home
RSS
Is the black church guilty of spiritual hypocrisy in same-sex marriage debate?
Delman Coates at Mt. Ennon Baptist Church is among a minority of black ministers in Maryland who have endorsed gay rights.
May 12th, 2012
08:00 AM ET

Is the black church guilty of spiritual hypocrisy in same-sex marriage debate?

By John Blake, CNN

(CNN) - Some people wonder if the black church will punish President Barack Obama for announcing support for same-sex marriage.

Here’s another question:

Why would the black church cite scripture to exclude gays when a similar approach to the Bible was used to enslave their ancestors?

“It’s so unfortunate,” says James Cone, one the nation’s most influential black theologians and author of “The Cross and the Lynching Tree.”

“The literal approach to scripture was used to enslave black people,” he says. “I’ve said many times in black churches that the black church is on the wrong side of history on this. It’s so sad because they were on the right side of history in their own struggle.”

Call it historical irony: Black church leaders arguing against same-sex marriage are making some of the same arguments that supporters of slavery made in the 18th and 19th centuries, some historians say. Both groups adopted a literal reading of the Bible to justify withholding basic rights from a particular group.

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

Opposition to gay rights is not the standard position of all black churches. Still, while several predominately white mainline denominations have officially accepted gays and lesbians in various forms, the vast majority of black churches still consider homosexuality a sin.

Black church leaders recently helped lead a successful drive to amend North Carolina’s constitution to ban same-sex marriage. The Rev. Fred Robinson, a black pastor in Charlotte, says most black churchgoers aren’t hypocrites. They take scripture, and sin, seriously.

“Black people are not confused,” Robinson says. “If you look at the scriptures that oppose homosexuality, Old and New Testament, they are clearer cut than the ones people used to justify slavery.”

Yet there are other factors beyond the Bible that shape the black church’s resistance to same-sex marriage.

“It’s more than scripture – it’s history, culture, how we were raised,” says the Rev. Tim McDonald, founder of the African American Ministers Leadership Council.

Some black church leaders are still fighting hard just to persuade straight black couples to marry. Accepting same-sex marriage when so many black households lack a husband and wife makes McDonald uneasy.

“I am not comfortable performing a wedding ceremony of the same sex,” says McDonald, an Obama supporter. “That’s just where I am.”

Some black pastors, however, embrace a literal approach to the Bible not just to exclude gays but to get rid of competition, says Edward Blum, a San Diego State University historian.

Some black pastors cite New Testament passages such as Paul’s demand that women keep silent in churches to argue against black women in the pulpit.

That argument is harder to make when black women’s energy and donations form the backbone of the black church, Blum says, but some still get away with it.

“The biblical literalist reading has kept male leadership in power in a church that is hugely female,” Blum says. “It keeps power in men’s hands.”

The one book that mattered

Black churches also embrace a literal reading of the scripture because of its unique history, says Blum, author of “W.E.B. DuBois, American Prophet.”

During slavery and segregation, many blacks saw the Bible as the one document they could trust. The Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, state and local laws – all found some way to ignore their humanity, Blum says.

The Bible, though, was one book that told them that they weren’t slaves or three-fifths of a person, Blum says.

It said they were children of God.

“Throughout the 18th and 19th century, what document could they trust?” Blum says. “When the Bible says it’s so, it’s something that black people believed they could trust.”

Their enemies, though, used that same veneration of the Bible against them. Slaveholders had a simple but powerful argument when critics challenged them: Trust the Bible.

They cited scriptures such as Ephesians 6:5. (“Slaves, be obedient to those who are your earthly masters, with fear and trembling. ...”) And they said Jesus preached against many sins, but never against slavery.

Since the Bible is infallible, and scripture sanctions slavery, it must be part of God’s order, slaveholders concluded.

“Slavery is everywhere in the Bible,” Blum says. “When Americans who were in favor of slavery defended it with the Bible, they had a treasure trove of clear biblical passages that accepted enslavement.”

Blum says abolitionists found it difficult to mount an effective counterargument. They couldn’t just say trust the Bible. They preached another approach to scriptures.

They said you couldn’t enslave people based on the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do to you. (Obama cited the Golden Rule and his Christian faith in supporting same-sex marriage).

“The abolitionist turned to the ethics and spirit of the Bible,” Blum says. “They were theological modernists before modernism.”

And what are black clergy and churchgoers today when they cite the Bible to oppose same-sex marriage?

Robinson, the North Carolina pastor, says they’re not homophobes.

“It says in the Bible that homosexuals will not inherit the Kingdom of God,” he says. “How do you explain that one away? A lot of honest Christians are not trying to hate homosexuals. They’re saying that if I take the Bible seriously, I’m not sure I can say it’s right.”

Robinson says that some opposition to homosexuality is actually based in compassion:

“If I’m concerned about your soul, I have to tell you the truth in love.”

Cone, who teaches at Union Theological Seminary in New York City, says black churchgoers opposed to same-sex marriage are instead mimicking their ancestors’ oppressors.

“I tell some people, ‘These people were against you.’ They would have lynched you. How are you going to now join them and help them lynch somebody else?’”

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Barack Obama • Christianity • Culture wars • Gay marriage • Gay rights • Homosexuality • Politics

soundoff (4,348 Responses)
  1. ACC

    Get your story correct. Blacks are not opposing gay rights. They are opposing the right to be married. The two questions that are being debated, are totally different. Today's gays have rights, during slavery, blacks didn't.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:43 pm |
    • Mike in WI

      Sorry, but gays do not have EQUAL RIGHTS !

      May 14, 2012 at 2:45 pm |
    • dc3219

      Applause. Great Comment.

      Exactly, this is a non issue and a joke.
      At least it's a little funny though.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
    • GauisCaesar

      The line will continue to be moved, this is the way of liberalism. It's not about equal rights, its about getting rid of the left fringe, to bring it into mainstream. The real motive is to get rid of religion indirectly, to instead attack social issues. Marriage was never part of equal rights, not until about 10 years ago. 10 years from now, it will be different.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:48 pm |
    • millmaster

      Ugh. Liberals, coservatives.... I grew up believing in America as the land of the free; with liberty and justice for all. Equal protection under our government. Freedom from big government intervention in my life. Religion being a personal choice and not a government enforced policy. Marriage is a legal contract meant to stabilize family units and society and allow two people to care for each other and a family. The government grants legal benefits to couples who marry and their children. The government should grant the same rights to all couples. Whether the couples can marry in a church is up to the church. But the government should not have a 'religious test' in order to decide which families are worthwhile.

      May 14, 2012 at 3:03 pm |
    • Ursasolus

      Amen!
      It is insulting that the LGBT community try to compare the two.

      May 14, 2012 at 3:11 pm |
    • LinCA

      @ACC

      You said, "Get your story correct. Blacks are not opposing gay rights. They are opposing the right to be married."
      So they are trying to deny a disliked minority a right that they themselves enjoy.

      You said, "The two questions that are being debated, are totally different. Today's gays have rights, during slavery, blacks didn't."
      While the rights that are being denied are different, rights are being denied. The justification for denying those rights is also the same as it was when blacks were being denied their civil rights.

      The justification to deny blacks their right to equal protection under the law was just as flawed as the justification to deny same sex marriages.

      The only arguments against same sex marriage are based in bigotry, ignorance or hate.

      May 14, 2012 at 3:24 pm |
  2. dc3219

    I'll change my stance on Gay marriage, when I can marry myself. I really egotistical and I love myself. I hate the hatred gays and straight people put on me because they don't support my lifestyle. Both me and myself consent to this relationship. Why do they hate me? Nobody fights for my rights. Why why why??? (sarcasm)

    May 14, 2012 at 2:43 pm |
    • AgentK

      Hate to rain on your parade...but as far as the law is concerned...you are married to yourself.

      May 14, 2012 at 3:15 pm |
    • Matteo

      Dude you stole my idea!!!! Thnk of the tax benefits.

      May 14, 2012 at 4:45 pm |
    • Matteo

      AgentK
      If the law says youa re married to yourself try taking all of the appropriate deductions on your next tax return. We'll see what the law says then.....

      May 14, 2012 at 4:46 pm |
    • Matteo

      AgentK
      If the law says you are married to yourself try taking all of the appropriate deductions on your next tax return. We'll see what the law says then.....

      May 14, 2012 at 5:00 pm |
  3. billyk

    The true hypocrisy is that the members of the so-called "black church" will continue to vote overwhelmingly for a man they disagree with on these social issues, mainly because his skin is dark.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
  4. G.S.

    We've lost our sense of boundary and good-sense. We've become a feel good population. People today don't want anyone telling them what's right or wrong. Will men and women someday wish to entry into marriage with an animal? I know that sounds extreme, but look at where we've come from. My neighbor, an African American, was enraged that the gay community was comparing themselves to the African American community. Where does it stop.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:39 pm |
    • HawaiiGuest

      How do you get from consensual relationship from two people of the same gender, to marriage to an animal that is unable to even communicate effectively with a human let alone give any form of consent?

      May 14, 2012 at 2:41 pm |
    • millmaster

      The promise of America is the promise of freedom, liberty and equal protection under the law. You are being hypocritical to claim to be an American if you want laws that discriminate against people because of the way God made them. If you believe it is a choice, I'd like to know how long it took you to make your choice. Your religion is your business but thank God we live in a country where there is not supposed to be a group of religious leaders making laws limiting our freedoms so that we may all make it to their heaven one day.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:49 pm |
    • Nat Q

      "Will men and women someday wish to entry into marriage with an animal?"

      How does this sad, primitive, backward mindset survive into the 21st century?

      No, this is not about animals. This is–and always has been–about consenting adults. Animals, by definition, cannot consent and so can never marry. Likewise, the arguments that pedofiles will want to marry kids...kids cannot legally consent. This is about expanding the rights of CONSENTING ADULTS. Everything else is a strawman and red herring.

      May 14, 2012 at 3:02 pm |
    • Matteo

      HawaiiGuest
      But when she looks at me with those big doe eyes Ijsut know what is in her heart!!! lol

      May 14, 2012 at 4:47 pm |
  5. Mario

    You don't have to be a white christian to be a total bigot.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:38 pm |
    • Boobie Miles

      You don't, but man, does it help.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:38 pm |
  6. Rob

    Unless an LBGT person has been owned as personal property for being Gay, they are no where close to the same. Until that happens, doen't be silly by comaring the two.
    A side from that, the goverment should not be in the marriage busiess at all. It wasn't until the 1800's that the US government got involved in marriage to try and stop interratial marriage. Then the power expanded with the New Deal.
    Every adult should be able to designate another adult to be in a civil union with so they have the same benifits as currently married couples. Then take the goverment out all together, no judges performing marriages. You get married in Church or where ever you feel comfertable. At the end you will be the only person that can speak for you relationship and only God can deceide. If you believe in one.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:36 pm |
    • James PDX

      Let's go back a little farther. It wasn't until a few hundred years after Christ died that the Catholic papacy decided they needed more control over their flock and decided to make marriage a religious event. Before that, it was a civil matter.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
    • millmaster

      Am I not owned by others when I have to pay taxes that go to support them but not to support my family? Of course slavery is it's own nightmare. But being treated as a 2nd class citizen by a government that says all citizens are to have equal protection under the law and all are to have the right to the pursuit of happiness is also an injustice. If you don't like the promises of America just move to some other country where religious leaders dictate all aspects of your life.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:43 pm |
  7. brent diamond

    it amazes me that a minority hated by some people would join that kind of thing and find their own group to hate. if you are going to hate someone, then you should know that person well enough to hold that hatred.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
    • Rob

      it amazes me that if you don't agree with the LBGT community, then it is considered Hate!

      May 14, 2012 at 2:37 pm |
    • bent square

      It takes to long and likely a smattering of literacy to get to know others. It's easier to just adopt the hate of others as your own. Most southern Christians do it, they hate who their Daddy hated, who their Church hated, who their teachers hated and who their first cousin hated, who was of course their first carnal experience...

      May 14, 2012 at 2:39 pm |
    • GodPot

      "it amazes me that if you don't agree with the LBGT community, then it is considered Hate!"

      It's fine if you don't agree that Blacks should be able to vote, thats your right whether you call it hate or not, but to deny them their right to vote, that is blatant hateful discrimination. You are not just disagreeing with them on a social issue, you are denying them real life benefits based on your "feelings" and nothing more. That is bigotry and hate.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:42 pm |
    • millmaster

      Rob, it is hateful when you seek to make laws and use threat of punishment to make people conform to what you want them to do. You are taking away their freedom and liberty to suit your own whim when they are doing nothing to harm you.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:52 pm |
  8. Richard

    Everyone has their own agenda. I try to live by, "Live at let Live", I think Jesus was saying that when he said, "Judge not lest ye be judged" There are many people who just don't get what Jesus has said. The crazy republicans talk about abortion as if Jesus spoke about it. He never did, you people have a rude awakening.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
    • dc3219

      If our country was set up like that, I could support Gay marriage.
      and I'm a conservative.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:32 pm |
    • GauisCaesar

      jesus didn't speak directly about gay marriage either. The verse you just gave was just one verse. When jesus met the woman that was being stoned, he said "sin no more." That meant that he believed in sin and told her not to do it again. So, obviously if you just pretend that he wasn't Jewish, you can make the argument that you did. Christians however, couldn't be that brain-dead about those issues.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
    • GodPot

      "Christians however, couldn't be that brain-dead about those issues."

      Looking at their track record, I beg to differ.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
    • as;ldkfj;aksl

      "Call it historical irony"

      I'd call it black racism. If they can't find it in themselves to be on the right side of history they are nothing but a bunch of N's to me. They are written off as far as I'm concerned.

      What a joke of a race

      May 14, 2012 at 2:36 pm |
    • dc3219

      I'll change my stance on Gay marriage, when I can marry myself. I really egotistical and I love myself. I hate the hatred gays and straight people put on me because they don't support my lifestyle. Both me and myself consent to this relationship. Why do they hate me? Nobody fights for my rights. Why why why why???

      (sarcasm)

      May 14, 2012 at 2:42 pm |
  9. Mary

    Don't compare the Civil Rights Movement to Equal Rights for the GLBT community to Blacks. That will irate them to no end!

    May 14, 2012 at 2:29 pm |
    • Had a little Lamb

      And we just hate to be irated...

      May 14, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
    • jevans

      Actually it does not "irate" us at all, it just shows your or whomever else's ignorance on both topics. While the overall themes of both movements are the same (equality for all), the prejucidical makeup of society back during the CRM was such that certain people were not allowed in certain establishments, able to vote, or able to choose where on the bus they want to sit. Gays face serious issues such as not being allowed to marry, as well as stereotyping that potrays them as "disgusting","soft" or "pansies". And while there are cases of hate crimes towards case, there was far more crimes, both reported and unreported, towards minorities during the early 20th century. So all of that said, there are many similarities between the two movements, but the hate from the CRM does not compare to the hate from this movement. Hate towards gays in my mind stems from plain ignorance. Racial hate, unfortunately, was much more deep rooted in society back then to the point where certain people felt they were genetically superior to others..... if anything, Jewish people and African Americans should share a common understanding in that regard.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:50 pm |
  10. Todd Gary

    It is insane suggest that Black Church should not be oppose a particular sin, because doing so would be employing the same tactics used to impress blacks in the past. Following this ideology would mean that the Black Church would be unable to oppose anything, pedophilia, theft, adultery, murders, etc. One would always be able to argue that scripture was being used to oppose these transgressions in the same ways it has been used to oppress blacks.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:28 pm |
    • James PDX

      The bad thing about strawmen is how inflammabe they are.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:29 pm |
    • millmaster

      The point is that you can use the Bible to support all sides of any issue. Jesus said there were two main commandments; love God and love thy neighbor as thyself. Americans need to understand they live in a country that promises equal treatment under the law. If they don't like that they can make a new amendment to officially make gay citizens 2nd class citizens (i.e. people who pay full taxes but cannot enjoy equal legal benefits for their families). Or they can move to another country where religious leaders make all kinds of laws to help ensure that souls will get to heaven. And heaven help you if you disagree with their path to heaven.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:57 pm |
  11. Mercedes

    You can support anything with Scripture. It is a complex book about God and mankind and it covers a lot of topics, so you can pick out what you like to prove just about anything. My favorite collection three verses taken out of context:
    Judas went out and hanged himself.
    Go and do likewise
    Whatever you do, do it quickly.
    So, I just "proved" the Bible supports suicide. The gullible will fall for this stuff. You need to have basic biblical literacy to enter any argument about the Bible, and few people do any more.

    We're all missing the point here. Forget slavery. The Roman Empire was more than 50% slaves and most of them were white, so let's stop being stupid about this.

    The hypocracy in this issue is a culture with 80% of its children born out of wedlock stating that marriage is something to be revered and not to be trifled with.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:27 pm |
    • GauisCaesar

      That argument you just made is the basis for people that claim a culture war. Liberal ideas of doing what you want are chosen over the idea of abstinence (and yes, abstinence doesn't work in a culture that continuously blurs the line of modesty in all areas of life). Summarily put, liberal values is why this country has a larg portion of out-of-wedlock children.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • dc3219

      Lets not forget the Jews being slaved by the Egyptians for a couple years there.
      See I just proved Slavery. NOT.

      Just because it's in the Bible, doesn't mean it was an affirmative teaching in the Bible. Try reading the entire Bible next time.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • Mercedes

      Before you attack again, by "gullible," I mean people who take adamant stands for or against some Bible point without having studied it. I happen to have read the entire Bible through more than once. The "gullible" are the pitchfork mob who hate the Bible but have never read it, being easily swayed by opinions they can't argue with.

      I'm always glad to get into a discussion about the messages of the Bible, but not with the loud and ignorant. Would I debate history with someone who doesn't know the first thing about it? Why? What a waste of breath.

      My experience is that the louder people claim the Bible is the basis for [name of your angry cause here], the less likely they have read it.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
    • jevans

      I can respect your opinion but I'm not sure you have the ability to make a point based on "facts" if you are inferring the Bible is any way a history book. If I misunderstood your latest post forgive me. As a collection of scriptures, many of which contain stories that seem "taboo" in this day and age, the Bible is great reading material for the purpose of getting in touch with one's spiritual side. However, your last comments leads me to believe you think the Bible contains "truths", a point which I would argue to death. If the bible contained universal truths, it would be the only religious "book" and that is obviously not the case. Would a Muslim be un-informed just because they read the Quran and not the Bible? Is an athiest with a Masters in World History be less qualified to discuss history than a Pastor/Priest that knows the Bible inside and out? Your comment about understanding the "point" of stories in the Bible absolutely makes sense, as the stories can and do teach valuable lessons. But what the Bible does not do is provide any sort of FACTUAL details concerning slavery, incest, suicide, or anything else. As a history buff, I can name over 100 books that will give you a much more factual view of the specific era in question (be it slavery or any other topic) without any religious undertones.

      May 14, 2012 at 3:03 pm |
  12. Chris

    Newsflash: There is no god. Never has been. Now can we please get back to deciding right and wrong based of its own merits rather than what some silly book says?

    Morality would not only exist without religion, it would thrive. Cmon, we're smarter than this people!

    May 14, 2012 at 2:27 pm |
    • Boobie Miles

      "Think of it this way: how many stupid people do you run into on a daily basis? Half of them are dumber than that!"
      – George Carlin

      May 14, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
    • johnCRoberts

      Really, Chris the Prophet has just disproved the existence of God....

      Hee-Hee Good one. (NOT).

