That's Just Ghey

by Jer

(note: This installment of the Drain is being composed from a Caribou Coffee in Omaha, Nebraska. I mention this for two reasons. First, Caribou is better than Starbucks. Second, when I think about Omaha, I imagine a lot of the Evangelicals about whom you're about to read. So you could say this is being written behind enemy lines! Then again, you may not have my proclivity for the melodramatic and you wouldn't think, let alone write, something stupid like that.)

"I'm tired of those old white guys telling us what to think and do." - A Christian college president, as quoted by Jim Wallis in the May 2006 issue of Sojourners magazine.

I'm resigned to the fact that there are some things in life I will never fully understand.

Sushi. Sushi is a great example of what I'm talking about. It's raw fish. Who am I? Gollum?

Or, who thought the mullet was ever a good idea north of the Mason-Dixon line?

And why, after 14 years in the NBA, can't Shaq hit a free throw?

Why do I still think a cup of sugar infused, caffeine lased, fatty coffee from Starbucks is worth the $4.50 I pay? Am I not paying to slowly kill myself?

Shakespeare in Love. Best Picture. 1998. Really?

And why oh why, do the vast majority of Evangelicals in this country think that the biggest issues facing the Church today are abortion and homosexuality?

This may prove to be a kooky thought, but doesn't it stand to reason that our response to the world around us should reflect Christ's response to the world? Granted, abortion wasn't a hot button topic back in His day, but homosexuality most certainly was present; and yet, He instead concerned himself with things like the afflicted, marginalized and the generally not-so-well-off.

Take the Beatitudes as an example. In them, we have the qualities for whom God is saving His blessings. The poor, the mourners, the hungry, the persecuted, the meek, the merciful, the pure of heart and the peacemakers. These's no declaration in the Bible that, "Blessed are the fag-bashers, for they will receive a slap on the back" But still we proceed as if there was.

I raise these questions now because I have a dear friend who is gay. He never told me he was a homosexual. In fact, so far as I could tell, he didn't really tell anybody. But it wasn't too long after meeting him that it started to make sense. Once I knew what I was looking at I could see that there were subtle things about him that pointed towards his being gay.

He's also a Christian. He believes in Jesus. He prays. He goes to church as a genuine expression of his faith. He even works for a private organization that espouses a Christian worldview.

Now before I take this a step further, let me be clear: I'm not trying to make an argument that homosexuality and Christianity are compatible. In fact, I feel strongly that they are not. From a biblical perspective, I believe the two cannot be reconciled and if asked, I'd share my perspective with my friend; not as a means of shaming him, but rather to let him know, as his friend, my thoughts. I have little doubt he'd respond in kind.

But I also don't believe that the mainstream evangelical response to homosexuality and the Bible are compatible either. Oh hell, while I'm at it, I think I'll just throw everything under the bus: I don't think the mainstream evangelical response to much of anything is compatible with the teachings of Jesus.

Hey Lord. The dying for our sins thing was great. We'll hold on that. But these teachings of yours? You can keep those. We've already got an entire Old Testament of them. But thanks anyways!

I'll give you an example of this from something I recently read in Sojourners magazine. A group known as the National Association of Evangelicas (NAE) has recently made "creation care" a priority. Their stance, in short, is that God created the earth and will someday "ask us what we did what His creation." To that end, they adopted a poilcy entitled, "For the Health of the Nation: An Evangelical Call to Civic Responsibility." It's progressive. It's responsible. It's biblically based.

But that didn't sit too well the many of the mainstream Evangelical leaders who refuse to broaden their perspective beyond the abortion issue and concerns over homosexuality. According to Sojourners:

A letter addressed to the NAE and signed by 22 of the Right's prominent leaders - including James Dobson, Charles Colson, Richard Land, and Louis Sheldon - said, "We have appreciated the bold stance that the National Association of Evangelicals has taken on controverial issues like embracing a culture of life, protecting traditional marriage and family." But it went on to say, "We respectfully request, however, that the NAE not adopt any offical position on the issue of global climate change. Global warming is not a consensus issue."

In other words, the environment is important, but let's continue to deal with the baby-killers and fags first, okay?

Abortion is murder. Homosexuality isn't biblical compatible. I get that. I believe that. Those are important issues. But there's more suffering and affliction in the world than there is homosexuality and baby killing, but you wouldn't know that based solely on the mainstream Evangelical response. Why is it that Brad Pitt cares more about the AIDS crisis in Africa than the church? Why aren't things like the ONE Campaign being founded by those who claim to love Jesus instead of the lead singer of a Rock band?

Bringing this full-circle to my friend, he recently sent me a text message that read, "I've been outted." Through a series of events, his sexual orientation became common knowledge at his place of employment. Having a some familierarity with this organization, I can imagine it didn't go over too well with some of their leaders. The trouble is, I may be more inclined to sympathize with those in charge if I trusted them to view homosexuality in a context that wasn't so narrow that it left room for some understanding and compassion for my friend. You know, that 'love stuff' Jesus kept mentioning.

I may be over-simplifying things, but I don't think I am. When evangelicals get their knickers in a bunch over the issue of homosexuality, they've usually got the story of Sodom and Gomorrah on the brain or some of Paul's teachings from the book of Romans. I'm not trying to invalidate the weight of those teachings, but why don't we use Jesus' teachings as the over-arching guide in our responce to societal and cultural issues and then fan our towards others?

I know why. Because dealing with a behavior doesn't require us to get personal, dirty or vulnerable. I know, because I hate that stuff. Makes me feel all funny inside. In short, dealing with the people behind the behavior requires a little digging the dirt. It can get messy.

But think of the alternative. I don't want to hear God to say to me, "For I was hungry and you gave me nothing, I was thirsty and you gave me more nothing, I was a stranger and you couldn't even make eye contact, I needed clothes and you left me butt naked, I was sick and you told me to cover my mouth when I coughed, I was in prison and you didn't even write. And why? Because it gave you the heebie-jeebies?!?"

"But Lord! Look at all the fags I shamed into obidience!"

Yeah, that'd go over real well.