Why do the Protestants conservative oppose the rights of homosexuals, while liberal Protestants right?

Ba Robinson's card based on religiustolerance.org (Canada) of 8 December 2005, freely translated from Laura C.

(In the United States) The members of the South Baptist Convention (together with other denominations within the conservative wing of Protestantism) and the United Church of Christ, (with other groups of liberal faith), are also considered Christian.
Everyone uses the contents of the Bible as the main foundation of their beliefs. So why have they achieved so different conclusions about homosexuality?

Especially with regard to:

-The morality or the immorality of homosexual behavior;
-The possibility for sexually active homosexuals to be admitted or not to be part of the clergy;
-The possibility for the same sex couples to see their relationships recognized by an ecclesiastical ritual similar to the wedding ceremony;
- The permission for homosexual couples to marry in church where this is legal.

Understand the different doctrines

An approach possible to understand these differences in opinion is to consider how each wing of Protestantism develops its religious beliefs.

If expressed by individual denominations, the beliefs of these groups are mostly based on a mixture of four factors.

In the case of homosexuality, this includes:

- What the Bible says about homosexual behavior;

- the historical position of one's ecclesiastical denomination on homosexuality;

- personal observation and the experience that comes from their own ties with homosexual people;

- the rational study;

- The results of research on genetics, child psychology, human sexuality, etc.

It is important to be aware of the fact that conservative and liberal Christians have a different consideration of these factors.

In general:

Conservatories rely on the content of the Bible as they interpret it. "Solo scriptura" was one of the shared proclamations of the Protestant Reformation. "Quod non est biblicum, non est theological" ("what is not biblical is not theological") was one of its slogans¹.

Conservatories give much less importance to the results of the research, which they refuse because in conflict with their own interpretation of the Bible. Relying on their interpretation of the Bible can be disastrous.

Consider the debate on slavery during the mid -nineteenth century. At that time, some denominations mentioned passages in support of slaves to the possession for possession.

Liberals give much more weight to the results of scientific research, and want to abandon the interpretation of biblical passages in favor of the new analyzes that harmonize the Bible and scientific discoveries.

This too can sometimes be disastrous. Although science is by its nature self-correction, sometimes some scientists develop theories that deviate widely from reality, they are inaccurate and cause damage.

Let us always remember that one of the inventors of the frontal lobotomies was awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine.

Typical Protestant opinions on homosexuality

Conservative Christians believe that the authors of the Bible have been inspired by God to write texts that are infallible - free from the error.
They often cite the seven passages of the Bible - often called (in Iglese) "Cluber Passages" - which have generally been used to condemn homosexuality.

They usually conclude that the Bible condemns the homosexual behavior clearly and uniquely, whatever the nature of the relationship:

- Genesis 19 treats the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in response to the widespread homosexuality of men who lived in the two cities.

- Levitico 18:22 and 20:13 clearly condemns the sexual conduct between people of the same sex, which is described as an abomination. The last step actually recalls the death penalty for sexually active homosexuals.

- Various passages of Deuteronomy, judges and King condemn homosexuality.

- 1 Corinthians 6 condemnation "guilty homosexuals", "homosexuals", "sodomites", or "those who abuse themselves with men," depends on the translation used. These people will not inherit the kingdom of God - they will not go to heaven after death.

- Romans 1 condemns homosexual behavior both between men and women.

Bennett Sims, the former Episcopalian Bishop of Atlanta, believes that these verses have influenced the formation of the negative opinion on the homosexuality of conservative Christians much more than any other passage of the Bible.

He writes in this regard: “For most of us who seriously honor the writing these verses present themselves as the capital text of the New Testament which unequivocally prohibits homosexual behavior.

In a more prohibitive way, this text has been taken into consideration to affirm that even the homosexual inclination is to be condemned, so much so that a type of humanity recognized as 'homosexual' has been constantly subject to contempt and discrimination "²

- 1 Timothy 1 contains thoughts similar to those of Romans 1.

- Judas 1: 7 Reinforce Genesis 19 and condemns the men of Sodom and Gomorra for their desire to have sex with male visitors - described in various ways by the translators of the Bible as "perversion", "perverse sensuality", "unnatural lust", "concupiscence of men towards other men", and "unnatural desire practiced".

Their conclusion is obvious: homosexuality is condemned consistently throughout the Bible.

They also interpret 1 Corinthians 6 as a demonstration of the fact that homosexuals can be treated and converted to internosexuality being first saved.

They generally believe that the right approach of a Christian towards a homosexual is to convince him to convert to heterosexuality and through reparative therapy and allowing him to save himself.

Typical beliefs of liberal Protestants regarding homosexuality

Liberal Christians generally reject the inspiration and infallibility of the Bible. They recognize that the Bible consists mostly in a text that promotes the author's evolution beliefs.

To this are added elements imported from nearby pagan cultures, a little religious propaganda and some topics - such as the execution of victims of rapes, religious and homosexual minorities; forced divorce for interconfecessive couples; genocides, etc. - that they see as completely contrary to the will of God.

