Navy plan to allow same-sex marriage on bases draws opposition
Soon the Navy may permit same sex marriages on Naval bases. A file photo of the USS Carl Vinson in the Persian Gulf.
May 10th, 2011
08:48 AM ET

Navy plan to allow same-sex marriage on bases draws opposition

By Charley Keyes, CNN Senior National Security Producer

Washington (CNN) - A preliminary U.S. Navy plan to allow its chaplains to perform same-sex marriages in military chapels after the end of "don't ask, don't tell" has fired up congressional opposition.

All services are moving forward with the transition from the present ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in uniform. Top Pentagon officials are expected to sign off on the new rules and the progress of training in coming weeks.

An April 13 memo from the Navy officer in charge of chaplains says they "may" officiate at same-sex marriages or civil unions, depending on both local laws and their religious organization.

It is not clear if the other services would have a similar provision.

"Regarding the use of base facilities for same-sex marriages, legal counsel has concluded that, generally speaking, base facility use is sexual orientation-neutral," Rear Adm. Mark Tidd, the Navy's chief of chaplains, said in the memo. "This is a change to previous training that stated same-sex marriages are not authorized on federal property."

Read the full story here.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Belief • Gay marriage • Military

soundoff (70 Responses)
  1. Reality

    The Navy cancelled the topic plans. The discussion in now mute.

    May 11, 2011 at 8:16 am |
  2. myklds

    Should it be civil union or civil wedding and their state law allows it, I think religion can't do anything about it. However, if (gays) they would like a wedding in the church or by people in religion (i.e. priests, pastors, chaplain, rabbis, imams etc., that would definitely be another story.

    May 11, 2011 at 7:45 am |
  3. Bibletruth

    How do folks that are OK with Gay Civil Unions or Gay Marraige feel about the rightness or wrongness, or neutrality regarding a right to have as many wifes (or husbands for a women) that the parties mutually agree to? Just curious.

    May 11, 2011 at 12:17 am |
    • Adelina

      @Bibletruth: they have no morality. May God protect children from the oncoming moral chaos through many true Christians in America...

      May 11, 2011 at 12:43 am |
    • Q

      As long as the relevant parties are legal-aged, consenting adults and that they all still pay appropriate taxes, no problem here. Probably take a few years for divorce law to catch up though...

      May 11, 2011 at 12:53 am |
    • Q

      I'd only add that we sort of already have this, though it's sequential rather than concurrent. Lot's of step-(fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters) out there. Not saying all of these relationships are good, but likely no better or worse than those you'd find in more traditional arrangements.

      May 11, 2011 at 1:27 am |
    • Evolved DNA

      ible truth..There is no possibility of a child being born in a same se-x marriage, ( well may be a lesbian couple) whereas there is a very large,almost inevitable opportunity for many children being born into a family that has multiple female partners. I would oppose it on that basis. The opposition to gay unions have no real basis in fact other than a biblical interpretation of believers, and I have never had a real explanation of why it is "so bad" ..it may make you uncomfortable but that all..There are many religious sects who claim that they have a right "given by god" to have many wives, or have young girls as-signed to them.

      May 11, 2011 at 6:59 am |
    • civiloutside

      While I can't speak for everyone who supports g-ay marriage, I personally have no problem with marriages between multiple mutually consenting adults. I do have problems with multiple marriage based on beliefs in the dominance of one gender over the other, or based on deception (such as one spouse being unaware of the existence of the other).

      May 11, 2011 at 8:48 am |
  4. JesusFreaker

    Religion teaches intolerance. For those of us whose minds aren't clouded by religion, it's very easy to be tolerant of others.

    May 10, 2011 at 10:59 pm |
    • Adelina

      @J-Freaker, but you guys are so intolerant of religious people and of everything or anything Christian!

      May 10, 2011 at 11:39 pm |
  5. Adelina

    It's a tough era for normal men to keep a sense of honor... What a stupid country and stupid ideology America is becoming to die for?

    May 10, 2011 at 10:25 pm |
  6. The Village People

    Where can you find a lot of seamen? In the Navy!

