Weekly Column
In August, fundamentalist preacher Dr. Michael Brown organized a regimen of red shirted Bible-thumpers to infiltrate Charlotte’s gay pride event. Hundreds of zealots confronted and harassed festival attendees with their arrogant slogan “God Has A Better Way.”
The hatred and religious bigotry was appalling, but not surprising. What truly bothers me, however, was the lack of mainstream Christians standing up and speaking out against such fanatical behavior. Virtually every time I write about the Religious Right I’m reminded by the faithful that “not all Christians are like that.”
Of course, this is true and some of the most dedicated activists I have worked with are people of faith. Last week, in fact, I teamed up with Resurrection Metropolitan Community Church to host a week of educational seminars designed to counter an “ex-gay” conference in Houston.
Still, the number of mainstream Christians fighting the hate campaigns of the Religious Right is disappointing. With thousands of churches, millions of members and a vested interest in fighting back against religious extremism, they have consistently underachieved and failed to reach their potential.
What would it look like if mainstream churches fought back against the Religious Right?
Picture two hundred of Dr. Brown’s “Red Shirts” smugly descending on innocent families at Charlotte Pride. Out of nowhere, five hundred mainstream, mostly heterosexual Christians appear and surround the theocratic thugs with blue shirts that read: God’s Better Way – Love & Acceptance.”
These despicable bullies would likely have no idea how to react in such a situation where Christians were calling them “unchristian.” Instead of the expected rush of self-righteous glory, I could see these folks slinking off, dazed and ashamed.
Of course, this is just a pipe dream. I’ve organized or attended dozens of protests over the past decade. Time and again, I’m disillusioned by the lack of support from liberal and mainstream Christian organizations. It seems they are either afraid to offend their most conservative members or they are mired in passivity that allows extremists to define their faith.
This lack of coherent opposition has led to a dire situation where Religious Right backed presidential candidates are vying to eliminate or reduce social safety nets, persecute immigrants, undermine working people, shred the middle class, turn the poor into destitute beggars, and roll back minority rights.
This reluctance to stand up and speak out has created a hazardous vacuum where only the shrill and unreasonable voices of fundamentalism are heard. Instead of the dialogue that many progressives of faith claim to desire, this perceived weakness creates a lopsided right wing monologue, which is having a deleterious effect on our nation and the world.
It is time to stand up, speak out, and give voice to our values. If not now, when? Are we going to wait until it is too late and we have lost our country?
Here are four recent examples of the Religious Right flexing its political muscle:
** Texas Gov. Rick Perry held a stadium prayer rally in Houston that preceded his announcing his candidacy for President of the United States. The event was hosted by the American Family Association, a Southern Poverty Law Center-certified hate group. Included among the speakers were many radical clerics from the theocratic New Apostolic Reformation. Also known as the Seven Mountains Movement, this group of extremists wants to turn America into a fundamentalist Christian nation. Their aim is to take over the following seven spheres of society that they refer to as mountains: Religion, Media, Government, Family, Education, Business, Arts & Entertainment.
** The American Family Association is organizing Pastor Policy briefings in presidential battlegrounds. In these events, candidates prostrate themselves at the feet of conservative pastors in Iowa and elsewhere, pledging to enact their agenda if elected.
** Former Christian Coalition director Ralph Reed is making a comeback with a new organization he founded, the Faith and Freedom Coalition. “Our goal is to build a file of 29 million conservative voters,” Reed told the New York Times. “We’ll e-mail them, we’ll call them, we’ll knock on their doors and, if necessary, we’ll drive them to the polls.”
** Extreme right wing organizations have been recruiting candidates in the GOP primaries to sign pledges that lock them into inflexible positions, even at the expense of the nation.
It is critical that people realize that these zealots have a radically different vision of this country than most Americans. If their power keeps increasing, they will be able to drastically reshape this country. There would be a tremendous loss of freedom, liberty and justice, while bigotry, intolerance and religious conformity would become the law of the land.
If the Religious Right can organize and mobilize to stand up for its beliefs in such a robust manner, why can’t the Religious Left? We desperately need to answer this question before Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin defile America – and permanently define Christianity.










Dan1el said “Some commands were meant to keep the Israelite children separate (do not eat shellfish, etc.,)”.
LOL, I love it when people trot out that pathetic rationalization – “Do meaningless gestures so people know you’re different”, as if a different language and style of dress wouldn’t suffice and be far, far more efficient in achieving the pretend goal. Of course no where in the bible does it say that Israelites were asked to do pointless things to “make them look different”.
Dan1el
How do you decide which sex someone is? By their sex chromosomes (DNA), or by their genitalia?
And what if the two don’t match?
*sigh* Sodom and Gomorrah? Really? It’s a sad reflection on ‘Christians’ that those who don’t believe in their flavor of religion know more about about that story than they do.
Sodom and Gomorrah was *not* destroyed because a bunch of men wanted to rape male angels – to suggest that is to also suggest that had the ‘men of the city’ agreed to rape Lot’s daughters in a purely heterosexual way, then the city would have been spared. Ridiculous. That argument fails, even without looking at what scriptures say about Sodom and Gomorrah – the reasons are listed elsewhere, and surprise! Homosexuality itself is NOT a reason.
Using the example of the woman at the well is interesting because she had been married FIVE TIMES and was now living with a man to whom she was not married. Trying to conflate this example with being Gay or Lesbian is interesting… especially since Jesus had no ‘moral judgement’ on her marital status.
A better example of what you’re doing is the example of the woman the Pharasees dragged before Jesus, seeking to put her to death for sexual immorality because ‘God’s law’ demanded it. Based on your previous posts, you aren’t standing with Jesus telling the Pharasees off for using ‘God’s law’ to condemn the woman – you’re standing with the Pharasees by using the same exact tactics they used.
Philipj,
Scripture is clear that some people are made eunuchs at birth — if something gets in the way of someone’s fellowship with Him, it should be rejected, no matter what it is: some people [who are clearly female or male] abstain from the use of that sex even in natural heterosexual (i.e.: “But from the beginning of creation, God ‘MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE; FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’; so they are no longer two, but one flesh” — Mark 10) relations.
In Biblical Christianity, sex isn’t the sole purpose of, nor the end-all-be-all of life: what the sole purpose of, and end-all-be-all of life is for people to know God! We would do “better” [1 Cor 7:8] to concern ourselves with this!
This is one way to look at it, partial as it may be; however, for those (the majority) who are not hermaphrodites, this isn’t even an issue — therefore, if someone wishes to be Christian, it is not confusing.
Ozymandias71,
1] Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed in God’s wrath because,
“The outcry to the LORD against its people is so great that He has sent us to destroy it.”
In other words, it was the acts that they were engaged in (one of them was exhibited — homosexuality — when the messengers entered the town) BEFORE the angels arrived that got them destroyed. I never said they were destroyed for trying to rape the angels — that is just an example of the very thing for which they were being destroyed.
2] Actually, Jesus did tell her she was in sin — “the man you are with now is not your husband” means that she was in some kind of sexual immoral sin.
Unlike the self-righteous & self-justifying sinners, this sinner did not resist (be proud); she confessed the Truth that she was in sin, and was saved — because she believed the Words of the Son of God (John 3:18).
She received the water of Jesus (His Word), that became in her a well of water, springing up to eternal life — and went immediately to tell people that Jesus had told her all her evil deeds (John 4:29).
3] Ozymandias71, am I asking anyone to be stoned? No; on the contrary, I am warning people that the wrath of God is coming, and to believe in His Son and obey Him in order to be SAVED from the wrath of God. That is love.
I would NEVER endorse a public stoning as a punishment for adultery, etc.: there is New Testament precedent for NOT stoning people to death (the Law’s demand for certain sins) for such sexual sins, in 1 Cor 5:1-5; however, according to the Apostle’s teaching, it STILL was unacceptable. The man was dealt with in such a way as to save him, because he was in a serious sin.
Jesus took the wrath of God for our sins — such as the man who slept with his mother, such as the woman who was sleeping with a man who wasn’t her husband; such as an adulterous woman or man — so that we could receive the Gift of 1] righteousness and the gift of 2] eternal life, by cause of the righteousness.
