There has long been a roiling debate about how to handle Bible thumpers. Should we engage them on what the Bible allegedly says about homosexual
ity? Or, should we tell them to get lost because we don’t care what the text of some ancient book says?
In a Huffington Post column, Kate Blanchard, Associate Professor of Religious Studies, Alma College, says ignore the fundies:
A student recently asked me for some advice about how to defend same-sex marriage biblically to people who insist that the Bible is against it. My basic response to such questions is, “Don’t.”
First of all, there is no “the Bible.” It is a collection of texts spanning millennia, recounted orally for centuries in multiple languages, finally written down in Greek and Hebrew by countless anonymous authors over the span of several more centuries, then further collected and translated into hundreds more languages in hundreds of stylistic versions. What we think of as the Christian Bible thus encompasses different things for Catholics, the Orthodox and Protestants. And second, there was no such thing as a “homosexual” identity or same-sex marriage when the various parts of the Bible were written (despite what some English translations say), so they can offer no explicit direction about it.
Most Christians today disagree with and openly disobey the Bible every single day: We see slavery as a crime against humanity, lend and borrow money at interest, don’t force our raped daughters to marry their rapists, wear mixed fibers, don’t cover our heads, eat bacon and sometimes even mix it with cheese, and — perhaps most shockingly, given its high priority in the Big Ten — trample the holiness of the Sabbath with reckless abandon. (Fans of “The West Wing” will remember similar observations beautifully immortalized by Jed Bartlett.) A few authors have recently conducted high-profile experiments in living biblically and found it to be much more difficult than many “Bible-believing Christians” would have us believe.
I’d be curious to know how our readers think we should engage the fundies? Debate them or dump them?
I recommend asking a fundie which of the zillion different versions of the Bible is the “inerrant word of God.” For bonus points, ask the fundie which language God was speaking when he dictated the Bible.
Ignore them. I always felt people like the Fre* Phel*s clan (censored because they love to link to anything that mentions them) are media, attention-seeking w****s. I’m not even sure they believe what they claim to.
They only do what they do as long as people pay attention. Ignore them and they go away. You certainly won’t change their minds, but perhaps you can make them think twice about leaving their compound to protest if it seems like no one cares anymore.
“Ignore them and they’ll go away” didn’t work on the playground. It just made them escalate to the point of genuine criminality. This is no different.
These are adults though and this isn’t a playground. Once they cross the line, they get arrested. Usually police are at the events these people like to gather at.
Aside from the “G*d hates” crowd, there are some “bible thumpers” you can debate, but again, you won’t change their minds. I’m all for a lively debate nonetheless, but not with the Ph*lps clan.
They’re behavior doesn’t do much to differentiate them from children. Besides, I never said anything about debating them. Debating them would just perpetuate their ill-deserved sense of legitimacy. Meanwhile, ignoring them will, like their child counterparts, make them more desperate for attention from the people they hate, and someone will probably end up dying before anything is done.
Ever heard of “extinction burst?” It is a term used by Behavioral Psychologist for the instance when a particular behavior, you are trying to extinguish, amplifies itself before eventually going extinct. Ignoring such bafoons, like debating them does little if anything to extinguish their behavior. When you debate them, you reinforce their negative behavior, and when you ignore them they get worse so you have to address them, further reinforcing the bad behavior and in turn making it worse. My advice. If someone is that mentally deranged we get them treatment to help them with their mental illness.
Dump them. As there is no single authority to debate, there is no closure to this srgument. If you take on the thankless and uneviable task of debating the fundies on this topic, you are stuck arguing with every self-schooled Biblical ignoramus who crosses your path. I can’t speak for others, but I have plenty of other *useful* things I could be doing with my time. Furthermore, I am a gay Pagan and I don’t care what’s in their silly-assed book because it doesn’t apply to me. End of discussion.
If by “engage” them, you mean talking to them, I’d say no. Experience has taught me that most fundamentalists are impervious to rational argument and evidence. Rather, we must engage in activism against fundamentalism and for LGBTQ rights, rather than argue about what the Bible says.
I favor any approach that helps to weaken the stranglehold of religion in general. The problem isn’t just the Bible Thumpers, it’s also the so-called moderates who help enable and give some credibility to the Thumpers. If a moderate believes in just the basics (that God exists, inspired the Bible, and has a son who died for their sins, was resurrected in three days, then rose into heaven, etc., etc.) then they are giving credibility to about 85% of the beliefs. The Thumpers then just carry it all over the top. I think the Thumpers have as much of a case for taking the Bible literally as moderates do for twisting it every which way to make it say what they want it to say. I, of course, think it’s all superstitious nonsense.
Well said, Richard. Your point about the moderates is right on. As for arguing with a “thumper,” I’ve tried it and they only dig in their heels all the more. They are impervious to reason of any kind. My best suggestion to them and everyone is to read the article, “20 Reasons to Abandon Christianity,” by Chaz Bufe (available in Google). It documents the horrible atrocities committed by Christians from the beginning. Anybody that can read that and still be a Christian is tetched in the head. But the thumpers would have a reply even to that.
Moderates speak volumes with their silence. I think in many respects they feel powerless to change anything so why try. I would like to see at least one contingency that calls themselves moderates who will say they don’t believe everything religion states, have a voice on the media stage. No such luck but it’s way overdue.
PS regarding debating an extremist, not recommended. I find extremism to be a social disease needing far more mental health care than an argument could ever provide. Best to love love them from afar “for they know not what they do.”
You can’t debate “faith” — those that hold it strongly will not change by a mere debate. They don’t think we should exist, even – and to start a debate over mere existence is too far too go. And, for many of them, first it’s even talking to gays, never mind debating “marriage” and “free speech,” or something. To them, you are arguing with their God. Well, as I like to joke: they need a better God. Truly, though, we have been playing defense, or speaking of why we’re here, or answering hetero’s questions on our sex lives — and rare is the article about how gay folks contribute to society; what is our positive contribution? It would seem, then, that ignoring their attacks, turning the other cheek, as it were, while pointing out we do good and have our own God(s) would be the better option. But, I’d stop with calling them crazy and other nasty words — you cannot win friends and influence people by calling them bad names. Love ‘em, with a Christian-like kindness that would curl their hair.
And, too, I have long maintained that we should include in every lawsuit we file that gay folks’ religious liberty is being trammeled, and that the gov’t, with its anti-gay laws, is merely honoring one religion over another. It’s more than just the 14th Amendment that covers us — it’s the 1st too.
Jim, I have been making that argument for the past 15 years. If they’re going to claim it is about sin and god’s purpose, then we have a religious ocmponent that must be dealt with. They’ve taken it out of the realm of mere civil law, and placed it squarely in the realm of government enforcement of religious belief.
Back in the prop. 8 days, I was quite loud on this. I was told by some of the clergy associated with the campaign that we shouldn’t bring it up because it would be seen as an attack on religon and would win us no friends. I just looked at them with disbelief, and knew from that moment on that I couldn’t work with the campaign. when the lawsuit against prop.8 was begun, i wrote again that we had to start talking about discrimination on the basis of religious belief, and was again told no, we shouldn’t.
We don’t have to call anyone bigots. We DO have to start talking about bigotry, especially religious bigotry. Since we are now just past the 50% tipping point, I believe we MUST bring this up, especially at the supreme court level.
But I’m afraid we won’t, just like we can’t have gay couples on TV talking about why marriage is important to them.
I find that a casual raspberry and a wave-off, followed by a shrug and saying “I don’t believe any of that crap” and then turning away, makes religious assaulters pause and stop speaking to me, so that is what I usually do.
Go around the fundies through civil law. Marriage equality went around fundies in four states.
I never reason with folk who believe themselves Napoleons, but I tire of these Napoleons manipulating our government into having me pay their uniforms.
My government won’t let me marry my same gender spouse. Why? Solely because fundamentalist religions insist on meddling in civil rights.
Outflank fundies in civil rights. Don’t engage them. Fundamentalists can catch up to equality after the fact.
My approach seems complex on the surface but it’s not. I don’t engage anyone first, for one. They are allowed their beliefs, however logically erroneous, as I am allowed mine (and some of mine probably fall into that category for a few people.) If someone engages me, though, my response is dependent on theirs; if they’re arguing a religious reasoning as basis for law, I counter with reason and separation of church and state.
If they’re just preaching for the sake of preaching, though, I usually tell them I’m not interested first, to give them a chance to realize I am not worth their time. If they insist, however, as a former Catholic, I still have a bible, and am not afraid to use it against them. But it’s rare that I get to that stage. I’d rather spend my time in more worthwhile pursuits.
I never argue religious matters with them. Let them think what they want, and they have to let me believe or disbelieve what I want. But woe to any of them who try to force their belief system on me through secular/civil law. Religion has absolutely no place in our legal system. We need to work harder to eliminate the few legal privileges that religious institutions (both good and bad) take for granted, like solemnizing civil contracts (marriage licenses), overly generous tax exemptions, etc.
There is little or no point in arguing with these people about what the Bible “really says” about homosexuality. Even if we knew for certain (and we don’t) exactly what the very few biblical authors who mention the subject at all had in mind, and even if it could be shown that they meant exactly what Bible bashers insist that they meant, it would not follow that we should be for ever bound by their opinions. As the late Sir Oliver Lodge wrote in reply to a Bible-thumping argument on a different topic:
I am an atheist and don’t vind the Bible to be a good moral guide so I don’t see the point of debating with these people. It would be like debating whether Zeus or Odin cares about homosexuality. But, if someone does actually believe in this stuff and knows enough to debate I’m not going to try to stop them, though I think the Bible is an anti-gay book and there’s not really any way you can honestly deny it.
There is a documentary “For The Bible Tells Me So” that I found very interesting and informative on the topic of homosexuality…makes it not so anti-gay after all.
As a Jewish person with many connections to Orthodox fundamentalist Biblical traditions, I am in favor of engagement.
I have found that there has been a sea change in attitudes among many Modern Orthodox Jews, including Rabbis.
At Yeshiva University which I attended in the 1970′s, gay students openly write in the newspaper and I saw only positive feedback.
In Judaism the commandments are paramount and there are many of them.
So even for a community dedicated to a sacred consensus that includes that male sexual relations is a big sin, there are other commandments that encourage alliances.
I think there are parallels with Evangelical Christianity.
It is no coincidence that the states that don’t have any legal protections for gays, also are the state with religious Republican legislators.
How can Alabama or Oklahoma be convinced to improve justice for gay people without dialogue and educating people about who gay people are?
Jean Pierre, you’re assuming that they are necessarily interested in dialogue and education. That isn’t the nature of bigotry, which is always self assured of its wholly imaginary superiority. My experience with double-down bigots is that nothing reaches them short of an ideological 2×4 hitting them upside the head.