    May 10, 2011 at 9:21 pm |
  7. david


    May 10, 2011 at 8:58 pm |
  8. Dorianmode

    Nice try, but saying, "pe-riod" does not end the discussion. Marriage is whatever human society defines it to be. I tend to agree with you that the defini-ti-on of marriage should be left to church bodies, as it seems that what they determine to be a "sacrament", (marriage), is up to them, and the interest of the state should remain in the civil arena. So for me, the state should not be involved in marriage at all. (See the California Prop 8 Appeals Court Decision case where the judge asked the plaint-iff's attorney "How exactly does same s-ex marriage threaten tradi-t-ional marriage ?", and the attorney replied, in open court, "I don't know". )
    Fortunately for the mil-itary, it's not up to you to allow g-ays to serve, or not. There are hundreds of thousands of them, serving all over the world. If you doubt that, check out the many many commercial ent-i-t-ies which cater to them, especially all over LA and San Diego, which are "packed to the gills" every day, and evening. This country would be immeasurably weakened without them, and I for one, am grateful for their work.

    What other people do in bed is not even slightly interesting to me. I personally think we should adopt the French legal model of civil unions, which permit children and parents, same s-ex couples, opposite s-ex couples, and various other combinations of people, to form civil unions, for legal purposes, such as inheri-tance, health care directives, etc., etc..

    As the scientific field of human se-xuali-ty becomes more available to more people, and the old stereotypes fall away, it's only a matter of time, and people will be slapping themselves on the forehead, wondering how they could have been so ignorant, and discriminatory. That may be even a few hundred years, but in the long sweep of human history it is a "moment".

    May 10, 2011 at 6:53 pm |
  9. AtheistSteve

    The points raised by CW and Ed are moot. Sin is defiance of Gods will and so is entirely meaningless from my point of view. The only things that matter are behaviors deemed legal in a secular society. Being gay isn't illegal....being a pediphile is. In fact it actually requires religion to make gayness an issue in the first place. The bible is nonsense and the morality it describes is far inferior to secular humanist morality.

    May 10, 2011 at 5:33 pm |
  10. Ryan from SF

    For-nication is defined as any se-xual act outside marriage (whether hetero or ho-mo). You may not agree but the Biblical stance is that both are immoral. I firmly believe, and the Bible brings out, that different people are susceptible to different spiritual forces that seek to destroy the soul (alcoholism, gambling addiction, anger, murder, jealousy, for-nication, etc). When I became a Christian in my 20's in my old life I really enjoyed sleeping with different women and lots of them. This had to be put away to follow Christ. I believe you, even if from a young age, fell prey to the spirit of ho-mos-exuality, which is essentially perverted lu-st. Like I had for the opposite s-ex, you had for the same s-ex. The beauty of true Christianity is it has the power to change the individual completely, if they want it to.

    Kind regards,

    May 10, 2011 at 3:03 pm |
    • Ed

      @Ryan, Thanks for not reading what I wrote. I already stated that hom-ose-xuality and for-nic-ation are essentially the same thing. That was my point to CW. It would not want to be declared an outlaw if he was hetero and for-nic-ating like a rabbit but last out law the g-a-y guys. The stance is inconsistant.

      Also If you had read what I wrote you would have realized that my hetero ways were realized at a young age and left off the part were you basically said I'm evil cause I'm g-a-y. Fianlly I too joined the church in my 20's and have been married for 10 years. I have never cheated on a girl friend or my wife. I don't think I need you to tell me how to behave. That to was part of my point to CW. Mind your own business stop telling everyone else to behave your way.

      I'm sure if I look deeply at ypur behavior as a good christian I can find a few missteps. Would you like your actions outlawed or jud-ged by everyone? I think not, so my point to you is the same as to CW treat other how you want to be treated, jud-ge not and watch that stone throwing.

      May 10, 2011 at 3:39 pm |
    • CW

      @ Ryan from SF,


      @ Ed,

      First you try to put words in my mouth....I never said that fo-rn-ic-ation wasn't wrong. I never said that I h-ate G-ay people...I'll say again if someone confesses that they are G-ay...me telling them that this is wrong isn't judging...the reason you ask?...it says so in the Bible...see 1 corinthinians 6:9. If it were wrong to try to help someone turn from their sins I guess we as christians would never try to help change an alcoholic, or gambler for fear of your so called "judge not or you'll be judged" comment. Second I never said I'm a perfect christian...BUT...if I am sinning then I would want someone to help turn me away from it as well so that "I" could confess it and repent as well. Third I never said that G-ay people aren't good people but, I would point to them just like I would want someone to do to me...that their lifestyle is a SIN!!!! Never said that I wouldnt' try to show them love as well...we all stumble...we all fall short of God ways....BUT to turn a "blind eye" and say "it's okay...you can't help it...go ahead and live that way"...is also very very very wrong.

