All Comments for: Up for Debate | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2009 > January

Christianity Today, January, 2009 |

Up for Debate

Publicly arguing for traditional marriage is worth it even if I don't change many minds.

Glenn T. Stanton | posted 12/08/2008 11:46AM

He lives in the manicured neighborhood of Sherwood Forest, Detroit, where auto-industry execs once retreated to cocktails in their mini-mansions after laboring at halcyon day jobs. I live on the tumbleweed-riddled ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 25 of 26 comments.

Page: 1 2

Show All

Elizabeth

Posted: December 14, 2008 4:23 PM

I'm a Christian and a Quaker and gay. I read about this article from LOGO news at 365gay.com in an article written by Corvino. I attend a Campus Crusade for Christ group on my campus with a facilitator who works for an organization that hurts LGBT people. I struggle all the time with how to be friends with her. It's a constant challenge, but when I'm able to do it well and leave the judging to God, I feel magnified in the Lord's presence. I believe that by being a good Christian and gay and participating in a group with those who persecute me, I can be a witness for God. So I admire you for going the other direction. I will never stop fighting for justice, but I also hope I will never fail to recognize other humans as beautiful creations of God, and that this will lead to redemptive dialogue.

Michael Carter

Posted: December 13, 2008 11:17 PM

I'm glad that you have both forged so unlikely a friendship and can debate one another in a positive manner. I've encountered few willing to treat me with the respect and dignity I try to treat them, and I see the same from those on my side. In regards to your UoI example, I feel you answered that particular question with grace. However, I would like to take that inquiry further. Homosexual couples form families regardless whether they are granted the right to marry. These families are comprised of two parents and their children. To deny homosexuals the right to marry denies jural rights to a person's partner's children; legally, the other partner is not the parent of the children he or she raises. Personally, I feel this endangers the children more than having two parents of the same gender; should a parent die, the children could be ripped from the family by legal action. Is this not more damaging? I'm sure this question is a common one, but I'm curious as to your response.

Brendan

Posted: December 13, 2008 9:31 AM

I'm on John's side, but having read your articles on the friendship you have forged in such strange circumstances, I feel you are one of the few opponents that is able to communicate without denigration. I agree that the most "tolerant" of campuses likely treat you with more contempt and rudeness than those I would consider "less tolerant" (of folks like me). I find that saddening. While I would label some of your fellow evangelicals as hate mongering, I would equally label some gay rights activists as "secessionists," bent on creating a separate gay 'race' or 'ethnicity' within the human family. I doubt seriously, from reading your article, that you would have a hard time if you found John and his partner were your neighbors; you seem to be able to live side by side quite well. So I remain puzzled over your fundamental views in opposition to their relationship. But I appreciate you for being able to say that you have gay friends, and they are not monsters. We rarely hear/feel that.

Tina	Posted: December 13, 2008 12:52 AM

Thank you for this article. I found this article through another article, one written by your friend mentioned here. I appreciate what you and Mr. Corvino do. Thank you for never portraying him as a pedophile or sex addict. I am gay. One of my dearest friends is an Evangelical, Conservative Christian and Republican. The friendship between you and Mr. Corvino reminds me so much of the friendship I have with this friend of mine. You are correct in saying that both sides need to present civility in the dialogue about this issue. I believe more Christians such as yourself should be more public. My "side" often only sees the angry Christians that cry hateful language, one being your boss at Focus. And I'm sure your "side" often only sees the angry homosexuals that only fight fire with fire. Thank you for your efforts to appreciate the diversity of us all, while we may not necessarily agree on certain points.

Marc	Posted: December 12, 2008 2:57 PM

Thank you for this article. I'm a gay man who believes strongly in marriage equality, and I also believe that G-d has a place for his gay sons and daughters. This article hints at the complexity of both sides of this debate, and I hope that we can all elevate ourselves to the same level of thoughfulness exhibited by the author. While it is frustrating for me to have to constantly explain why I am not a G-dless hedonist trying to destroy the American family, I can empathize how difficult it must be for so many good Christians to be likened to Hitler for their anti-gay rights convictions. Clearly, neither side of this debate is entirely composed of the caricatures that have come to characterize it. In the spirit of this article, I urge anyone who takes this debate seriously to engage in a thoughtful conversation without someone they profoundly disagree with. We may have a lot to learn from each other.

Tom	Posted: December 12, 2008 2:15 PM


Thoughtful column. I almost completely disagree. But it was a thoughtful presentation. He could offer a variation on the Viggie Tale theme: "Apparently, God has made you a little too special."

Steve Fridsma

Posted: December 12, 2008 2:03 PM


If not a documentary, just write the book, as in "Jim and Casper Go to Church". It simply recounts the visits between 2 friends, one of whom is atheist, one of whom a boomer pastor, to 12 american churches and what they experience and take away from each experience, with a powerful wrap-up.

