By Marlon Milner - May 12 2009

"I have got something for all these sissy men who can't walk straight - it's called a baseball bat!"

I will never forget those words.

They were not spoken on the corner, or on the basketball court, or even in a bar. They were spoken over the pulpit, by a Christian minister who was adamantly opposed to homosexuality and same-sex marriage.

The words - while crude to say the least - are also quite common. Here was a Baptist minister, preaching in a small Pentecostal church, talking about a subject that all too often was used homiletically to "get in the house," that is to get an enthusiastic response from the audience. I took offense to these words over 10 years ago. So after the service I confronted my pastor about the guest preacher's comments, which came just weeks after Matthew Shepard, a gay student at the University of Wyoming was robbed, beaten, and left to die in October 1998. Shepard was found after several days being tied to a fence, with a severe head fracture, and in a coma. He died days later in a hospital in Colorado.

Given the swirling debate about hate crimes and this violent murder at the time, it was the height of irresponsibility for this minister - no matter what his view was on homosexuality - to advocate violence.

It was precisely this kind of vitriol that had rendered meaningless any intelligent moral or Biblical argument Evangelical preachers could make against homosexuality and same-sex marriage. But it also became obvious to me that it was totally not pastoral to make such comments.

Sex generally, and homosexuality specifically have been taboo subjects in far too many Evangelical churches. The ineffectiveness of the Evangelical church to talk about sex and homosexuality is as evidenced in the hate mongering words this pastor shared from the pulpit, as it is with Bristol Palin getting pregnant and ultimately not getting married, even while her mother was the Republican nominee for vice president of the United States.

The failure to have what Rev. Dr. Yvette Flunder - herself a former Evangelical - calls a non-punitive discussion on human sexuality hurts Evangelicals and their position in many ways.

The first and most obvious problem is that of hypocrisy. Miss California, Carrie Prejean could criticize same-sex marriage, but pose in nothing but her panties. And Bristol could have a baby outside of marriage, even as Sarah Palin was embraced as the darling of politically active Evangelical Christians. At minimum, such photographs, which would be generally considered pornographic by most Evangelicals, are as detrimental as same-sex practices, at least if Evangelicals want to be consistent on what they see as rampant sexual immorality in society. Evangelicals, often embarrassingly, end up on the wrong side of sexual issues - not known for our purity or consistency. But rather always know for our scandal or hypocrisy, whether it was Jim Bakker or Bristol Palin, or Ted Haggard.

But having no frank talk about sex is not only hypocritical, it's not rational. Evangelical Christians' silence about sexuality, or regulatory approach to sexual relations never offers explanatory power, particularly to young people who search for identity through sexuality. As girls and boys become women and men, they often define themselves through sexual practice. A boy's manhood is defined by his ability to be sexually active. And the sure sign of a mature young lady is that she has a baby bump. Now, obviously this reflects the immaturity of many young people to experiment with sexual practices, without understanding the consequences.