Why anti-gay bullying is a theological issue

[zeborah]

"Anti-gay bullying is a theological issue because it has a theological base. I find it difficult to believe that even those among us with a vibrant imagination can muster the creative energy to picture a reality in which anti-gay violence and bullying exist without the anti-gay religious messages that support them."

Read more at Sexuality/Gender: Religion Dispatches

Comments

[tree_and_leaf]

I have to admit I can, very easily. I'm not defending the church's record on homophobia, which is largely (though not exclusively) abysmal, and I really do wish the church would rethink things, but it's not a uniquely faith-related issue.

You can have a totally toxic conception of 'manliness' and 'womanliness' which leads to homophobia without being Christian; or it needn't sit easily with your Christianity (see also: the type of fundamentalist who's uneasy with the 'girly' Jesus they see the church as promoting, where 'girly' means 'not macho'). And the homophobia of the Nazis wasn't justified in religious terms, but in terms of what was "natural" and what would promote lots of Aryan babies.

[flourish]

I agree with this - my believe that people are shitty knows no bounds - but I do think that in the US, right now, religious justifications are a huge part of the greater movement to prevent equal rights.

IMHO, it's not so much that individual people who are doing the abuses are necessarily thinking about the Bible when they torment a kid, but that the signal that this is OK is given by (say) the national debate about gay rights, which is often framed in Biblical terms.

[tree_and_leaf]

Yeah, there's a big cultural difference between the US and the UK (where I'm based), particularly on the place of religion.

[flourish]

Indeed!

[zeborah]

Certainly there's some difference, and it's different again in New Zealand, but none of us have any laurels to rest on. It was a UK magazine that we wanted to use to teach our youth group until I noticed its homophobic messages and had to talk to my minister about how if I was going to use that magazine I'd be challenging those messages so hard. And the broader church I belong to in NZ (though thankfully not my own congregation) still refuses to ordain ministers in a gay relationship.

The message I get out of the article is that as long as the church says homosexuality is a sin, and refuses to ordain gay ministers - even if it speaks against physical violence - it's still sending a strong message that there's a group of people that aren't as good or deserving as other groups. And ultimately such a message is supportive of the attitudes that let people think they can get away with violence. (And which let people actually get away with violence, too.) If we actually want to end the violence, we need to do a heck of a lot more speaking out - not just about the violence, but about the attitudes that support the violence.

[tree_and_leaf]

There's certainly homophobia in the UK, and there is certainly homophobia in the British church, but I genuinely don't think that religion is the primary motor of British homophobia (any more).

[julesjones]

My immediate thought is of the official state homophobia (as in "homosexuality is a perversion found only in the decadent West" rhetoric) found in the USSR and its client states. Of course, I also regard the USSR's official atheism to be a prime example of atheism practised as an organised religion, complete with the usual behaviour patterns of an aggressively hegemonising form of organised religion.

[kerravonsen]

The words "pluck the log out of your own eye" occur to me. Unlike many here, I do believe that homosexuality is a sin, but that in no way justifies violence against gays. No way. Which makes me think that there is something more to it than just a "theological" base. Because if it were just theological, then the "theological base" would be used to justify violence against other kinds of sinners, and yet that isn't happening. No lynching of suspected adulterers, no bashing of blasphemers... why?

[zeborah]

I think you're right that it's not just theological, but the theological is used to support the bashing to such a tremendous extent that it's irresponsible of churches to just keep their head in the sand about it. It's our teachings that are being perverted; we should take responsibility for being really active in fighting the effects of them. Even if we don't intend those effects -- especially if we don't intend those effects!