Instead of focusing on the seven "Clubber Passages", they derive their beliefs from the biblical themes of love, attention to other human beings, reception and justice.

When they study the "Clubber Passages" often interpret them in a very different way and conclude that the Bible does not say anything about emotional, committed and consensual relationships between people of the same sex.

Typical interpretations in this sense:

-Genese 19 speaks of the entity of residents to rape foreigners.

-Levitico 18:22 and 20:13 condemn homosexual behavior, but only in pagan temples.

-Vari passages of Deuteronomy, judges and king actually condemn prostitution.

- 1 Corinthians 6 condemns those who harass children.

- Romans 1 speaks of heterosexuals who go against his own nature by engaging in homosexual behavior.

- 1 Timothy 1 contains thoughts similar to those of Romans 1.

Judas 1: 7 accuses Sodom's men of having wanted to commit a bestiality: to force a non -human species - in this case the angels - to have sex with them.

Their conclusion is obvious: the Bible condemns homosexual abuse - the rape that desecrates sacred places, prostitution, abuse on children, bestiality and sexual activity against one's fundamental nature.
It is not pronounced on the sexual activity between people of the same sex within an emotional commitment relationship.

In general, progressives believe that the right approach of a Christian towards homosexuality is that of:

-I help homosexuals to accept their orientation as ethically neutral, normal, natural and immutable.

-Inity to end the oppression of gays, lesbians and bisexuals

- as well as the special privileges of heterosexuals - the right to marriage, for example.

- Refuse reparative therapy as ineffective and dangerous.

Opinions expressed by Bishop Episcopal John S. Spong

Waterfront Media regularly publishes a newsletter in which Bishop Emeritus John S. Spong answers the questions asked by the public³ who wondered about the growth of conservative protesting denominations and was "rather disgusted by the fact that their 'love' towards humanity did not include homosexuals" and other groups, asking Spong's opinion on the future of these groups in the United States.⁴

JS Spong replied that religious fundamentalism is a mechanism that generates security and stability in their members who live in a culture that is rapidly changing.

Unfortunately this requires that some groups be demonized. At present, the chosen group are people with homosexual orientation.

Spong scrive: “penso che negli ultimi anni siamo entrati in un “nuovo medioevo”  nel mondo occidentale, segnata dalla crescita di sistemi religiosi che cercano di costruire sicurezza incoraggiando il pregiudizio contro una vittima designata.

Sia il fondamentalismo evangelico che il cattolicesimo romano ultraconservatore oggi insediato in Vaticano sono pubblicamente caratterizzati dalla loro ostilità viscerale e disinformata verso le persone omosessuali.

Quello che gli eretici erano nel medioevo, i neri nei giorni della schiavitù e della segregazione, gli ebrei nella Germania nazista sono diventati gli omosessuali nell’isteria religiosa dei giorni nostri. Tale tipo di comportamento è sempre una risposta alla paura e ad un mondo in continuo cambiamento.

Una religione che dia sicurezza, che richieda sempre una vittima, è come una droga che ci allontana dalle situazioni difficili della vita. Non è certamente l’onda del futuro cristiano …

Oltre a ciò penso che dovremmo riconoscere che la verità e l’unità non possono essere costruite identificando una vittima che crei l’illusione dell’unità stessa contro un nemico comune.

Quando tali istituzioni dicono che Dio odia le stesse cose che odiano i suoi adoratori tutti dovrebbero essere molto sospettosi.”

“Le ere buie non durano per sempre. Tra dieci anni questa fase della nostra storia sarà di sicuro finita.

Today's scientific and doctors, who present homosexuality as a perfectly normal but minority aspect of our humanity, a given and not chosen aspect of life, will have put these prejudices to the test so deeply as to make them seem not only antiquated but also ignorant.

Let us remember that less than a century ago left -handed, deviant and unnatural were persecuted.

On the other hand, I share the enormous embarrassment for the fact that the Christian Church is today the greatest voice of the West in the persecution of those members of society whose only "sin" is to be born with a sexual orientation other than that of the majority.

One day we will be tremendously ashamed of the Christian leaders of our generation. "⁵

If Bishop Spong is right, fundamentalists will have to go on leaving the homosexuals aside to demonize another group - perhaps Muslims, witches, neopagans or some other religious group.

___________________________
¹ James Akin, "The Practical Problems of Solo Scriptura,": http://www.cin.org/
² "How To Be True to the Bible and Say 'Yes' to Same-Sex Unions,"
³ You can receive the newsletter by subscribing to the website: http://www.johnshelbyspong.com/
⁴ John S. Spong, "Bishop Spong Q&A On Growth of the Evangelical Community," Beliefnet Weekly Mailing, 7 December 2005.

Original text: Homosexuality and bisexuality. Why are Conservative Protests Opposed to Gay Rights, While Liberals Favor Equal Rights for All?