November 22nd, 2009
 

365 Gay: Living

Video: Newsweek’s religious case for gay marriage

, Executive Producer, 365gay News

The Religious Case for Gay MarriageNewsweek’s provocative cover story this week explores what the Bible really says about gay people, gay marriage, even gay sex.

Religion editor Lisa Miller talked to scholars who say neither Jesus or the Bible ever explicitly define marriage as between one man and one woman.

“The Bible’s view of marriage is nothing like the way we view marriage today,” Miller told 365gay News. “There are all kinds of ways to interpret it because the Bible was written three or 4,000 years ago, for a world that looks completely unlike our own.”

Newsweek editor Jon Meacham predicted the predictable backlash in his column, and Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention soon followed up.

Here’s how Newsweek laid out the religious case for gay marriage.

“There are four or so verses that are quoted over and over and over by the religious right against homosexuality,” Miller told 365gay News.

“Two of them are in Leviticus, two of them are in Paul, and there’s a verse in Genesis. I went to those verses and I talked to scholars about them, progressive scholars, and I said, is there another way to interpret this, besides just condemning homosexuality as an abomination?”

“The argument I’ve been getting the most is the Adam and Eve argument. Marriage is between a man and a woman,” Miller said.

“There’s a verse in Genesis that says when a man leaves his family he should cleave to his wife and they should become one. The problem with that verse is that it was written in a universe where men were polygamists, and as one Bible scholar I talked to said, you know he should cleave to his wife but how many wives?”

As for Leviticus, where passages refer to sex between men as “an abomination,” Miller said that’s part of a book of rules for a world very different from today.

“This was a very particular world and there are all kinds of rules in there about blood sacrifices and the best way to kill an animal. You have to say, look these rules just don’t apply themselves anymore. We don’t do weird haircuts, we don’t do blood sacrifices…. why do we have to take these two verses about human sexuality so seriously when three pages later there’s instructions on the best price to pay for a slave whether it’s a man, woman, child or old person? Let’s be real about how useful this book is to us.”

Miller pointed out that while there is no passage in the Bible that refers to sex between women, she thinks the discomfort with gay marriage is grounded in discomfort over gay sex.

“The scholars I talked to especially about the verses in Paul say that the condemnation of gay sex in Paul is really a condemnation of the worst kind of craven, licentious, debauched behavior that in fact Paul was talking about the behavior of the Roman emperors Caligula and Nero, who everybody in the first century would have known were just bad, bad people. His condemnation of it is a condemnation of a sort of general wickedness and promiscuity, and that in fact what Paul argued for, is family stability.”

“Get married, don’t get divorced. That was a big thing for Paul, stay together. It’s actually a socially conservative argument. Get married, stay married, it’s good for society, it’s good for kids, it’s good for families. Love and the experiment of trying to stay loving even through difficult times is a very Christian endeavor. Let’s try to give that to everybody.”

Miller said she was most moved by what she learned about the Bible’s true message of inclusion and love.

“The message of Jesus is to reach out to everybody. God loves everybody. A priest quoted to me Psalm 139 which is, ‘I am wonderfully and fearfully made.’ It’s a Psalm about how God sees inside you, your most secret self, even the parts of you that you don’t show to the world. And it’s a wonderful argument for gay marriage. It’s like, God loves all of us, in all of our beauty, in all of our imperfection. Why would he discern between us based on something like sexual orientation? He wouldn’t. I found that a very moving argument and it was inspiring to me.”


Login or Register to comment.

or Login with Facebook:

  • Gene Said: December 13th, 2008 at 1:56 am
    • So, uh, where’s the video? What am I missing?

  • Nathan Said: December 13th, 2008 at 12:50 am
    • The human heart is weak, if it finds a fault either real or illusionary in someone else it will attack that person. Sadly people who claim to be Christians are the ones attacking the GLBT community dragging Christianity’s name through the mud as they throw stones at others while ignoring their own imperfections.

  • otter Said: December 13th, 2008 at 12:14 am
    • How about this? Let’s start a church where same sex marriage is a sacrament, and then sue the snot our of anyone who tries to prevent us from the free exercise of our religion!!
      Wouldn’t it be fun to cry foul on the Christians who are using the government to establish a state religion in direct violation of the constitution???
      It would make for a fine legal clusterf–k, with the proponents of one religion are preventing another religion from practicing their faith!!
      Sounds like fun to me!

