Religion Page

[cantdog]

There's a referendum, here. Maine loves referenda. This one was prompted by an anti-discrimination law that was signed by the governor. They started in petitioning right away.

"They" means, of course, the fundies. Now it's on the ballot. "They" objected to a law stating that sexual orientation was not to be used as a basis for discriminating in housing, employment, and all that sort of thing.

This is from David Henry.

Below is a statement I have written about Question One on the ballot this fall. I'm bringing copies to the annual meeting tomorrow. I had hoped to email this around earlier; now I hope some of you will receive this before heading over to Rockland.

- David Henry


Question One: Can Christians Just Say No?
by David Paul Henry October 19, 2005

On November 8, Question 1 on the ballot will be: “Do you want to reject the new law that would protect people from discrimination in employment, housing, education, public accommodations and credit based on their sexual orientation?”

I maintain that our answer should be No. We do not want to reject a law that says that homosexuals should be treated fairly as human beings.

As disciples of Jesus Christ, we want to follow the example and teaching of Jesus. In marked contrast to the culture of his times, Jesus made a point of treating people fairly, especially those who were considered outcasts because of disease or ethnic heritage or even because they led wicked or immoral lives - they were sinners!

Jesus didn’t stop with treating outcasts fairly. He taught and practiced a ministry of compassion to people who were oppressed or marginalized for whatever reason. He became known as the friend of sinners.

Jesus welcomed sinners and ate meals with them. He befriended a crooked tax collector named Zacchaeus. He allowed a prostitute to approach him in public and wash his feet with her hair. He did not condone their conduct. But he didn't reject them either. Far from it: he sought them out as the good shepherd, the great physician.

Jesus once encountered a woman at a well. Not only was she a woman, she was a member of a despised ethnic group, the Samaritans, and her conduct was so immoral it seems likely she was an outcast in her home town. Jesus spoke to her, he asked her for a drink, and he even offered her a drink of living water, boldly breaking multiple social taboos. Whenever Jesus came across a discriminatory practice, he deliberately broke it. Jesus reached the Samaritan woman with the gospel, and she became one of the first Christian witnesses.

Yes, many (but not all) Christians believe that the practice of homosexuality is wrong. Even if it is, especially if it is, the challenge to Christians is to demonstrate the same compassion for homosexuals that Jesus showed to people of all lifestyles and circumstances. I believe a Christian ministry of compassion includes defending homosexuals from discrimination.

Do we want to reject a law that protects homosexuals from discrimination? The example of Jesus leads me to say No. If anyone wanted to deny the Samaritan woman access to the well, Jesus would say No.

Why then is the Vote Yes on One effort being supported primarily by Christians?

Here is a summary of their position. Homosexual behavior is not only wrong, it is harmful, to those who engage in it and to society as well. The inclusion of sexual orientation in civil rights laws gives distorted and harmful sexual practices standing as normal and legitimate. This affects how sexuality is taught in schools and how home and family are presented on our TV screens. And it could lead to
legal recognition of same-sex marriage. Voting Yes to reject the law that adds sexual orientation to the civil rights protection list will hold back the cultural and legal acceptance of homosexual behavior.

I agree that Christians should be concerned about these matters. But the campaign to reject Maine’s anti-discrimination law dishonors God in three ways:

1. It abandons the ministry of compassion taught and practiced by Jesus Christ. Certainly Jesus understood the harm caused by immoral behavior. Yet he never seemed concerned that being a friend of sinners might lead to legitimizing sinful behavior.

2. It damages the integrity of our proclamation of the gospel. When Christians mount campaigns to overturn anti-discrimination laws, their message is, “We support ostracizing sinners.” That message can only harm the witness of the churches.

3. It indicates lack of trust in God. Christians have a choice: Follow the example and teaching of Jesus and trust God to direct the results, or stray from the shepherd out of fear of where following Jesus might lead. But we can affirm, with Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, that the victory has been won, therefore our labor in the Lord is not in vain.

A group of religious leaders once brought to Jesus a woman they claimed had been caught in the very act of adultery. They challenged him: "In the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" Jesus' reply sent them away in silence. "Let anyone among you who is without sin cast the first stone."

Perhaps these leaders wished to present themselves as champions of righteousness, and portray Jesus as soft on condemning sin and sinners. Jesus stopped the stoning. He admonished the woman to “go and sin no more,” but did not condemn her. He replaced condemnation with compassion, and revealed that his critics needed God’s grace just as much as the woman did.

Of course, vote Yes on One proponents are not suggesting that homosexuals be killed by stoning. But by campaigning to reject civil rights protections, they are implying that homosexuals may be denied the basic rights of living: holding a job, finding a place to live, obtaining health care services, drinking water from a well.

To those who believe they should vote "Yes" I can only say: Let anyone among you who is without sin cast the first ballot.

Meanwhile, the furor continues.

 

[Belegon]

Thanks for sharing that...it is an unfortunate truth that any missive including the phrase "as Christians we..." and "homosexual" I would usually skip over.

Sounds like this guy actually paid attention to the man who started the religion instead of some of the idiots who now claim to advance it's causes. good for him.

 

[logophile]

There's a referendum, here. Maine loves referenda. This one was prompted by an anti-discrimination law that was signed by the governor. They started in petitioning right away.

"They" means, of course, the fundies. Now it's on the ballot. "They" objected to a law stating that sexual orientation was not to be used as a basis for discriminating in housing, employment, and all that sort of thing.

This is from David Henry.


Meanwhile, the furor continues.

The world is a scary place. While I am shocked at this referendum, I am simultaneously not surprised.

Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention, Cant. Please continue to keep us informed as things progress.

 

[cantdog]

The confusion of marriage with morality has done more to destroy the conscience of mankind than any other single error.

Manning 'phone banks. Will update.

 

[rgraham666]

Amen, brother!

 

[SeaCat]

Get this man some bodyguards before the fundamentalists stuff his ass in the freezer. He has commited the ultimate sin don't you know? He has decided to think. (I like him.)

Cat

p.s. Isn't it sad that someone felt that a referendum like this needs to be put up?

 

[cantdog]

David Henry went with us on some of the La Romana trips. He is a soft-spoken, compassionate voice-of-reason sort of man. He can help people to slow down and see each other's point of view, in argument. He can also work in the hot sun without complaint. A fine man.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Jesus came to save us sinners. Saints don't need saving. All those who don't think or claim they aren't sinners should find a new religion to join and leave Christianity alone.



"While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
--the bible

 

[cantdog]

I would like to see more Christians contesting these people, whose beliefs and actions only blacken Christianity's name. What right have they to be called fundamentally Christian? It makes it sound as though the weirder your belief, the more fundamental to the faith it must be.