      May 10, 2011 at 3:59 pm |
    • Ed

      @CW Ok I miss understood your point I apologize. You think being g-a-y is a sin I think being g-a-y is beyond their control. Acting on their attraction is a sin, but it does little good to say that to them constantly. My g-a-y friends know how feel and don't expect my approval. I know they are what they are and don't ask them to change. You do seem to think its ok for the government to discrominate against g-a-y people since they give us hetero people tax breaks for being married and we can join the military openly. I submit it is fine to think they should restrain their behavior the same we hetero's should. But we don't want laws forbidding our unrestrained behavior so their should be none on them either.

      The government has already made illegal for companies to discriminate against g-a-ys why should the government be exempt. Also you and I can resolve our hetero unrestrained ways by marriage they can not, so you are basically saying they have to live their lives without a life partner since even a civil union should not be allowed. I submit they have a right to love just like we do. The behavior may always be on the level of for-nic-ation so thefore a sin, but again we can leave that to God.

      May 10, 2011 at 4:13 pm |
    • Ed

      @CW " If it were wrong to try to help someone turn from their sins I guess we as christians would never try to help change an alcoholic, or gambler "

      The big difference here is that drinking and gambling are a choice being straight or g-a-y is not. Alcoholism is a disease but hom-se-xuality is not. So your comparison is not quite fair. If we don't help the acholic is would be like not helping some one who is sick with the flu. The best we could do is tell g-a-y people not to be active but they can not change what they are attracted to. Just like we can not I like women I can't change that and become g-a-y. A g-a-y likes men they can't change that and like women. They are what they are all tehy could do is not act on their attractions. That would be a best practice, but very hard for some one to do for the entire lives.

      May 10, 2011 at 4:44 pm |
    • Dexter Skagway

      Hi Ed. A bit of a digression here, but the concept that alcoholism is a disease has not held up very well over time. The best thinking at the moment is that the driving mechanism for addiction is something like a malfunctioning appeti-te. The hypothalamus region of the brain has given strong indicators that it is responsible, but the exact mechanism is unknown. As an odd aside, there are a group of people who quit smoking immediately, without any cravings at all – all you need to do is get brain damage in the hypothalamus to do it yourself.

      May 10, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
    • Ed

      @dexter I suggest the brain damage to my wiife she is trying to quit smoking. In either case I was pointing out the comparing hom-ose-uality to alcoholism was like comparing apples to oranges. One can not control what gender they are attracted too. The can choose whether or not to drink. When the drink enoughto fall into acoholism they need help to get better. You can not make a hom-ose-xual better at best you can get them not to act on their desires but they will still be g-a-y.

      May 10, 2011 at 6:08 pm |
    • Dexter Skagway

      Agreed on your major point. I was just digressing.

      Hey look! I worte a post with less than 57,000 words in it!

      May 10, 2011 at 8:18 pm |
    • Logicstic

      If (being gay) it's not a choice,hence, it can either be a disease or a sort abnormality.

      May 11, 2011 at 6:09 am |
    • Ed

      @Dexter I suggested your brain damage idea to my wife to quit smoking, don't think she's gonna try it but thanks for the idea

      May 11, 2011 at 10:20 am |
  11. HotAirAce

    Religion is wrong. Worrying about what consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedreoom is wrong. Religion/believers do not own the word "marriage." There is nothing wrong with same-s3x marriage from a legal perspective. If a religious tribe does not want to marry anyone, that is their right, but they should otherwise shut the phuck up and leave everyone else be. What don't believers understand about "if you say the law should be whatever because your book of tribal myths says so, you are trying to impose your religious beliefs on all?"

    May 10, 2011 at 3:01 pm |
  12. Ryan from SF

    @Doc Vestibule
    I think you're an atheist (not certain) and while I am a Christian from everything I've read by you, you appear to be the most considerate, intelligent, non-judgemental atheist I've ever "seen". Thank you for your mature, tactful approach.

    May 10, 2011 at 2:51 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      Thank you very much. After being labelled everything form a dog to a nazi by the people on this board, it is reassuring to know that some people recognize that I'm not such a bad guy.
      And while this may seem like massive contradiction, I am an atheist who tries to live a christian life.
      It is my opinion that regardless of whether one considers the bible fiction or fact, the character of Jesus Christ is a fine ideal to aspire to.
      While I reject shamans, dogmatic thinking and the supernatural, I do not considers those things necessary to try and live a life of humility, compassion, charity and tolerance – traits that I think should be the cornerstones of any true Christian.

