Many fundamentalist Christians condemn homosexuals, justifying their bigotry on the basis of a ‘literal interpretation’ of the bible. Yet any sort of objective assessment of their beliefs quickly reveals how they reinterpret scriptures in their own favour all the time.

Take Maragret Court as one example of someone who vocally condemns gay and lesbian people. The majority of Christianity (for instance the Catholic Church) completely reject women in meaningful roles, while other denominations, such as the Anglican community, is ripping itself apart over the issue.

For Ms Court the issue is settled.  The verdict is in her favour.

I happen to agree with Ms Court, but that is because I consciously choose to interpret the bible in a life affirming way. But it takes a conscious interpretation of the bible to acknowledge that. Ms Court presumes her interpretation is accurate, despite its fundamental disagreement with almost two thousand years of tradition and the beliefs of generations of Christians.

Take another example, the ‘prosperity’ theology of some churches, particularly American churches. This theology takes explicit exhortations of Jesus Christ for his followers to embrace poverty and replaces it with a belief that his followers are uniquely blessed and should expect financial rewards in this world. This represents a complete turnaround from almost 2,000 years of Christian belief and practice. But no matter, it makes it a lot easier to be a Christian in this day and age!

It has been speculated that the prosperity theology contributed to the Global Financial Crisis!

It is interesting how each instant people who profess to believing the literal word of God reinterpret generations of understanding and practice in their own best interest. Good on them I say, but don’t pretend it is not motive by self interest.

Take Ben Wyndal’s response above. I don’t judge him for his inability to deal with the issue of homosexuality. After all he has a family to feed, a career to pursue. His self interest is caught up in not rocking the boat. The Christian church has a long history of turning its back on those who disagree with accepted theology.

Matt Glover, a Lilydale Baptist pastor who supports gay marriage, was sacked as a consequence from a church he had pastured for over 10 years. The response from his fellows was that:

“Some in the church felt he was ”opening the door to sin” and activist Christian group Salt Shakers asked followers to pray that God would ”improve or remove” him.”

(A comprehensive response from Glover is available here. )

No wonder most Christian leaders are too afraid to take a stand against the bigotry of the mainstream Christian perspective. They know which side their bread is buttered on!

It takes a brave person to go against the social tide, particularly when their income depends on it. This helps give context to responses such as Ben Windle’s.

While such attitudes are perfectly understandable, they are hardly adequate when the beliefs been perpetuated have a detrimental effect on those who are really vulnerable to social pressures, teenagers. Gay and lesbian teenagers commit suicide at much higher rates than other groups.

They deserve better.

Few Christians seem to have the courage of their convictions. They would rather impose their beliefs on others than question themselves.

This is an extract of an email that I sent to a ‘Facebook friend’ who I had known years ago, Ben Windle (his blog is accessible here). Like many such acquaintances, I had known Ben somewhat but had fallen out of meaningful contact years ago. When he was promoting what he represented as a ‘Christian’ response to same sex marriage, I engaged him in the following conversation:

I responded to your post because it hurt me personally. I enjoyed attending CCC in the West End as it was a great community and I had some awesome friends. However, I also was struggling with intense suicidal thoughts, constant depression and abject loneliness.

Interestingly, when I came out to myself (at 31) everything changed. Life is now worth living. You might say I had a meaningful conversion experience!

I’m married (your opinion on its legitimacy is irrelevant) and have been for the past 5 years.

I’m not telling you this to change your view (you lack my subjective experience to have a meaningful perspective) but you probably have more people like me in your congregation. You may think your taking a ‘christian’ perspective on your actions. Be aware of the consequences for those in your congregation. Check out these two blogs – one of mine and one on the topic from a pretty good writer. Here and here.

Windle’s response? To de-friend me from Facebook. An apt, concise summation of the moral and intellectual arguments of the Christian Church.

Sadly, this lack of capacity to engage is typical of all fundamentalist Christians I know. I believe it is not possible for them to reconcile the emotional hurt caused by their beliefs with living and breathing human beings. So, rather than grapple with their beliefs they de-friend them.

Personally, I would consider this an excellent time saver all round if it was not for the large number of young gay and lesbian Christians struggling with the false dichotomy of their sexuality and their spirituality.

