Do gays need a church of their own anymore?

Jan 1, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Peninsula Clarion

On that Sunday in 1968 when Troy Perry borrowed a minister's robe and started a church for gays in his living room, the world was a very different place.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of25
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Oct 10

San Francisco

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

No. We don't need one at all. If everyone replaced the time spent in church with studying science, evolution, and the horrifying history of religious oppression, the world would be a far better place than anything the bible would have you believe.

Besides, who needs a church when we get a sermon from David Moore every few hours?

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

4

2

2

"If Jesus ever said anything about homosexuality, it is not recorded in the Bible, even mistranslated. He did, however, speak extensively on God's unconditional love. Yet instead of dwelling on biblical love, Christians have historically been more concerned with obscure passages of Levitical cleanliness codes and Paul's misunderstood comments in Romans. Instead of focusing on the incredible injustice and hatred demonstrated by Christians and others, tying to deny homosexuals even basic civil rights, people appear more concerned with the specific homosexual acts between consenting adults who are naturally have a homosexual orientation. As James B. Nelson notes, the Bible more clearly advocates a "love ethic" rather than a "sex ethic."

I Cor 6:9, no way refers to homosexuality. The original Greek word often quoted as sexual immorality, Paul used was "porneia" which means "a harlot for hire". In Corinth in the temples of Venus, the principal deity of Corinth, where Christians went to worship, a thousand public prostitutes were kept at public expense to glorify and act as surrogates for the fertility Gods. This sex with the pagan Gods is what Paul was talking about - fornication is an admitted mistranslation and has nothing to do with gays or singles sex. This rendering reflected the bias of the translators rather than an accurate translation of Paul's words to a culture of 2000 years ago worshipping pagan sex gods.

Romans 1:26-27 mentions homosexual acts performed by people who are clearly described as heterosexual. The men in the NT patriarchal culture exerted dominance not only over women, but over younger males as well. The nature of homosexual acts in the Bible are so very different from what we know as homosexuality today that the passages have no application to today's homosexuality. Such practices as in NT times simply no longer exist. Alleged references to homosexuality in I Corinthians and I Timothy are the inventions of anti-gay translators. They are not in the original Greek texts." (Rev.Dr. Mel White) The word "homosexual" wasn't even invented until 1869. When you see it in the bible, you know it is a modern mistranslation and misinterpretation of the original texts.

"What the Bible forbids is acts of lust, rape, idolatry, violation of religious purity obligations, or pederasty, but no condemnation of homosexuality in relationships of mutual respect and love. "On the other hand, the Bible pointedly celebrates instances of same-sex emotional intimacy, a fact often overlooked by fearful homophobic readers." James B. Nelson, Professor of Christian Ethics, United Theological Seminary

Yet Jesus told us:

John 13:34: A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.

John 15:12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.

John 15:17: This is my command: Love each other.

Matthew 7:1: "Do not judge, or you too will be judged.

Luke 6:37: "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.

Matthew 7:12: So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Meanwhile, the irrational prejudice promoted by some who claim to be Christians, continues to cause needless suffering and death, here and around the world.

Since: Oct 10

San Francisco

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

NoQ wrote:
<quoted text>
No, but what they do need is, a giant shithouse so they can eat all they want, anytime they want.
If you had any friends, they'd be the type to beat the crap out of you if they found out you spend all your time hanging out in gay forums. Imagine what they'd do if they discovered your scatology fetish. Good thing for you you're a friendless loser.

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

GoldenGator wrote:
<quoted text>
If you had any friends, they'd be the type to beat the crap out of you if they found out you spend all your time hanging out in gay forums. Imagine what they'd do if they discovered your scatology fetish. Good thing for you you're a friendless loser.
You kidding? He needs his friends to help him with the typing, spelling, and sentence formation.

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

fr caleb:

>Your Spam has been proven false....zzz<

No, YOURS has been proven false. Yet AGAIN, DAVID MOORE OF PEKIN IL.
catholic created gay

Saint Augustine, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Caleb wrote:
<quoted text>Your Spam has been proven false.
John 1:1 tells us Jesus is THE WORD.
THE WORD says:
Leviticus 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
Leviticus 20:13 - If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their blood guiltiness is upon them.
Romans 1:26-27 - For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
I Corinthians 6:9 (NIV)- Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
I Timothy 1:8-11 (NASB)- "But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted."
The 'closet queen' with a thousand names

“Times are changing!”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Hates Queers wrote:
one day when Jesus comes back and you won't be able to deny him then.
You can explain to Jesus how you so blatantly, "hate".