  • mom Said: December 13th, 2008 at 12:04 am
    • Day late and a dollar short. WTF couldn’t they publish this in October????

  • Will Said: December 12th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
    • Either Discovery channel or WE channel.One of then had done an episode to religion, and it had actually pointed out the few “gay” parts to it.As the David issue.Being the boring different interpitation.Honestly,no really.Any man to hold another man,when not in a freezing situation.In cloth together is at lest bisexual.This is clearly stated, but of course most wont know this, or ignore it.

  • LOrion Said: December 12th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
    • Please Ginelle, Evangelical Anit-Christians…do not THINK, by definition..They follow all rules and morals and orders from their Pastors…so a lot more hate is on the way…which just proves they follow the Anti=Christ …not the true one.

  • Barry Birnberg Said: December 12th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
    • I have recently spent time with a Minister who told me he was against Gay Marriage but not a Same Sex legal Union. When I explained the difference he realized he had been peaching based upon assumptions about what was possible and allowing his prejudiced past upbringing, to direct his unrealistic present. He promised never to preach a word about anything again without knowing it’s true meaning. We can only hope!!

  • RICK Said: December 12th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
    • Got a great idea !! We discussed this over dinner tonight. Lets all pick a day and a month and all rent buses and converge on city halls everywhere( except mass. and conn.) and apply for marriage licenses !! We will flood the citys with couples who demand our Civil Right to get married to the ONE WE LOVE like the rest of society does. Remember -STRENGHT IN NUMBERS– !! HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THAT ?The news media cannot ignore us !!Our messege is clear !!

  • Mike in Wisconsin Said: December 12th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
    • Amber, the following is from Wikipedia: The Pauline epistles, Epistles of Paul, or Letters of Paul, are the thirteen New Testament books which have the name Paul (Παῦλος) as the first word, hence claiming authorship by Paul the Apostle.

      So perhaps the author of this article did know what she was talking about.

  • ingo Said: December 12th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
    • I’m just waiting for “a burning of Newsweek” (by the conservatives); bet it’s coming.

  • Amber Said: December 12th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
    • “Two of them are in Leviticus, two of them are in Paul…” Since when is Paul a book of the bible? I agree that the bible doesn’t condemn homosexuality, but if you are going to write an article, please at least get the basic facts correct.

  • Kris Said: December 12th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
    • I’m so sick of the same verses being used against me. It’s funny how a person teaches his beliefs, and doesn’t take into consideration that he may have taken it wrongly. There are several books of the Bible that are not allowed for us to read. The Bible is taken so much out of context, that one day someone could say that being a premie baby is evil, or owning a pet that licks your face evil.

      I believe that there are reasons for everything that is on this earth. Although some people run to the Bible for every single question they have, the answer is not always there in their Bible, so then it is time to make a change and to get out of that “BIBLE” book. It’s now the early 2000’s, many things have changed. It’s a new world, not one that holds the bible’s sayings anymore. In the BIBLE it tells us of slavery, and other things that are no longer tolerated. It’s time to give every person breathing today, their civil rights.

  • JayC Said: December 12th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
    • Regrettably, it appears that many of the conservative christians make no attempt to put the bible in an historical perspective. They claim it is to be read literally. Except for the parts that should be interpreted.:-) Face it: when it comes to this mob, we are not dealing with the most educated people. Their clergy are telling them basically: “You may be a sinner, but at least you’ll never be as bad as those homosexuals!”. It makes them feel good, and that’s what religion is all about.

  • Ginelle Said: December 12th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
    • I would hope, in response to Ingo’s comment, that people, especially people who claim to be conservative christians, take a page out of history by not going on a witch hunt to burn Newsweek as people with the Bible years ago. Pick up Newsweek at your local store, read through the articles as they are written, carefully thinking about the points they are trying to get across. If you are on-line, then you have the added benefit of several videos which address the issues in a very detailed and informative manner. Don’t cross it off as a bunch of rubbish until you actually can say that you have read and you have understood.

  • ingo Said: December 12th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
    • I’m just waiting for “a burning of Newsweek”; bet it’s coming!

 
Login

Register
Lost your password?


or Login with Facebook