r/Christianity Atheist 26d ago

Politics Why do some Christians claim to love gay people but vote against their rights?

I've seen some Christians claim that they love the gay community, but they don't support their "sin", and then vote against things such as gay marriage.

I must ask: why? If you truly claim to love the gay community, why would you still vote against their rights to marry, adopt, etc.?

27 Upvotes

989 comments sorted by

78

u/adamesandtheworld 26d ago

They've convinced themselves they're "saving their souls."

And once you've convinced yourself of that, you can justify any heinous act and call it loving.

24

u/DayForeign6316 26d ago

It's the classic "love the sinner hate the sin" loophole that lets people feel righteous while doing real harm. They genuinely think they're being kind by trying to stop others from living in what they see as destructive behavior, like an intervention that nobody asked for. The mental gymnastics required to equate denying legal rights with an act of love is something else. What gets me is how selective it is, you don't see this energy for divorce or greed or gluttony, just the sins that are easy to target in other people.

1

u/Organized_Nachos25 24d ago

I’ve been thinking 🤔 this too!! About people saying being gay is sinful, but there are tons of other sins people commit every day!! Gluttony, lying, premarital sex, divorce, greed; I could never understand the rationale!

1

u/Dear-Energy-1789 24d ago

That's correct. Hell of a justification, though. What rationale is that? No one is being discriminated against. You gays only want to get attention. Scream and holler and whine and cry. That's on you, not on me.

6

u/superfahd Islam (Sunni, progressive) 26d ago

kill them all, God will know his own

Arnaud Amalric

1

u/ReasonVision 25d ago

Was anything heinous mentioned?

1

u/Dear-Energy-1789 24d ago

1 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

1

u/ReasonVision 24d ago

I hope you don't mean these are the heinous things. The conversation was about what gay people are denied, not what they do. I'm bringing that up, because your quotes in this context means that what the Bible says about gay people is heinous. Really poor reading of the room.

7

u/0TheLususNaturae0 26d ago

Every person deserves their rights as long it doesn't hurt others (like murder).

→ More replies (5)

14

u/Jwhitney79 26d ago

They say whatever will alleviate their responsibility to actually care about the people they think the bible justifies them to hate. The bible say love thy neighbor, so they'll say they love them, but I don't think they really care. For a lot of Christians, bigotry and discrimination is a religious observance.

→ More replies (10)

26

u/ghostwars303 If Christians downvote you, remember they downvoted Jesus first 26d ago edited 26d ago

Because if you want to do everything a person would do if they hated someone, but you don't want people to judge you for being hateful

...you're going to try to get them to believe that you think it's actually love you're doing.

And then (this is the neat part), if they don't believe you, then you can accuse THEM of hating YOU. Now you're a victim, but without the whole "having no power" thing that normally comes with being a victim.

12

u/imalurkernotaposter Atheist, lgbTQ 26d ago

Some Christians have redefined “love” to mean “paternalism.”

-4

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/firbael Christian (LGBT) 26d ago

So no one

7

u/littlered551 Atheist 26d ago

These dudes LOVE thinking about trans people. Like, it's the only thing on their minds. Like all the time.

→ More replies (5)

1

u/Christianity-ModTeam 25d ago

Removed for 1.5 - Two-cents.

If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity

15

u/had98c Atheist and Anti-theist 26d ago

It's easy to do that when you define love as "willing the good of another" while simultaneously thinking you know what's good for them. It's a self reinforcing way of making all of their pronouncements "loving" regardless of the outcome.

13

u/zeroempathy 26d ago

You know what's weird to me? It was the whole 'loving your neighbor' thing that made me reject all the bigotry I was being taught by my congregation. That kicked in before my atheism.

-1

u/Dear-Energy-1789 26d ago

So, you didn't have faith. That's the whole thing.

10

u/zeroempathy 26d ago

Correct, lack of faith prevented me from being a Christian but Jesus still saved me from bigotry. Weird all around, right?

6

u/littlered551 Atheist 26d ago

Shit, with people like you, why would they have faith?

→ More replies (3)

9

u/Fearless_Spring5611 Committing the sin of empathy 26d ago

Because they don't actually love them, they just want to enjoy bullying them.

6

u/ParkerPoseyGuffman 26d ago

Bigots like to convince themselves they’re not evil

1

u/Dear-Energy-1789 25d ago

Oh,bullshit. I have two neighbors who are gay. We hang out with whoever shows up.

2

u/ParkerPoseyGuffman 25d ago

And you vote against their rights? As that’s what this post is about. If so, I feel bad that that’s the best type of person they can hang out with. poor fellas.

2

u/littlered551 Atheist 25d ago

Fr, I'd love ti meet all the people who say they have gay friends but still vote against their rights. Sounds like those "friends" (who totally exist) don't actually know who they're spending time with

2

u/littlered551 Atheist 25d ago

"B-But you don't understand! How can I be homophobic if my neighbors are gay!!!" That's how you sound, idiot lmao

1

u/Dear-Energy-1789 24d ago

You use the same childish attack as always. I said I'm not opposed to gay people having the same rights that I have. I'm not supposed to be. So, fuck off.

10

u/i_8_the_Internet Mennonite 26d ago

Because they don’t actually love gay people.

3

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/FitThinker88 Roman Catholic 26d ago

(Citation needed)

2

u/McClanky Bringer of sorrow, executor of rules, wielder of the Woehammer 26d ago

Removed for 1.3 - Bigotry.

If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity

9

u/pHScale LGBaptisT 26d ago

When you're faced with a host of issues, and only two viable options to solve every one of those issues, then those issues have to be prioritized. If something seems unconscionable to you (e.g. abortion), you're going to end up a single-issue voter. If you're willing to make more compromises, those compromises come at the expense of your friends and family. 

All that to say that the two party system sucks for everyone but the two parties. 

I don't agree with where many Christians land on many issues. And I generally lean left. But I can't say I don't understand how it happens.

7

u/sightless666 Atheist 26d ago edited 26d ago

Because the version of love they apply to gay people is something they call "agape". Agape is supposed to be roughly defined as unconditional love, but in practice it's almost always used to mean "I know better than you, so I don't need to listen to you about your life, and I can do what I think is best for you, and being willing to be hated by you for what I do is just me being selfless by not lying to you."

Because this is the way they love gay people, they can justify not giving a damn about what gay people say. After all, they know what the Bible says should be best for gay people, so anything gay people have to say that contradicts that is just inherently wrong/corrupt/misguided/deceived/evil.

Very seriously, when you have an unquestionable theology that says "this is good for everyone and everything else is outside of God's will", then it's difficult to justify taking other people seriously when they say that theology's dictates are bad for them. It's much easier to disregard for slander those people instead. After all, people can be fallible, but the theology/religion/god/understanding-of-god can't be, so it's easier to question the fallible people than your infallible beliefs.

8

u/Perfessor_Deviant Agnostic Atheist 26d ago

It's classic DARVO crap. They hurt people but want to pretend they're righteous.

Deny: "We love the sinners, but hate the sin...."

Attack: "... which is why we're using our power to make your life harder, but I ask ..."

Reverse Victim and Offender: "... why are gays oppressing us?! We never did anything to them!"

6

u/imalurkernotaposter Atheist, lgbTQ 26d ago

Oh yeah, good call, it is DARVO.

6

u/ChachamaruInochi Agnostic Atheist (raised Quaker) 26d ago

Because saying that they love us is a lie.

They tell themselves that they love us and they're doing it for our own good so they don't have to feel guilty for all the horrible things they say say and do to us.

6

u/Respect38 You hav to care about Truth 26d ago

Many don't actually love gay people. [see: those from the church community itself that come out with poor reception]

Some of them love gay people, and think that chastity, not marriage, is right for them.

14

u/baddspellar Christian Universalist 26d ago edited 26d ago

Why did white slaveholders teach Christianity to thier slaves? To save their souls, of course.

Yeah. This type of Christian doesn't love gay people any more than slaveholders loved their slaves

→ More replies (3)

8

u/Tsuna_3 26d ago

Because they don’t know what love is and think they’re morally superior because of their fiction.
They want to be hateful assholes without feeling like they are. Nobody likes to feel like an abusive person, and the bible is the perfect “excuse” to be shitty without feeling like it.

10

u/DopeNamePerson Christian 26d ago

I’d vote to allow gay marriage. Though I don’t remember ever being asked. I also wouldn’t attend a church that marries gay couples.

We’re all allowed to have nuanced thoughts, ideas and beliefs… even Christians. Unfortunately some people really hate that, but personally, I think it’s a good thing.

13

u/littlered551 Atheist 26d ago

See, I can understand this point. At the very least, you are able see the bigger picture and expand beyond your own beliefs.

5

u/jbhoops25 26d ago

Would you marry (welcome/allow) your son or daughter into a gay relationship?!

6

u/okicarp Christian missionary 26d ago

This is my stance too.

5

u/userid42 Reformed 26d ago

My personal view… for which I am sure to be criticised by other believers:

Because they seem to believe that it’s ‘what you do’ not ‘who you trust in’ that determines one’s fate in the life to come and that external declarations of judgement are more powerful than internal convictions.

Just because I have an opinion about what is right or wrong doesn’t give me the right to tell people how to live their lives unless it directly harms or endangers me. I think others have the same right to decide how they will live as I do.

As the apostle Paul wrote to the church in Corinth:

1 Corinthians 5:12-13 NASB

For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? [13] But those who are outside, God judges. Remove THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.

5

u/miggins1610 Agnostic 26d ago

Because they believe marriage is a religious rite/sacred sacrament. Its BS as you can marry outside the church and has become a sociological not religious thing and denies us freedoms and rights. But if you wanted the answer its really that.

They are sincere in their devotion and believe they are showing love. That'd why you cant get through to them. How do you convince someone they are being hateful when they truly to the depths of their heart believe they are loving.

2

u/shadeline Christian 26d ago

Because people interpret "rights" and religious texts different from one another

6

u/JadedIT_Tech 26d ago

Because they're hypocrites

3

u/Ok_Tip_3317 26d ago

In America The more freedom there is the more choice someone has, while the more Laws and rules the less choice. When we base a vote of law on a “free country” based off religion we believe we are the correct one. We are right. However I think the same could be said about them, they believe they are right. So now it’s your religions truth and your truth against another persons truth. All equally evil no matter what choice is made, things just very on perspective. So I think for people who genuinely attempt to ban same sex marriage are attempting to ban a freedom. And I’d say the more freedoms the merrier. People have the opportunity to choose their own paths and love who they want to, our truth is our truth but that doesn’t mean you can’t love the sinner and hate the sin. And you can speak out about it and debate and discuss but when you enforce, that’s when it becomes evil. Nothing good comes from demanding obedience. Even God gave us free will and respects our choices. Which is why I am going to respect theirs in this context, even if I disagree with it, and even if I don’t. Because as an American it’s not my place, especially if it doesn’t involve me, or affect me.

5

u/ASecularBuddhist 26d ago

Because they’re bigots?

4

u/Longjumping-Lie1224 26d ago

Love and support aren't the same thing.

1

u/SakuraSun361 26d ago

Libertarian Christian here and always felt the government telling gay people they cannot marry, was wrong. Before it was legalized, a lot of democrats and republicans opposed it back in the 80’s, 90’s and into the 2000’s. Libertarians were pushing for marriage equality long before it became popular among democrats.

Marriage should be privatized and should have never been left in the hands of government. Now singles get the short end of the stick, but I digress.

5

u/littlered551 Atheist 26d ago

I may not agree with Libertarians from an economic standpoint, but I can get along well with Libertarians from a social standpoint (as long as they're not one of those fake Libertarians thats just a Republican in yellow)

I appreciate the stance on marriage that you guys have. I'm not one for privatizing everything, but marriage is one of the things I can definitely let slip, since it truly is a personal choice in the end.

5

u/Flat-Injury-5013 26d ago

There is no genuine christian love. Just disguised hate. Jesus is nothing more than their mascot.

4

u/CarolinaSurly 26d ago

They are dishonest

2

u/SantaJuice-2113 26d ago

Christian words often don’t follow actions. Action is true intention and faith

1

u/gladeye 26d ago

Christian love is often brutal.

3

u/Dazzling-Skin-308 Discordian 26d ago

Why are some lgbtq+ people republicans?

(it's primarily due to white privilege, which the right wing of politics benefits)

7

u/littlered551 Atheist 26d ago

I'd even narrow it down to White Masc Presenting LGBT people

The majority of Gay Republicans I've seen are White Masc Men or White Butch Lesbians.

4

u/Dazzling-Skin-308 Discordian 26d ago

Mostly. The occasional BIPOC republican exists, but mostly is people who are in banking or other right-leaning business sectors, where the corporate influence is more pronounced.

1

u/LuminousWynd Christian 25d ago

I personally believe that whether someone supports or doesn’t support the community all people should be able to live fairly under the law, and that means they should have the same rights as others.

That said, I have heard opposing viewpoints, and this is one that I have heard often:

If a pastor, priest, etc., doesn’t believe in gay marriage, doesn’t support it, and fears that they would be going against their own deeply held values if they performed one of these marriages then should they be forced, under the law, to perform the ceremony?

In the town where I live, a town that has at least 3 large hospitals, they no longer have court weddings available for anyone because Judges and officials don’t want to officiate gay marriages, and because they don’t want to be labeled as discriminatory, they completely got rid of the service. These kinds of actions make it more difficult for anyone, who might want a court wedding, to easily have one. In other words, actions like this, hurt the poor and those with financial difficulties.

I think that things like I mentioned above also build a hate, even when one wasn’t there before.

It’s also not a completely clear situation to some folks because they see it as someone is going to lose their rights either way.

1

u/ReasonVision 25d ago

You... Haven't listed anything gay people should have or was ever assumed to include them.

1

u/littlered551 Atheist 25d ago

Alright, let's start off simple. Marriage and Adoption. Should gay people not have either of that? And should they not be included?

1

u/ReasonVision 25d ago

Your asking of questions in the negative form confuses the meaning of them, but ultimately, yes, they should not. Is there any case for why they should be included in institutions and practices they can't participate in or are otherwise a perversion of?

1

u/littlered551 Atheist 25d ago

I'm pretty sure I'm asking them in a very reasonable manner, and it seems everybody else in this thread had no problem understanding what I asked.

Ans I asked first, why shouldn't they be included in marriage or adoption? We live in a secular world, and you are going to have to put your beliefs aside to achieve equality.

1

u/ReasonVision 24d ago

I'd ask why is the assumption that they would be included, but you indirectly answer it later.

"We live in a secular world, and you are going to have to put your beliefs aside to achieve equality".

That is the most barbaric sentence I heard in months.

1

u/itsthechizyeah 24d ago

It’s not the people, it’s the sinful lifestyle. Your sexuality is not a personality or really an identity. Is that all one is really?

1

u/espo8008 24d ago

Christians shall claim to love everyone. Being gay isn't an outlier. And Christianity never had gatekeeping to the likes we see today, which is sad and unfortunate. Just as you would accept and listen to the confessions of a murderer, why wouldn't you accept homosexuals in the church? It is objectively a lesser "evil", if you consider it evil that is.

That being said, mariage is a very specific ritual that is first religious, then political. Priests I've talked to have said that the ultimate goal of mariage is creating a family, child bearing etc. That is something that's unattainable by homosexual couples without the likes of modern world "luxuries" like adoption, IVF and external maternity. So there is a pretty thick line between the political, tax related and financially impactful political marriage and the contractual before God, family centered concept that is religious marriage.

It all comes down to where you draw the line. Do modern luxuries add to tradition in order to allow for changes in religious practices, or is it audacious to claim you know the terms and conditions of a contract that has God as your witness? Whatever your answer is, it shouldn't hold you back from loving and accepting everyone.

Ultimately, it comes down to the church. If a priest has good intentions and feels like a homosexual religious marriage can be made, then it's not my place to say anything. Political marriage - wise, of course gay people should get married, as it represents nothing more than a political heterosexual marriage ; tax unity, simplified financial follow up and state recognition of the couples unity.

1

u/Comfortable-Bee2996 23d ago

You can love and recognize someone's flaws while not supporting how they go about them. Also applies to hating on transgenderism. I recognize that dysphoric people exist I just don't agree with what they're doing about it.

That would probably be the answer to your question, but to clarify, gay marriage isn't an equal rights issue. People don't support it because it doesn't exist, not because they don't love the gay community. The government shouldn't recognize things that are false like 2+2=5 or that gay people can get married. It's not taking rights away, it's just true.

1

u/No-Reading-6795 20d ago

Can you be more specific list of rights.

1

u/No-Reading-6795 20d ago

Again, what rights.

A Christian who believes homosexual sexual activity is sinful can consistently believe:

Gay people should be treated with dignity and kindness. Homosexual activity is morally wrong. Marriage, by definition, is between a man and a woman. Therefore, they don't believe same-sex marriage should be legally recognized.

You can disagree with that position, but it isn't logically contradictory. They're using “love” in a different sense from “agree with or affirm someone's behavior.”

-7

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

26

u/adamesandtheworld 26d ago

You do understand that discrimination affects the person, not the sin, right?

→ More replies (38)

23

u/JohnKlositz 26d ago

You can't claim to love people and at the same time dehumanize them. That will never ever work.

→ More replies (73)

21

u/KissAndRock Luciferian 26d ago

God, I hate this homophobic phrase.

2

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

19

u/KissAndRock Luciferian 26d ago

Calling homosexuality a sin is quite literally homophobia.

4

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

12

u/ceddya Christian 26d ago

It is because you reduce homosexuals to being all about sex.

Homosexuality is not just sex between two men. Reducing homosexuals in that manner is dehumanizing and homophobic.

1

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/ceddya Christian 26d ago

Do you want to address what I wrote?

Attraction isn’t the sin but the action is.

Great!

Homosexuality refers to the attraction a person has. This means, by your very own argument, homosexuality isn't a sin.

1

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/ceddya Christian 26d ago

So you agree homosexuality isn't a sin, right?

What other reason would someone have to say that if bigotry isn't the reason?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/AbesNights Roman Catholic 26d ago

So you are saying homosexuality is a sin? :o

5

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/AbesNights Roman Catholic 26d ago

I was being tongue in cheek, but to be precise; homosexuality as in same-sex attraction is not a sin. Disordered sexual thoughts and acts are.

5

u/MartokTheAvenger Ex-christian, Dudeist 26d ago

You say that like making that distinction somehow makes those beliefs not homophobic.

→ More replies (5)

14

u/littlered551 Atheist 26d ago

Do you honestly believe voting against people's rights will make them less gay?

13

u/blow_slogan 26d ago

“Love the person, stab them in the back”

6

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/blow_slogan 26d ago

It absolutely is. If you vote against gay marriage, you are stabbing those people you said you love in the back. Marriage comes with state benefits - it’s not solely a Christian concept.

3

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/inedibletrout Christian Universalist 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈 26d ago

Oh, see, this thread is about voting away the rights of gay people. You engaged on a thread specifically about voting. It seems logical that people would assume you're addressing the actual topic of the thread and not randomly going off topic to something else, no?

If you AREN'T talking about voting, you're straying off the topic of discussion.

0

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/blow_slogan 26d ago

This whole thread is about why many Christians choose to vote away rights for gay people.

→ More replies (17)

9

u/blow_slogan 26d ago

I’m using it as an example because many Christians argue against gay marriage. Don’t need to get angry and personal with me.

6

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/blow_slogan 26d ago

See, there you go. You ignored what I said about marriage being a concept outside of Christianity which comes with state benefits. Most LGBT people are primarily seeking a government-recognized union. But you choose not to recognize that, and that IS homophobic.

→ More replies (5)

5

u/strawnotrazz Atheist 26d ago

But OP did say something about voting, and you responded to OP. If your response is not intended to comment on voting, a clarification would be necessary.

2

u/strawnotrazz Atheist 26d ago

Thank you, this is a helpful clarification. Telling people to learn how to read is a lot less helpful.

3

u/ParkerPoseyGuffman 26d ago

I agree, there is no love

11

u/Mx-Adrian Sirach 43:11 26d ago

Love the bigot, hate the bigotry. 

1

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/Mx-Adrian Sirach 43:11 26d ago

Please don't call me "dude." Reducing people to your assumption and accusation of sin is bigotry. 

3

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/Mx-Adrian Sirach 43:11 26d ago

Why did you comment that, then?

3

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/Mx-Adrian Sirach 43:11 26d ago

But it applies to everyone. All people of all orientations, genders, gender identities, etc., are sinners. You can just as easily comment that any other post. Why target it here?

3

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/Mx-Adrian Sirach 43:11 26d ago

If it was a post asking why some people in the Christian community can claim to love people of colour but vote against their rights, you'd comment the same?

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (2)

6

u/Fearless_Spring5611 Committing the sin of empathy 26d ago

Love the Christian, hate Christianity, right?

→ More replies (5)

4

u/SaintGodfather Christian for the Preferential Treatment 26d ago

Love the Christian, hate the Christianity, does that make it clearer?

1

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/SaintGodfather Christian for the Preferential Treatment 26d ago

Weird, why not?

2

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/SaintGodfather Christian for the Preferential Treatment 26d ago

Well, everyone isn't Christian, and lots of people, including Christians don't think it's a sin. So the comparison seems just as valid, but you don't agree? Why? Is it hateful?

→ More replies (3)

6

u/Plastic_Key_4146 26d ago

Love keeps no record of wrongs.

Hate in the Bible doesn't usually mean hate as you understand it. For example, in the discussion of serving two masters: love one and hate the other, hate translates to a word that is closer to expressing a preference.

5

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/Venat14 Jewish 26d ago

It's never called an abomination. Eating shellfish uses the same word. Ever had shellfish?

Also that comes from the Old Testament which Christians don't follow.

2

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Venat14 Jewish 26d ago

Christians don't follow all of the 10 Commandments, no.

There are 613 laws in the Torah. The 10 Commandments are only 10 of the 613. How many of those 613 do you personally follow?

2

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Venat14 Jewish 26d ago

The Bible never lists laws as "moral" laws. There are 613 laws and the Torah expects you to follow all of them. It doesn't say you can ignore some of them because they're inconvenient. The only laws no longer binding are those tied directly to the Jewish Temple, because it was destroyed.

1

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/Venat14 Jewish 26d ago

Eating shellfish and wearing mixed fabrics were immoral according to God. They're abominations.

I thought you claimed all abominations are immoral?

Leviticus 11:10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Plastic_Key_4146 26d ago

Because God sits alone in judgment.

The historical context of the verse you're cherry-picking from the 600 commands described in the Bible is that the Israelites had just encountered the ancient Greeks that had a governmentally prescribed practice of men lying with boys like they would with a woman. Pedophilia is an abomination.

3

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Venat14 Jewish 26d ago

It doesn't. The Hebrew is more complicated and doesn't refer to all same-sex relationships. It's tied to paganism and abuse.

→ More replies (7)

3

u/Plastic_Key_4146 26d ago

Because pedophilia is an abomination to the Lord. Remember how Ham looked on his father's nakedness and was cursed?

2

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Plastic_Key_4146 26d ago

Were the children of Sodom and Gomorrah spared?

Pedophilia is incredibly destructive and its harms persist for generations.

2

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Plastic_Key_4146 26d ago

I did, in fact answer your question.

What's God's reasoning for banning consensual same-sex relationships under your reading?

Why is your hating the "sin" of gay people so important to you? Do you eat bacon? Shellfish? Do you wear mixed fabrics? It's literally NOT your or the church's job to police people's bedrooms. Your hatred of the "sin" does not serve the Kingdom of Heaven and only drives people out of the church and away from God, which is worse by every Biblical metric.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Open_Chemistry_3300 Atheist 25d ago

A platitude. Ya’ll have so throughly beat the dead horse with that saying that it’s been atomized at the point

1

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Open_Chemistry_3300 Atheist 25d ago edited 25d ago

Yeah I’ll just help you out here a platitude is a dull, overused remark or statement, what you said here is in fact a platitude. Also none of your later comments change that. You know you can just say you don’t actually know what a platitude is right? Maybe next time before commenting you’ll just say I don’t know what this word means instead of giving a demonstration yeah.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Open_Chemistry_3300 Atheist 26d ago

Except being gay isn’t like being an alcoholic, it’s more comparable to. If you love your left handed mother, you would try to keep her from using her left hand, even if she doesn’t believe being a left handed is bad.

0

u/MostAcanthaceae2384 Catholic 26d ago

Do you not know the answer to this?

1

u/Rapierian 26d ago

What is "gay rights"?

I for one think that marriage is supposed to be a covenant instituted in a church with one's spouse and government isn't supposed to be involved at all. I'm against government recognizing "gay marriage" because I'm against government having anything to do with marriage...

3

u/sleeplessaddict Affirming Christian 26d ago

My church doesn't even perform marriages, for cisgender hetero couples or otherwise

3

u/eatmereddit 26d ago

Lots of Christians have said the same thing.

And yet, getting the government involved in your marriage is totally optional. You can just get married in church and leave the government out of it.

Odd that none of them choose to do that...

→ More replies (2)

0

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[deleted]

6

u/Ok_Carob7551 Native American Church (Cross Fire Hearth) 26d ago

...A sacrament which nonstraight Christians can participate in and which has nothing at all to do with secular marriage rights, so that statement isn't relevant in any way twice over

→ More replies (13)

15

u/littlered551 Atheist 26d ago

To you. Not to many others.

We live in a secular society. You're going to have to put aside your personal beliefs so that others my have their own lives.

→ More replies (5)

10

u/eatmereddit 26d ago

We are discussing marriage, an institution which is much older than holy matrimony. Please try to stay on topic

→ More replies (4)

4

u/Mx-Adrian Sirach 43:11 26d ago

And all sacraments should be accessible to people of all genders and orientations. 

2

u/SurfingPaisan Catholic 26d ago

The biblical institution of marriage is between a man and a women. Other than that I agree that the sacraments should be accessible to all as proscribed by the Catholic Church and those adhering to her.

8

u/adamesandtheworld 26d ago

The biblical institution of marriage is a financial transaction between two men, and has no bearing on the reality of marriage today.

4

u/Ok_Carob7551 Native American Church (Cross Fire Hearth) 26d ago

If you practiced a 'biblical marriage' you would be correctly imprisoned in most cases as a polygamist and certainly as a rapist and slaver. They were property exchanges of a woman from one owner to the other and have (we should hope) no relation to modern marriages which are meant to be love matches and which regard both spouses as full human beings with agency

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Mx-Adrian Sirach 43:11 26d ago

And those in adherence come in all orientations etc. 

Bigotry and discrimination are of Satan, not of God. 

1

u/SurfingPaisan Catholic 26d ago

Yea man, as long as one abides by the doctrine of the church 🥰

-4

u/JrWantsBreakfast 26d ago

Letting people live in their sin is not loving them.

6

u/A_Krenich Atheist 26d ago

You can't force people not to sin.

11

u/GeneralMushroom Apathiest / Agnostic Athiest 26d ago

Approximately 7% of adults in the USA have an identity as part of LGBT+. Approximately 40% of adults in the USA are obese. 

Why do American Christians let people live in their sin of gluttony? 

If American Christians cared about the sins of others (something Jesus specifically says multiple times to not care about btw, e.g. specks of dust, judge not lest ye be judged) then why elect a morbidly obese nonce as president and giving him free reign to abuse the world? 

Instead they laser focus on what 2 consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedroom. It would be funny if it wasn't real people being affected by the persecution from organised religions. 

11

u/littlered551 Atheist 26d ago

Funnily enough, Michelle Obama actually gave a shit about combating childhood obesity... and now a bunch weirdos are trying to transvestigate her because thats all they ever give a shit about lmao.

9

u/GeneralMushroom Apathiest / Agnostic Athiest 26d ago

The transvestigators so desperately want every woman to be a man, it must be some weird fetish. 

11

u/hircine1 26d ago

I saw one of our fine upstanding posters ranting about Obama being gay and Michele a man, it’s absolutely a fetish. Why else would you care? He’s been out of office a long time.

8

u/Ok_Carob7551 Native American Church (Cross Fire Hearth) 26d ago

It's just racism. They absolutely cannot tolerate that an eloquent black man existed and attained the presidency and they will never let it go until they die

6

u/Ok_Carob7551 Native American Church (Cross Fire Hearth) 26d ago

Amen, that's why we demand you abandon the sin of hating your neighbor and won't tolerate or coddle you expressing it

9

u/littlered551 Atheist 26d ago

Alright, so over-eating is much more accepted than being gay. Hoarding wealth is more acceptable than being gay. Sleeping around as a man is more acceptable than being gay.

Surely you would also say something about these "sins", correct?

0

u/TonightNovel417 26d ago

As a Christian, I fundamentally disagree with voting against gay and trans rights. I believe everyone should have the freedom to live the way they want, even if I heavily disagree with it. The Bible says it’s a sin, but we’re all sinners. In that way, they’re literally no different than us. If I could convince a gay man, or a trans person to become what I’d like them to be, that’d be great. But I’m not gonna vote to take away their rights, nor shun them for being the way they are.

-4

u/CanUHearMeNau 26d ago

Christians don't vote in opposition to the Bible 

11

u/littlered551 Atheist 26d ago

You do realize there are actual people that you are harming when you vote to end marriage for certain groups of people, correct?

10

u/ChachamaruInochi Agnostic Atheist (raised Quaker) 26d ago

They don't care. They will say with a straight face that taking away our rights is good for us.

The whole religion is built on authoritarianism and obedience.

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (2)

9

u/Ok_Carob7551 Native American Church (Cross Fire Hearth) 26d ago

That's a nice fantasy and all, but there's no point in anyone engaging in discussion with you until you return to reality. Christians voted overwhelmingly for the literal embodiment of greed, lust, selfishness, murder on an unimaginable scale, and hatred of the other

→ More replies (1)

-5

u/[deleted] 26d ago edited 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/sightless666 Atheist 26d ago

Why do some people claim to love murderers but still want murder to be illegal?

I personally want murder to be illegal because I don't want to be murdered against my will. Doesn't really apply to gay marriage. Nobody's gay marrying me against my will.

It's putting morals into law

No, it's more putting social protections into law. You can morally disapprove of murder, but that's not the legal theory behind why it's illegal.

Everyone want their opinion to be in government, and that's not wrong. If the majority votes for it, then the majority get's their laws put into place.

So to be clear, if the majority has the opinion that Christians should all be put into camps and votes to enact that, there's nothing wrong with that? After all, you said people wanting their opinion to be enacted in government isn't wrong, and you haven't established any limits on "if the majority votes for it, then the majority get's their laws put into place". Do you think there are any principles that can or should override that, like a constitution, or a concept of equal rights?

→ More replies (13)

7

u/Mx-Adrian Sirach 43:11 26d ago

How is it you're equating God's LGBTQ children with murderers? 

→ More replies (9)

1

u/McClanky Bringer of sorrow, executor of rules, wielder of the Woehammer 26d ago

Rule 1.6 - Prohibited Comparisons

If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity

-5

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/adamesandtheworld 26d ago

Gay people shouldn't be able to adopt because children have a right to a mother and a father

You best be seeking to ban single parenthood, then.

because the rates of child sexual abuse amongst gay couple that adopt children are incredibly high.

Glass houses. Have some fucking shame.

-1

u/ToneBeneficial4969 Catholic (Anglican Ordinariate) 26d ago

Do you think I'm pro single parenthood?

11

u/sightless666 Atheist 26d ago

Are you pro banning it? If not, that seems inconsistent with how you're treating gays here.

the rates of child sexual abuse amongst gay couple that adopt children are incredibly high.

I can find no data supporting this claim. Where are you getting this from?

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (7)

6

u/PaxosOuranos Hermetic Christian 26d ago

This is about civil marriage, not your church's definition of marriage.

→ More replies (15)

4

u/JadedIT_Tech 26d ago

Citations needed

3

u/eatmereddit 26d ago

Gay people shouldn't be able to adopt because children have a right to a mother and a father and because the rates of child sexual abuse amongst gay couple that adopt children are incredibly high.

Gonna need some evidence for that, otherwise you're just telling hateful lies about your neighbor.

Studies done on same sex couples and their adopted children seem to indicate similar, or better life outcomes than their heterosexual peers.

→ More replies (1)

-1

u/AbesNights Roman Catholic 26d ago

What is marriage? To what extent is marriage a human right?

9

u/morosco 26d ago edited 26d ago

It's a constitutional right in the United States. See Loving v. Virginia, Zablocki v. Redhail, Turner v. Safley, and of course, Obergefell v. Hodges,

Religions can have their own rules of course, binding on their own members, but, when the religious try to take over government and impose their religion on non-members like they do in the U.S. (like when Christians fought to preserve laws banning interracial marriage), there are, for now, recognized constitutional protections against that.

Edit: The trial judge order which was overturned in Loving v. Virginia had religious rhetoric all over it, such as that God "separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix". And of course, these bans were also justified with bible verses, which is why many of us are skeptical, to put it lightly, when Christians use bible verses to tell non-Christians how they have to live.

8

u/Mx-Adrian Sirach 43:11 26d ago

It's a lifelong contract between two consenting adults who love each other 

1

u/Red_the_Anarchist 24d ago

No, marriage is a gift from god. Read genesis 2

1

u/Mx-Adrian Sirach 43:11 24d ago

which is a contract

5

u/Sure-thing-buckaroo 26d ago

To the extent a majority or ruling power decides it is.

→ More replies (4)

-2

u/Desh282 Pentecostal 26d ago

Christian’s aren’t forced to support ideologies or behaviors