      May 14, 2012 at 2:38 pm |
  13. Beserker

    Its sad that these religious fanatics percieve the Scriptures in the Bible when it benefits their argument. If you believe in the bible then you cant believe in evolution and how can you call yourself a Christain and go against the teachings of whats in the bible?

    May 14, 2012 at 2:25 pm |
    • GauisCaesar

      In America, we are allowed to vote how we want. If you don't like it, move. Also, accepting someone and accepting their sin are two different things. Christ (nor the Bible) ever ask or expect you to accept sin.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:27 pm |
    • dc3219

      You can believe in the Bible and evolution. You just contradict yourself if you believe the Bible and Darwin's theory of evolution.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:28 pm |
    • James PDX

      Actually, Christ did ask you to accept sin. He told you to turn the other cheek, not to judge others, etc... Maybe you should reread the Bible.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • Richard

      Let me ask you a question, since you are such a good student of scripture. How long did it take God to create the earth? Please say six days and he rested on the seventh. If that is your answer, you might want to think who the audience was in those days. God gave each person a brain so they can think abstractly. Unfortunatley some people just are lemmings and will belive anything.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
    • GauisCaesar

      James, judging PEOPLE and judging SIN are two different things. I'm sorry your mind cannot understand this. Maybe you should just leave this to people that have actually read the Bible and practice it!

      May 14, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
    • Beserker

      I hear yall, but again you prove my point. I can care less, since he is only using this to try and get that party's vote. everyone has excuses based on their religion or their views of the bible.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:37 pm |
  14. dc3219

    "Are blacks Hypocrites." John, I think you just stereotyped, stereotypers.

    Not a good strategy.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:24 pm |
  15. ILoveJesus

    Regarding the scripture being quoted from Ephesians 6:5, the KJV Holy Bible, reads "Servants...". The word "slave" appears ONE TIME in the KJV Holy Bible. Jer. 2:14. In this verse the Lord through the prophet Jeremiah is simply posing a question to Israel. The word "slaves" appears ONE TIME in Rev. 18:13. Here the Bible speaks of God destroying Babylon and how no longer will merchandise be made of "....and horses, and chariots, and slaves, and souls of men."

    May 14, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
    • GauisCaesar

      The word slave comes from an abbreviation of the people who have really been enslaved greatly as well as blacks, the slavs. Before the middle ages, the word didn't exist. In the Bible, a slave is a good comparison to what God wants of his people.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:26 pm |
    • GodPot

      And the KJV has it absolutely right, even though the Hebrew and greek words being translated are EXACTLY the same word as where the KJV uses "servant".

      How about you translate this prophecy "And in the time of the dark one, who shall be the first among his people to rule, the unholy alabaster people shall rise up in one voice, denouncing reason, decrying logic, demanding fealty while giving none, and their ignorance shall know no bounds." GP 1:15-16

      May 14, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • mema

      Gauis- If in fact the word slave did not exist before the middle ages then why is it used even once in the bible? Also why is there such a basic lack of understanding on the term slave, from a biblical standpoint. I mean if you are going to call blacks hypocrites because their ancestors were slaves then at least understand the point you are arguing for or against. If you do not understand the biblical view of a slave then what in the world is your argument based on? Biblical slaves in no shape or form resemble the perception of modern day slavery. The bible also speaks of slaving after riches. A biblical slave was to be treated quite well in fact and became a slave as an option of repayment. They were given the ability to buy their freedom. They recieved wages and could recieve inheritance or position of more respinsibility. Slaves would not have been treated in the way more modern day slaves have been abused. They were valued and respected. There was never even a valid biblical argument to own and abuse black slaves in America. Nor was it the origibal basis for it. The bible was missrepresented as an excuse for continued slavery! Just because the black Christians do not favor gay marriage that in no way makes them a hypocrite! Its God who says it is a sin, so as a true Christian would/should respect Gods view over mans, period! This fact does NOT make one judgemental or full of hate! In fact it has nothing to do with either of those. If however their teachings were to incite each other to violence against gays based on their lifestyle then yes, that would be hate or judgement. As it now stands, simply having a diffetent view and/or standing up to defend your own, thats called a Democracy! A vote is taken, the majority rules. As has been the way of our Country. Now who should argue against Democracy?!

