Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
Oy gevalt

The Jewish Gays Getting Married To The Opposite Sex Aren’t In It For The Sex

Rabbi Areleh Harel in Israel’s West Bank has become “the go-to rabbi for homosexuals,” because he’s playing matchmaker with gay Jews who want to have some semblance of a normal life and family — or at least what he and his supporters believe that to be. These couples aren’t denying their situation orientation, they say, but they are getting married, raising children, and leading happy lives. You’ll forgive me if I don’t believe all this.

Haaretz relays that Harel has married off 11 “happy couples” with a 12th just announcing their engagement.

So what’s this process like?

Harel said all his couples receive close support from a team of psychologists, marriage counselors and social workers. They also consult frequently with rabbis, including Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein of the Har Etzion Yeshiva, Chief Rabbi of Ramat Gan Yaakov Ariel, and especially Rabbi Menachem Burstein, head of the Puah Institute, which specializes in halakhic solutions to fertility problems. His 12th couple has just announced their engagement, Harel said, and he has a list of another 30 gays and 20 lesbians seeking matches. They don’t deny their sexual identity, he stressed, but “they want to establish a home, whether for the sake of becoming parents or for the social recognition. A family isn’t just sex and love. It’s an instrumental partnership, though not just a technical one.”

So these couples are actually thriving?

Etti and Roni, both religious, were married five years ago. Though they were honest with each other about their sexual orientations from their first meeting, to the outside world, they portray themselves as a normal heterosexual couple. Today, they have two children, and are thrilled with the results. “It’s incredible,” they wrote. “Six years ago, we didn’t think we would ever be this happy. We thought everything was black, that we’d lost our chance of a normal life. But today, things are good for us. There are gaps, but that’s true in every case. And we fill them with the great love we give to and receive from our children, and also enjoy the simple human love we give each other, such as any two people can give and receive.”

[…] Roni, 35, owns a business; Etti, 30, is a paramedic. Roni tried conversion therapy to change his sexual orientation, with no success. He said he also had relationships with various other men, “until I decided this isn’t for me; I want a family and children.” Etti said her family still doesn’t know she’s a lesbian. She had one “serious” lesbian relationship, but “realized it was more important to me to raise children and live in a normal family.” Both said that upholding the religious prohibition on homosexual sex was “very important” to them, as was their desire for “more or less normal parenthood,” and both factors had influenced their decision. Harel introduced them, and as the first of his gay-lesbian couples, they term themselves “guinea pigs.” They are careful to keep up normal appearances before the children and the outside world, even sleeping in the same room, though they don’t sleep together. Their children were born through artificial insemination. “Most of the time, it’s good for us together, like business partners. Of course we have quarrels and tensions, but who doesn’t? … Like good friends, we have a great deal of mutual respect and a great deal of platonic love.”

But isn’t forcing gays into heterosexual marriages doing more harm than good? Nope, insists Harel.

Gay-lesbian marriages have long been practiced among the ultra-Orthodox, but the current initiative is different in that it stems not from an effort to sweep the issue under the carpet, but from a growing acknowledgment of homosexuality, prompted in part by four organizations for religious homosexuals: Havruta, Bat Kol, Hod and Kamocha. Harel explained that while secular homosexuals see gay marriage as the solution, religious homosexuals are often unwilling to violate the halakhic prohibition on homosexual sex, and are thus seeking other solutions.

“Most of the couples agree not to have relationships with members of their own sex, but if there are ‘lapses’ once every few years, they don’t see this as a betrayal,” he said. “Generally, it’s between them and their Creator.”

Well that’s a first: a religious leader that’s basically blessing sex outside of marriage. Maybe this is something I can get on board with.

By:           JD
On:           Mar 11, 2011
Tagged: , , , ,
  • 49 Comments
    • gregger
      gregger

      oy vey ist mir!!!

      Mar 11, 2011 at 3:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Francis
      Francis

      Organized religion is an illness. These people are more concerned with keeping up appearances and being “accepted” by “God” and their friends and family who would never love them for who they truly are, than actually accepting themselves and living according to what they are. It’s sad, but honestly it’s pathetic to me.

      Mar 11, 2011 at 3:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill
      Bill

      pathetic.

      Mar 11, 2011 at 3:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mr. Enemabag Jones
      Mr. Enemabag Jones

      So who are they having sex with, if not each other?

      Mar 11, 2011 at 4:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Corvidae
      Corvidae

      As long as it works for them, and they’re not pretending to be cured or affecting anyone else, I can’t see a problem with it.
      Good luck and Mazel’tov.

      Mar 11, 2011 at 5:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ogre Magi
      Ogre Magi

      The Abrahamic faiths are not and never will be a friend to our kind!

      Mar 11, 2011 at 7:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bubba
      Bubba

      Yes, yes, “organized religion is evil,” “you’re lying to the world and to yourselves,” etc. But this isn’t conversion therapy; there’s no belief that they can “change” their orientations. If they’re happy and their kids are happy, then more power to ‘em.

      Mar 11, 2011 at 8:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Atheism is prejudice and nothing more
      Atheism is prejudice and nothing more

      Francis writes “Organized religion is an illness.”

      Homophobes declare that homosexuality is an illness. Francis is engaged in exactly the same behavior that homophobes engage in.

      “These people are more concerned with keeping up appearances and being “accepted” by “God” and their friends and family who would never love them for who they truly are, than actually accepting themselves and living according to what they are.”

      Homophobes make the same sort of argument about GLBTQ people – that we are shallow, obsessed with “keeping up appearances” and be “accepted” by “the gay community” – people who never really love them for who they truly are, and homophobes assert that we refuse to accept ourselves and living according to what they believe we are: heterosexuals tempted to sin.

      Ogre Magi writes:”The Abrahamic faiths are not and never will be a friend to our kind!”

      Homophobes make the same argument to each other and to Christians – that homosexuals are not and never will be a friend to people of faith. They do so for the same reason Ogre Magi made his/her diatribe – to characterize an entire class of people as the enemy and worthy of hate.

      Atheism is consistently expressed in all the same language and tactics of every other prejudice. It is only a prejudice and nothing more.

      Mar 11, 2011 at 8:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ted C.
      Ted C.

      @Francis: Organized religion did not invent homophobia. There are plenty of homophobic societies that don’t have an organized religion.

      Mar 11, 2011 at 8:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      I don’t see that what these couples are doing as harmful: no one is forced to marry, no one is being forced to have children., & each partner is clear what kind of relationship they will have.

      Plenty of heterosexual couples do almost the same thing: they may have children w/o assistance, but they raise the kids together & stop being sexually active with each other.

      These couples, at least have a whole network of suppôrt with the counsèlors, etc.

      I couldn ‘t live like that, but I don’t think they should be faulted for aggreeing on the parameters of the marriage upfront and living accordingly.

      i would much rather see this arrangement than the common M/F marriage where the L/G partner isn’t honest with the straight spouse until the lies get exposed over time.

      Mar 11, 2011 at 9:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Soupy
      Soupy

      Keep in mind that Cassandra has a deep seated prejudice against atheists. Which is just as bad as a prejudice against organized religion.

      Mar 11, 2011 at 9:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Francis
      Francis

      I don’t consider myself an atheist, and religious fundamentalism was a major part of the reason homophobia is so widespread. Many of the so-called non religious reasons to be anti-gay, are actually rooted in traditional religious belief. I’m not attacking anyone individually, but as a whole, we need to get real. As a gay person, I’ve gotten real, and realized the obviously fact it is largely ORGANIZED RELIGION that is the main driving force (actually, the main excuse maker/cover) of anti-gay hatred worldwide. It’s not “God” that’s the issue, it’s the followers who are the problem. This story is just so pathetically sad to me, these people aren’t being real. They aren’t real couples. They aren’t in love with one another. It’s basically a business relationship, consensual arm pieces. How can anyone desire to live like this? How can anyone be happy keeping everyone in the dark about their true selves and not living according to their true selves? This is one of the biggest problems we as a community face, self-loathing LGBT citizens, who are more concerned with what everyone else things, and not about themselves. And it’s because of organized religion and the followers of it that these gays are like this, and it makes me angry to see anyone defend it.

      Mar 11, 2011 at 10:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • greenmanTN
      greenmanTN

      OK, so the religious organization contributes to the homophobia in society, making these people feel like they are unable to have satisfying lives with a person of their own choice and gender.

      THEN the same religious organization makes the oh so “generous” deal with these people that they’ll fix them up with someone in the same boat but the opposite sex, so they can form a fake relationship and family, a simulacrum of the ONLY type of relationship the religious organization endorses and recognizes to begin with.

      Do I have that right? Yes, I think I do.

      OH THANK YOU SO GODDAMN MUCH! How very fucking generous of you to create the situation that makes these people so unhappy in the first place then “fixing” it for them by arranging fake marriages! How VERY fucking BIG of you to at least be honest enough not to claim you’re “curing” them!

      Jesus! And some of you are actually PRAISING these assholes for this scam?!

      Mar 11, 2011 at 11:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jukadiie
      Jukadiie

      normally i try not to be offensive to whatever situation but im sorry..this is just stupid.

      Mar 11, 2011 at 11:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris
      Chris

      How horrible. It is sad that they feel they cannot live normal lives unless they live like heterosexuals.

      I am surprised at people defending such homophobia. Though there are many reasons for it, the article clearly states that religion is at play for their rejecting their homosexuality. And I’m sorry, but saying that it is a sin, going to conversion therapy, and marrying someone of the opposite sex doesn’t sound like someone accepting their homosexuality.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 12:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John
      John

      I far prefer this to the nonsense put forth by groups like Exodus or Love In Action. However, perhaps it’s the very lapsed Catholic in me but I personally would have a big problem with intentionally perverting the institution of marriage let alone bringing children into what is essentially a lie. They may be honest with each and perhaps a few close friends but to their own children and the rest of the world they are intentionally lying. Certainly no couple is obligated to inform their children of their sex lives, but passing themselves off as a real couple is a lie. Catholics wouldn’t consider this to be a sacramental marriage at all, but an invalid fake one. In fact, one could even argue that such an intentional perversion of marriage is sinful but I’ll leave that to others to play with. I realize that this article is speaking about Orthodox Judaism and not Catholicism but I have to believe quite a number of Jews would be very disturbed by this as well. It may have some merit in very hostile cultures as a means of survival but for the most part I find this to be quite disturbing.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 3:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      Two people agree to marry, to create & raise a family. They may or may not have sex; they may agree, or not, to have sex with other people outside that marriage.
      They realize the trade offs betweeh choosing to be coupled with one person as opposêd to another. Between being married vs being single or serially monogymous.

      That’s not just a description of these couples, but of *many* str8 marriages as well, even if the hetero marriage starts of with ideals of lifelong sex, companionship & fidelity.

      I sure wouldn’t want to live that way, but I’m neither Israeli, nor Jewish, nor willing to live without regular episodes of sex(!), but I wouldn’t be in a position to critique someone who was willing to live with those tradeoffs. Different country, different culture, different world views.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 3:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • prohomo
      prohomo

      @Chris: Exactly. You said it right,CHRIS.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 3:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Shannon1981
      Shannon1981

      Well at least they aren’t hurting anyone else, nor are they trying to convert themselves and other people. But happy? I can’t buy that…

      Mar 12, 2011 at 8:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Atheism is a prejudice
      Atheism is a prejudice

      Chris

      No one is defending homophobia, but anti-religious folk here are promoting their own prejudice.

      Soupy is simply a congenital liar, incapable of telling the truth about anyone.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 9:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jackson
      Jackson

      Where to start. Firstly religion. To the few very religious gays on here, you’re quite idealistic (or calculating…haven’t figured out which) as to the Churches and church crowds involvement in many anti gay legislations. Are you really convincing yourselves, or worse, trying to convince the rest of us that religion did NOT play a major role in every single anti gay religious ballots/legislations? including the most recent one from just yesterday in maryland where two dozen churches and religious orginizations joined forces in the name of “standing against gay sin” all while each church demanded it’s followers to contact all said Maryland lawmakers and make their voices be heard against equality? are you say religion has not been the argument used by religious folk to stand against gay rights recently? Do you think we’re idiots? Nothing makes me more livid in this world when a gay religious person tries to sell me on the idea that religious folks are extremely supportive and have not been a road block to equality. I find it a calculating and disturbing attempt to recurit and convert another church member. What you all (religious gays) want us to do is to differentiate between the many religious folks who spew anti gay bigotry, and the disproportionately smaller pro gay churches. The pro gay churches are the outliers to the churches who brought 15,000 people outside the governors office in Hawaii, collected millions to strip rights away from Californians, who threatened…actually threatened elected officials in D.C and Maryland.

      NOTHING is more insulting than being told by a gay person that religion and religious folk have been our allies throughout the years. Sickening.

      and the comments about athiests seem as “radical” as FACTUAL comments about religious followers in regard to gay rights. Instead of trying to convert gays to be religious (that should be the LASTTTTTTTTTT effing priority for the gay community) you over zealous religious gays should do a little better job promoting equality and humanity to members of your Church and other neighboring Churches.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 9:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Soupy
      Soupy

      Au contraire, Cassandra. You are promoting your own prejudice. And getting quite angry and defensive about it. I suspect that I touched your guilty conscience. I have made no comments for or against organized religion, but you continue to post hate filled messages about atheists.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 9:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mikenola
      mikenola

      when are people going to get over their blindness to the realities of human sexual ranges? Gay and Straight people need to get a grip and face facts.

      Bisexual and Asexual people are a part of the sexual norm!.

      For centuries some people have chosen to stay on the DL or suppress their sexuality, all to conform to a label that society provides. Some “celibates” are just asexual by nature and are not really suppressing any form of sex drive at all.

      Sexuality is not always a clear cut issue.

      Personally in my younger years I tried sex with women, didn’t enjoy it, sex with men however….LOL.

      I self describe as gay and am quite happy with that. However there are many who haven’t or don’t want to have the gay or straight label put on them by anyone. Great for them.

      These couples and many of those who “claim” to be cured of homosexual desire are choosing to deny themselves. The only real problem with their choice (for others) is that it is usually associated with actions and advocates who would destroy LGBT people.

      If they were just in denial about their own sex lives I could care less! it is the destruction of other people that makes this an issue!

      The other thing I want to say is that US gay folks need to start taking control of the conversation.. Religion is a CHOICE, gay is NOT! When are we going to fight this on grounds that make sense? When are we going to throw this back in their faces?

      Mar 12, 2011 at 12:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • greenmanTN
      greenmanTN

      To my mind this is every bit as cynical and calculating as anything the US Christian Right ever came up with.

      What if tomorrow Exodus, Focus On The Family, and the Mormon Church issued a joint statement acknowledging that “ex-gay therapy” didn’t work but they would continue to oppose any and all rights for gay people including gay marriage because, hey, The Bible sez? They’ll also continue to demonize gay people from the pulpit and the media, making it more difficult for gay people to come to terms with their sexuality and form solid relationships. However, out of the generosity of their heart they’ll start acting as match-makers between gay men and lesbians to they can form fake marriages because at least that way they’re hidden and decent people don’t have to see any of that icky gay stuff. Now wouldn’t that be nice of them?

      In fact I wouldn’t be the least surprised if some Christian Right groups adopt this tactic since it avoids one of the most controversial claims of the “ex-gay” movement, that they can cure homosexuality. In fact it’s exactly what they’re already doing because I don’t think the leadership of these Reparative-Therapy groups really believe in it either. They just push “ex-gays” and “ex-lesbians” into marriages, slap their picture on a magazine cover, and treat their same-sex urges with a 12-step program like it’s alcoholism or drug-abuse. This is just a *slightly* more honest version of the same destructive, homophobic crap.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 2:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Shannon1981
      Shannon1981

      @greenmanTN: I sort of think they DO believe that converting people works. And even if they don’t, they still don’t care. In their minds, you either live “normal” or else, even if it means marrying someone you aren’t attracted to or don’t love. That is even more absurd to me, because aren’t they making a mockery of the institution of marriage? A marriage like that is a flippin’ joke. No love, no attraction, none of the things real marriage should be about. I really hope Exodus and their ilk don’t adopt this crap. That would set us back eons.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 2:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • greenmanTN
      greenmanTN

      It’s my personal belief that while there are some people who believe the “ex-gay” BS, for the main proponents of it like FOTF, FRC, and the other Religious Right groups it’s just a politically convenient lie.

      So long as they maintain that homosexuality can be “cured” they can keep claiming that being gay is a choice. Without that they’d have to admit they’re advocating discrimination against a group for an inherent, inborn quality that can’t be changed, which would change the debate entirely and cut into their profits. These groups benefit enormously from keeping their followers scared that they’re under threat from gays, the government, and whatever else works.

      I think it’d be interesting to ask some of them if they’d want their sons or daughters to marry someone who “used to be gay.” I doubt they would and that puts the lie to the confidence they claim in their methods and results. And really, who would WANT to marry someone for whom it took the threat of eternal hellfire and damnation to make them choose you? It sounds like a recipe for misery on both side to me.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 4:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Soupy
      Soupy

      I think back to a time when men could not come out. Gay men could lead very lonely lives and were thought of as an eccentric bachelor. I don’t think right wing christians and homophobes had a problem with that because they could pity the person and think that they led such lad lives. They can’t do that anymore, and it infuriates them.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 4:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Shannon1981
      Shannon1981

      @greenmanTN: It is a recipe for misery. I know several people who are “ex-gays.” They are the most fucked up people ever. Most of the fundy churches around here offer all kinds of literature to convert your children or yourself. They know it isn’t right too, because if you want to go to one of these “ex-gay” camps,etc they are VERY discrete about signing you up, giving you payment options,etc. If they thought what they were doing was harmless, I don’t think they’d take such pains to keep it so quiet. I get respecting people’s privacy, but while they scream from their pulpits about how being gay is a horrid sin, they make you ASK for a way to overcome it. It’s weird.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 4:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      Pre-gay rights, men who would today identify as “gay” would often marry women. Some of their marriages would work, some of them wouldn’t. It’s fair to say that a lot of seething resentment within marriages may have been due to mis-matched orientations. Wife-beating may have reflected this.

