Letters To The Editor
PEOPLE IN SOCIETY
Both sides miss crucial point
Letter after letter appears, condemning or defending homosexuality, each side citing Scripture. Here’s something for both sides to consider.
God’s word is clear on homosexuality. One can’t pick and choose which of God’s words to heed. You either take the Bible as a whole or reject it. The argument this was exclusive to ancient history and doesn’t apply to today falls apart with God’s nature. He didn’t change his mind to suit the time. Jesus does admonish us consistently through word and example to love one another, repentant and unrepentant, sinner and saint.
He loves all, which brings me to my point. Yes, homosexuality is a sin. Don’t defend sin; there is no pride in sin. But hold on, condemners, before you chalk up a vote for the anti-gay side and before the others talk me contemptuously into the homophobic pit. Let’s all consider John 8:7 and Matthew 7:1- 5. Who is without sin? Nobody outside of God.
Instead of focusing on someone else’s sin, take a look at your own. All sin is evil in the sight of God.
I’m having enough trouble keeping my own life as pleasing to God as possible, without laboring to point fingers at others. I, too, am a sinner who will one day come before that same Jesus who is both the loving, kind, merciful God and the righteous bringer of judgment the other side refers to. He is ready to forgive us all, just ask him. Martin Miller Spokane
Leave judgment to God
This is in reference to Hal Robinson’s letter (Dec. 24, “It’s not about love but Jesus’ will”:
I am only a beginning student in religion, but I have learned this much: “Judge not others lest ye be judged.”
What right have you to condemn homosexuals to hell? As I understand it, even rapists and murderers can enter heaven if they believe in Jesus Christ and repent their sins. I, personally, do not believe homosexuality is wrong. I just don’t see how love can be a sin. From a religious standpoint, however, it seems to be, and so I ask you to think of another maxim from the church: Love thy neighbor.
Love and accept them, even if you do not approve of them, and remember that God is the only judge. Cassandra Gulam Coeur d’Alene
To deny love is to refute
God As a Christian gay man in a committed relationship to another Christian gay man, I get a smile on my face when I read inane comments from readers, such as those made by Hal Robinson (“It’s not about love but Jesus’ will,” Dec. 24).
First, Jesus did not live during the time of Leviticus. Jesus did away with all of the old Jewish laws with his new commandment, “As I have loved you, love one another.”
Secondly, Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. It is not mentioned in any of the Gospels.
If God loves all of his creatures, and he does, why can we not love one another regardless of our sin? When I die, I know that God’s judgment of me and my partner will be much more loving than Robinson’s. Blaine Stiles Spokane
Anti-gay pronouncements lame
The recent spate of letters on what their authors claim as the Christian response to homosexuality reveals an interesting phenomenon: selective Scripture passages used unthinkingly in support of a cultural bias (of several centuries’ standing) rather than letting Scripture interpret Scripture.
The favorite Leviticus verses quoted against homosexual activity occur in the Holiness Code, which deals with ritual purity. The same term (translated as “abomination”) used for a man laying with another man as with a woman is also used for eating the flesh of a sacrifice on the third day and for eating unclean animals. Also, the same Holiness Code forbids sexual relations with a menstruating woman (Lev 20:18), and calls for stoning of a man or a woman who is a medium or a wizard (Lev 20:27).
The Holiness Code even appears to forbid animal hybridization, crop rotation and much modern apparel (Lev 19:19).
The Bible has few passages on homosexuality — the Sodom story (ignoring the parallel in Judges 19:22ff and the fact that Ezek 16:49 says sin of Sodom is that Sodom “did not aid the poor and needy”) the two passages in the Holiness Code of Leviticus, the first chapter of Paul’s letter to the Romans and a few lists of vices (in which the translation itself is questionable).
The Bible has massively more passages against adultery and fornication, yet good Christians of the stripe writing letters to the papers would be much more indignant about a gay bar than about a swinging singles bar. Timothy Rolfe Madison, S.D.
Know-it-alls really know not
Love, compassion, love, compassion …
The Pharisees are alive and well. This is well evidenced by the ongoing gay-bashing letters using the Bible as a rulebook for Jesus.
A delightful marquee of a local church read, “Moralism grows in the absence of strong theology.” This moralism is an ongoing problem for our country, as well as for Christianity.
A recent letter to the editor quoted one of the hundreds of laws listed in the book of Leviticus as being the words of Jesus. Wrong!
As a matter of fact, many of Jesus’ arguments with the Pharisees of his day were over these laws. Jesus made a stand against these purity laws, even gave his life in his stand against them. When a lawyer asked him which was the greatest of all laws, Jesus answered, “Love God with all your heart, mind and soul and your neighbor as yourself.” He stated over and over that you can’t get into heaven (and heaven can’t get into you) if you have your judgment circuits on.
The Pharisees in Jesus’ day put God in a box (phylactories). Our modern Pharisees put God in a book. Many people want their God all neat and predictable.
Conversion has a shelf life of only one day, then it putrefies and turns into self-righteousness.
Remember also that no word of God is God’s last. The living Christ is a testament to this fact. God is still speaking. God is still being born again.
In Christ there is no straight or gay. I continue to pray that God’s compassion will rule this world some day. Rev. Michael J. Rice-Sauer Spokane
Christ’s example quite clear
In response to the Dec. 29 letters by Byron Scott (“Being gay is a matter of choice”) and Kayla Schuler (“No defense for homosexuality”):
Isn’t it possible that if Christ died for the sins of the world, that would include sinner, non-sinner, believer, nonbeliever, straight and non-straight?
I don’t believe his love and forgiveness is exclusive and conditional, which is why self-righteous attitudes such as theirs help the rest of us turn the other cheek. Suzanne Mathews Spokane
SCHOOLS AND EDUCATION
Look to teachers, not language
I must have missed the last few years completely, although I do have a 20-something daughter.
I’m astounded that the Oakland (California) School District has the audacity to want to designate the colloquial speech of young African American youths - they call it Ebonics - as a foreign language. On top of that, the district is asking the federal government to fund this utterly insane idea.
In the 1950s there was bebop and the beatniks. No official designation was afforded them, even though they did have their own “language.” In the 1960s there were hippies with their own jargon. Countless generations of teens have created their own vernacular, whites and blacks alike.
Why, all of a sudden, because grades are lower than other students’, is the African American community and specifically teachers, blaming a language for their poor showing in the schools? Coming out of these same centers of learning are extremely educated, articulate African American youths who excel in public speaking, English, history and math. They go on to become lawyers, doctors, CPAs and politicians. Is it at all possible that our teachers are to blame?
Kudos to the U.S. government for telling Oakland it will not fund this absolutely senseless idea. It’s hard to applaud the government these days; for once it did something worthwhile. Even the NAACP has condemned Oakland’s position.
Seems to me this supposedly new language actually originated with the inauguration of the rap movement years ago, of which there are both black and white performers. Suzann O’Sullivan Embury Hayden, Idaho