Since: Oct 10

San Francisco

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Hates Queers wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't hate people that are gay I hate the gay acts people do by going against God's word and love.
Yes, God approves only of far loftier acts of love, like the Kentucky practice of sex between siblings. Or is that betwixt?

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

4

2

2

One needs only read the preceding posts to see that yes, MCC (and other GLBTQ communities of faith) are still very much needed and necessary today.

There are always going to be GLBTQ people who are coming out of the closet and/or trying to work through the spiritual and religious implications of living open and authentic gay lives. They've heard all the "clobber passages" that are misinterpreted and mindlessly repeated by folks like the self-loathing creature from Pekin; and they've been similarly preached at by the members of the GLBTQ community who have come to the conclusion that religion and/or spirituality must be discarded if one is to be accepted in the GLBTQ culture.

These people need to know the truth: that they are awesomely and wonderfully made just as they are, and that they are loved by their Creator. They need to have safe places to go where they can hear the same thoughts, insights, and revelations that Not Yet Equal so eloquently voiced earlier in this thread. They need to be reassured that there are those who will support them and nurture them as they learn to reconcile their God-given sexual orientation with their God-given spirituality.

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
One needs only read the preceding posts to see that yes, MCC (and other GLBTQ communities of faith) are still very much needed and necessary today.
There are always going to be GLBTQ people who are coming out of the closet and/or trying to work through the spiritual and religious implications of living open and authentic gay lives. They've heard all the "clobber passages" that are misinterpreted and mindlessly repeated by folks like the self-loathing creature from Pekin; and they've been similarly preached at by the members of the GLBTQ community who have come to the conclusion that religion and/or spirituality must be discarded if one is to be accepted in the GLBTQ culture.
These people need to know the truth: that they are awesomely and wonderfully made just as they are, and that they are loved by their Creator. They need to have safe places to go where they can hear the same thoughts, insights, and revelations that Not Yet Equal so eloquently voiced earlier in this thread. They need to be reassured that there are those who will support them and nurture them as they learn to reconcile their God-given sexual orientation with their God-given spirituality.
Or, instead of asking "Which church?", they might ask the more fundamental question -- "Why any church at all?"

Several things led me away from my former belief in supernatural beings in addition to the anti-gay attitudes of my church. Many gay friends suggested that I tried their "more accepting" churches or religious beliefs after I came out and subsequently left the church, but ultimately I decided to question ALL dogmatic beliefs. A belief in a god was unsustainable since there simply was no evidence to support such a claim.

There is life after faith belief, and one can find reality can be very rewarding.
Sheldor

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Why does anyone need a church? MCC has made many positive contributions to the "gay community". Many secular organizations have done the same without the need for a magic Norse God.

“... from a ...”

Since: Mar 09

GREAT HEIGHT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

1

1

SURE we do ... just so there's a place for "Caleb" to be outside of while he wails and gnashes his teeth.

We wouldn't want him to be unhappy, after all.

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jerald wrote:
<quoted text>
Or, instead of asking "Which church?", they might ask the more fundamental question -- "Why any church at all?"
Several things led me away from my former belief in supernatural beings in addition to the anti-gay attitudes of my church. Many gay friends suggested that I tried their "more accepting" churches or religious beliefs after I came out and subsequently left the church, but ultimately I decided to question ALL dogmatic beliefs. A belief in a god was unsustainable since there simply was no evidence to support such a claim.
There is life after faith belief, and one can find reality can be very rewarding.
But Jerald, that is the one of the points I was making earlier. You have made a personal decision, based on your personal experiences, that there is no Supreme Being. Apparently, that works for you. Good for you! Your life is your life, and you have every right to your personal belief system, whatever it may entail.

However, why can't you extend that same respect to others who believe differently than you, whose life experiences have led them to draw opposite conclusions that work equally as well for them? In forcing your opinions on spiritual matters down everyone else's throats make you any different from the people who attempt to force their beliefs on sexual orientation down your throat?