If they could be spared the years of aching loneliness and despair that I endured, it is worth while trying to talk with bigots.

PS. Windle has been offered an opportunity to respond formally.

When I first read John Shore’s blog, a number of years ago, I was initially drawn to his insight into the emotionally isolating experience traditional Christianity imposes on its gay and lesbian members. He consistently highlights the hypocrisy of those that represent themselves as being in a state of contact with a divine being of love while denying a minority its experience on this earth.

John has a whole series of riffs, such as this or this, on the failures of traditional Christianity to convincingly mount an argument that deal with the reality of living and breathing homosexuals. When ‘Christian’ beliefs are considered in light of the lived experience of gay and lesbian people theology collapses revealing its latent cruelty.

I should know as I tried to live according to those beliefs for almost a decade and a half. The consequence was emotional despair, years of loneliness and struggling with suicidal thoughts.

Not happy Jan.

Shore has recently compiled a series of testimonies from gay and lesbians and their experiences with Christianity and his own pithy rebuttals to common contemporary Christian attitudes. I contributed my experiences as a gay Christian.

Key quotes from my experiences:

As the oldest son of Pentecostal Pastors who founded eleven churches throughout Australia, the church was the closest thing to a home I ever knew. My first memory was crawling on the floor of a meeting hall during a worship service while my mother played the piano and my father exhorted the congregation to engage in the Pentecostal two-step.

With a deep and abiding sense that ‘something’ w as wrong with me I never pursue d my involvement with the church. That was until my late twenties. Despite the beginnings of a successful career as an economist, I left the Reserve Bank of Australia to study theology. My primary motivation was to try and change myself so that I could have what my social circle considered a proper relationship. But so much of my energy was focused on maintaining the proper social facade there was very little behind the image to give to another human being.

…After 15 years everything changed for me when a friend pushed me to consider that I could be gay and remain a Christian. This was a radical thought.  I was able to come to terms with my sexuality when I realised that my heart would, without any conscious volitional control, fall in love with men.

What point worshiping a God of love if it means denying the ability to experience it?

From the point I accepted my own ability to love, and receive it, everything changed in my life. I have met, and married (to the limits of the law) my life partner. We’ve been together for over six years and in that time I can unequivocally say that I’ve become a much better person. A better Christian.

John Shore’s response to Christian arguments about sexuality is here. The book can be purchased here.

I highly recommend it!

Below is the opinion piece by Victory Life pastor Margaret Court in the Herald Sun where she lays out her beliefs. My response to her initial comments is  here. Despite its poor quality, I am re-posting Ms Court’s comments it in full. However, I have taken the liberty of highlighting three sections. These sections reflect Ms Court’s thoughts and beliefs that:

• being gay to a choice (see what I’ve written about attribution theory and its influence on moral evaluation);
• her ‘sleight of hand’ comparing the ‘hard work’ of becoming good at tennis with marriage.  Clearly she is utterly clueless about homosexuality; and
• her sense of victim hood. People criticise stupidity and heartlessness. These are not noble qualities in anyone, particularly not someone purporting to be a Christian leader. It is far easier to perceive yourself as the victim rather than actually considering the comments and opinions of those that disagree with you.

It is worth noting that there are as many references in the bible to women being subservient to men and not being in positions of leadership as there are to homosexuality. Ms Court chooses to reinterpret one that is convenient to her while holding a strict line where it doesn’t matter to her.

Her opinion piece is:

“Priority is to protect marriage

• by:Margaret Court
• From:Herald Sun
• January 25, 2012 12:00AM

WE live in a blessed nation but Australia is on a steep moral decline.

Everywhere you look we are making excuses for a sliding lifestyle and more people are blind to it than ever before.

Our Constitution is based on biblical principles and our nation is great because of it.

We are a country with a moral fabric and families and marriage are at its core.

But increasingly our kids are being taught that anything goes.

As a society we are losing touch with fundamental Christian values, as our leaders lean towards an agenda of political correctness to keep the minorities happy.

We live in a world of moral values. Even those without faith know what is right and what is wrong. We all have a conscience and so many people get trapped in the pattern of saying something is right when deep down they know it isn’t.

