Not Getting It

A bit of a recap first (and believe it or not, I consider this post to be a direct sequel to this one):

Dan Savage had quite an earthy riposte to the Christian reader who protested his remarks about the role of churches in anti-gay bullying and hate crimes. The reader had this to say:

To that end, to imply that I would somehow encourage my children to mock, hurt, or intimidate another person for any reason is completely unfounded and offensive. Being a follower of Christ is, above all things, a recognition that we are imperfect, fallible and in desperate need of a savior. We cannot believe that we are better or more worthy than other people. I have never in my life know someone who loved the Lord who wished ill will on other people and certainly not death "so that [we] can perpetuate [our own] agenda."

Savage:

The dehumanizing bigotries that fall from lips of "faithful Christians," and the lies that spew forth from the pulpit of the churches "faithful Christians" drag their kids to on Sundays, give your straight children a license to verbally abuse, humiliate and condemn the gay children they encounter at school. And many of your straight children—having listened to mom and dad talk about how gay marriage is a threat to the family and how gay sex makes their magic sky friend Jesus cry himself to sleep—feel justified in physically attacking the gay and lesbian children they encounter in their schools. You don't have to explicitly "encourage [your] children to mock, hurt, or intimidate" gay kids. Your encouragement—along with your hatred and fear—is implicit. It's here, it's clear, and we can see the fruits of it.

There's more, and as far as I'm concerned it's right on point. So of course, via Sullivan, we get this from Benjamin Dueholm:

The wild free-associating Savage is doing here--between traditional views of marriage and Christian sexual ethics, children's attitudes, bullying, and suicide--surely sounds plausible to his apparently quite credulous readership. But plug in just about any other religion or group and see how it sounds to you. Would you want to see some evidence for the bolded statements above? Are the bullies who cause so much high school trauma devout and practicing Christians? Are average churches writing licenses to abuse gay kids? If so, I'd sure like to know. They may well be! For all I know, Savage is merely describing statistically robust correlations between youth church attendance and high school bullying. But when you claim that defining marriage as a heterosexual institution = bullying = gay teen suicide, one would like to see the facts of the case.

Frankly, to cast Savage's comments as "wild free-associating" is a little over the top. I don't mean to sound condescending, but apparently someone needs a map and a flashlight here, although I don't see how anyone could not understand Savage's point.

Christianity, even the most peace-and-love, warm-and-fuzzy, puppies-and-kittens varieties, teaches that homosexuality is a sin. Granted, this is a tenet of the desert monotheisms as a group, and there are some denominations and sects that are at least trying to rethink their positions, but by and large, this is the message from the dominant Western religions. It can be as extreme as the pronouncements of the pope or such charlatans as Tony Perkins and Bryan Fischer, all condemning same-sex attraction as the worst possible danger for Western civilization, or it can be as relatively benign as the "acceptance" of the Episcopal Church, which even ordains gay clergy -- as long as they remain celibate. (Which is not required of their heterosexual clergy. "Benign," sadly, is not an absolute value.)

And after that, the exhortation to treat these poor, "intrinsically disordered," immoral and degenerate gays as real people might not have much of an impact, don't you think? (One of the things that came closest to causing me to lose my lunch within living memory was an op-ed by Tony Perkins in WaPo that had "compassion" in the headline. Printed on National Coming Out Day. I think the appropriate word here is "travesty." And quite likely meant to be deliberately insulting, considering the smarmy assholes who are the titular editors of that section.)

And, to get back to the marriage question, which is always central these days: Until gay couples have the same right to unfettered participation in marriage that their straight counterparts have, the message is still that gays aren't as good -- they are lesser, and they are "Other." And as long as the churches that are preaching that message stand in the way of that participation, whether through lobbying legislators or trying to appropriate the institution itself (and make no mistake: marriage has never in its history been solely or even predominantly a religious institution), then they are culpable, because that institution has come to symbolize the acceptance of gay people by society at large. (We're at the point where the material benefits of marriage, although they may add weight to arguments at law, are beside the point. It is marriage as a marker of status within the community that is the key issue.)

So, to answer Dueholm, yes, the kids who are doing the bullying are quite likely church-going Christians (although their devoutness is open to debate). And yes, average churches are writing licenses to abuse gay kids. And yes, the sun still rises in the east.

Dolt.