The punishment (stoning) does not apply to the offenders, because Jesus took the punishment — however, those who take refuge in Him will not continue in sin (1 John 2:4; 3:4, 9), but walk as He walked (1 John 2:6) — and be free from sin (Romans 6:14), because they’re walking in the Truth, and the Truth set them free from sin (John 8:32)!
“Such WERE some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” 1 Cor 6:11
He does not invite us into the Kingdom to continue doing evil works…
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Cor 6:9, 10
…what a lousy Savior (from sin — Matt 1:24) that would’ve been! It is only sin that God’s wrath falls upon — whoever repents, and lives holy will not be under the wrath of God (as Sodom and Gomorrah served as an example of).
God received me based ONLY on His mercy, and He will do the same for anyone — I do not deserve anything but to be destroyed in the lake of fire, but He had mercy on my evil soul! He is merciful, but will not allow a single sin to go unpunished — therefore, He sent His Son to take the punishment, so that we could have the power, and a chance, to live holy lives with Him (if we receive His Word as Truth, confess we are guilty, we can receive His love, and come to know Him).
Telling the Truth isn’t always convenient, but it is always the right thing, and it is love.
Dan1el:
I am not arguing the merits or the validity of the exegesis and related holy texts. I merely question the inerrancy of the Bible as the “Word of God” if it was human beings who edited it and translated it. This seems to be the position you are espousing.
Also, you keep pointing to the condemnation of “sin” in the Bible by Jesus. However, if you will note, rarely does Scripture specifically mention what “sin” is. You are right, in the stories and parables of the Bible, Jesus instructs people to turn away from sin. But, rarely do the writers of the Gospels say what that sin is. There are times that they do, but more often than not, they don’t. It’s left up to readers to interpret what qualifies as “sin.” “Sin” changes from generation to generation. What was not “sinful” in Jesus’ time (slavery, plural marriage, torture, chauvinism, etc.) is considered sinful today and vice versa. As a regular church-goer, I can tell you that I’ve heard the same stories from the Gospels repeatedly throughout the years and each time during the homily the priest has offered a different interpreation of the story and the “sin” that should be avoided. Since our interpretation of “sin” changes, how can you, or anyone else for that matter be certain that homosexuality is or should be classified as “sin?”
Lastly, your argument about “abstaining from the appearance of evil” is open to a fair bit of interpretation which still makes me question a literalist interpretation of Holy Writ. Does it mean abstaining from actual evil or just the appearance of it? You can do whatever you want so long as no one else knows about it; so long as you keep it in the closet? How does that lead to a more spiritual life in Christ?
*Matt 1:21, not Matt 1:24
Nick K.,
If you don’t believe in the inerrancy of the Prophetic Word of God which the Prophets of old (Enoch, and onward, to John the Immerser) spoke, then we really have nothing to discuss — your ‘Christianity’ is not historical Christianity: every doctrine of the Apostles, and the very Life of Christ was based upon it. “It is written” — and that is how Christ acted.
If not, you really have no valid basis for Christianity — you just have your own made-up religion.
However, for those who do wish to live according to the Word of God, they must take the whole Word in context, and execute the will of God, accordingly — inasmuch as we are called to live “no longer for ourselves, but for Him Who died for us”.
Sorry Dan1el, but Jesus is a myth. There is no evidence outside the bible that he ever existed. The bible was written by men who knew nothing about science, who plagiarized beliefs of other religions, and who couldn’t check back what they wrote for inconsistencies and errors.
BTW, Why didn’t God destroy Lot’s daughters for having sex with their father? Is God OK with incest? After all, that’s the explanation the bible gives for how humanity spread.
Paul pretty much made Christianity his made-up religion. He contradicted several of the teachings and beliefs of the person he supposedly met (Jesus). He was unfair to women. He condemned his own people (the Jews) for rejecting and killing his savior.
Dan1el
Both Albert Mohler, head of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and Tony Perkins, of the Family Research Council, have stated that homosexuality is not a choice. So you go tell them (especially the former) that they aren’t Christian…
Are you going to support Pat Robertson as well, who just two weeks ago said that it was ok for a man to divorce his wife (who has advanced Alzheimers) because she is pretty much dead anyway?
What about Fred Phelps? Do you thank god for dead soldiers too? Unless you go to Fred’s church, you are going to hell. I’m pretty sure that you feel the same way about your church – so which of you is right, you or Fred?
Philipj,
1] I do not trust in denominations, nor their leaders’ interpretations (or misinterpretations) of Scriptures; I trust in the Word of God: those men will answer to God.
2] What Pat said about Alzheimer’s has no bearing on the current subject — although, I think anyone can see that what he said is incorrect.
3] Fred Phelps, and his mishandling of the Scriptures, have nothing to do with the current subject, either — however, I do not subscribe to his [invalid] beliefs.
Fred forgets that the fruit of walking in the Truth is love, joy and peace; and he forgets that he, too, has been forgiven of sins worthy of judgment (therefore, he ought to have mercy on others).
When James and John asked Jesus whether they should call down fire to destroy those who did not receive His Message…
“…He turned and rebuked them, and said, ‘You do not know what kind of spirit you are of’…” Lk 9:56 — this is one verse that I think has valid application for a Fred Phelps (no hatred or condemnation intended).
Lastly, I do not “go” to a “church”.
Dan1el:
For the record, I believe that the Bible holds certain spiritual Truths that are more powerful than the literal ones fundamentalists get bogged down in. It is those spiritual Truths that keep my faith strong in God and Jesus. IMHO, it is literalism that is more damaging to the Christian spirit than whether or not my boyfriend and I continue our relationship openly.
One question though: If you do not go to a church (which is fine and absolutely nothing wrong with that), might I ask who has the more made-up religion here?
Dan1el, so you don’t go to church. So you’re a freelance bigot and religious kook?
Nick K.,
1] I hear you; however, you have no Word from God upon which you are hinging your beliefs — “Abraham BELIEVED GOD, and it was credited to him as righteousness”; Jesus believed God, too: “it is written”, He said, and He did things, “so that the Scripture might be fulfilled”. He said, “if I call angels from the Father to save Me, how will it happen according to the Scriptures, which say it must happen this way?”. He LIVED to fulfill Scripture (Psalm 40:7)!
The entirety of the Christian faith — from beginning to end; from top to bottom — is premised upon the Jewish Scriptures (the Torah/Law, Nevi’im/Prophets, and Kethuvim/Writings): always has been, and always will be.
This begs the question: how did you become persuaded of the things you are persuaded of? Whereupon were these beliefs of yours founded? Not the Word of God, like all historical Christianity — do you see, friend? It just doesn’t work.
Our faith is based on the fulfillment of the Promise made to Abraham (Genesis 18 + Galatians 3), on the Promise made to the woman (Genesis 3:14, 15), on the Promises made through the Prophets (Isaiah 53), and on and on and on: on the other hand, your faith has no definitive root in God’s Word; therefore, it is not “faith in God” (like Abraham) — so, how can you believe what you believe, if you are just believing your own self, instead of God?
I am sorry, dear friend, but it seems you have some tough decisions to make (like everyone else alive, including all Christians) if you want to be a true Christian and truly know God (which, that is the whole purpose of Christianity) — this is my belief, based on experience, and on Scripture.
Why would I discuss this? Because the Truth is the Way to Eternal Life — and eternal joy (Isaiah 35:10) — in the presence of God (John 14:6): and I want to empower people to those ends.
2] If you want to see more how Christ was spoken of in the Old Covenant, visit “settingcaptivesfree.com” and look up their “Cross Study” — it is an illuminating look at all of the biblical archetypes and fore-shadows of Christ and His redemptive work!
3] In the Scriptures, there were only city-churches — one church per location. Believers were NOT to be divided up into “buildings” (called “churches” — which, they are not; the “church” is the assembly of the people) or denominations — I don’t think I am bound to that practice, since it is not in the Word of God.
Genesis 22:18*
Wow, Dan1el reminds me why I’m soooooo thankful that I managed to reject religion entirely. Pure joy and peace is not having to worry about the wrath of a psychotic deity.
Yeah, Richard, Dan1el has driven me even farther from Christianity, if that is even possible…don’t get me wrong, I’m not blaming him, I’m THANKING him for showing me the true face of Christianity.
People who are truly happy don’t go around trying to convince other people how unhappy the latter are…
Good to know!
megalomania much?