It’s that attitude that can harden hearts. People suddenly justify the immoralities around them. We have taken the easy way out. Minorities are now making it harder for the majority. They are increasingly taking everything that is good in society and pushing it to the side.

Looking back, you can see that there has been a steep decline, especially when it comes to the issue of sexuality. There is so much scripture within the Bible that points to what we see happening now. We are losing that sense of discipline.

Let me be clear. I believe that a person’s sexuality is a choice. In the Bible it said that homosexuality is among sins that are works of the flesh. It is not something you are born with. My concern is that we are advocating to young people that it is OK to have these feelings. But I truly believe if you are told you are gay from a young age, soon enough it will start to impact your life and you will live it. If somebody is told they are gay they often start to believe it.

We are living in a society that takes the easy way out. But we have to work at life and make things better. You need to be disciplined. I became the first Australian woman to win Wimbledon because I trained hard and worked towards it.

It’s why I believe so strongly in the sanctity of marriage. It takes hard work. Children need a mother and a father – stability from a male and a female – and I think we are losing sight of this.

We are led by politicians who lie and spread deceit. They no longer stand true to their word and that affects us all, as a nation. Lies just don’t seem to matter much any more.

There is so much deception in the world and it’s getting worse by the minute. The Book of Romans speaks of the people of Earth trading in God; of worshipping life and things within it instead of God who made us. By refusing Him, women no longer know how to be women and men no longer know how to be men. We have lost our way and have been convinced by the secular view that it’s all OK.

It worries me because I fear our next generation will lose all direction and become more blinded than ever before.

I can’t understand, if we are a blessed nation under a biblical Constitution, why there is such a push to change it? We will only start to tear away at the rich fabric and sustained values. Then God will take his hand off our nation and the lights will go out.

That is why I believe we need to protect marriage because it has been God-ordained from the beginning.

God told man to be united with his wife and to multiply on earth.

I had fame and success and a great husband but I always knew something was missing in my life. I used to think there had to be more to it.

I knew He was there but I didn’t know how to make the connection. I didn’t understand how God could be real in my life. But then I accepted Jesus Christ, and believed that He came to Earth as the son of God, to die for our sins.

Even then I didn’t understand the power of the Bible, his word. If I knew then what I knew now I could have won six Wimbledons, not three. The New Testament is the greatest book on psychology. It shows you how to live victoriously. It’s our TV guide to life. It has everything in there for every facet – even how to run a nation.

People think it’s a book of fear but it is not. It’s a book of love and a training manual for life that offers protection from sin. Life is but a wisp. So many turn to God on their deathbeds but if they accepted His love during life they would experience far more blessings. We will pass away, but the scriptures won’t.

We need to turn our minds back to God and I still believe we have the capacity to make that change. Understand that there is a God and that He is real and that He can be part of your life.

A nun at my primary school once gave me the cane and it was one of the best lessons of my life. She could see the potential in me long before I did. She gave me a grounding for the future, for which I remain grateful. I didn’t have an easy childhood but I had good families around me that sowed into my life. That’s what our kids need right now. People who are willing to stand up for them, for our families, in a world where we have become far too scared.”

One of the best articles I have ever read on the topic of gay marriage was by Raimond Gaita, an emeritus professor of moral philosophy at King’s College London. He puts his finger on the reason for opposition to gay marriage:

“Many opponents of gay marriage do not see depth at all in gay sexuality. They think gay relationships are, at best, loving friendship plus sex. The sex and the loving friendship, they believe, can never be integrated in a way marriage requires them to be. Implicit in the marriage vow is a requirement to seek an ever-deepening understanding of the way love and sexuality enrich one another. It is an understanding of the place of sexuality in our sense of what it is to be human, and the requirement to seek it has no end. ”Marriage”, one might say, is a verb rather than a noun.

Obviously people who find gay sex disgusting or immoral do not think gay sexuality can rise to that requirement. But the kind of blindness to the meaning of gay sexuality that I have just described is pervasive, I believe. It lies behind the emphatic ”is” when people say marriage is between a man and woman – by definition, they are tempted to say. For them ”gay marriage” is an oxymoron.

That is a more radical position than the one that judges gay sex to be immoral. Even the most severe moral condemnation of anal sex cannot make ”anal sex” an oxymoron. But the belief that gay sex, of its very nature, cannot have the depth that would enable it to rise to the marriage vow, implies that nothing the state can do can make a marriage out of a gay relationship.

From this perspective, even if the law were to permit gay marriages, these would be marriages in inverted commas only. The state cannot do what is, so to speak, conceptually impossible.”

Raimond goes on to provide one of the most beautiful articulations for empathy that I have ever read:

“Our sense of a common humanity is premised on seeing in all human beings their capacity to make meaning that we respect of the big facts that define the human condition – our mortality, our vulnerability to misfortune and, of course, our sexuality. To be blind to that in others is to be partially blind to their humanity.”

History is replete with horrific examples of times when humans have been blind to the humanity of others. Nazi Germany is only the worst example of what can happen when we deny the humanity of our fellows
The truth is we are small children, struggling together through a foreign country. Out of our depth, lost and alone except for each other. The world may be teeming with humanity, consciousness is still a rare and potent gift in this amazing universe.

A follow up to the last post and this one on institutional bigotry: you have got to watch this video. So sad.

so sad

How do you weigh up this kid experiencing bullying every day for eight years with the potential possibility that the Church may experience discrimination (even though it is legally protected from such an eventuality). Check out this great blog for an impassioned plea for Christians to act according to their faith.

Hard to compute that anyone would weigh one over the other.

In a case of exquisite timing, the Australia ran an opinion piece where the commentator lamented that the gay marriage debate:

“is not just about rights but about the contestation of values and attitudes.”

The essence of Frank Furidie’s opinion piece was an objection to the ‘self righteousness’ that he perceived in proponents for same-sex marriage. His position is summed up by the quote:

“In the Anglo-American world, gay marriage has become one of those causes through which the cosmopolitan cultural elites define themselves and construct a moral contrast between themselves and ordinary folk. What’s really important for them is the sense of superiority experienced through the conviction that “we” are not like them.”

OH MY GOD!

I love the fact that Furidie’s principle argument is based on perceived ‘intolerance’ of his views. All I can say to him is “man up.” No one is actively discriminating against you. You suffer no negative consequences other than mild social condemnation. In contrast, those who seek to perpetuate discrimination do so from a personal belief in their own morality. They certainly do not have valid arguments to support their case.

Will Furdie’s next opinion piece be about all those poor maligned racists? They have strong views about the values and systems that should underpin Western societies. Perhaps he might argue for greater tolerance of misogynists? Not likely!

His conclusion about gay marriage:

“In such circumstances elite-sanctioned snobbish intolerance is no more acceptable than anti-gay prejudice.”

Actually there is a massive difference. Institutionalised bigotry has a profound impact on the mental and emotional health of those discriminated against. Check out my blog here. In contrast, being frowned at during a dinner party is, potentially, an opportunity to reassess your belief systems

The timing is fantastically ironic because on the same day that his op ed piece was published, the most populous state in the US (New York) passed marriage equality through its Republican controlled legislator. Check out this great post on the topic by Andrew Sullivan.

Personally, I don’t care about your views just don’t enshrine them in legislation. Or come to my dinner party!

A peaceful rally against discrimination was violently upset by a group of radicals intent on pushing their own message. Sound like something happening in an Arab rebellion? It happened in Adelaide and the violent group of counter-protesters were christians (members of the Adelaide Street Church). They even pushed a woman out of her wheelchair, prompting the original rally organiser to call the police.

What heinous rally were these christians protesting? What would cause them such outrage and prompt such aggressive behaviour?

200 people had gathered outside the South Australian parliament to rally in support of the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHO). The IDAHO protesters were there to take a stand against discrimination and bigotry, against the ‘outsider’ being punished and persecuted. Pretty much the message Jesus was trying to convey when he would eat with the social outcasts of his time.

So these ‘christians’ were protesting against a protest whose intent was to violence and vilification.

I find it fascinating that they would take actions counter ethical to the nature of their beliefs and not even realise how hypocritical they are. The IDAHO protest descended into ‘violence’ when reverend Sue Wickham of the Uniting Church symbolically married about 20 same-sex couples with the words: “You are now illegally husband and husband or wife and wife.”