      Some of these orientation mis-matches produced children because many of the men – who would today identify as “gay” – were actually bisexually oriented to varying degrees. They were able to rely on their sexual attraction to women – even if it were residual – to produce offspring. You only need one ejaculation to produce an offspring.

      I’m talking about this in the past tense but, of course, orientation mis-matches are very common even today.

      It’s also fair to say that the burden on women is less than it is on men. Men must be aroused in order to deliver sperm. Women don’t have to be aroused to deliver the egg; their delivery happens automatically. Thus, in men, arousal is coupled to delivery whereas in women it isn’t.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 4:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Soupy
      Soupy

      And clearly, you will hold this biology against all women for the rest of your life. Which is sad.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 5:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      Soupy,

      I’m not holding anything against women on the basis of them being women per se. I just don’t like hypocrisy and double standards in women.

      As for biology, why on earth would I hold biology against women? I just don’t like women who claim that their biological sexuality is equivalent to a man’s. It ain’t – and never will be.

      Socially, women shouldn’t try to pretend that they are as sexual as men. Women need to remember that they are sellers and men are buyers. Sellers should not over-state what they are selling – it comes across as fake and diminishes the person.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 5:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez
      Daez

      @Ted C.: There are plenty of homophobes that never set a foot in a church in their lives. People hate what is different. Straight men look at gay men as lesser because they can not see them as equal. Its an innate decision to see those that you simply can not understand as lesser. Religion is twisted around to make these straight people feel better about their lack of humanity, but religion itself did not make these people homophobic.

      @Francis: You used the exact right terminology when you called religion a COVER/EXCUSE for homophobia. You can remove religion completely and you still won’t get over the lack of understanding, the “yuck” factor, and the need to be “manly” and follow traditional gender roles that is inherent in straight culture.

      Why is it that you need to fit everyone in your little box. You attack others for doing the same (homophobes, Jesus freaks, even atheist) then you talk about how these people can not be happy (says you) even if they are. You talk about how this is just a contractual arrangement (just like every gay marriage and commitment ceremony as well as the straight ones) and how you these people must really hate themselves (even if they don’t). You get to be the one to judge them for all of this? Then don’t bitch the next time some homophobic ass completely disembowels your relationship.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 6:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • prohomo
      prohomo

      I’ve always considered myself superior to straight men. I’m(we)are far nicer.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 6:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Soupy
      Soupy

      Jesus, Jason, If I were a woman and you “reminded” me that I was a seller, not a buyer, I’d throw a drink in your face.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 9:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      @Soupy: Jason knows as much about women as he does the world outside of the special hôspital where he spends most of his time. He is childish and sleazy and is jealous of liberal bisexual women with their “fake sexuality” and their “long, flowing hair.”

      That comma between “long” and “flowing” is *very* important to the Jason, & I believe we should respect that punctuation. :-D

      Mar 12, 2011 at 10:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Oprah
      Oprah

      I think this arrangement is outstanding.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 10:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Geoff B
      Geoff B

      @Jackson: Yes, most organized religion is anti-gay, but not all. We need to be careful about marginalizing our allies. My partner, whose family is very conservative is very supportive of us. In fact the minister who did his sister’s weddingt came up to us and asked when the sould do our ceremony. He and his wife simply said “you two love each other and that#s what makes God happy”. There are faithful who want and demand equaility and we shouldn’t disregard them.

      Mar 12, 2011 at 11:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SteveATL
      SteveATL

      My boyfriends very religious family who was extremely involved in the Church made his childhood a living, brutal HELL for him for being gay. He didn’t even come out, but they suspected he was gay. They started conversion therapy (a practice operated by MANY, many, manyyyy Churches out there and done so in a hush hush under ground manner) when he was 14. They had daily interventions telling him if he chose to be gay he would burn in hell, his flesh and soul would burn forever after his passing. This was the O so loving religion and religious people. They terrorized this child all in the name of something that has yet to be proven, and when he did finally stand up and say he can’t help being gay and wants to love a man and wants their love too, they kicked him out at 17 years of age. That is religion, and the bulk of religious beliefs and religious followers. Like it or not, that is the hard, matter of fact truth. Of course, no group has members who are all alike and of course there will be religious members who are not like that, but in life…it’s human nature, if not vital to assess groups based on the actions of the majority .There were some in the Nazi clan who didn’t support or believe what other Nazis did. But the message being promoted by the majority is the message to decode and a majority of religious people are downright hateful toward gays. It’s very crucial to know who your enemies are in a battle to know exactly what you’re up against, and regarless of people with personal religious agendas selling us on the idea that religion is not hurtful for gays. I’d argue it’s the worst thing for a young gay person to be around. Religion terrorizes our gay youth, and I practice my freedom of speech to speak against it whenever I can.

      Mar 13, 2011 at 12:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Shannon1981
      Shannon1981

      @SteveATL: Thank you for speaking the truth. I went to one of those hush hush underground conversion camps, and it did me a world of harm. I have tolerant, accepting friends of faith, but religion is a subject we rarely touch on, because when it came down to it, they know the friendships are over if they push the issue. People like that sicken me, but what is even MORE sickening is the lie that organized religion isn’t the reason for the gay plight. It most certainly is. Can’t have your cake and eat it too. People need to realize that the only devil that exists is organized religion.

      Mar 13, 2011 at 12:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Atheism is a prejudice
      Atheism is a prejudice [Different person #1 using similar name]

      “Where to start.”
      You chose not to start with the truth,Jackson.

      “Firstly religion. To the few very religious gays on here,”

      The very few – hmmm. Homophobes routinely claim that there are very few homosexuals, and therefore, what they say and do has no meaning.

      “you’re quite idealistic”

      You say that as if ideals are bad. I’ve been told by many a homophobe that I am idealistic too, also with the insinuation that having ideals is bad.

      “(or calculating…haven’t figured out which)”
      Here’s the prejudice appearing – rather than accept our testimony for what it is, you have to find some derogatory spin to put on it.

      “as to the Churches and church crowds involvement in many anti gay legislations.”

      No, actually, we are neither calculating nor idealistic about the role that some, even many, churches and congregations have been involved in anti-gay legislation. We recognize that many religious people have actively worked to oppress GLBTQ people.

      However, many religious people have worked to end that oppression, and frankly, more religious people work to end anti-gay oppression than atheists. The majority of all work to end anti-gay oppression has come from people of faith.

      Atheists, by and large, have done very little – beyond, of course, asserting that anti-gay theology is correct.

      “Are you really convincing yourselves, or worse, trying to convince the rest of us that religion did NOT play a major role in every single anti gay religious ballots/legislations?”

      No, lying is more what atheists do.

      “where two dozen churches and religious orginizations (sic)”

      This is text book prejudice, and it mirrors the way homophobes cite some number of GLBTQ doing something they consider wrong as evidence against all GLBTQ people. In fact, your entire tactic – the accusation of misrepresenting the role of a defined set of people – is one that homophobe use frequently. Of course, they point to something like sexual misconduct or substance abuse, i.e., accusing pro-gay folk of “trying to convince the rest of us that gays are not sexual predators” or “trying to convince the rest of us that gays are not alcoholics” or some such.

      “are you say religion has not been the argument used by religious folk to stand against gay rights recently?”

      That is not the argument I have ever made. You are arguing a strawman position, rather than addressing what the issues that I and others have actually raised.

      “Do you think we’re idiots?”
      I think you are dishonest and a bigot, with the exact same moral and ethical standing as any homophobe.

      “Nothing makes me more livid in this world when a gay religious person tries to sell me on the idea that religious folks are extremely supportive and have not been a road block to equality.”

      So, your own invention makes you livid. How sad for you. But, your anger-control issues do not change anything.

      Atheists have been poor allies, at best, for the GLBTQ people, who mostly exploit anti-gay theology to prosecute their own prejudice against people of faith. Atheists online defend anti-gay theology – as accurately representing Christian theology, more stridently than 99% of all homophobes.

      The majority of all support for GLBTQ people comes from people of faith, and arises out of the fundamental principles that their religion teaches, nurtures and inspires in them.

      Anti-gay theology is a tiny portion of most religions’ beliefs and values, and frankly, it contradicts the essential and defining values of all of the major religions at least.

      “I find it a calculating and disturbing attempt to recurit and convert another church member.”

      Your presumption reflects only your own motives and character.

      “What you all (religious gays) want us to do is to differentiate between the many religious folks who spew anti gay bigotry, and the disproportionately smaller pro gay churches.”

      Your characterization “disproportionately smaller” is a fabricated distortion.

      But your real mistake is in criticizing the attempt to accurately differentiate between those who actually do malign GLBTQ people, and those who do not but are members of a large group you hate. How terrible of us to tell the truth to you.

      Of course, your tactic above is also one that homophobes use – complaining when pro-gay folk try to draw a distinction between GLBTQ people who do something homophobes complain about (sexual misconduct, anti-religious hate speech, etc) and GLBTQ people who do not seek to eradicate religion, abuse drugs, or wear polyester in clashing colors.

      “The pro gay churches are the outliers to the churches who brought 15,000 people outside the governors office in Hawaii, collected millions to strip rights away from Californians, who threatened…actually threatened elected officials in D.C and Maryland.”

      I realize that atheism has no moral code, no condemnation of deceit, but, really, do you truly believe that it is wise to lie in public?

      The anti-gay churches represent only a small portion of all people of faith, most congregations are simply too busy with other things – from simply paying the electricity bill, to feeding the poor to building hospitals and schools in impoverished countries, to expend much effort on politicizing homophobia.

      “NOTHING is more insulting than being told by a gay person that religion and religious folk have been our allies throughout the years. Sickening.”

      You have very bizarre standards then. Many millions of religious people have been, and are, the allies of GLBTQ people. But atheism is not the ally of anyone but atheists.

      “and the comments about athiests seem as “radical” ”

      Homophobes dismiss criticism of their prejudice as radical too.

      The important thing is that rather than actually address what has been presented about atheism – that it is simply a prejudice that is consistently expressed in the same arguments, tactics and methods as any other prejudice, you provided yet another confirming example.

      “Instead of trying to convert gays to be religious”

      Another strawman argument. Although, there is an implicit criticism of atheism there, unintentional as it must have been.

      After all, I’ve been focused on rebuking prejudice itself, rather than promoting religion, when I point out that atheism is a prejudice. Your interpretation of this – i.e. – that rebuking prejudice is an attempt to convert gays to be religious – indicates that you believe that only religious people can become free of prejudice.

      “(that should be the LASTTTTTTTTTT effing priority for the gay community) you over zealous religious gays”

      Name calling and the use of obscenity indicates that you lack a substantive argument.

      “should do a little better job promoting equality and humanity to members of your Church and other neighboring Churches.”

      Since we orders of magnitude more than an atheist has ever accomplished, perhaps you should mind your own insufficiency. After all, every time you promote the prejudice against people of faith, atheism, you implicitly promote every other prejudice, including homophobia as well.

      Mar 13, 2011 at 8:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      @Atheism Is Prejudice:
      Do you have any plan to comment on the actual article? I’d be interested in your thoughts! Thanks.

      Mar 13, 2011 at 9:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Soupy
      Soupy

      Have you ever seen the remake of Cape Fear? Where Robert DeNiro sinks beneath the waves babbling scripture? It’s pretty cool.

      Mar 13, 2011 at 10:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Atheism is a prejudice
      Atheism is a prejudice [Different person #1 using similar name]

      Soupy prevaricated thusly:

      “Keep in mind that Cassandra has a deep seated prejudice against atheists. Which is just as bad as a prejudice against organized religion.”

      “You are promoting your own prejudice. And getting quite angry and defensive about it. I suspect that I touched your guilty conscience. I have made no comments for or against organized religion, but you continue to post hate filled messages about atheists.”

      Soupy, if ever there were a need for someone to provide a real-time example of the intrinsic prejudicial nature of atheism, by modeling the behavior of other bigots, one can count on you to provide it.

      “prejudice against atheists” is a false accusation on your part, since what I have consistently argued is that atheism is a prejudice.

      But let’s unpack your deception a bit.

      Atheism and homophobia have a great deal in common. Both are negative and degrading opinions about other people that hide behind a simplistic, and seemingly innocuous or neutral statement.

      Homophobia is the negative and degrading opinion about homosexuals that hides behind the simplistic and presumably neutral condemnation “homosexual sex is wrong” – generally phrased as “homosexuality is sin”.

      Atheism is the negative and degrading about people of faith that hides behind the simplistic and presumably neutral belief “God does not exist”.

      In both cases though, these opinions are about something that people actually experience, and both prejudices routinely express themselves by repudiating or rejecting such experiences. Both homophobia and atheism is routinely expressed with words like “sick” and “mentally ill”, and testimony about real life experiences, whether about the love between two men or women, or experiences of the Divine, are simply dismissed as delusion or fabrication. In both cases, a group of people who do not, according to their own testimony, experience a particular something, are claiming that no one else does either.

      In both cases, homosexuality and spirituality, while there is tangible expression, the true heart of each is intangible. Just as spiritual experiences of the Divine cannot be quantified – measured, neither can the emotional experience of sexual attraction. And both homophobia and atheism exploit and pervert this intangibility as they claim “what you people say you experience does not exist”.

      Both homophobia and atheism rely on verbal abuse to be expressed, both seek to purge certain people and ideas from society, and both cast the subject of their prejudices as a threat to society, accuse them of corrupting children, etc.

      Both homophobia and atheism, and other prejudices as well, rely on the defining trait of prejudice – judging all members of a group by the perceived flaws of some members. And so we hear from homophobes that the excesses of some GLBTQ people define the lives of all GLBTQ people, and we hear from atheists that the abuses committed by some people of faith define all people of faith.

      And both homophobia and atheism are expressed by ignoring, hiding or minimizing the positive contributions of their subjects, while exaggerating any negatives. Or negative behaviors found in all groups of people, such as abusive behavior, are cast as the sole provenance of the targeted people. In other words, even though people from every demographic can be unfaithful and promiscuous, to homophobes, gay people are defined as sexually and emotionally promiscuous and unfaithful, and to atheists, all wars are caused by religion, even though war is a universal human failing.

      Another commonality is one that Soupy employed – inventing a false reality that presumes a negative motive. Homophobes reply to any critism with “you gays just have a guilty conscience” nonsense, like Soupy’s remark. And they routinely assert their what they imagine GLBTQ really experience, as Soupy did in his post quoted above.

      Additionally, both homophobia and atheism is routinely argued by declaring,as Soupy did in the passages quoted above, that any criticism of homophobia or atheism respectively, is “hate filled”. All the while, of course, their own pejorative and abusive declarations are supposed to be perceived as noble and virtuous.

      Why does this matter?

      Because Soupy false argued that criticism of atheism is the equivalent of prejudice against religion. But then means that criticism of homophobia is the equivalent of criticism of homosexuality, because the relationship between atheism and religion is the mirror of the relationship between homophobia and homosexuality.

      And homophobes routinely assert that any criticism of their prejudice against homosexuality is itself prejudice – the very same argument Soupy made about atheism. Of course, neither actually apply this principle to themselves.

      But there is fundamental moral failing involved. Spirituality and sexual orientation are innate capacities for experiences, they are part of people’s self-ness. Homophobia and atheism are negative conclusions about other people, they are just derived ideas. So Soupy, and his homophobe peers, argue that criticism of an idea is the moral equivalent of people themselves.

      Except of course, when they are the ones doing the criticizing. For some special reason, no one is supposed to criticize their actions, ideas, lies and claims.

      Go figure.

      Mar 13, 2011 at 10:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris
      Chris

      @Atheism is a prejudice:

      Wow, “I am not prejudiced because atheism isn’t good enough to be prejudiced against.”

      I see you know the term strawman, well your posts embody the term. Please, feel free to make more insulting generalizations about atheists in response to insulting generalizations about religious people. I am sure it will work out wonderfully in the end.

      I doubt there is anything I could post that could change your mind, but I have to wonder if you believe you are changing any minds when you call your opponents prejudiced philosophically by default. The only thing that atheists have in common is the lack of belief in a deity. Everything else about them is as as varied as, say, the acceptance of homosexuality among religious groups.

      Mar 13, 2011 at 11:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mark
      Mark

      @Atheism is a prejudice: No ones going to read that crap. Stop wasting your time dear and instead channel your energy into fighting bigots. Religion DOES harm. Religion DOES divide. Religion is FILLED with hypocrisy and beyond it all, religion is meant to control our livelihood and the thinking of the masses in a free society. Your radicial and rather militant way of expressing yourself do nothing but prove the point of how over the top religious folks are. It was the most liberating day of my life when I freed myself from the Church and I encourage ALL LGBT to do the same. Free your mind, soul and life. You’ll forever be thankful for it.

      Mar 13, 2011 at 11:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Atheism is a prejudice
      Atheism is a prejudice [Different person #2 using similar name]

      Chris wrote:

      “Wow, “I am not prejudiced because atheism isn’t good enough to be prejudiced against.” ”

      Funny, but that has no bearing on anything I wrote.

      “I see you know the term strawman, well your posts embody the term.”

      No. But if your summation above accurately reflects your ability to read what I wrote, I can see how you could be so thoroughly mistaken.

      “Please, feel free to make more insulting generalizations about atheists in response to insulting generalizations about religious people. I am sure it will work out wonderfully in the end.”

      No doubt it made you feel good to write that, but once again, it has no foundation in anything I actually wrote.

      “I doubt there is anything I could post that could change your mind,”

      Your skill set is not my responsibility.

      “but I have to wonder if you believe you are changing any minds when you call your opponents prejudiced philosophically by default.”

      Since that is not an accurate summation of my position, it is little more than a derogatory dismissal. Perhaps addressing what I actually did provide is outside of your skill set.

      “The only thing that atheists have in common is the lack of belief in a deity. Everything else about them is as as varied as, say, the acceptance of homosexuality among religious groups.”

      The only thing? So, atheists do not breathe air, are not carbon-based life forms, do not reproduce, are not subject to the laws of physics, etc?

      Amazing.

      However, the defining trait of atheism is the negative belief in the existence of the Divine. Atheism claims “there is no god” which is a statement about the universe (and everything else), in contrast to “I, personally, do not believe in god” which is a statement about one’s self.

      Now, the diversity among atheists, in all of the other areas of their lives has one relevant application to the issues I raised: atheists then have no business, no ethical foundation, for invoking the broad, all-inclusive and pejorative generalizations on people of faith.

      And yet, that is all atheism is.

      Mark

      “No ones going to read that crap. Stop wasting your time dear and instead channel your energy into fighting bigots.”

      Ah, Mark, if your assertion were true, you would not be compelled to dismiss my posts as “crap”. But you do so because you are concerned that people will read, and will be convinced by what I presented.

      I am channeling my energy into fighting bigots. However, I cannot in good conscience, because of my ethical system, condemn and fight one prejudice, such as homophobia, and be silent and complicit in another, like atheism. I direct my energy to address the prejudices I know about from direct experience, and support the efforts of other people when they address the prejudices they experience.

      “Religion DOES harm.”
      Homophobes make the same claim about homosexuality. So? Should I be swayed by their false and derogatory claims too?

      Mark, some people chose to harm others, and they use anything and everything available to them. Some use religion, some use science, some use medicine, some use music, some use literature, etc. But these things are not intrinsically harmful.

      “Religion DOES divide.”

      Everything that mankind has ever discovered can be used by divisive people, but that does not mean that science is divisive, that music is divisive, that the internet is divisive, that religion is divisive.

      You are confusing the way something can be used or abused, with the nature of the thing itself. Religions vary of course, but Christianity, the one I am the most familiar with, actually has a unitive message, rather than a divisive one. But atheism is only divisive, it defines all of humanity into two groups, one of which is deemed intrinsically inferior. Do you know anything like that?

      Homophobia.

      Racism.

      Sexism.

      “Religion is FILLED with hypocrisy”
      There are many, many religions, some may be filled with hypocrisy, others not. In most cases, such a charge would be entire subjective. You perceive hypocrisy, others perceive consistency. Only your ego supports your claim.

      Atheism though, is hypocritical, it makes a pretense of values that it does not actually possess.

      “and beyond it all, religion is meant to control our livelihood and the thinking of the masses in a free society.”

      What amazing super-powers you have presumed for yourself, that you think you know what the purpose of the beliefs and experiences of most of humanity for as long as humans have left records of any kind. Your assertion above is not accurate, it is simply a pejorative falsehood borne of your prejudice and ego.

      “Your radicial and rather militant way of expressing yourself do nothing but prove the point of how over the top religious folks are.”

      If I had a penny for every time a homophobe has characterized my clinical, dry writing style as radical and militant, after I have methodically challenged anti-gay theology, I could buy a penthouse in Manhattan. Your dismissal is just that, a fallacy used to reject my assertions without doing any actual work.

      “It was the most liberating day of my life when I freed myself from the Church”

      Slavery to prejudice, including the prejudice of atheism, is not freedom.

      But more important, do you realize how closely your statement parallels the hyperbole that “ex-gays” use so often. “I was enslaved” they say “to sex, until I rejected my homosexuality.”

      “and I encourage ALL LGBT to do the same. Free your mind, soul and life. You’ll forever be thankful for it.”

      Ex-gays say the same thing about homosexuality. Atheism and homophobia routinely use the metaphor of slavery to vilify that which they hate.

      The real moral failing on your part is the assumption that just because you experienced religion in a negative way, everyone else does or will, and must be liberated to your way of thinking. How egotistical.

      How is your position any different from that of the homophobes who define homosexuality as a form of slavery and seek to liberate us from it?

      Perhaps, some day, both homophobes and atheists (and all other bigots) will learn to mind their own lives and stop assuming that their lack of experience of something has no bearing on anyone else, much less everyone else.

      Mark, of the two of us, my values required of me that I honestly address what you actually presented, while your values apparently did not. Perhaps you left more behind than just “the Church”.

      Mar 14, 2011 at 12:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris
      Chris

      @Atheism is a prejudice:

      Hah, word count and pedantry aren’t winning you any points. I’ll snip the needlessly insulting bits:

      “However, the defining trait of atheism is the negative belief in the existence of the Divine. Atheism claims “there is no god” which is a statement about the universe (and everything else), in contrast to “I, personally, do not believe in god” which is a statement about one’s self.”

      The first quote is a gnostic atheist, or strong atheist, while the second could be from an agnostic atheist, or weak atheist, as well. What is your point?

      (I’m sure it is going to involve some sort of claim involving TRUE atheists)

      “Now, the diversity among atheists, in all of the other areas of their lives has one relevant application to the issues I raised: atheists then have no business, no ethical foundation, for invoking the broad, all-inclusive and pejorative generalizations on people of faith.”

      True, but why is it that you feel that you can make these all-inclusive and pejorative statements about the non-religious:

      “to atheists, all wars are caused by religion, even though war is a universal human failing.”

      “Both homophobia and atheism rely on verbal abuse to be expressed, both seek to purge certain people and ideas from society, and both cast the subject of their prejudices as a threat to society, accuse them of corrupting children, etc.”

      “No, lying is more what atheists do.”

      Apparently, none of this is wrong because atheism isn’t a legitimate point of view, but a prejudice. And therefore, we can make insulting generalizations about it? Sounds like what homophobes say…

      Oh, and the atheists I know are more accepting of the LGBT community than the religious people I know. You don’t want to deny my experience, do you?

      Mar 14, 2011 at 1:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Soupy
      Soupy

      I am not an atheist myself, but I will defend their right to express their views without condemning them or making false equivalences about them. I will not preach hate.

      Mar 14, 2011 at 7:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Atheism is a prejudice
      Atheism is a prejudice [Different person #3 using similar name]

      Chris

      “Hah, word count and pedantry aren’t winning you any points.”

      Ah, so this is just a game for you, a way of entertaining yourself at the expense of others. Is Facebook down or something?

      Your empty dismissal indicates that you cannot come up with a substantive rebuttal.

      “I’ll snip the needlessly insulting bits:”

      So, you’ll snip the passages of your prior post that I quoted. Ok.

      I wrote: “However, the defining trait of atheism is the negative belief in the existence of the Divine. Atheism claims “there is no god” which is a statement about the universe (and everything else), in contrast to “I, personally, do not believe in god” which is a statement about one’s self.”

      Chris replied: “The first quote is a gnostic atheist, or strong atheist, while the second could be from an agnostic atheist, or weak atheist, as well. What is your point?”

      Your assertion is not particularly honest. The nuance strong vs. weak atheist is a false one. Atheism does not make the distinction “I, personally”. There is a difference between atheism and unbelief.

      However, the real dishonesty is that you rip this quote out of context, to make a cheap point in something you apparently see as a game. Funny, rather than acknowledge that your assertion

      “The only thing that atheists have in common is the lack of belief in a deity”

      was completely false, you quibble over semantics instead. As I pointed out, atheists have many things in common, beyond their assertion that God does not exist.

      Nor did you bother to address the impact or effect of that assertion, the fact that said assertion is an unsubstantiated dismissal of the testimony and experiences of most of humanity. You are playing the same game that homophobes use – duck the real issues to fixate on red herrings and diversions.

      Is there a honest reason, beyond pointless game-playing, that you chose not to address the substance of my remarks?

      “why is it that you feel that you can make these all-inclusive and pejorative statements about the non-religious:

      “to atheists, all wars are caused by religion, even though war is a universal human failing.”

      One of the predominant arguments that atheists make on line, in books, in person, is that all wars are caused by religion. Your attempt to shift the focus onto me does not change the fact that this is an argument used across the board by atheists.

      Further, this particular argument is fraudulent, and yet, day after day after day, on websites across the ‘net, in books and every other media, atheists blame war itself on religion.

      Nor did you even attempt to address the larger issue I raised subsequently: “confusing the way something can be used or abused, with the nature of the thing itself.” While religion has been used as the cover-story for wars, the predominant cause of war has been property – wars to acquire land, people, resources. So you have avoided the meat – the fraudulent way the subject of war is used by atheists to condemn religion, and you ignore the way this fraud parallels the way homophobes use traits like promiscuity to condemn homosexuals, to try to eliminate the whole question out of hand by attacking my character.

      So, don’t run away from this. Make a real effort and address the point:
      “And both homophobia and atheism are expressed by ignoring, hiding or minimizing the positive contributions of their subjects, while exaggerating any negatives. Or negative behaviors found in all groups of people, such as abusive behavior, are cast as the sole provenance of the targeted people.”

      My argument is that atheism demonstrates all the same characteristics of other prejudices, particularly homophobia. Don’t run away from that.

      I wrote: “Both homophobia and atheism rely on verbal abuse to be expressed, both seek to purge certain people and ideas from society, and both cast the subject of their prejudices as a threat to society, accuse them of corrupting children, etc.”

      How exactly is a statement about the way atheism is expressed suddenly “all-inclusive and pejorative statements about the non-religious”? Are you playing the standard homophobe argument, whereby any criticism of their assumptions is an attack on them personally?

      Of course, not only do homophobes play that particular game, they concurrently insist that their own criticism of GLBTQ is not a prejudice, is not personal, is not an attack. Who does that sound like? Just like so many atheists on-line and professional atheists like Dawkins.

      And while you employ the quote above to discredit me, you have not even attempt to actually prove that my statement is false.

      Do you find it acceptable when atheists here opine that the world needs to be purged of religion/religious people, or that religion/religious people are a threat to society? You are hunting for some evidence of a double-standard on my part, and yet it appears you should be looking in a mirror for it instead.

      “No, lying is more what atheists do.”

      It is well-documented that atheists consistently lie about religion. Of course, the same is true of homophobes, as is what you have done with this particular quote – rip it out of context.

      Anti-gay theology is predominantly created by ripping texts out of context, and assigning to them a meaning or purpose other than the one their context imposes. It is a handy technique for creating a false impression, and you’ve wielded it consistently.

      “Apparently, none of this is wrong because atheism isn’t a legitimate point of view, but a prejudice. And therefore, we can make insulting generalizations about it? Sounds like what homophobes say…”

      That may be your opinion, but it is not what I have expressed, and your distortion is evidence that affirms the prior quote. You’ve objected to the observation of dishonest, and despite the examples Soupy provided, yet engage in dishonest behavior yourself.

      “Oh, and the atheists I know are more accepting of the LGBT community than the religious people I know. You don’t want to deny my experience, do you?”

      Denial is a crucial part of atheism, so why would I intrude on your territory? There is no need to deny your experience, though, when there are plenty of anti-gay atheists on-line. Your testimony simply indicates something about the people you encounter.

      For example, if you are out as a GLBTQ person, and as abusive to people of faith in public as you are on-line, then it stands to reason that your abusive example could easily influence the people of faith you encounter, and, you could then presume that their coolness toward you is also directed at all GLBTQ people, when it fact, it is simply you that they do not accept.

      It is likely that it is your overt and abusive prejudice about their faith that you encounter and then interpret as homophobia.

      However, as an atheist, you do deny the validity of the experiences of people of faith, and in doing, your own credibility vanishes as well. If only you chose to believe people of faith when they testify about their lives and experiences, then your claim “the atheists I know are more accepting . . .” could be believed in return.

      Mar 14, 2011 at 8:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     




    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.