“If you subscribe to the hateful biblical doctrines detailed in this post then you have rightly earned my loathing.”

“If” being the operate word and “you” being the universal anyone, commonly replaced by the Queen with non directive pronoun “one”. Which I flat refuse to use lest I come across like a member of the aristocracy. So patently I wasn’t referring to *you* – give me some credit.

My point is simple yet clearly easily misunderstood.

If you (one) spread(s) hate you deserve to get it thrown right back at you (one).

Its that simple.

If you note that I have an aptitude for writing then you should also note I have an aptitude for caveats. In my last sentence I used the term “usually”. Go back an re-read my comment and you’ll see I left plenty of room for people like *you*.

Equally, when I wrote the original article, I was targeting a particular religious conservative. This much is clear because the article clearly addressed the views of one individual and those who shared his beliefs.

Unless you share his beliefs (and you have made it quite clear you don’t) then you really ought to be smart enough to realise that the article is not addressing you (or people who think like you).

I also think most people know what I’m talking about when I say “I hate” orthodox interpretations of abrahamic religions. I’m talking about those who take a conservative and literal interpretation of scripture.

And frankly I don’t care what your personal experience of religion is like because your experience of religion is clearly far more liberal than the norm.

When I say: “people [like you] will usually find themselves at odds with their religious leaders”. I’m speaking factually.

A pro-gay catholic will find himself at odds with the pope. A pro-gay Muslim will find himself at odds with 99% of ayatollahs, a pro-gay Anglican will find himself at odds with the archbishop of Canterbury. I don’t know that much about the Jewish faith but I know that a pro-gay Jew will find himself at odds with Leviticus 20:13 as will any pro-gay Christian, who also has Romans I to contend with.

Factually I’m talking sense. If you are religious (in the abrahamic faiths) and are pro-gay then you are either at odds with your religious leaders or at odds with your scripture (or both).

To answer the rest, in order,

“Gay people don’t spread hate. Religion spreads hate. Its intended target is frequently gay people. However when you spread hate you often get it thrown right back at you.”

Erm, yes exactly.

“I’m not a Christian, I don’t have to turn the other cheek, I don’t have to love the hate-monger regardless.”

Nor do I, I’m a Jew.

“If you subscribe to the hateful biblical doctrines detailed in this post then you have rightly earned my loathing. I feel perfectly justified in despising people who spread such bigoted beliefs.”

Perhaps you didn’t read my post? I’m an out, bisexual, Reform Jew. I don’t hate gays, women, or for the record Palestinians or Germans either. Nazis, I hate.

“Equally though, show me a moderate Christian, Muslim or Jew, (they do exist) tolerant of homosexuality and bisexuality, supportive of gay rights, one who believes people of all faiths and none have something of value to offer this world and they’ll find no truck with me.”

Really? Then why tar them all with the same brush as the “God hates fags” brigade?

“However, the same people will usually find themselves at odds with their religious leaders.”

How many of those religious leaders do you know? My rabbi (who’s a woman, btw) knows I’m bisexual and has no problem with it. And perhaps you haven’t heard of Lionel Blue, who is Jewish, gay, a British Reform Rabbi, and has been out since the sixties. Or Steven Greenberg, an American, Orthodox rabbi who is openly gay?

And finally, “To answer your post…. NO – I’m not going to stop with what you call “religion hating” – because frankly I do hate religion. At least I hate orthodox interpretations of the Abrahamic faiths. (I don’t know enough about other faiths like Hinduism or Sikhism to develop an opinion.)”

Well, quite frankly this is bull. It also brings us right back to square one, “gay people don’t spread hate”. Now, either you presumably include bisexuals in that statement, or you allow that bisexuals do (and can) spread hate. Because that’s exactly what you’re doing. It certainly is true that religion can be used an excuse to spread hate, but so can atheism, anti-clericalism etc. as you so deftly prove. You quite clearly have a brain and an aptitude for writing; it’s sad to see it shown up by your attitude to religion. Don’t have a religion? Fine, I have no problem with that. But in my view your opposition to religion should stop at objecting to people using religion to oppress others – whether others pray to Allah or YHWH, or meditate in front of a statue of Buddha, have sex with other men (or other women) or eat pork is quite frankly no-one’s business but their own.

To answer your post…. NO – I’m not going to stop with what you call “religion hating” – because frankly I do hate religion. At least I hate orthodox interpretations of the Abrahamic faiths. (I don’t know enough about other faiths like Hinduism or Sikhism to develop an opinion.)

Its also very different to Queer-hating. Let me explain why.

Gay people don’t spread hate. Religion spreads hate. Its intended target is frequently gay people. However when you spread hate you often get it thrown right back at you.

I’m not a Christian, I don’t have to turn the other cheek, I don’t have to love the hate-monger regardless.

If you subscribe to the hateful biblical doctrines detailed in this post then you have rightly earned my loathing. I feel perfectly justified in despising people who spread such bigoted beliefs.

Equally though, show me a moderate Christian, Muslim or Jew, (they do exist) tolerant of homosexuality and bisexuality, supportive of gay rights, one who believes people of all faiths and none have something of value to offer this world and they’ll find no truck with me.

However, the same people will usually find themselves at odds with their religious leaders.

It’s the Christians that think the old testament’s mistranslated verses (the whopping two of them) really do refer to homosexuality who are a challenge.

And apparently it was okay to be a lesbian. They aren’t refered to until the new testament (allegedly); not by Jesus of course, and only once.

As a bisexual Christian, I would like to say that, if Christians would spend more time sharing the good news of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and less time fretting over other people’s sexual and romantic orientations, we might actually fulfill His “Great Commission”.

This is in response to a particularly ridiculous post appearing recently on this group’s wall. It has been making the rounds and I hope you enjoy it.

Why Gay Marriage Should be Illegal

1) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

2) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

3) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

4) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

5) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britney Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

6) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.

7) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in America.

9) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans

11) Civil Unions are almost the same as marriage, they are seperate but equal, and everyone knows how well that worked out with the white and black children having seperate but equal schools

Perhaps we should make a distinction between legal and ecclesiastical marriage. If some fundamentalist congregation doesn’t want to marry two men, fine. Many religious groups have their own special requirements for marriage, but those restrictions need not apply to people outside their church.

I understand resentment against anti-gay hate, religious and otherwise. Nevertheless, I wouldn’t paint all Christians with the same brush. Not all Christians are fundamentalist, evangelical, or anti-gay. At least one large group (the MCC Church) actively includes GLBT people in every respect. I’m not trying to promote that or any other church. I just want to be fair-minded because I think pitting GLBT acceptance against religion trivializes both and makes it harder, not easier, for GLBT people to win the acceptance we deserve. Fundamentalists and bigots get the most press, but James Dobson not speak for all Christians any more than Roy Cohn speaks for all queer folks.

Despite that minor disagreement, I appreciate your post, and I enjoy visiting your blog. To read regular thoughts about bisexual concerns is fantastic. I look forward to reading from you again.

C.