Saturday, December 20, 2008

"love the sinner, hate the sin"

"I was always taught to 'love the sinner but hate the sin'."
Ever heard this chestnut? If you all would indulge me, I'd like to take a moment to deconstruct this sentence, beginning with the definition of "SIN":
Sin: Any act regarded as such a transgression, esp. a willful or deliberate violation of some religious or moral principle (
For starters, when all of you sinner-lovers say 'love the sinner, hate the sin' just what "sin" are we talking about? Being born gay? Doesn't sin, by definition, require an action of some sort on the part of the sinner? Gay people did not do anything to become gay. It's just how they are - no action required there. therefore, I'm pretty certain that it's not a sin to be gay.

So maybe it's the ACT of being gay that you don't like. Hmmm. Let me think about this one. Which of my daily actions make me gay, exactly? Let's trace through what I consider to be one of my typical gay days:
  • Wake up
  • feed the bunnies
  • have some coffee & toast
  • take a shower, get dressed
  • go to work/school
  • stop by one of my record stores to see what's new
  • watch The View, Olberman, Daily Show, etc
  • blog
  • study, if necessary
  • feed the bunnies
  • pick Leo up from work, hang out for a while
  • brush my teeth, pee, go to bed.
Wow. You know, until I had it all written out like that, I had no idea how actively gay I was! What a homo!! I look at that list and see nothing but evil abominations. Seriously, though - So far in this discussion I'm not seeing which of my actions is damning me to eternal hellfire. I consider myself to be a pretty good citizen, actually.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the 'sin' you're talking about is the act of gay sex, or sticking the man's thing-thing somewhere other than a woman's who-who. Having carnal knowledge, if you will. Now, is it the intercourse itself that is sinful, or the fact that it's sex outside of marriage? 'Cause if it's the latter, the remedy is pretty obvious: repeal senseless and bigoted amendments like Prop 8.

So perhaps you are defining a gay person simply as "someone who has gay sex". Hmm. Do you think maybe that if my partner and I don't have sex today, that makes us straight for a day? Would my 'typical gay day' look any different if my partner and I didn't have gay sex? Of course not. If gay people stop having gay sex, they are still gay. Perhaps you want all gay people to remain celibate their whole lives - do you really, honestly think that's realistic? Do you think it's realistic to expect any group of people to never have sex? To even suggest such a thing is ludicrous, no matter how badly you might want it to happen.

Maybe you would be satisfied if gay people started having straight sex instead. I know you don't understand this (mostly because you're not willing to try), but asking gay people to marry the opposite sex in order to have "normal" sexual relations is like trying to make a car run on orange juice. For a majority of gay people, it doesn't work (that's because for gay people, gay sex IS perfectly normal and natural). That's not to say that gay people can't have straight sex, because technically it's possible. But is this really what you want, because statistically I think we have plenty of data proving that most "straight" marriages that include a gay spouse end up in heartbreak, divorce, and children in therapy.

Maybe you are against any sexual activity that cannot create children. If so, then there are groups outside of gays that you should also prohibit from getting married, including women who are infertile or past menopause, men who shoot blanks, elderly people. Would it make sense to come up with a proposition that would retroactively nullify all straight marriages that haven't produced any children?

For those of you who enjoy saying "Love the sinner, hate the sin" because you think it makes you look like a good Christian, it doesn't. It also doesn't make you look "tolerant". When you talk about 'loving the sinner but hating the sin', it tells people that you are ignorant and unable to think outside of the King James box.

You heard me.


Arthur (AmeriNZ) said...

The first thing that comes to mind is "Amen!" Funny that. I came here by way of This Boy Elroy, but I have you bookmarked—I like this and the other posts I've read so far.

Jeff said...

Thanks for the comment Arthur! I appreciate it.

OC said...

Hey Jeff...How is it that something so simply "common sense" can make so many folks cringe? Your post evokes a pretty simple philosophy. Let it be. Thanks for taking the time to write this. I love you, OC