Steve Skeete

Posted: December 11, 2008 4:08 PM

To me there is nothing paticularly virtuous in saying that one has either a homosexual friend, or that one can debate without hostility or rancour. For the Christian both of these should be par for the course. I have always wondered, particularly when I read comments to articles, why persons must bring so much venom and bile to the discussion, often not even dealing with the subject matter; but as Jesus said, "out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks". A person is not hostile or intolerant because he/she is homosexual or anti homosexual, and there is no reason why two persons with strong convictions for and against an issue should not be able to debate the issue in a mature, measured and meaningful manner without one calling the other nasty or insulting names. Homosexuality makes no sense to me, biologically, biblically or other wise. It makes perfect sense to some. We should both be able to share our views, then leave the auditorium and go home unmolested.

Rob	Posted: December 10, 2008 4:01 PM


Fascinating article. I hope you manage to find a journalist or documentary maker to do exactly as you suggested, maybe even interviewing people afterward. I would love to see it.

Jeff	Posted: December 09, 2008 10:10 PM

Liked the article for much too often as a Christian gay man I am demonized because of my beliefs. It is sad that we can not honestly dialogue truthfully especially on issues that have great importance to our society. As was stated fundamentalist come in many means and forms. It is just so sad to me that the issue for so many in the church regarding gays and lesbians is that they can not get beyond the act. I do not have a gay lifestyle like I do not have a Christian lifestyle. I also think it ironic that those who so oppose gay marriage then bring up the loose morals in gay culture. Marriage has a wonderful way of bringing two more closer together.

Mil	Posted: December 09, 2008 9:11 PM

This is all very well and good, but if one thinks marriage should only be between a man and woman (which I do), what does one do about the people who are born either with physical organs or hormonally somewhere in between? When the doctor decided at birth that they would be one or the other. I have read about it in the endocrinology journals. Not a large percentage, but it does happen. Where do those people go and how fair is that? What if the doctor decided you should be a female and you feel more like a male when you grow up? I don't know how to answer. I do think that it is great that y'all are friends. We conservative Christians think nothing of being friends with a gossip or someone who has sex with their heterosexual partner outside of marriage, but we treat gay people as if they were the "pariah' and could never be our friends. Somehow we have managed to make this sin worse than someone who lies in politics as long as they claim "prolife. That is clearly not Biblical.

Dave	Posted: December 09, 2008 7:00 PM

Thanks for this thoughtful article. The debate is complicated by our inability to distinguish between homosexual orientation (where our temptation comes from) and homosexual action (what we do when we give in to that temptation). My heterosexual orientation means I am tempted by people of the opposite sex, but, by the grace of God and the power of the Holy Spirit I resist those temptations and keep my thoughts and actions pure. And when I fail I have sinned. Surely the same would be true of a homosexual Christian. The orientation is different but the action would be equally pure or sinful depending upon how successfully they resist the temptation. Assuming Mr. Stanton recognises this distinction his sentence "I concluded by explaining, as she might imagine, that I did not believe this substantive virtue redeemed homosexuality itself." would have been better expressed "...homosexual activity itself."

David T

Posted: December 09, 2008 6:52 PM

This article is one of the most grace-filled approaches to this issue I have ever read. Thank you! It is sad to see responses like Jerry's which miss entirely the power of grace and love and what it means to invite someone into a relationship with God whose life-style God wants to redeem. Contempt and condemnation are not only poor tools for dialogue, they betray a sickness in the Body of Christ that is every bit as bad as the sin being condemned. If a gay person ever wonders if change is possible, they will certainly not check in with those who treat them with disgust.

Jerry Sabo

Posted: December 09, 2008 5:27 PM

It is senseless to debate same sex marriages or wether homosexuality and lesbianism are condoned in the Bible. Scripture clearly mandates that these practices are forbidden and they are wrong. God clearly stated "Honor you father and MOTHER" not Father and Father. We as Christians are commanded to love one another but not condone the act. It is easy to see that God hated this act by what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah. Jesus when tearing down the synagog for gambling never said anything about hating anyone but that he despised the act.

Howard

Posted: December 09, 2008 10:18 AM

I find Mr. Stanton's views on debate encouraging. I have recently finished a college course on Ethics where my views clashed, rather loudly, with some of my classmates. That being said, one of my staunchist opponents and I have become friends. We found that, although we disagree on certain subjects, as long as we did not stoop to name-calling that we could state our positions and counter-points and still remain friends. His characterzation of certain audiences is spot on. I remember reports where speakers, including the President, have been abused by the audience. For some reason, this seems to occur more with the so-called Liberal audiences, which I find ironic in that they are supposed to be more open-minded. It is a sad fact that the Liberals among us cannot listen to opposition to their views without shouting derrogatory comments. I guess they realize that their positions are built on sand whereas we have ours built on the Rock.

DSM Deacon

Posted: December 09, 2008 10:12 AM


Thoughttful, however i have one question: What other church sacraments would you like to see regulated by the government?

Joe	Posted: December 09, 2008 6:42 AM


Pretty good piece, but I have to observe that the plea for thoughtful conversation and 'inclusion,' so to speak, is coming now that we no longer have the upper hand.

Ray	Posted: December 08, 2008 10:59 PM

I do not understand what is judgmental about condemning something that God calls an abomination. The Apostle Paul says, 'does not nature itself teach you'. If a 'marriage' of two who are of the same gender is not able to produce children, as God intended, then we should call it what God calls it and not shrink from the responsibility. Yes, God is love and will forgive anybody who repents of the sin of homosexuality. Christians should hate the sins that God hates, but love the sinners like God does. They need to be warned of the consequences, not excused by philosophical mumbo jumbo. Christians need to stand on the Word of God. If we can manipulate God's Word to suit our own attitudes and purposes, it is no longer the Word of God, but the philosophy of men

Gregory Peterson

Posted: December 08, 2008 10:20 PM

"Some of my best friends are Gay..." Give me a break. That you're on speaking terms with a Gay person obviously means nothing to you, except as proof of self righteousness and expansive, smarmy condescension. "The mysterious otherness' of the so called opposite sex. We all have an an "X" chromosome. We are all humans. "Humanity and the family need male and female to need each other." Yes, so? A few percentages of the population, where Gay people need each other, hardly threatens that. People not only pass on genes, we pass on memes. Humanity also needs productive and happy Gay people. There is the question of "what traditional" marriage?" There are a great many, as you well know. Why is there marriage? What is the history of marriage? In many parts of Western society, marriage, until fairly recently, was often a contract between men; future son in law (or his father), and future father in law, who promised to deliver his certified pure property for the right bride price

george bonnar

Posted: December 08, 2008 7:33 PM

a ring does not make you married,nor does a ceremony or a piece of paper or a licence. Rather it is a vow of commitment between two people,just as it was in the days of israel,,marriage is a rather new concept which began later in the catholic church,and was a way to raise monies,as were indulgences back in the day.,,however,it does have its merits also,,as a legal way to fight polygamy and a few other sins of the flesh.It is a sad reality,that most people dont last together anymore,since GOD perfers them to stay together for life,as they should,but sometimes no matter what one does or gives for another,is still not enough..what a sad state we have fallen into.

Brent

Posted: December 08, 2008 5:35 PM


Very nice article. I hope CT will have another like it from a Christian arguing in favor of gay marriage from a Biblical perspective (yes, there are many). If they are really interested in the debate, they will.

Dakotahgeo

Posted: December 08, 2008 5:31 PM

Interesting article. I only wish we as a nation and church would work as hard solving the divorce problem as we do to estrange the GLBT population in this world. I look at the debacle that evangelical christianity has caused in just the last 8 years and the mayhem it has caused for the last 35 and I have no use for the "christian" cause which the conservative faction of evangelism espouses. Nothing of interest in your form of christianity for the people of today! Thank God I participate in a loving, accepting mainline "Christian" church who accepts all of God's children and leaves the pickin' and choosin' behind. I have the very happy task of helping people heal which you people look down on, and the unhappy task of trying to convince them that not all evangelical conservatives are wackos. Most Sincerely, GMMelby, Pastor/Chaplain

Roger Fleming

Posted: December 08, 2008 5:17 PM


It is refreshing to learn of genuine engagement in honest debate with those who disagree with us. I feared this kind of meaningful, thoughtful debate had gone the way of dinosaurs. Thank you.

Stan	Posted: December 08, 2008 5:04 PM


While I confess, and you have corroborated that belief, there is no "biblical" place for homosexual marriages, you not only defend the point well, but have truly accomplished a respectful and non-judgemental attitude. Would that more of us evangelicals, and I include myself, could reach such a place!

mark almlie

Posted: December 08, 2008 1:43 PM

Thank you for this. Frankly my view of Focus on the Family became one degree more positive after reading this--i.e. i'm surprised they employ such a thoughtful, balanced, engaging fellow as yourself. Good for them--and you. This was a joy to read. I do agree with the above comments however. I would like to hear your response to the "strongest" argument for homosexual marriage. i also appreciated your inclusion of the woman's question, "Do you see anything praise worthy about my relationship?" Thoughtful.

Page: 1 2

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment