You had me up until the very end. Can you please elaborate on what your friend meant with the last statement, regarding a perceived wrong?

I'm not gay, but if I were, I would tell your friend to just go buy his chicken sandwich.

No. I doubt he's patting himself on the back. He's actually taking a lot of crap from Christians for his stand. Christianity teaches that the hosexual act of sex is a sin. He's pretty much saying, "So what? We all sin". I realize there are many people who don't believe it's a sin, and I respect that. For any of us to make head way with fellow Christians, we have to say, "Okay, so it's a sin. Why is that any different than YOUR own sins"?

I'm sure your friend is patting himself on the back for his "tolerance" , but that sounds pretty degrading and hurtful to me. ("there, there, little sodomite---Jesus still loves you--and so do I").

No. I doubt he's patting himself on the back. He's actually taking a lot of crap from Christians for his stand. Christianity teaches that the hosexual act of sex is a sin. He's pretty much saying, "So what? We all sin". I realize there are many people who don't believe it's a sin, and I respect that. For any of us to make head way with fellow Christians, we have to say, "Okay, so it's a sin. Why is that any different than YOUR own sins"?

I think it's a step in the right direction to have Christian leaders speaking out, even if its not using the EXACT words others would like to hear. It's progress, though. I think it's unfortunate that the good can't be seen in his intentions and he's told to just shut up nd buy the sandwich. He tried. Which is far more than other Christian churches were willing to do.

While I disagree with your pastor friend about the sinfulness of adult consenting same-sex relationship, I admire his take on Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day as idolatry.

I am completely aware of the good intentions and did not choose my words maliciously. I'm not trying to be mean, but for all the good intentions, he is still tone deaf and I think sometimes you need to be blunt about it
It's called "tough-loving the sinner". ...:flowerforyou:
In some ways, it's more important to push those that are half way there all the way home, rather than those who haven't reached the start line yet. After all, we aren't handing out participation ribbons......

It's interesting to me. Catholicsm teaches that pre-marital sex is a sin. Using birth control is a sin. Divorce and remarriage without an annulment is a sin. So on and so on. Guess what? Our churches are filled with people guilty of these sins. Just because Christianity teaches something is a sin, doesn't mean all Christians want to run off the sinners or hate them. My friend is a pastor, so he had to choose is words carefully. I'm glad he took a stand and is doing what he can to "push" his parishoners in the right direction.

The difference is the other things you mention are things that people DO. When being gay is lumped in there, people are being cast as "sinners" for what they ARE. That's really the crux of the argument IMO.

This was written by one of my old high school friends who is now a pastor at a non-denominal parish:

THURSDAY, AUGUST 02, 2012

Chick-fil-a Sacrificed to Idols
1 Corinthians 8: 9 Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak.

This passage took on new meaning for me this morning and I wanted to share it with you.

Many well-meaning “Christians” took to the streets yesterday and PACKED Chick-fil-a’s across this country in what most deemed “Chick-fil-a Appreciation Day”. But we should know that is was more of a support of Dan Cathy’s stance on “biblical family values” than it was appreciation for good food and good service. Christians were countering an attempt by the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered) Community to show up en mass and merely order a cup of water in order to clog up lines and frustrate the staffs and management at CFA.

I saw pictures on Facebook of Christians standing in line, taking pictures with the CFA mascot, proudly carrying their cups and bags of CFA food around like a badge of honor. People actually ordered bags of CFA sandwiches to pass out to homeless people on street corners….all in support of CFA. While these are not all bad things, it is the tone and manner in which Christians are voicing their support of CFA that disturbs me. Our posture sucks.

The LGBT has taken Dan Cathy’s remarks that he supports a “traditional family unit, made up of a man and woman in marriage” as anti-gay. Their thought being, if you are FOR traditional marriage you hate gays. CFA’s known policies of hiring and serving everyone are the same. Patrons are not asked their sexual orientation when stepping to the counter and there is no blank on employment forms asking about sexual orientation. I also know that CFA donates moneys to pro-traditional family causes...(Focus on the Family being one and there are others).

But here is the rub for me in light of today’s reading……we need to be careful that we do not exercise our rights to a great chicken sandwich on a day and in a manner that is deemed to be anti-gay. Christ was not anti-gay. If we believe that he was, we have our theology screwed up. He was anti-sin. He was just as much anti-gossip, anti-adultery, anti-greed, anti-covetous, anti-glutton as he was anti-gay. Can we gossip and still be loved by Jesus? Can we covet and still be loved by Jesus? Then can’t a person be gay and still be loved by Jesus? And if Jesus loves them and the entire LGBT community, shouldn’t we also love them?

I am reminded of the story of the woman caught in adultery. Where he literally advocated for this woman as she was about to be stoned by the religious. The religious! He didn’t condemn her for her sin to the contrary. He knelt beside her and drew in the dirt, as the religious were picking out their stones to throw at her. He questioned their hearts asking the one that was without sin to cast the first stone. Then they dropped their stones and left. After they left he asked, “where are your accusers. Has no one condemned you (to die)?”. And she replied, “they have all left”. And he said to her, “nor do I condemn you". Jesus himself did not condemn…what gives us the right?

This condemning patriotic idol of traditional family values has become a STUMBLING BLOCK to the LGBT Community. I call it an idol because we have elevated it above our love for them. When Christ said, “love your neighbor as yourself”, he was talking about ALL of our neighbors, including the LGBT Community. When he said, “whatever you have done to the least of these brothers and sisters you have done to me” he was talking about ALL the marginalized, including the LGBT Community. Yet we have grabbed hold of their sin, elevated it above our own, and are willing to cast hate filled stones.

Right or wrong, our action of solidarity for a restaurant and it’s CEO can be construed as anti-gay. If it is perceived as wrong by the LGBT then we should not eat Chick-fil-a sandwiches sacrificed to the condemning patriotic idol of traditional family values.

The LGBT has taken Dan Cathy’s remarks that he supports a “traditional family unit, made up of a man and woman in marriage” as anti-gay. Their thought being, if you are FOR traditional marriage you hate gays. CFA’s known policies of hiring and serving everyone are the same. Patrons are not asked their sexual orientation when stepping to the counter and there is no blank on employment forms asking about sexual orientation. I also know that CFA donates moneys to pro-traditional family causes...(Focus on the Family being one and there are others).

I have always seen the struggle for Marriage Equality as something that would be hard fought for. I lived in Hawaii when the state was trying to pass a civil unions bill in 2009 and I sat in the state capital building and listened to people say horrible things about the gay community. But none of that effected me as much as coming out of my office yesterday and seeing a line stretching down the block of people waiting to get into Chick-Fil-A.

People waiting with excitement and pride to show that they do not support equality. I suddenly felt like an alien in my own town, surrounded by people that i see everyday who jumped at the chance to show their evil side. I have spoken with my friends and many of us feel the same way, just utter shock and sorrow. The very existence and support of yesterday’s Chick-Fil-A appreciation day has negative impacts on the well-being of countless gays around this country. I could only wonder what the people in that line would have done had they known that I was gay as I walked by. To fear the anger and resentment of your neighbors for being who you are is not the freedom that the American dream promises. I hope for more, and I hope for better from my fellow Americans.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/08/not_the_freedom_the_american_dream_promises.php?ref=fpblg

Thought about it some more and, sorry, not buying it.

When you (general "you", not YOU) ascribe a blanket condemnation to what is essentially the only form of sexual expression a group can engage in, and that group is born the way they are and cannot change, then I don't think you can separate the two and you are still attacking someone for who they are.

The other fundamental difference is that the "sinful" actions you cite are only "sinful" because they result in doing something hurtful to another person, not because of the act itself. The same is true for just about any "sin"--lying, stealing, murder, etc.

Using the sectarian justification (i.e. the selective use of "biblical" prohibitions), a) gay couples are prohibited from entering into the type of sanctioned arrangement in which sex (as you define it) is "non sinful"; and b) since any sexual acts between them are considered "sinful", they can only remain "nonsinful" by abstaining from any type of sexual relations whatsoever.

Since the religious prohibitions allow for no other options, I think it is hair-splitting of the highest order to assert that "it's not the person, it's their actions".

If I boycotted every business that did something I didn't agree with I would be naked and have nothing to eat.

If I didn't boycott a business that spends money on conversion therapy that should be classified as torture, I'd have trouble sleeping. Thankfully we don't live an all-or-nothing-world. I don't imagine you have much trouble sleeping regardless.

I just find it humorous that people can get worked up over some issues while they wear clothing made by exploited workers, eat food produced by exploited workers, eat food created while mistreating animals, etc, etc... I guess you pick your battles

I also find it ridiculous that anyone would suggest a person that eats a box of chicken nuggets is against gay rights.

To your last statement, I think it's an issue of whether or not they know where they're money is going. If the consumer does know that CFA gives money to anti-gay organizations, then yes, they're literally saying it's ok with them that the company is spending whatever small fraction of their $3.50 on making life harder for the LGBT community. In that sense, that knowing consumer is against gay rights. It's not ridiculous at all.

If the consumer is ignorant, then there's no way to tell if they're against gay rights or not.

EDIT: We can compare it to people who are vegetarian for moral reasons. Now, I know that animals are mistreated by our food industry. Killing them doesn't bother me, but torturing them does. Yet I don't take the time to make sure that the meat I eat is killed humanely or that the restaurants I go to keep that in mind. Someone who feels strongly about this probably finds that contemptible. They're allowed. I feel kind of guilty about it, but not guilty enough to change my behavior. It's kind of the same situation here. I hold people in contempt who would knowingly give this company money when I know they're going to use it against me (in general way). They probably don't care.

Now, contrasting the two, I'd like to think that my civil rights are a more important issue than animal treatment by the meat industry, but I suspect a cow would disagree with me.