Can Christians Escape the ‘Hate’ Label in Gay Marriage Debate?

Over at The Christian Post, contributor Jeff Shapiro wonders,

Can Christians ever escape being labeled as “hateful” people while standing firmly on the pro-family side of the gay marriage issue?

The answer seems to elude him, but I can spell it out in just a few short words: “Hateful is as hateful does.” If a bunch of secularists got together and passed amendments defining marriage as the union of two non-Christians, would any mealy-mouthed language about “defending secular marriage” succeed in hiding the blatantly anti-Christian sentiment behind such actions? Of course not. Christians can blather all they want about how they’re motivated by “love” for gays, or by “pro-family” sentiments, but even if such motives were sincere, it would not change the fact that their actions are oppressive, and a deliberate violation of human rights.

Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies with the Family Research Council, tries to make it sound like Christian oppression of gays is simply an innocent expression of love.

“I think that’s kind of the major challenge that we face,” he commented to The Christian Post. “We in the pro-family movement … those of us who are Christians, we know in our hearts that we are motivated by love, not hate. The definition of love is not that you let people do whatever they want.”

“The essence of love,” he added, “is to desire the best for someone, and to act to bring that about. And I would argue that’s what we think we’re doing.”

Let’s turn that around, shall we? We secularists know in our heart that what’s best for Christians is for them to stop wasting time, energy, and money on mythical deities and superstitions. If we were to outlaw Christianity in the name of “protecting” them from harmful false teachings, which would be more important, our self-professed “love” for the poor ignorant Christians, or the fact that our actions would violate their human rights?

If Sprigg were honest, (and I realize that’s a big “if”), I think he’d have to admit that the “love” motivation is entirely irrelevant to the question of whether it’s ok to violate the human rights of those who do not share our religious beliefs. He’d certainly say so if he were on the receiving end of such treatment, instead of dishing it out to others! The “love” defense is a sham, and is merely a cover for promoting persecution of gays. Sprigg himself even gives us a good example.

Sprigg also emphasized that he wants to see homosexuals spared from any harm, particularly emphasizing physical harm from health concerns like the AIDS epidemic.

Classic hypocrisy. People who truly care about such things know that a committed, faithful, long-term relationship with a single partner (aka “marriage”) is one of the best ways to eliminate the promiscuous sexual liaisons that spread diseases like AIDS. But that’s precisely what Sprigg wants to outlaw. Constitutional amendments against gay marriage promote the spread of diseases that Sprigg piously pretends to want to stop. The real motive is much less honorable: to persecute and oppress gays until you force them to submit to your religious demands.

It’s not “loving” to try and force others to be something they’re not. It’s not loving to take people whose only “sin” is that they happen to fall in love differently than the rest of us, and punish them by denying them the right to get married according to their natural affections. It’s not loving to take someone who can’t help being what they are, and trying to drum into them the bigoted idea that they are perverted and evil and disgusting just because they’re not like us.

Those things are all hateful, and they would be hateful even if all you did was talk like that. But believers like Sprigg aren’t content to just talk hate. They abuse the democratic process in order to legally rob gays of their human rights. And that goes beyond hateful.

Can Christians escape the “hate” label for their hateful and oppressive behavior? Not if we’re honest. You can talk all the “love” you want, but as even Jesus himself said, “You will know them by their fruit.” The fruit of hate is abuse and oppression, and Christian propaganda can’t change that.

4 Responses to “Can Christians Escape the ‘Hate’ Label in Gay Marriage Debate?”

  1. mikespeir Says:

    Sorry, I couldn’t get past the pro-family vs. gay marriage thing. You have to work hard to make the two incompatible.

    • JohnMWhite Says:

      Agreed, and this is particularly striking about the hypocritical Christian position – to them, family cannot include homosexuals. They are completely unable to see the wood for the trees, the blatant fact in front of their face that gay people marrying makes for a family and therefore their stance against it is an attempt to prevent the formation of families.

      Every time I hear the terms ‘pro-family’ or ‘family values’ it makes my skin crawl. ‘Family’ is a code word not for the simple unit of collective love that builds up households and eventually societies, it means a specific type of sheltered nuclear family that follows the speakers’ particular traditions and dogma. It is an impressive feat of doublespeak, for a family by their definition is actually a very exclusive, rather than inclusive, place.

      They can say until they are blue in the face that it isn’t about ‘hate’, but it sure isn’t about love. Love involves acceptance and tolerance, not forcing people to conform to a mold they were never made to fit just because your own particular deity told you it was wrong to have buttsecks. And what really grinds my gears is the pseudointellectual bull they come up with to try to cover their intolerance in a cloak of concern. If they really are so concerned about the health effects of homosexuality, why aren’t they turning up at gay pride events to throw out condoms and leaflets? Why not give anywhere near as much attention to any other ‘disease’ or ‘dangerous behaviour’? As the original post says, their actions belie their arguments about doing it all for the wuv.

  2. Hunt Says:

    Well said.

  3. Brian Moon Says:

    Well of course Christians would have trouble seeing that what they call “love” looks very much like hate to everyone else. They get that from their confused image of God’s “love”, which looks like The Problem of Evil to everyone else. Their God’s “love” includes the suffering of innocents “in the name of the Greater Good”, debilitating diseases, and natural disasters that kill millions based on no criteria beyond random chance.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: