly. Let it sink in.

One last example from the past:
"Church-inspired mutilation, torture, and burning of "sodomites" in sixth-century Byzantium, medieval France, Renaissance Italy, and in Spain under the Inquisition. But Protestant authorities were equally committed to the execution of homosexuals in the Netherlands, Calvin's Geneva, and Georgian England."

In a future post, I'll detail at length the causal connection between anti-homosexual theology and hate crimes targeting gays and lesbians. If you are still reading at this point, you've been through enough for one day. On to the analysis.

Brody says that the perception of Christians as hateful and intolerant is 'totally wrong'. As he put it, he's here to say that, it is his purpose. Completely wrong, wholly wrong, entirely wrong, not a single example or case wrong.

Now had he said that such perceptions are not accurate regarding all Christians, that would be a different story. It would recognize that some Christians have, in fact, done hateful and intolerant things, while others have not. But he argued that the perception is totally wrong, asserting that the perception is completely false. And Mr. Brody is a professional writer; nuances like modifying the correct noun are kinda important in that line of work.

The evidence of history disproves his claim. Sadly, there is a huge element of truth to the aforementioned perception - many Christians have done hateful and intolerant things, many continue to do hateful and intolerant things to this day. Christians who are serious about following Christ's teachings in their lives have little choice but to acknowledge the abuses inflicted on others in the name of Christianity. People who are more interested in other people's lives, may of course exercise other priorities.

So, let's look at what that word, hateful, means. Maybe there's some loophole in the definitions that would make torture, or murder, or persecution, something other than hateful.

Hatred is defined as "the emotion of intense dislike; a feeling of dislike so strong that it demands action" The word Hate brings up concepts like hostility, extreme aversion, and hateful is defined as "full of or expressing hate; malignant; malevolent".

Sorry, but sticking the Pear of Anguish into someone's body counts as expressing hate. There's no loophole. Anyone who wants to prove otherwise need only cheerfully volunteer to experience it first-hand to prove it is not hate.

I doubt there'll be any volunteers.

Of course, torture is near the extreme, along with pistol-whipping someone. What about something a bit less bloody, like denying people basic civil rights? How about preventing them from protecting their families from material ruin through the use of a basic civil contract?

I'd call such things hostile, malignant, malevolent. I think deliberately and willfully hurting other people is at least malevolent.

Now, David Brody says that his values matched those of Focus on The Family, an organization with a long history of persecuting GLBTQ people.

"After two years of unemployment, he took a job as a radio reporter at the conservative ministry Focus on the Family, which fights abortion, pornography and homosexuality. "Their values and my values matched up," he said."

Focus on the Family's harassment of GLBTQ people is grist for many, many posts, and includes not only promoting lies and stereotypes about GLBTQ people, but actively campaigning to deny us basic civil rights, including freedom of religion. Remember, that chosing not to believe that homosexuality is sin - is a religious belief, one that is supposed to be protected. Every attempt by conservative Christians to deny us rights because they believe homosexuality is sin, intrinsically forces their religion into our lives, and abrogates our religious freedom to enforce their religious beliefs.

Mr. Brody is an employee of CBN, the Christian Broadcasting Network, founded by Pat Robertson. Pat Robertson's statements about homosexuals include:

“When lawlessness is abroad in the land, the same thing will happen here that happened in Nazi Germany. Many of those people involved in Adolph Hitler were Satanists. Many of them were homosexuals. The two things seem to go together.” - 700 Club, 1-21-93 (source: People for the American Way Foundation)

“...What kind of craziness is it in our society which will put a cloak of secrecy around a group of people whose lifestyle is at best abominable. Homosexuality is an abomination. The practices of those people is appalling. It is a pathology. It is a sickness, and instead of thinking of giving these people a preferred status and privacy, we should treat AIDS exactly the same way as any other communicable disease...” - 700 Club, 6-6-88 (source: People for the American Way Foundation)

“You know, one of the great misnomers in our society is the term `gay.’ That somebody who is involved in something that is leading to suicide, where the V.D. rate is 11 times that of others, which are almost driven and ashamed and fearful and confused and psychotic and all the others that we read about plaguing this part of our society. The term gay is the most serious misuse of the English language. They’re not gay, they’re very, very depressed and miserable.” - 700 Club, 5-6-82 (source: People for the American Way Foundation)

And worse.

Sorry, but the statements above qualify as hate. The ban on same-sex marriage is a manifestation of hate. The discriminatory laws still in force in states across the U.S., which penalize homosexuals for failing to live up to other people's religious beliefs, are manifestations of hate. Anyone who would wish to make a convincing argument to the contrary, need simply sign a legal statement irrevocably and permanently barring his or her self from the contract of marriage with anyone of any gender.

Again, I doubt there will be any volunteers. The legislative actions mentioned just above, which penalize and coerce GLBTQ people, are primarily the work of conservative Christians. The perception Mr. Brody dismissed is far, far, far from "totally wrong".


Now, here's the moral problem in Mr. Brody's statement. Either its author is not telling the truth, making a deliberately false claim, or

he doesn't consider torture, discrimination, persecution, abuse, murder, coercion to be hate when directed at certain kinds of people. What would that concept be called?

How about "disregarding their humanity"?

The point is, Brody's claim, patently false, not only disregards, but actively discards the very humanity of GLBTQ people, among many, many others.

It totally isn't hate, apparently, because we aren't people. Not totally.


I don't know about you, but I feel sinned against by David Brody. I feel lied to, and lied about. If you agree, you can email him and invite him to repent, his email is available at the last link. Be sure to extend your forgiveness to him for his sins against you or your family or friends.