Daubenmire: Christians Can’t Let Gays Come Out of the Closet

Dave Daubenmire sounded a lot like a Christian Reconstructionist fascist in a recent video, saying that as soon as Christians accepted that it was okay not to imprison people for sodomy, same-sex marriage became inevitable. He doesn’t actually endorse stoning gays explicitly, but he does say that God’s standards never change:

As Daubenmire explained, once Christians compromised on God’s standard of “no homosexuality [and] sodomy is a crime” by agreeing to allow gay people to “come out of the closet and be recognized,” it became impossible to stop gay marriage.

“The church is rot with compromise,” Daubenmire said. “Values we used to stand for we now compromise because why? We think maybe God was a little bit crazy back in those old days when he made some of those rules … Compromise isn’t a good thing. How do we know that? Because the Lord himself said, ‘I change not. I’m the same yesterday, today, and forever.’ He is a solid rock. He doesn’t compromise. And neither should we on values that matter. Compromise is deadly, folks.”

So if God is the same forever, that means his command to stone gay people to death remains in force, right?

httpv://youtu.be/Y1GItQvay8E

"It's "The Little Drummer Boy" that does it for me."

Bakker Declares Victory in Mythical War ..."
"A few years ago I was wished a merry Christmas by a man wearing earlocks ..."

Bakker Declares Victory in Mythical War ..."
"Me previously:At some point conservative Christians may stop defending Roy Moore’s predatory behavior. Artor responds:No, ..."

And Two More Women Come Forward ..."
"He'll probably revive the War on Christmas rhetoric next year, knowing his viewers will likely ..."

Bakker Declares Victory in Mythical War ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • John Pieret

    his command to stone gay people to death remains in force, right?

    Only gay males. Leviticus says nothing about lesbianism (polygamy was ok then, women didn’t mean much and if they diddled each other in the harem, it was no big deal).

  • D. C. Sessions

    And what was that all about selling everything you have and giving the money to the poor?

    (I’m skipping the whole shellfish etc. thing because of the “Jesus exemption,” but that one is Jesus.)

  • http://heb712.blogspot.com heddle

    So if God is the same forever, that means his command to stone gay people to death remains in force, right?

    And it also means Christians are still supposed to sacrifice animals for atonement. I’m sure he agrees with that.

  • matty1

    Claiming to speak for a god is pretty much the Bible definition of prophet (more than predicting the future) and we all know what that unchanging law says about those who make that claim falsely.

    How sure are you, he wants you to be saying this stuff Dave?

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    So if God is the same forever, that means his command to stone gay people to death remains in force, right?

    Well, not to death*.

     

    * Compromise!

  • Kaintukee Bob

    @5: Compromise! What sorta wishy-washy leftist commie are you? Everyone knows that compromise is surrender!

  • scienceavenger

    As Daubenmire explained, once Christians compromised on God’s standard of “no homosexuality [and] sodomy is a crime” by agreeing to allow gay people to “come out of the closet and be recognized,” it became impossible to stop gay marriage.

    Ah, ye blind pig hath foundeth yon slop. It’d be too much to expect for him to explain why that’s a bad thing.

  • busterggi

    I’m keeping a box of rocks in my car incase I see the Coach at an endless shrimp buffet.

  • eric

    Daubenmire on Jesus: ‘He doesn’t compromise.’

    Jesus on Jesus: ‘its best to be celibate. But if you can’t be celibate, get married rather than hooking up.’ (Matthew 19:10-12)

  • Michael Heath

    In the late-1990s I read one of the Jack Miles biographies of the Christian god. I think there was at least two, if not three of those books. I read the first one, which starts of course in Genesis; that book won a Pulitzer prize in 1996.

    Miles found that the Bible’s perception of the nature of God evolved through the period when the Old Testament was written and edited. God as presented in the most recent Old Testament writings was a very different than the god(s) presented in the earliest passages.

    God’s nature also paralleled the beliefs of people in the region and those nearby cultures that were influencing the Jewish people of those times. This of course was greatly amplified with the Jesus character (not a topic of Miles’ first book). It’s almost as if the god(s) of the Bible were merely a reflection of the culture from which the Bible was written.

  • peterh

    Karen Armstrong’s A History of God also shows this god critter to have been quite malleable through time.

  • http://timgueguen.blogspot.com timgueguen

    So, if Daubenmire believes God’s laws are unchanging, does that mean we should go look in his basement, just in case he’s got some slaves chained up in it?

  • howardhershey

    Sticking with marriage, didn’t the New Testament say something about divorce (unless because the spouse engaged in ‘sexually immorality’) and remarriage, as opposed to widowhood and remarriage, being the equivalent of adultery (Matthew 19:9)? Not to mention actual adultery. And we know the Biblical penalty for adultery (Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22). Hint: It is exactly the same recommended punishment proposed for same sex couplings (Leviticus 20:13) Jesus, however, left the job of punishing to “him who is without sin”. I am sure there would be enough volunteers who claim to be ‘without sin’ among televangelists.

  • anubisprime

    The shorter synopsis being ….If teh ghey is allowed out of the closet and become equal members of society then the main stay and target of fundamental xtianity and their innate, if not inane, bigotry does not get any exercise at all and that is repression!

    They are not sure about atheists anymore…them critters bite back these days…and women are far less controllable then they traditionally once were.

    It is not a target rich environment is a secular world, and the gaps for their delusion are getting getting impossible to keep open, seemingly their only option would be each other, as internecine jeebus drooling warfare is equally traditional one other alternative offers good old fashioned racism.

    But the problem there is that there are far to many races to keep straight in their intolerance list and they are not sure what the quota should be applied and to what race, they are not all equal apparently.

    The blackman is easier to denigrate but seeing as most seem to be xtian that might be difficult to quantify, besides they have been there done that and got fingers burnt in the courts and historical reality, the brownman is the latest and most enthusiastically endorsed addition to their shit list, and that is a tad easier to blowhard about given their preference in delusional shit soup,, but they are not so easily confronted in the streets of righteousness cos the majority live in other countries.

    The yellow peril has stumped them seeing as Asian economic power owns much of the western market place, besides the erstwhile leaders of xtian political aspirations tend to confuse who are bad yellow peril and who is good yellow peril…and Russia has nukes so tis a caution it really is.

    It is a quandary they are in and no mistake, if they allow teh ghey tosneak out the side door of the closet via the law of the land that leaves good old fashioned xtianity without a valid bell to ring on their bike….and they are not used to being ignored, so they is sad and grumpy bunnies so they are!