Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Church of Scotland’s official magazine criticises those who use the Bible as excuse for homophobia

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. I long for the day when these types of rational voices from the faith communities outweigh the hateful, irrational, odious voices. In realisty we are probably already there, but the media gives far greater weight to hate.

  2. The issue is that people outside the churches are very ignorant of their blatantly selective use of scripture and tradition to justify homophobia. It needs to be publicised much, much more.

  3. Har Davids 20 Apr 2009, 3:51pm

    It’s great that rationality rears it’s head in the CoS, but can any religious instution afford to be rational?

  4. Well, it might be that some people use the Bible for ‘homophobia’, whatever this artificially invented term means. The fact of the matter is that homosexuality is a psychological disorder, to say the least, and those who want to get rid of it CAN get rid of it. The most terrifying thing is that the state is endorsing it and supports the view that it is normal. This is absolutely stupid and irrational. Moreover, people today are not free to express an opposite to homosexuality view on sexual ethics. This is suicide for the society.

    Again, as I stated before, dump on me your usual hatred. Nothing new!

  5. The article states, “about homosexuality, nowadays understood as a matter of genetics rather than lifestyle.”
    (Please show me the accepted medical/research studies that
    allow the above statement to be made.
    The studies by Simon LeVay on brain structre, the study of male
    twins by Bailey and Pillard, and Dean Hamer’s National Cancer
    Institute on homosexuality and genetic inheritance — all have
    been shown+ to be unacceptable by the majority of
    reputable scientists. and in fact most them say “There’s no
    evidence at present to substantiate a biologic theory
    or sexual orientation.”
    So if you’re going to say that homosexuality it inborn and not
    influenced by a number of non-biological factors, you have
    to show evidence, not just opinions.

  6. I think this is actually very significant. Within Scotland, the COS has on some occasions been more open minded than others, regarding many social issues.

    “life and Work’ has been published for a very long time, and is often discussed amongst christians, especially within Scotland.

    Maybe, just maybe, there is light at the end of the tunnel of the venomous hatred spouted by so-called’ christians against homosexuals. Maybe, just maybe, the Church of Scotland will once again show the lead, and make christianity inclusive of ALL people, rather than a vessel of bigotted hatred and derision.

    The technical points raised in the article are quite correct, in that many christians actively choose to ignore certain parts of the bible, and yet will rabidly cite one section of Leviticus whilst ignoring others.

    Time for some truth. Time for christians to wake up, and realise there is no longer a place for those who CHOOSE to discriminate in the name of god.

    Homosexuals are people too.

  7. Duke – I don’t want to heap hatred on you , but let me ask this; why in God’s name would anybody “choose” to be homosexual? Whether it’s biology/genetics is beside the point. This is what these people are, along with being the same mix of delightful, love-capable, vulnerable, creative, precious – and no doubt in some cases hate-capable, vindictive and blinkered – human beings as the rest of us. In all of that list, the most important two elements are “love-capable” and “vulnerable”. Are homosexual people capable of sacrificial, self-giving love? Yes. Are they capable of constructing faithful loving two-person relationships on the basis of that love? Yes. Can they be hurt and destroyed by unloving attitudes? Yes – just like everyone else. Are they stuck with what they are? Just like the rest of us, yes. Is God capable of loving them as they are? Yes. If there is a real, profound, caring, sacrificially loving relationship between two homosexual people, is the God revealed in Jesus Christ really going to find that so awful that he demands that they destroy it, or he will destroy them? I know what I think. But then, I worship Jesus Christ, not the Bible.

  8. Duke – I don’t want to heap hatred on you, but why in God’s name would anybody “choose” to be homosexual? Whether it’s biology/genetics, psychology or sociology, the story we tell to make sense of homosexuality is irrelevant. It’s something that people are manifestly “stuck with” (and many of them would be much more positive than that it the way they speak of their orientation!) And just like the rest of us, they are a mixture of love-capable, generous, open, creative, vulnerable – and yes, no doubt blinkered, hate-capable, narrow-minded and bigoted – HUMAN BEINGS. A threat to society? I don’t think so! So it might be worth asking why some people do find them so threatening… And in that list, the two really important items are “love capable” and “vulnerable”. Can homosexual people build loving, faithful, sacrificially caring relationships out of their orientation? Manifestly, yes. Can they be hurt and damaged by attitudes around them, and prevalent in society? Manifestly, yes. And I find myself asking, where there is real, sacrificial, caring, self-giving love in a relationship, is God really going to demand that the people in it destroy it – or otherwise he will destroy them? Not the God revealed in Jesus Christ. But then again, it’s Jesus Christ I worship, not the Bible.

  9. Sorry for double comment. I didn’t think it had taken the first one – forgot to type in the two words! Hope the Hosts can fix it.

  10. Duke – Apologies that we can’t provide you with any fresh insights as to why your comments are such a waste of space. But then you didn’t really provide us with any fresh material of your own to work with, did you?

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all