The Bible And Lgbt Rights
By RUPERT MISSICK Jr:
THE discussion between popular preacher Dr Myles Munroe and Fox Hill MP Fred Mitchell has been an interesting one. Interesting only because it is fascinating watching someone with a bigoted position attempt to maintain their civility while still holding fast to their bigotry.
In
a recent speech he gave in Trinidad and Tobago, Mr Mitchell said his
political career suffers because of his position on LGBT matters.
Almost
on cue, Dr Munroe told the press that he recommended that the prime
minister consider removing Mr Mitchell from his post as foreign affairs
minister because his personal opinions may interfere with his
objectivity in carrying out his duties in representing the viewpoint of
Bahamian people, meaning that support of LGBT issues did not represent
the majority of the convictions of the Bahamian people.
Dr
Munroe’s position was predictable. Nearly all preachers run to the
“solace” of the Scripture to justify their bigoted positions. On one
hand you can’t blame them because it is to be expected. I mean you do
expect a lawyer to refer to his law books. But the Bible isn’t a law
book.
The
Bible, particularly the Old Testament, cannot be the basis of forming a
just and equal society because it doesn’t treat everyone equally and it
is not just.
The
Bible is like your schizophrenic uncle, you love him, you respect him
but you have to take what he says in context and usually with a grain of
salt.
Is
your schizophrenic uncle right about some things? Sure. Does that make
him someone you should follow blindly and without question. Probably
not.
Because
one minute this uncle loves you more than anything in the universe and
the next he’s willing to smite you for an offence as simple as doing the
laundry on the Sabbath or ready to declare you unclean for something
your body does naturally.
Let’s
face it, no one lives by Biblical standards, not because the road to
righteousness is tough but because it’s impossible. And let’s be honest,
as far as a rule book goes it’s filled with contradictory nonsense.
If
our lives depended on following the Bible to the letter, then we’d all
be dead. Literally. In the words of Psalm 130:3 if the “...Lord marked
our guilt, who would survive”.
The
Bible is right about loving your neighbour as yourself, being
non-judgmental and taking care of the widowed, the poor and the sick.
It’s not right about gay people.
It is as wrong about gay people as it was wrong to support slavery and the subjugation of women.
Any
book that can be used to support laws that bolstered segregation, the
outlawing of interracial marriage, laws preventing women from voting and
the right of one group to assert itself over the next, among a plethora
of human-rights abuses, deserves our scepticism.
Last
year, Mr Mitchell publicly declared his support for the gay rights
cause, calling it part of the ongoing fight against all forms of
injustice around the world.
Speaking
at a church service for Nelson Mandela, Mr Mitchell said although it
faces much local opposition, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans-gender
(LGBT) movement is part of the universal struggle against
discrimination symbolised by the beloved South African leader.
Mr Mitchell is on the right side of history with respect to this issue.
As
with interracial marriage before it, many will look back and wonder
what all the fuss was about. As more and more countries and states
accept LGBT unions and after society and the “sanctity of marriage”
doesn’t go to hell in a hand-basket, the religious anxieties over the
issue will fade.
The
Charter of the United Nations encourages “respect for human rights
and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction”. Similarly,
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1945) states in Article 2:
“Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this
Declaration, without distinction of any kind.”
Despite
this, the rights of all citizens of this and other countries, even
those who have signed these treaties are not being protected.
LGBT
people are being separated by the fact that one set of privileges and
rights are being afforded to one group, but not to them.
March 17, 2014