Adeliade Now reports:

“But as couples embraced, Christian demonstrators arrived bearing Bibles and placards and, as the rally marched to Parliament House, cries of “you’ll burn in hell” were as loud as those demanding equal rights.

One demonstrator said it was Jesus’s love for all that had inspired him to try to save their souls. Scuffles broke out throughout the crowd before several Christian demonstrators were removed by police.”

If they really wanted to protect the sanctity of marriage, then they should focus on their own. Divorce is a recent social phenomenon that has reshaped the nature of relationships in the modern world. Unfortunately, studies have found that Christians are just as likely to break the sanctity of marriage (despite explicit biblical prohibitions) than
non-Christians.

Perhaps what these christians find threatening is not that the ‘gays’ do not care about their views, but that they might have to look at themselves closely. If they had the courage to do that, then they might start on a spiritual journey rather than look to external sources to justify their current beliefs.

Next post: Capital punishment and christian hypocrisy

Our physical appearance can have a major impact on our personal success. Humans are tribal creatures that have evolved in a highly dangerous environment. As a result of evolutionary pressures, the human brain is hardwired to make important judgements about someone’s social status based on their physical appearance.

Take height for instance. It has been well established that every extra inch of height adds an approximately $1,000 a year in wages after controlling for education and experience for both men and women. Even among identical female twins (whose height can still vary), the taller sister earns more than the shorter.

Of the 44 American presidents, only five have been substantially less than the average height of their time. The last short President elected was Benjamin Harrison in 1888. The reason for this remarkable result is that people make an assumption about someone’s social status based on their height.

It also works the other way. In an experiment conducted on five classes of Australian college students, a man was introduced as a visitor from Cambridge University in England. However, the visitor’s status was represented differently in each of the classes. To one class, he was presented as a student; to a second class, a demonstrator; to another, a lecturer; to yet another, a senior lecturer; to a fifth, a professor.

After the visitor left the room, each class was asked to estimate his height. It was found that with each increase in status, estimates of his perceived height rose by an average of a half inch. As a consequence, estimates of his height as a professor were two and a half inches taller than as a ‘student.’

While you cannot control how tall you are, there are ways to influence how people perceive your social status. Consider the case of the beard. Beards are a physical characteristic of men that literally separates them from boys. It has also been found to have an unconscious influence on people’s perception of you.

A 1990 study involved participants rating perceived characteristics of a range of photos of clean shaven men and the same individuals when they had beards and moustaches. Participants rated men with more facial hair higher for masculinity, maturity self confidence and dominance.

Perhaps the reason for its influence is that a strong beard enhances the jaw line, a masculine characteristic, signals a high level of testosterone, and gives the appearance of seniority. These factors enhance the appearance of social dominance and can have a major influence on personal success.

A study conducted in Texas, and involving almost 300 participants, had HR managers evaluate the characteristics of a series of prospective employees based on a photo that showed them as either clean shaven, moustached or bearded. These managers, responsible for hiring and firing people, rated images of people with facial hair as being more physically attractive, more competent and being better composed than images of clean shaven or moustachioed individuals.

This finding was replicated in another study that asked people to select a candidate for a job from a series of made up applicants. Although participants rejected statements like “facial hair affects job performance” they consistently selected the full bearded applicants over clean shaven ones.

The impressions given by facial hair are not all equal. A moustache should never be seen in the office place. Even a clean shaven man will be consistently ranked more attractive and intelligent than an image of the same man with a moustache. Whether you wear a full beard or a few days stubble should depend on whether you want to appear intelligent or attractive as both men and women find a few days growth more attractive. However, having a full beard gives the impression of being more intelligent. In one study conducted in the UK, an image of Santa Claus, minus the hat, was presumed to be a high ranking academic he was thought to be so intelligent!

Because they are rooted in our shared evolutionary past, the unconscious assumptions people make about your social status are the same the world over. They have been replicated from the streets of New York to the jungles of Central America and even on isolated islands in the Pacific. So, next time you reach for a razor ask yourself if it wouldn’t be better to go without it?

Awesome news! I just received the physical copy of a newspaper with an article published in it! It has been a while coming, but I am very happy to say that my article (based on this blog) is now in print at the WA Business News.