The Week has an interesting article asking if conservative opposition to gay marriage is the same as being racist. For starters, the Bible did address slavery, but it didn’t seem to be in the context of race-based slavery, as was the case in the U.S., Great Britain, Spain and the Netherlands. It’s true that there were some Christians, who were members of the Ku Klux Klan, went to church at 11 a.m., then burned crosses on front lawns and lynched innocent blacks later in the evening. Some people back then used their religion to justify their racist attitudes and treatment of blacks. Some are trying to do that with the gay community. Marginalizing people on the basis of their religion and sexual orientation is just wrong. I will admit, I wasn’t a gay marriage proponent for many years, but I have come to the realization that depriving someone of being with the person they love is just wrong. It’s morally wrong. The fact is racism and homophobia should have no place in our society….period.
The big deal is that strictures against homosexuality are rooted far more deeply in the Judeo-Christian tradition than racism ever was. Yes, slavery is found throughout the Scriptures and comes in for criticism only, at best, by implication. But race-based slavery — and the racism that made it possible and continues to infect ideas and institutions throughout the West to this day — receives no explicit endorsement from the Bible.
Which isn’t to say that those seeking to justify race-based slavery or racism couldn’t, and didn’t, twist biblical passages to make them provide such justification. But the Hebrew Bible and New Testament clearly do not teach (either explicitly or implicitly) that buying, owning, and selling African slaves is next to godliness.
The same cannot be said about the normative teaching on human sexuality contained within the Judeo-Christian scriptures — and even more so, within the interpretative and theological traditions that grow out of them. In dismissing this teaching so casually, Chotiner ends up implying that traditionalist churches and religious communities are the moral equivalent of the Ku Klux Klan.
If that’s an accurate evaluation of their moral status, then we can expect that before long traditionalist religious views will be denied legitimacy by the courts, denigrated in the public schools, and thoroughly marginalized in our public life. (For a sober but concerned exploration of how the social and legal persecution of traditionalist belief might unfold over the coming years, see Rod Dreher’s recent cover story in The American Conservative.)
Chotiner and his fellow secular liberals may well be right that traditionalist views of sexuality are bound to evolve, with nearly everyone destined to accept and affirm the dignity of homosexual relationships. But given the commitments of these same liberals to personal freedom, shouldn’t they also insist that the evolution take place at its own pace, without being forcibly imposed by the coercive powers of the state? Source: The Week
Um, I remember a time when interracial marriages were against the law in America. It’s still frowned upon by many who are still hellbent on living in the Dark Ages. While it may not be a popular position, people are free to have their own opinions. I wouldn’t call someone a racist for believing that marriage should be between one man and one woman. You have to consider the context in which the person is voicing his or her opposition to gay marriage. Yes, there are some people who have racist views of the gay community, but there are some who aren’t. If the truth be told, no matter where one stands on the issue of gay marriage, it’s very easy for each side to twist the Scriptures to fit their ideology. That doesn’t make it right. Far from it. The bottom line is that we are all afforded freedoms under the Constitution. That also includes the LGBT community. So, deal with it.