‘Phobia’ in Homophobia obscures simple hate

Playing devil’s advocate: “but I don’t ‘fear’ homosexuals”.

I would reply: what are the different words for “love” in the original Greek of the bible? One of them, agápɛ, was more of an attitude that translated to intentional actions that promoted unconditional well-being. “Love thy neighbor as thyself.”

But that’s not what they’re practicing. It’s quite the opposite: agápɛ ≠ mísia. They can say “love the sinner; hate the sin” all they want. But how that translates is deflection off the sin and onto the sinner. “Tough love” – for my “own good”? The ends justify the means?

I’m thinking that the primary command to “love thy neighbor” and “the greatest of these is love” was meant to show Grace – the very foundation for getting into Heaven – not “toe the line” to spare us sinless-righteous from countenancing your sinfulness and forcing us to live among it.

This is the “Christ” part of christianity. Without it, it’s christianism and its followers christianists. Anything you add to Love becomes a condition; if you condition Grace in anyway, it ceases to be Grace. The light is out.

So, if not agápɛ, then what? Mísia, as in homomisia, homophiliomisia and/or misohomophilia for the perspective and misohomophiliac or misohomo for the person exhibiting it.

I can see hate being how a deep fear is expressed. But I see actions born of fear more like reactions to create barriers. (For example, fear of being invaded would compel deliberate construction of defenses.) Premeditated actions and false-witness based on “tradition,” disapprobation and personal disgust, that’s hate. Seeing dragons in the windmills, that’s disease. Tilting at windmills, that’s a choice.

Let’s call it what it is: hate.

Black Christian Pastors’ Hubris

Re: Black Christian Pastors:

  • “you are my enemy”
  • “It’s time to take our nation back.”
  • You can’t compare gay civil-rights struggles to black struggles

It suddenly occurred to me: “protecting beliefs” has no boundaries. If you think that marriage is only between male & female because your religious beliefs, that’s fine. If you also believe that the institution of marriage is established by your god; the U.S. is a Christian country; and that, therefore, laws should be Christian-based, it makes sense that you might think that in fighting the progression of same-sex marriage, you are “protecting your faith.”

But your faith is personal. And to extend it to the entire country is dominionist and, frankly, self-absorbed.

Those such as Pastor Roland Caldwell declare as “enemies of God” and therefore “my enemies” all those who believe their faith is about living the life of Christ, not trying to structure a nation to conform to their own beliefs.  Their enemies are the same people who believe in fairness and equality for all tax-paying citizens of this same nation.  To those self-righteous who arrogantly claim to know the mind of God with authority to name who His enemies are, I say you’ve overstepped or stepped over the living-by-example and grace-as-light foundation of the person whose name you have soiled, whose light you have tainted, whose Grace you have horrifically misrepresented.

You want to use the word “enemy”? Then you are an extremist. Thankfully, the rational voices of Christianity, while obviously silent, vote. And your trying to shame them into your Taliban-like tribe I expect will backfire. It’s too bad extremists become the face and voice of Christianity, just as they do with Islam. On that point, you have just another element of hypocrisy as part of the expression of your “faith.”

Have you declared a type of civil war within the domain of Christianity? If so, then you are its poison and its demise. How many more factions in the country will simply despise you, while you then cry “persecution!”  You are more Christian than other Christians?  There are degrees of salvation and righteousness?  (Like the Benham Brothers being “too Christian for HGTV”?)

Arrogating the -ism

When you talk about how gay struggles can’t be compared to black struggles, it’s hard to know when you have drifted from the context of slavery to the concept of racism. You use them interchangeably. Continue reading

Amazing Grace, Legislated

From Strong’s Concordance: “Grace, the state of kindness and favor towards someone, often with a focus on a benefit given to the object.”From the Greek word Charis (xάρις), related to Charisma (gracious gift). Both these words originated from another Greek word Chairo(to rejoice, be glad, delighted).

And He has said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness.” Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may dwell in me (2 Corinthians 12:9).

It is understandable that people believe that any tie they have to a perceived immoral action is equivalent to doing the action, condoning the action, or enabling the action be done.  So, tax money being used to fund an abortion is seen negatively.

This really is not such a stretch, because — from a nationalistic perspective — when the US Govt (including the Courts) does something internationally (or even nationally, but observed by the international community), I can feel proud or ashamed, elated or appalled.  In the same vein, I’m not happy that the money I have contributed as a citizen has been used to used to start & conduct wars in the name of supposed safety, spreading democracy, or pushing other national “interests” that negatively impact other peoples.

It is also understandable that people want to change, structure, or institute laws and policies that minimize or remove immoral connections.  There is a push from religious or other moral perspectives to do that under the banner of re-establishing the US as a Christian Nation (Dominion), taking back the country from Godless forces, and turning back progressive (ever changing and evolving) agendas that foist upon them both immorality and connection to it.

For individuals with this perspective, when it comes to voting or participating in national issues (such as by voting or debating), decisions & viewpoints need to be “biblically informed.”  For instance, “From God’s ethical command not to murder, flows, in the minds of many people, the obligation to protect the lives of unborn children. Therefore we campaign—sometimes very aggressively—for laws that protect the lives of unborn infants.”

There exists an underlying pressure to “be Christian,” and to be Christian, you have to do and think Christian things, in every context.  If you help to enact a law that is Christian-based (presumably), then you are both being Christian and … that’s the question here.  You are obviously attempting more than just “being Christian” because your actions result in larger things that affect more than just you.

There is more going on here than merely distancing oneself, for example, from abortion ties.

Continue reading