      May 14, 2012 at 3:01 pm |
  16. eAGERLY oBSERVING

    I can't remember being this excited about a fight since the Tyson/Holyfield rematch!

    The blacks vs. the gays. We've gotten everyone else in our society to tear each other to shreds, but not these two. I'm sure all of you have grown tired of hipster vs redneck, protestant vs catholic, north vs south, black vs white, gay vs straight, immigrant vs natural born american vs native american, white collar vs blue collar, democrat vs republican, old vs young, or men vs women.

    After this match, I want to see Kindly Coolie-Baking Grandmas vs Habitat for Humanity Volunteers. They've been getting off way too easy!

    May 14, 2012 at 2:21 pm |
    • Sad

      It's like watching bum fights, where both sides have been beaten down and abused for years but now someone pays them to fight eachother and the rest of us can't look away.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:25 pm |
  17. Alan

    Being gay is not the same as being black.
    Believing marriage should be between one man and one woman does not make you a racist.
    Have a nice day.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:21 pm |
    • Kafir

      A bigot by another name...

      May 14, 2012 at 2:29 pm |
    • pokey

      you are right alan, it makes you a biggot!

      May 14, 2012 at 2:29 pm |
    • DK

      Wow. You don't get what this conversation is about at all, do you?

      May 14, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • talbet

      Believing gays shouldn't be legally allowed to get married means you believe in discrimination against a minority of people.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:32 pm |
    • Faye

      Amen and thank you !

      May 14, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
    • Guest

      More of a unchristian bigot.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
    • Den

      You know there is such a thing as being a gay and black. *gasp*

      May 14, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
    • Nat Q

      No, it doesn't make you a racist as "gay" is not a race. It just makes you a plain old-fashioned bigot.

      May 14, 2012 at 3:06 pm |
    • jevans

      funny because i have a black shirt that says GAY all over it. in that case being gay is being black

      May 14, 2012 at 3:07 pm |
  18. n8263

    It is immoral to impose your religious superstition on others.

    You do not believe in religion because you honestly think it is true, you believe in it because you fear mortality or are seeking meaning in your life. It does not take a genius to figure out all religion is man made, so for humanity's sake, please stop lying to yourself.

    Deluding yourself in religion does not change reality. Lying to yourself is probably the worst possible way to try to find meaning.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:20 pm |
    • thinking clearly now

      N8263....You assume to know why I believe in God? Because of my motality and seeking meaning in our lives? If it makes you feel better to think that then more power to you. The real truth of the matter is I know and have meaning in my life and I believe in God because he is who created all things. I feel its an honor to serve him all the days of my life. If all I recieve in return is his love and approval that is.sufficent

      May 14, 2012 at 2:28 pm |
    • n8263

      @thinking, how do you know your god is the one that created all things?

      How do you know it was not Allah, or a god unkown to man?

      May 14, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • jevans

      n8- That's just it, he/she doesn't know. Noone does. Every religion is based upon the "my God is the REAL God" addage. I'm not bashing religion, folks can do whatever they want, but I think it's foolish to live your life within the confines of a religious system that in itself is more hypocritical than the people worshipping (Priest molestations, Pastor infidelity, Chuches being "tax exempt" but then have Clergymen with Mercedes parked out front, etc,). I'm all about finding meaning, supporting the belief system of your choice, and all that good stuff. But I cannot stand when people get all RAH RAH about religion as if everyone needs to get behind it. I don't project my agnostic views on anyone, and quite frankly I don't even think religion should be discussed outside forums like these or within the four walls of the Church/Mosque/Temple.

      May 14, 2012 at 3:14 pm |
  19. n8263

    Christians should be the least judgemental based on the teachings of Christ, but here they are.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:18 pm |
  20. jon

    A pig with lipstick on is still a pig.

    May 14, 2012 at 2:17 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.