I would suggest "To Each His (or Her) Own". Personally, I am deeply spiritual but not at all religious; my years of experience as a hospice worker have convinced me that there are mysteries surrounding the human soul that we don't fully comprehend. That doesn't (and shouldn't) give me the right to attempt to sway you to my way of thinking; nor does it give me the right to tell people who are religious that what works for them is invalid. Can you not extend to others the same courtesy you are entitled to?

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
<quoted text>
But Jerald, that is the one of the points I was making earlier.


Exactly what point would that be, other than that the "truth" lies in a belief in a "Creator"?
Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
You have made a personal decision, based on your personal experiences, that there is no Supreme Being. Apparently, that works for you. Good for you! Your life is your life, and you have every right to your personal belief system, whatever it may entail.
However, why can't you extend that same respect to others who believe differently than you, whose life experiences have led them to draw opposite conclusions that work equally as well for them? In forcing your opinions on spiritual matters down everyone else's throats make you any different from the people who attempt to force their beliefs on sexual orientation down your throat?
I would suggest "To Each His (or Her) Own". Personally, I am deeply spiritual but not at all religious; my years of experience as a hospice worker have convinced me that there are mysteries surrounding the human soul that we don't fully comprehend. That doesn't (and shouldn't) give me the right to attempt to sway you to my way of thinking; nor does it give me the right to tell people who are religious that what works for them is invalid. Can you not extend to others the same courtesy you are entitled to?
I believe I was doing just that, and offering such people an alternative to what you claimed in your post:
Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
These people need to know the truth: that they are awesomely and wonderfully made just as they are, and that they are loved by their Creator.
I didn't state that belief was "invalid". I merely stated that I found no evidence to support a belief in supernatural beings, and that's why I sought an alternative.

Why did YOU ASSUME that my posting an alternative that you clearly ignored was necessarily discourteous?

Why do believers see disbelief as some kind of personal affront? Why is my alternative "disrespectful"? Perhaps because the notion that others don't rely on unproven or conveniently unprovable claims is discomfiting to you?

Why can't non-believers offer safety, comfort and solace? Apparently, you believe that the safe places are those that offer "revelations" and reassurance that support and nurturance can be found with those who believe in god-given things:
Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
They need to have safe places to go where they can hear the same thoughts, insights, and revelations that Not Yet Equal so eloquently voiced earlier in this thread. They need to be reassured that there are those who will support them and nurture them as they learn to reconcile their God-given sexual orientation with their God-given spirituality.
That's a rather presumptuous claim, and rather limiting. Why didn't you include the possibility that such persons could find happiness and support without having to hold onto these beliefs?

Why is my mentioning such an alternative a sign of "disrespect" or "discourteous", but your omitting them isn't?

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Jan 1, 2013
 
Jerald wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly what point would that be, other than that the "truth" lies in a belief in a "Creator"?
<quoted text>
I believe I was doing just that, and offering such people an alternative to what you claimed in your post:
<quoted text>
I didn't state that belief was "invalid". I merely stated that I found no evidence to support a belief in supernatural beings, and that's why I sought an alternative.
Why did YOU ASSUME that my posting an alternative that you clearly ignored was necessarily discourteous?
Why do believers see disbelief as some kind of personal affront? Why is my alternative "disrespectful"? Perhaps because the notion that others don't rely on unproven or conveniently unprovable claims is discomfiting to you?
Why can't non-believers offer safety, comfort and solace? Apparently, you believe that the safe places are those that offer "revelations" and reassurance that support and nurturance can be found with those who believe in god-given things:
<quoted text>
That's a rather presumptuous claim, and rather limiting. Why didn't you include the possibility that such persons could find happiness and support without having to hold onto these beliefs?
Why is my mentioning such an alternative a sign of "disrespect" or "discourteous", but your omitting them isn't?
Jerald, you are spoiling for an an argument. Look elsewhere, my friend.

My original post was about GLBTQ people of faith who were seeking an alternative to religious condemnation by straights and religious disbelief by fellow gays. I simply indicated that MCC and other gay churches offered them a viable alternative, alleviating the need for them to falsely choose between their sexual truth and their personal belief system.

You then piped in using language about "supernatural beings". Apparently you meant that to be respectful; it didn't come off that way to my ears. I found it dismissive, patronizing, and churlish, and in context you seemed to be lumping those who were religious and those who were spiritual together in one broadly defined category.

I must have misunderstood. What I'm hearing in your rebuttal is that you are extremely supportive of other people's beliefs, and nonjudgmental to a fault. My bad. I apologize for misreading your noble and magnanimous posts, and the welcoming and affirming spirit behind them.

Are we done here?

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Jan 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
<quoted text>
Jerald, you are spoiling for an an argument. Look elsewhere, my friend.
I wasn't when I originally replied to your first post, a post which was not in response to anyone in particular.
Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
My original post was about GLBTQ people of faith who were seeking an alternative to religious condemnation by straights and religious disbelief by fellow gays. I simply indicated that MCC and other gay churches offered them a viable alternative, alleviating the need for them to falsely choose between their sexual truth and their personal belief system.
You claimed that people have been "preached at by the members of the GLBTQ community who have come to the conclusion that religion and/or spirituality must be discarded if one is to be accepted in the GLBTQ culture" (whatever THAT is).

And I offered yet another alternative which you didn't. It's a false choice to have to choose between churches. No church is a viable choice, too.

And it's a false choice to have to choose between belief or being "discarded by the GLBT community." I have plenty of very good friends and family (indeed, the vast majority of my friends and family are believers of some sort), and they aren't "discarded", nor are they made to feel that way.
Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
You then piped in using language about "supernatural beings". Apparently you meant that to be respectful; it didn't come off that way to my ears. I found it dismissive, patronizing, and churlish, and in context you seemed to be lumping those who were religious and those who were spiritual together in one broadly defined category.
Actually, I was talking about me and my beliefs. I once believed in supernatural beings. I wrote
Jerald wrote:
Several things led me away from my former belief in supernatural beings in addition to the anti-gay attitudes of my church.
I was including all supernatural beings that I had believed in (god, satan, angels, etc.), not just your conception of your god.

You don't like the term "supernatural being" for your god? Sorry. It's not a natural being, is it?
Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
I must have misunderstood. What I'm hearing in your rebuttal is that you are extremely supportive of other people's beliefs, and nonjudgmental to a fault. My bad. I apologize for misreading your noble and magnanimous posts, and the welcoming and affirming spirit behind them.
Are we done here?
Sure. Your apology is accepted.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Jan 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

To get back to the question of the article.....

Yes, MCC is still relevant. They are not just for GLBTs, regardless of what is thought. They are also welcoming to straights. But that aside, there are still plenty of GLBTs out there that need to hear the God of their youth still loves and accepts them. Now, I am no believer in religion, but I recognize that there are those who are, and they need the lesson of acceptance that is taught at MCC. I believe that I heard that when Troy Perry first started this church, he did so with the vision that it would some day not be needed. But today is not the day.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Jan 2, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

NoQ wrote:
<quoted text>
No, but what they do need is, a giant shithouse so they can eat all they want, anytime they want.
Care to donate your trailer? I'm sure it is full of it.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Jan 2, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Caleb wrote:
<quoted text>Your Spam has been proven false.
John 1:1 tells us Jesus is THE WORD.
THE WORD says:
Leviticus 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
Leviticus 20:13 - If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their blood guiltiness is upon them.
Romans 1:26-27 - For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
I Corinthians 6:9 (NIV)- Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
I Timothy 1:8-11 (NASB)- "But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted."
Happy 2013, David. Hope your family has made a resolution to keep you on your meds this year.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Jan 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jerald wrote:
<quoted text>
Or, instead of asking "Which church?", they might ask the more fundamental question -- "Why any church at all?"
Several things led me away from my former belief in supernatural beings in addition to the anti-gay attitudes of my church. Many gay friends suggested that I tried their "more accepting" churches or religious beliefs after I came out and subsequently left the church, but ultimately I decided to question ALL dogmatic beliefs. A belief in a god was unsustainable since there simply was no evidence to support such a claim.
There is life after faith belief, and one can find reality can be very rewarding.
As a fellow atheist, I agree with you in part. But the reason non-fundamentalist religions continue is that some people cannot live an existential life. They need to believe that someone out there cares for them. If we atheists want to religion to wither away as Marx and Engels thought nation states should wither away, we would need to make sure that people do feel cared for.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of25
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••