      May 10, 2011 at 7:47 pm |
    • Ryan from SF

      But I was only joking my dear, looking for a way to hide my fear..LOL!

      May 11, 2011 at 5:59 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      Well, I guess its back to my role as a hellbound, cantankerous, evil, communist-nihilist-nazi-dog.

      May 11, 2011 at 8:02 am |
  13. Reality

    Gay Civil unions? Yes!

    Gay Marriages? No!


    From below, on top, backwards, forwards, from this side of the Moon and from the other side too, ga-y se-xual activity is still mutual mas-turbation caused by one or more complex se-xual differences. Some differences are visually obvious in for example the complex maleness of DeGeneres, Billy Jean King and Rosie O'Donnell. Of course, not all having these different tendencies show it outwardly.

    May 10, 2011 at 12:40 pm |
    • civiloutside

      This seems to be based on the as-sumption that s-ex is only for procreation. It's much more complicated than that, even for hetero couples who are looking to have kids.

      May 11, 2011 at 8:53 am |
  14. GSA

    Nice to read. Man or woman, gay or straight if someone wants to serve and is qualified then let them serve and give them the same rights as all others.

    May 10, 2011 at 11:16 am |
  15. Ron

    I'm glad to see the Navy following through with this promise to eliminate DADT and its issues. There is no real reason to stop it. If a man and women can do the same work, they should have the same benefits as everyone else.

    No religion owns marriage and more importantly, all benefits of marriage are given and supported by the Government, which is not supposed to enforce any particular beliefs on its people.

    Granted, there will still be those who will rant and scream but eventually, they will fall by the way side and life will continue, as it should.

    It appears that "with Liberty and Justice for all" is actually getting closer to being a fact rather than a glossed over lie.

    May 10, 2011 at 10:32 am |
    • CW

      @ Ron,

      Let me guess you feel the same way for

      child pedo-philes
      ...and the like.

      No....Marriage is between a man and woman.....period.

      this is wrong....I would rather not have ANY g-ay's in the military. I don't want anyone to d-ie before they confess, repent and turn to God....I wouldn't want anyone to go to war living this way and d-ie before they change...turn from their sins and accept Christ.

      May 10, 2011 at 12:19 pm |
    • Ed

      @CW Its ridiculous to lump hom-os-ex-uals and ped-op-hiles like that. Very few hom-ose-x-uals are ped-op-hiles, most pedo.s are eithe ase-xual or het-ero-se-xual when dealing with adults. many are married wife their own children they also molest.

      The idea of hom-se-xuals changing implies the choose their se-xuality most people don't choose. We are what we are. The gay community is full of consenting adults you are typically as moral as any christian except they are gay, which they can't help. Stop dis-cri-minating against them leave the judgement to God. His judgement is fair and just and as a christian you should trust it. I'm not trying to imply how that judgement will go I don't know what Gods judgement will be for any of us and we will al face it. I'm just saying since the gay community is not hurting you let God be their judge.

      May 10, 2011 at 12:32 pm |
    • CW

      @ Ed,

      You say:

      Gods judgement will be for any of us and we will al face it. I'm just saying since the gay community is not hurting you let God be their judge.


      I say:

      Okay....so let's say that those that enjoy kiddie po-rn get together and form their own club or movement if you will and lobby to get laws passed that would abolish the database they have to register in and also allow them full rights as citizens....you know being able to have jobs around kids an stuff. Is that hurthing you?.....

      My point is that YES they are hurting this society and this world by trying to get everyone to "ACCEPT" THIS SIN!!!! I'm not judging anyone as you say....I call a spade a spade....that's NOT judging. If it were then Jesus wouldn't have told his disciples to be weary of "wolves in sheep's clothing" now would he. Now let me also state that our Lord Jesus when he was walking the face of the earth also called SIN a SIN....see the conversations he had with the pharisee's and sadducees. In addition you say that "they"(g-ay people) can't help themself's...that is untrue. We all have a CHOICE to "die to self" and turn from ALL sin and follow him.

      May 10, 2011 at 1:30 pm |
    • Ed

      @CW thats the seocnd time you have linked hom-ose-xuality and pedo-philia. They are completely different things. Statiscs show most pedo-philes are either straight in adult relationships or they don't have adult relationships. So stop linking the 2 they aren't related.

      In your child po-rn example there is a vic-tim the child so its not the same as 2 consenting adults in private. Simply put it does not affect you so mind your own business.

      People do not choose to be g-a-y any more the you chose to be straight you just are. My mother knew when I was 6 I was straight. Not because I was doing anything a 6 year old should not and she realized while I was in a ballet class of all places. I stop ballet that year becasue of people like you teasing me at school. But in class in the row in front of me there was a cute redheaded girl and I would reach and step on her foot. She would turn and sl-ap me not hard. Her mom and mine would laugh because they could tell she didn't really mind. we were flirting in a completely age appropriate way. Thanks to people like you I lost touch with her when I quit ballet. Who knows were it would have gone. My sister continued and said the girl asked about me some times but I was 6 and didn't want to be teased. Really sad thing is the teasing never stopped. Buttom line I flirted with the girl because I was attracted to girls didn't choose it just was.

      Hom-ose-xual activity is basically for-nication or s-e-x with some one you are not married too. Wo if your going to con-de-mn gays you need to con-de-mn for-nica-tors. How many good straight christian do that. Would you av-oid you con-de-mn-ation. As I said they are consenting adults so mind your own business and leave jud-ging them to God. You like to quote the Bible it also says "jud-ge not lest ye be jud-ged" are you ready to face God if his using the same harsh jud-ge-ment on you you are using on hom-ose-xuals? Think hard on that one. Christ also said "let he who is without s-i-n cast the first stone." You cast a lot of verbally stones are you truly qualified?

      I know I'm a si-n-ner so when I face God I want mercy and understanding so I try to show the same to others. That's another good quote from Christ "love they neighbor as you would thy self." That and jud-ge not are among the quotes most often ignored by christians by the way. Ask yourself do you ignore them a bit to often? Again think hard on that one. regardless of what you decided leave the g-a-y folks alone they really aren't hurting you. as for for-cing society to accept their s-i-n, rubish you s-i-n by your choice no one can force it own. So go back to your glass house and leave them be.

      May 10, 2011 at 2:03 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      CW would like the government to legislate morality.
      There must be a yearning deep in human heart to stop other people from doing as they please. These rules and laws are always for the other fellow. Not one of those people who rally for such laws has said: Please pass this so that I won't be able to do something I know I should stop. Nope – it was always something they hated to see neighbors doing. Stop them for their own good.

      May 10, 2011 at 3:16 pm |
    • CW

      @ Ed,

      For you Doc,

      And Doc wants an "anything goes society" as long as it doesn't hurt anyone that he knows of. No matter if it is against the Word of God or never meant to be. Just do it....you know "what feeeeels goood".

      May 10, 2011 at 4:05 pm |
  16. CW

    @ Doc,

    What you don't understand is its GOD'S business what we all do. This is wrong.....I know you and I will never agree on this but I guess most "choose" to believe everything in the Bible except those six passages that talk about how living a G-ay lifestyle is wrong.

    May 10, 2011 at 10:13 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      God can go ahead and pass posthumous judgement, but while we're still on earth it is the laws of man that prevail.
      Fortunately, man's laws are starting to recognize everybody's basic human rights like life, love and the pursuit of happiness, regardless of race, creed, colour, religion, or se.xual orientation.

      May 10, 2011 at 10:40 am |
    • Ed

      @CW, There is a difference between moral law set by God and law set by man. No other organization is allowed to dis-cr-im-ina-te against hom-ose-xu-als why should the government or military be allowed to. The Navy is not requiring catholic chaplans to perform the ceremony. They are allowing each chaplan to decide for themselves based on local law and their religious belief. We can not have religious freedom if we ram our beliefs down everyones throats against there will.

      I agree hom-ose-xua-lity is im-moral but it is the same sin as for-ni-ca-tion. Should we through all for-ni-ca-tors out of the military of dis-crim-ina-te against them. I wonder how many christian would find themselves out of the military in that case. I wonder how many of us would face your dis-cri-min-at-ion then. Hom-ose-xu-ality is not choice. To act on it is but to be g-a-y is not. Would you be so willing to live your life alone if you were gay. Hom-ose-xua-lity is a s-i-n against God but not man (there is no human vic-tim) so let God deal with it in his own time and way.

      May 10, 2011 at 12:02 pm |
    • Artist

      CW is this publication of laws and rules written by the actual hand of god?

      May 10, 2011 at 1:09 pm |
    • CW

      @ Artist,

      Good to see you made it to this.....if you had checked the other story I answered your question but I will rep-ost my reply again.

      The Bible is the true word of God. God used Man to write his book....Moses, the apostle's....Kings.

      May 10, 2011 at 1:23 pm |
    • JesusFreaker

      CW, you've obviously haven't read the Bible. Try it. It's quite shocking what you will find in there. Take it literally if you want, but you won't be a free man for long if you believe and follow all of God's laws. You, like all Christians pick and chose the scriptures that agree with your opinions and beliefs.

      May 10, 2011 at 10:33 pm |
  17. Ed

    sounds reasonable to me the military is coming in line with civilian law and att-itude on the subject

    May 10, 2011 at 10:04 am |
  18. Doc Vestibule

    When Winston Churchill was appointed First Sea Lord, he described the Royal Navy's traditions as "rum, sodomy and the lash".

    Regardless, spouses cannot server together and fraternization is still a court martial offense when I last checked.
    What your shipmate does with his penis when on shore leave is his own business and has no effect on his performance as a sailor and a soldier.

    May 10, 2011 at 9:41 am |
    • \/

      ... or va.gina.

      May 10, 2011 at 10:40 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      What? You mean they're letting WOMEN in uniform now?
      It's bad luck to have a woman on a ship...

      May 10, 2011 at 11:04 am |
  19. Milton Boyette

    Please Come Lord Jesus!!!
    Does no one read God's word? I have yet to read that HE has apologized to
    Sodom and Gomorrah.

    May 10, 2011 at 9:17 am |
  20. Milton Boyette

    Please Come Lord Jesus!!!
    Does no one read God's word? I have yet to read that HE has apologized to
    Sodom and Gomorroh.

    May 10, 2011 at 9:12 am |
    • Artist

      Milton, you are clearly confused and your faith is misplaced. It is man's word and your faith is in the few men thousands of years ago that claim it came from god. Your life is based on wishful thinkign and assumption.

      May 10, 2011 at 1:08 pm |
    • Kyle

      biblical scholars maintain that the real sin of soddom and gommoroh was not sodomy, rather it was inhospitality towards others. and if you are going to take the bibal literally i bet you believe the earth is 6000 years old. and for that matter dinosaur fossils were placed there to confuse science right? the people that take the bibal literally scare me

      May 10, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
    • Kyle

      and the fire that rained down was a result of an asteroid colliding with earth, causing destruction to MOST OF THE EARTH NOT JUST SODOM AND GOMMOROH, so basically everything that any society was doing was against gods will. and frankly, fornication is a sin too.... Deutronomy 5: 6-21 states that fornicators will not enter heaven.

      May 10, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
    • Dorianmode

      Great article.
      First, it shows the breathtakingly fast movement of this culture, (the military), to catch up with the Fortune 500 cultures, and many other "organizational" cultures, such as state and municipal government's public opinion. I don't watch most of them, but Glee, Modern Family, etc., etc., many movies, (which would have been unthinkable 40 years ago), all have actively g-ay people, portrayed as completely acceptable members of society. It's an inevi-table locomot-ive. Welcome to the 21st Century.

      @ Milton Boyette
      If your Lord Je-sus wanted to "co-me" he would. Obviously he can't/doesn't.
      You need to take a bible study course. Most scholars today would say that the Sodom and Gomorrah story, (which you misspelled), is not about a "g-ay lifestyle". The entire concept of se-xual orientation, as such, did not exist in human culture, until the 19th Century. The text you reference may have condemned specific acts, (and there is a good case to be made that THAT is not what this story is about), but a general "orientation" could not have been in the minds of the authors as it simply did not exist at that time. I am not going to simplify this for you, you will have to go find the answers for yourself, but here's a hint. The S&G story is about hospitality, and the unbreakable obligation of a host to his guests in that culture. (You realize of course that in that story, the host offered to give his daughters to the "mob", to save his guests from abuse, and THAT was not condemned ?) BTW, the fact that he hasn't apologized to S&G is a problem for me. Maybe you shouldn't remind us of the fact that he destroyed two cities, full of innocent people, which is another matter.

      It is the ultimate irony to me, that this story, about hospitality, is today used to separate some from the (communion) table, THE most inhospi-table act possible.

      May 10, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
    • Keith

      Kyle, which biblical scholars? Is Rob Bell one of them? As far as the age of the earth, are you familiar with the gap theory?

      May 10, 2011 at 10:19 pm |
1 2
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.