These days, every Christian who is “against homosexuality” (whatever in the name of Monstro’s blowhole that actually means) presents the same argument. That argument is … well, this, taken directly from an email sent me this morning:
Would you support a serial adulterer who loves his wife, but is just attracted to other women because that’s who he is and how he was born? How about an alcoholic who just can’t help himself? Would you support him as he leaves his wife for alcohol? A glutton? A man of extreme pride? Why does homosexuality get a pass, and not any other sin? A person with homosexual desires who resists temptation is exactly the same as a married man who resists temptation to carry on affairs with other women — which is to say, a human being battling the temptation to sin. The most compassionate thing that we could tell someone struggling with homosexuality (or any other sin for that matter) is to keep resisting temptation. Keep battling. Don’t give in. This is your badge as a Christian, that you fight temptation.
Um … for the record, I do not make this stuff up.
By “these days,” I mean that the typical Christian argument against homosexuality has changed. It used to be, “Gays are really only messed-up straight people. They should let Jesus make them straight, so that they can stop acting all gay and not go to hell.”
Nowadays, the Christian refrain isn’t, “Stop being gay.” Now it’s “Stop acting gay.” They’ve given up trying to argue that gays can change their sexual orientation: the complete failure of Christian Fix-a-Gay and Homo No’ Mo! programs — not to mention a universe of anecdotal and empirical evidence — have left them little choice in that.
So they’ve changed their approach. Now their argument is that a homosexual struggling against the temptation to act homosexual is no different from anyone else struggling to resist a sinful temptation.
Christians love this new argument. If I’ve heard it once, I’ve heard it ten thousand times. We all have. You whisper “gay” into the ear of a sleeping Christian, and there’s an excellent chance they’ll just start saying it in their sleep. “Just like any other sinful temptation. We’re all sinners. Must resist.”
And putting your brain to sleep before you say that is the very best way to say it, too. Because it could only make sense to a brain-dead person. It’s just too stupid for words.
But lemme try to find some words anyway.
Virtually all sins share a crucial, defining, common quality. Because that quality, which is present in every other imaginable sin, is utterly missing from being or acting gay, insisting on putting homosexuality into the same category as every other sin — or in the category of sin at all — is like gluing wings on a pig, and insisting the result belongs in the category of “bird.” It doesn’t. It can’t. It won’t. Ever.
Here is that Big Difference between homosexuality and all those activities generally understood to be “sinful”: There is no sin I can commit that, by virtue of committing it, renders me incapable of loving or being loved. I can commit murder. I can steal. I can rob. I can rape. I can drink myself to death. I can do any terrible thing at all — and no one would ever claim that intrinsic to the condition that gave rise to my doing that terrible thing is that I am, by nature, simply incapable of giving or receiving love.
No one tells the chronic drinker, or glutton, or adulterer, or any other kind of sinner, to stop experiencing love. Yet that’s exactly what so many Christians are insisting that gay people do.
When you tell a gay person to “resist” being gay, what you are really telling them — what you really mean — is for them to be celibate.
What you are truly and actually saying is that you want them to condemn themselves to a life devoid of the kind of enduring, romantic, partner-to-partner love that all people, Christians included, understand as just about the best part of being alive.
Be alone, you’re demanding. Live alone. Don’t hold anyone’s hand. Don’t snuggle on your couch with anyone. Don’t cuddle up with anyone at night before you fall asleep. Don’t have anyone to chat with over coffee in the morning.
Do not bind your life to that of another. Live your whole life without knowing that joy, that sharing, that peace.
Just say “no” to love.
Be alone. Live alone. Die alone.
The “sinful temptation” that Christians are forever urging LGBT people to resist is love.
Being, of course, the one thing Jesus was most clear about wanting his followers to extend to others.
This essay is taken from my book:
















{ 876 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 … 3 4 5
I find that there is one fundamental flaw with this chain of reasoning you have presented in the “Wings on a Pig” article from the Oct 1 issue of Christian Issues.
You have equated love with sex. No, you didn’t say it right out, but that’s really the only thing wrong with homosexuality. A man can love another man, and a woman can love another woman. In fact, a married man can love other women, but he can’t have sex with them. Sex is not love.
Love is patient, love is kind… and on it goes in the 13th chapter of 1st Corinthians. A man can experience love for another man without the lust.
This is the most ridiculous argument. A marriage is not a marriage without intended sex. Come on.
Hey John Shore!!
Hey bro, thanks for your blog, I’ve found a lot of good reading here. I think you are very sincere in your writings and I appreciate the passion you put into it. Sigh… but I’m torn with the content of this blog, particularly the last 18 lines or so (lol.. yes, I counted).
If you asked 1,000 men, “Who do you love the most?” And maybe, “Who loves you the most… even unconditionally?” Or, “If you hit the lottery, who would you spend money on first?” I wonder what the majority of them would say… Their girlfriend(s), boyfriend(s), wife, husband, daughter, son, mom, dad, granny…
Rather than suggest which I think the most common answer would be, I’ll only assert that, whichever the most common answer is, I bet you that the answer, from most guys (and gals), would not be largely informed by… eros (sexual love or desire).
For so many of us, the person we love the most is not the person(s) we have experienced eros love with- I’d bet you, John Sore, $100 that this category of person falls 3rd or even lower on the list.
The ONLY point I’m making in this long comment is that to resist sexual desire or relationships is not to resist love. It doesn’t mean to live and die alone. It doesn’t mean that you will have a lesser existance or deprived loveless life! To reduce love to this level of experience is… well… I’ll just say that I’m just sorry so many of us honestly can reduce love to this… As I’ve experienced love so great that any romantic desire or relationship has paled in comparison.
This is not to say the love between a couple isn’t the most passionate and powerfully intimate love many experience, but it is to say that there is even more! to love. More to life than that. Consider the words of Jesus when speaking about eunuchs in Matthew, or the words of Paul in 1 Corinthians and other books. I isn’t even God’s intention that we all amrry… are the rest to live lives devoid of life and love!! Absolutely not!!
I’m done, for now, John Shore. And I’ve got that $100 set aside. Did you even right the last 18 lines of this blog? Doesn’t seem like your style! Just kinda… or wholly off, i thought… and you’re usually on point.
Best Regards to you, John Shore!
Phil or Phillip Watson, if you prefer… lol
my friends are gonna get on mr for the errors… especially that “right” in the last paragraph… oh the shame…
It is very late and I’ve slept 5 hours in the last 2 days… And my typos- or the embarassment- will probably keep me up another night… I wish we could edit comments….. Thanks again for such great articles/blogs, John Shore.
Phillip
I’m with Jennifer!
I didn’t say it, GOD DOES.
How do you mean? Please elaborate.
excellent article……..you might like mine of a similar vein
http://gayambassador.blogspot.com/2011/10/normal-0-false-false-false-en-au-x-none.html
Let’s turn this argument completely around: what if heterosexuality was considered a sin: so all those “Christians” would then say: Just resist being attracted to members of the opposite sex. Maybe THEN they would start to understand. Or….maybe not.
You are so amazing at putting into words exactly what I believe!
However if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and acts like a duck, it’s probably a homophobe. And that is a sin.
John, I appreciate all you do to make the name of Jesus famous. I still don’t understand, though, why people argue homosexuality or any other matter from a legal perspective. We are not Jews. All things are lawful (but to each individual, some things are not beneficial). Christians must follow the Spirit dwelling in our hearts. If the Spirit leads one to be in love with someone or to smoke hashish or to run a stop sign, it is sin to disobey him. So if one feels conviction to have a homosexual relationship, thank God for him or her, for that person does the will of God. Who knows how many might be saved from perishing because of that person’s obedience to the Giver of Law? We are rightly judged by no one. We are not Jews.
And something I know I’ll obsess over for months!
Sir, I salute you. You gave us THE defining argument on this matter.
John Shore, you’re arguments are alway well thought-out and intellectually delivered.
A strong rhetorical point. I find it more satisfying to argue what constitutes a sin than whether a particular act is automatically sinful. I have been able to get a few Fundies to see that it is context not the act intrinsically. You find a flaw and use it to change a mind once in a while.
« 1 … 3 4 5