homophobia

Giacomo Sanfilippo of Orthodoxy in Dialogue is being persecuted for defending LGBTQ+

My friend Giacomo runs the site Orthodoxy in Dialogue, which has quickly become the standard bearer for LGBTQ+ people gaining acceptance in the Orthodox Church.  And this has made him a target for a fundamentalist contingent which has a lot in common with MAGAs, many modern white Evangelical/Fundamentalist churches, and a certain anti-Francis segment of the Catholic Church.

We have learned a lot about gender variations over the past 2000 years, things which people just didn’t know back when the Bible was written, just as with human reproduction (people used to think there were little men in sperm) and astronomy.  If the Church truly is not against science, then it has to admit when it’s pushing views that are hopelessly antiquated.  But some people are against any kind of change even when it’s desperately needed.

Many of us want people to be allowed to marry whoever they want and stay in full communion.  This isn’t about allowing licentiousness or promiscuity or pedophilia in the church–homophobic tropes where people just assume if you’re gay, you must be in favor of these things as well.  Society in general has been moving toward acceptance, but some just want to drag us backwards again.

For several years, Giacomo Sanfilippo has been subject to various attacks for trying to change hearts in the Orthodox churches so they can be safe spaces for believers who are LGBTQ+.  He’s been slandered, libeled, sued for defamation, and now he’s been doxxed on Twitter. They’re trying to get him in trouble with his bishop.  It’s being done by a group of people who claim to be “Christian” and call him and his allies “wolves.”

But I’ve seen a sample of their behavior online, and–to paraphrase John Fugelsang–I’ve seen atheists who are better Christians than these people.  They have no idea what Christianity is.  They’re the pack of wolves.  They harass, troll, abuse, and give Christ a black eye with everything they do.  They need to get off the frickin’ Twitter, sit down with the Red Letters of Christ, and come to repentance for the hate that fills their hearts, because right now it’s Satan they’re serving, not God.

Reblog: Hell is for Homophobes | john pavlovitz

In fact, the spectacular irony on display, is that while Jesus never mentions any restrictions on who can follow him based on gender identity or sexual orientation, he speaks explicitly and often about those who profess faith, while living with contempt for others; those who do damage and leverage power to inflict wounds, those who neglect and ignore and prey upon the marginalized, those who wield religion like a weapon. (The very kind of malignancy Vicky Beeching has endured publicly, and that millions of LGBTQ folk deal with every day in their classrooms, homes, hallways, workplaces, and neighborhoods.) If there’s anything the road to Hell is paved with, it’s bigotry and violence done in the name of Jesus….

The cognitive dissonance on display is astounding; that these people can manage to believe they’re actually doing the will of God or sharing the Gospel, while berating and bullying and beating the hell out of strangers simply because of how they identify or who they love. Worse still, is that these sanctimonious, high-horsed zealots will try to use the very same Bible they persecute the LGBTQ with—to glorify guns, justify war, refuse refugees, endorse racism, perpetuate misogyny, and validate Donald Trump. Talk about miraculous.

Source: Hell is for Homophobes | john pavlovitz

“Gender-Identity and Expression”: Let’s add this to our anti-discrimination ordinances!

A gay member of our local city council wants to add “gender identity and expression” to our anti-discrimination housing ordinance.  At first I thought it was covered under “sexual orientation,” but he explained that it refers to transgender individuals–not the same thing at all.

Now, I have my own opinion on whether or not we should be tampering with our genes, but there is absolutely no reason why my opinion means that such people should be tossed out into the cold.

If they are decent tenants, paying their rent, keeping up the place, etc., then you shouldn’t be able to evict them just because they believe they should’ve been born a woman/man.

I’ve seen the same response from enough people that I have to ask: Did the local Republican party put out a flyer with talking points on this issue?  Basically, focus on bringing jobs to our area, not on this guy’s agenda.

Um……..The job of the city council IS stuff like this.  It’s their JOB to deal with such things as garbage, street clearing, water rates, anti-discrimination, ordinances, etc. etc.

And as my husband says, if they take care of that well enough, that attracts more jobs because businesses can attract workers who want to live here.

Should we have told this to the ones who fought for Civil Rights: “Focus on jobs, not ending discrimination”?  This is civil rights for the LGBT community.

I may not be part of that community, and my husband does not agree with it, but we are united on the importance of fighting discrimination.  Our religious beliefs should not infringe on another’s right to live as they wish.  Isn’t that what freedom really is?

If freedom is so important to you, then why deny it to the LGBT community?  According to the city council member who wants this, people do lose their homes over this.

Now I found a blog (which I do not wish to link to) complaining that this policy is dangerous and will violate our “safety, privacy and religious objections.”  The writer is upset that another city has already added the clause, and now our city is talking about it.

How does it violate our privacy to not get tossed out based on what we do in the privacy of our homes?  How on earth is our safety compromised by this?  And why is it okay to allow our “religious objections” to force some law-abiding citizen out of his home?

Some things about this town are so backward that it does get very frustrating.

 

So the Scouts are now considering whether to allow gays. I think it’s awesome if they do: No more official discrimination/bigotry.

The policy against gays makes me very uncomfortable, what with having my boy in the Scouts, and not wanting to teach him bigotry.  I want to teach him better than what I grew up with, in a more ignorant time.

However, my husband is ambivalent, especially since–while he doesn’t want to tell others how to live–he’s very conservative.  And a family member is very glad to have a daughter instead of a son, said he’d keep a son out of the Boy Scouts if they allow gays.

It just hurts to see this stuff going on at home.  I’m trying to break free of what we were taught about this growing up.  I want my son to never learn it.  The older I get, the more liberal I get.  The more I want my son to not be held back by the false beliefs of the past.  But how do you deal with it when the approach in your own household is so split?

%d bloggers like this: