Gays Christians Shouldn’t Just Leave the Church; They Should Leave the Faith

Last week, Christianity Today‘s spinoff Leadership Journal published a joke of a piece called “Help, I’m Gay.” Unfortunately not satirical, it’s an imagined conversation between Pastor Stanton L. Jones and a fictional gay man (“Todd“) whose comments are “a composite drawn from many of Stan’s interactions” with LGBT people who are unhappy in the church.

The premise of the piece is pretty similar to lots of other “conversations” we see between conflicted LGBT Christians and their smiling-but-belittling church leaders. Lots of loving the sinner and hating the sin; lots of suggesting that being true to God should be prioritized over being true to oneself. And, as always, plenty of unanswered questions and/or vague responses:

Todd: I’m not inclined to think the Scriptures are just wrong. But why does God condemn homosexual conduct? Does he hate me? That’s what Romans 1 seems to imply.

Jones: I am not sure I have a great answer for that. The Scriptures relate the commands but do not give extensive justifications of those commands.

Oh, good. That’s helpful! Patheos’ Tony Jones (I assume there’s no relation, but I’ll refer to him as Tony for clarity’s sake) discussed the faux interview last week, taking serious issue with the pastor’s ultimate suggestion that gay people should shamefully confess their identities to a church official and ask to take on a desired leadership position, anyway. Tony writes:

I think we can all agree that this is some bad advice. If you’re gay, don’t tell your evangelical pastor, “I’m a man who feels sexual attraction to other men, but I’m staying chaste. Can I please serve as a leader in this church?”

No, don’t do that.

Instead, find another church.

There’s more bad advice at play here than simply the pastor’s suggestion to throw your livelihood away in the spirit of leading a bigoted church. In fact, pretty much every one of Pastor Jones’ responses reeks of anti-gay prejudice and homophobia — which is especially problematic when this article posits itself as the ultimate answer for struggling LGBT Christians.

To begin, Jones characterizes homosexuality as a form of “sexual brokenness” and evokes the usual Biblical verses that some people interpret to mean being gay is sinful. But then he takes this standard argument a step further, suggesting that Scriptures should take precedence over a person’s lived experiences or their own personal relationship with God.

Prominent New Testament scholar Luke Timothy Johnson (writing in Commonweal, 2007) said: “I have little patience with efforts to make Scripture say something other than what it says, through appeals to linguistic or cultural subtleties. The exegetical situation is straightforward: we know what the text says.” He is straightforward that the Bible condemns all homosexual behavior. His proposed response has intellectual integrity, even if, in my opinion, it is spiritually disastrous. As a progressive, he concludes, “I think it important to state clearly that we do, in fact, reject the straightforward commands of Scripture.”

He rejects the Bible’s commands on the basis of the authority of experience, namely, what he regards as the exemplary spirituality of gay and lesbian Christians he knows.

But one of the foundations of classic Christian belief is that our God is a God who reveals himself and his will for us in the Scriptures, and that the Scriptures can be trusted absolutely. I would urge you not to just reject the Scriptures.

Of course, the Biblical stance on same-sex relationships is ambiguous. And for every Bible-thumper who declares that Jesus decried men laying with men, another person will bring up the intimate relationships between David and Jonathan or Ruth and Naomi, sometimes thought to be Biblical representations of same-sex couples. (P.S.: Plenty more rebuttals to the commonly-used Biblical arguments against homosexuality can be found here.) But to suggest that there’s no possible way to reconcile being gay with the hard-and-fast instructions in the Bible because the book is more important than a person’s own beliefs is truly troubling.

So, from its very beginning, this so-called advice column is painfully flawed.

When Fictional Todd asks why God hates homosexual conduct — “Does he hate me?” — Pastor Jones doesn’t have an answer for him. He speaks at length about the significance of the trinity between man, woman and God, namely the only familial arrangement that deems a person worthy of holy love. (Married and chaste? Sorry. Single and sexual? No blessings for you.)

But then he has the audacity to suggest that a gay Christian should just pretend not to be gay in order to get more in touch with their faith. And this discussion of “radical obedience” is where we see more clearly than ever just how toxic this “advice” is:

A fundamental question that you will face time and time again is “What is the core of my identity?” The message that comes from the world today is that your sexual orientation is the core of your identity: “Who are you? You are gay.” End of discussion. I believe the Christian faith would call us to a different answer. The calling to be a disciple of Christ is a calling to radical obedience, to become that which we are not. All of us face a fundamental challenge of reforming our identity into Christ. We face fundamental questions of what God made us to be. The overarching teaching of Scripture is that we are called to become like Christ, and that calls us on a journey of self-sacrifice.

Next, we get a reference to that somehow-not-yet-dead question of whether or not sexual orientation can be changed. (Of course, nothing about the pastor’s response is rooted in any decent science.)

Todd: Well, that’s not totally convincing, but I wasn’t expecting a waterproof answer. A lot of God’s commands are mysterious. So what about the change question? Can my orientation change?

Jones: The best answer is an unequivocal “perhaps.”

No, it’s not. This has been proven time and time again, and it’s vile to suggest otherwise. While the pastor’s column does say that a gay Christian should be wary of any program that promises a “cure” for homosexuality, it also suggests that people who suppress their same-sex attractions or take on a life of chastity as an alternative to being LGBT are much better off, even if it means they will still face a degree of hostility from the church:

Many of our churches so emphasize family life that those who are single are treated as if their lives are “on hold” until they get married. The individuals who are succeeding at this life of chastity tend to be people who have found committed, chaste relationships in Christ of care with same-sex and opposite-sex sisters and brothers. To succeed in this direction, you have to face the risks of sharing your story with more people, and be ready to challenge your church and other Christian communities to be a help rather than a hindrance in your pursuit of God’s will for your life.

Soon after suggesting that gay Christians should seek help from mental health professionals to “heal” their same-sex attractions, Jones attempts miserably to explain what makes a person gay. His claim is that it’s very minimally related to genetics and biology, and largely related to environmental factors:

There’s a statistical measure of the power of a genetic influence called “heritability,” and the heritability of same-sex orientation is approximately on par with the heritability of many common attributes of personality and many proclivities towards certain types of behavior, such as the proclivity toward church attendance or even television watching. And few of us would say that we go to church or watch television because our genes made us do it.

Persons from broken homes or an absent parent, or who have experienced some form of sexual abuse, appear more likely to struggle with same-sex attraction and engage in homosexual behavior than those who have not experienced those things.

What a horrific analogy. Suggesting that a person is gay because of childhood abuse or a broken home is perhaps one of the grossest things you can say to them, and it blatantly defies all kinds of research to say that sexual orientation isn’t substantially inherent. But are we really surprised that a person like this doesn’t check his facts?

In his last act before bowing out, Jones says outright what we know he’s thinking: that we’re all just sick.

In many ways the decision decades ago by the major mental health organizations that homosexuality is not a mental illness is right. Experiencing same-sex desires does not itself qualify as a mental illness. But what was wrong about that decision is the false conclusion drawn by many that same-sex attractions (and other sexual variations) are as normal as heterosexual inclination. Further, many make the false claim that homosexual persons are just as emotionally healthy on average as heterosexuals, which is simply empirically not true. Homosexual orientation is consistently associated with higher levels of depression, anxiety, and similar conditions, even if many gay and lesbian persons are not depressed, anxious, and so forth.

Perhaps it never occurred to the pastor that the incessant discrimination, ostracism and bigotry LGBT people face from churches like his are the primary reason for all that depression and anxiety. But he and his backers are too closed-minded to accept that there could be any way of thinking aside from their own — even if it means turning the other cheek at the number of lives they’re hurting.

In his final resounding piece of advice to Imaginary Todd, Pastor Jones offers this: Acknowledge that you are sinful, immoral and broken. Tell your church so. And then, after promising that you won’t give in to your sinful, immoral brokenness, ask for a leadership position in the church that you obviously love more than you love yourself.

And now we’re back to Tony’s critique of the pastor’s advice. Tony suggests finding another church, where announcing your status as a second-class citizen is not a prerequisite for gaining the respect of your peers. But for those who are as disturbed as I am with the pastor’s suggestion that this process should guide the way for LGBT people in any Christian faith, that’s not a strong enough solution.

If ever you’re made to feel this terribly about being who you are, don’t just leave the church — leave the faith.

About Camille Beredjick

Camille is a twentysomething working in the LGBT nonprofit industry. She runs an LGBT news blog at

  • Gus

    It’s interesting that this “conversation” includes questions for which he has no answers. Most of these sorts of things are set up as straw men so that there’s a pat answer to every question that is at least satisfying to the person who wrote it, if not to anyone who applies a bit of reason to it. But in this case he selected questions he couldn’t answer. What I don’t know is if he was trying to be honest, to appear honest and gain credibility for his other points, or if those questions are just so obvious that he couldn’t ignore him and his whole set of beliefs on the subject is so bankrupt that he can’t even come up with an answer.

  • Gus

    A fundamental question that you will face time and time again is “What is the core of my identity?” The message that comes from the world today is that your sexual orientation is the core of your identity: “Who are you? You are gay.” End of discussion.

    Well actually, if you’re taking that message from the world, I’m sorry, but you’re getting the wrong message. Maybe it’s being sent, but there are plenty of LGBT activists who would send a very different message: That your identity is what you choose to make it. Your orientation is what it is, and it’s almost certain to be a part of your identity, but as a whole your identity is fluid, complex, and at least partly self defined.

    All of us face a fundamental challenge of reforming our identity into Christ. We face fundamental questions of what God made us to be. The overarching teaching of Scripture is that we are called to become like Christ, and that calls us on a journey of self-sacrifice.

    That’s rather convenient when you’re a straight cis white male for whom most of what Christianity demands is what you want to do anyway and not much of a sacrifice.

  • Dan

    I can’t stand these imaginary conversations. There seems to be a few of them cropping up lately. It’s just a disingenuous attempt to throw up a straw man against whom they can argue. They pick the questions obviously.
    Not worth taking seriously.

  • Dan

    Gus and Dan…typing at the same time.haha

  • AFabulousAtlantanAtheist

    I really have a hard time understanding how someone gay could/would/should want to be a part of any church which condemns them. Stockholm syndrome?

  • Tel

    Jones couldn’t even tell Todd that God didn’t hate him?

  • sam

    I would just add “straights” to the title as well.
    “If ever you’re made to feel this terribly about being who you are, don’t just leave the church — leave the faith.”

    I’d also add “If you’ve never be made to feel terrible about being who you are, don’t just leave the church– leave the faith”.

  • ShoeUnited

    “Jones: The best answer is an unequivocal “perhaps.””

  • David Kopp

    Of people that suffered childhood abuse, I’d think the religious are a lot higher on the list of concerns than homosexuals. Religion is proven dangerous, and it’s passed on to children as “truth” before they learn to reason for themselves. Homosexuality comes… well, after puberty, really. Well into reasoning age.

  • The Other Weirdo

    Perhaps he had a rare moment of lucidity and realized he couldn’t just flat out lie to a person’s face like that.

  • Stev84

    A lot of Christian sects make getting married and “the family” the core of people’s identity. So it’s really all about their sexual orientation.

  • Raising_Rlyeh

    Reading what Jones wrote just makes me want to take his bible and hit him with it. It is still the same bullshit about how we all are sinners. Why do these people think it’s a good idea to state that we are basically lower than dirt?

    The most disgusting things are those related to the statements of mental illness.

    “In many ways the decision decades ago by the major mental health organizations that homosexuality is not a mental illness is right. Experiencing same-sex desires does not itself qualify as a mental illness. But what was wrong about that decision is the false conclusion drawn by many that same-sex attractions (and other sexual variations) are as normal as heterosexual inclination.”

    “Second, our struggles toward holiness are an integral part of what it means to be human.”

    No, it’s fucking not. I do not “struggle towards holiness.” I try to be a good person, but that is not a struggle in any sense of the word and I do not define myself by that.

    The Bible gives the definitive but unsatisfying answer that your experience, like mine, is the result of being a sinful person in a broken and sinful world.

    Again this is just psychologically depressing and destructive.

  • Lauryn

    This post makes me think of the Dan Savage speech I transcribed this last week. Maybe you’ll enjoy it also.

    “If I hadn’t been gay, I sometimes wondered if I would’ve questioned my faith in relation to my sexuality. I describe that as the thread I began to pull that unraveled the garment of faith, and irrational belief. Not all gay people do that.
    Some gay people, just when they realize that their faith is in conflict with their sexuality, move on to some new faith that isn’t in quite as much conflict. But for me it kind of fell apart.

    Because I figured that what I had been told by this church was wrong about me, so what else is this church wrong about? And that led me to think about all the ways in which we can’t know what we can’t know. We shouldn’t trust people who pretend to know the unknowable. That we should acknowledge the unknowable, embrace ambiguity. And think for ourselves.”

    -Dan Savage, Transcribed from the FFRF 2013 National Convention

  • Richard Tingley

    I think it is good old fashioned cognitive dissonance. Some people feel that they need a god of some sort to be true. The entire concept of life without a plan/guidance from a higher power is just unthinkable. The fact that it condemns their sexual orientation is just another thing to explain away.

  • R Vogel

    If ever you’re made to feel this terribly about being who you are, don’t just leave the church — leave the faith.

    This is Begging the Question at best and a Straw Man at worst. You even acknowledge in your article that there are ‘Plenty [of] rebuttals to the commonly-used Biblical arguments against homosexuality’. There are plenty of churches, more all the time in fact, that reject the fundamentalist theology of biblical inerrancy and embrace all people. Because some atheists make horrible arguments for stupid things (e.g. Ayn Rand) does that mean atheists should abandon their atheism?

  • R Vogel

    I would assume as an Atheist you would have a hard time understanding how anyone would be a part of a church period. But, your statement begs the question. The church does not necessarily condemn them. If you are really interested in learning how a gay person can be a Christian, Kimberley Knight has an amazing blog on the Progressive Christian channel worth checking out.

  • MNb

    One addition: even if gay preferences were a choice then no pastor with an outdaten book in his hand is going to tell me with whom I want to have sex and with whom not. Good sex is fun. What kind of belief system is it that wants to prevent me from making me and my partner (male or female) happy?

  • Antagonistic A

    Another great example of the religious not only pushing their morals and beliefs onto others, but also acting as if they are highly superior. This person being gay should be left alone, if a man chooses to be true to himself instead of God, then why talk him out of it? If what Christians say is true, he will be punished for it later (however what they say is ******* anyway). Proven by how hard these moronic believers try to convert everyone with an ounce of actual free will.-

  • Deus Otiosus

    It would seem though that, if you were able to accept that the bible was not inerrant, that you’d then have to review the rest of the text in that light. If you were to do so with a modicum of intellectual honesty, the sheer number of inaccuracies, falsehoods, and moral shortcomings should suggest that any truths found were merely coincidental. Or, at least, you should get the impression that the bible is as accurate and as true as one would expect of any book written in the era surrounding the 1st century c.e. If that is the case, why would you assume any of its metaphysical claims (immaculate conception, vicarious redemption, spiritual immortality) had merit? If you recognize that the only evidence that the faith is true is found in the bible, and then you agree that the bible is wildly, hilariously, faulty in its truth claims, why on earth would you still follow that faith? So yes, “leave the faith” is solid advice in this case.

  • Pinkerbelle Merrick


  • fenaray

    I have never understood this. I spoke with a gay friend who considers herself an xian about it and her opinion is that religion got it wrong. I am so glad to be an atheist.

  • L.Long

    When he TEARS the gay stoning to death parts out of the buyBull in public, then I will believe the ‘Progressive’ part. Till then he is in denial of the buyBull.

  • L.Long

    I do not understand how any gay can be xtian! Even saying well jesus loves us, is total denial of the buyBull.

    1-jesus is suppose to be the god-man and is the god of OT come to earth.
    2-gawd does not make errors or lie.
    3-gawd says ‘phuck da gay!!!’
    4-as stated in 1 gawd = jesus=gawd
    5-jesus says ‘phuck da gays!!’
    so gay xtians pray to a gawd that WILL send them to hell no matter what!
    They can always pray to the FSM as he don’t care and the prayers are just as effective.

  • Grotoff

    The church essentially treats gay people like the wider culture treats those who are sexually attracted to children. It very likely has a genetic component but that doesn’t make it OK. Those who don’t act on it are doing great, but need to be watched closely and distrusted.

    They really don’t see a difference between attraction to adults capable of giving consent but not getting pregnant and attraction to children incapable of giving consent.

  • Cyrus Palmer

    Exactly. The bible got the shape of the earth wrong, wrong about the order of creation of the sun stars and earth, wrong about how life started, wrong about a global flood, wrong about how to treat gay people and people of other faiths, but it’s still the “infallible word of god”. So join a church that takes a ‘progressive’ view of the bible, meaning they take even less of it seriously. That’s a sensible thing to do….. If they throw away so much of the bible, why can’t they just chuck the whole thing out? We as humans CAN decide for ourselves what is moral and how to form a civilized society without ‘divine authority’ you know….

  • bickle2

    It’s pretty clear. If you are Christian and gay, you must kill yourself. If you refuse to do so, then you must stop being Christian. No cherry picking, a Christian myst believe the bible, black and white and without exception, and obey every command therin. If you do not, you do not have faith, and therefore all protections under the law for your religion made null and void

    These are the kinds of techniques atheists need to start using. Refuse to murder your sassy child? The priest is arrested for fraud and the property and finances seized. Act on your faith, and we arrest you for attempted murder. Completely constitutional.

  • Ron

    “But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God.”

    ~Secret Gospel of Mark

  • steve b

    One of the reasons I left the (catholic) church was due to the virulent anti-gay sentiment within. I could have always found another church that did not harbor such sentiments, but such a church would still have to answer for the anti-gay verses in the scripture. Those verses are there and there’s no getting around it. Because these parts of scripture conflicted with my moral sense, I had to throw the scripture out as a guide for morality. It would be the same if I was going to teach a class on nursing, and I was considering a textbook to teach from. If I opened that book and found it talked about applying leeches to order to bleed off bad humors, I’d throw that textbook right out.

  • CottonBlimp

    At the same time, I have a hard time understanding how someone could be an atheist and a misogynist. I suspect it’s a similar thing.

  • Rain

    I would urge you not to just reject the Scriptures.

    Okay yeah thanks for your “urge”. Duly filed in the round file thingy.

  • timberwraith

    There are a great number of LGBT affirming churches in the world.

    Go here for a list of affirming churches in the US.

    Go here for a list of affirming churches in Europe.

    There’s also the MCC church which is a denomination founded to provide an open and affirming space for LGBT Christians. They’ve been around since 1968 and have over 200 congregations in 37 countries.

  • smrnda

    Holiness is a made up state that’s designed to be perpetually out of reach, so some priest can tell you you’re broken and need fixing and keep himself and his church in business by inventing a problem that isn’t real.

    And who cares if sexual attractions are normal? The only thing that matters if if they’re done between consenting adults without doing harm.

  • smrnda

    That’s kind of a huge oversight, as consent is pretty much the only sensible basis for sexual ethics.

  • sara

    There are different methods of dealing with it. Some say that those passages are actually referring to something else. Some are sure that god will forgive them because they can’t help it, and because there’s no reason to assume that sin is any worse than bearing false witness, or lusting in your heart. Some accept the notion that they are going to hell. Just because it’s stressful or doesn’t work out in their favor doesn’t mean it’s easy to let go of what they’ve always believed the world is. If whatever religion they were raised in is true, it remains true even if it condemns them.

  • Pseudonym

    You can’t tear that bit out of the Bible any more than you can tear slavery out of the book of the history of the United States. That would be denial.

    Christians up the liberal end of the spectrum tend to believe that the Bible was written by (and is partly a record of) human beings who sometimes got it wrong, and that this makes it more valuable, not less. Any anthology which only gives you one opinion on all matters of importance probably isn’t worth reading.

    Only fundamentalists require one source of information which gives unambiguous orders which must be obeyed without question.

  • Pseudonym

    If ever you’re made to feel this terribly about being who you are, don’t just leave the church — leave the faith.

    FWIW, I read it as “leave that church and leave that faith”. Even you would probably be better off as an atheist than than being in the same church as this clown.

  • Pseudonym

    So join a church that takes a ‘progressive’ view of the bible, meaning they take even less of it seriously.

    Perhaps it’s just having been brought up in a liberal church, but I’ve never understood this.

    Consider the case of two people who read Aesop’s fables. Person A says “there must have been talking animals in Ancient Greece”. Person B says “the Ancient Greeks were so stupid that they believed in talking animals”. Which of the two would you say is taking the fables more “seriously”?

  • Pseudonym

    Little-known fact: The first legal same-sex marriage in the United States was performed in a United Methodist Church.

    In 1971.

  • Dan Weeks

    There are myriad reasons to leave faith, that is, blind belief in something or someone, in this case supernatural, without proof or evidence, behind. Perpetuating a cycle of hatred, both outward as well as toward ones self, is easily one of them.

  • Greg G.

    Christians Shouldn’t Just Leave the Church; They Should Leave the Faith

    I fixed the title to be more inclusive. One shouldn’t leave the faith because a god doesn’t like them. They should leave the faith because gods are imaginary.

  • novenator

    I’ve had discussions with a few gay conservatives that go the same way (Log Cabin, GOProud, etc.). They just don’t seem to understand that no matter how big of conservative christians they become, those bigots will *never* accept them.

  • DavidMHart

    Ummm … the USA did tear slavery out of the course of its history, in the sense that there is now a constitutional amendment banning slavery. Of course, it is not denial, because anyone wanting to do so can read history books about slavery, and look up earlier versions of the constitution from before the addition of the 13th amendment.

    If anyone is going to hold that the bible is anything more than a collection of ancient myths and legends – in particular, if anyone is going to claim that the bible is a relevant guide to how to live an ethical life today, then they ought to be prepared to discard those bits of the bible that we have discovered to be incompatible with an ethical life since the time those bits were written (while still allowing those who are interested in the bible simply as a repository of myths and legends to look up earlier editions of it). If the bible is to held up as a guide for people today, then it ought to be amendable just like the US constitution is.

  • Pseudonym

    The USA cannot tear slavery out of its history, though the Texas board of education is going to try.

    Christians up the liberal end of the spectrum tend not to use language like “guide to how to live an ethical life today”. Having said that, there’s a continuum of possibilities between “absolute guide to everything” and “pretty much useless”.

  • Houndentenor

    It’s a good question. I wish I had an answer. If I could explain that, I could also explain gay Republicans too. My best guess is that many in religion are there in a guilt/shame cycle. The standards are impossible. How could you go through life without ever coveting or lusting? Then you feel guilty and ashamed and come back to church for forgiveness which then reinforces the guilt and shame. It’s not that no one should feel guilt or shame. If you’ve actually hurt people you SHOULD feel bad about that. But a lot of it is directed at things that are perfectly natural and normal. The church tells them they are sick (which they aren’t) and then offers a cure. The “cure” of course is more guilt and shame. In many traditions even questioning the authority of the church or the Bible is a major sin, so even thinking about leaving is cause for…you guessed it…even more shame and guilt. It can take a great deal of will-power to escape that kind of gravitational pull and if they don’t quite escape they feel even more guilty and shameful than ever. It’s a horrible cycle. I am glad I escaped and in retrospect I wonder what took me so long, but it was very difficult to challenge basic assumptions that had been taught to me from birth.

  • Houndentenor

    They have been taught from birth to fear life without belief more than anything. I remember one of the Four Horsemen (someone else will remember) talking about how people believed in belief more than they believed in god. I think that’s true. That’s why so many Xtians claim that nonbelievers “believe” in something else as a substitute for god because they can’t conceive that everyone else isn’t as superstitious as they are.

  • Houndentenor

    There are also homophobic atheists. (probably a huge overlap between them an the misogynists) It would be nice if we could shed all of our cultural baggage at once but sometimes it happens in baby steps.

  • Houndentenor

    Don’t use this expression in their presence unless you are ready for a major league temper tantrum, but the general consensus among gay people is that the GOProud bunch are “self-loathing”. When you listen to them (if you really have to, but not recommended) you’ll find that they don’t like being gay and don’t like other gay people. You’ll hear expressions and stereotypes straight out of the right-wing anti-gay playbook. I’d go a little easier on Log Cabin since they did bring the lawsuit that was about the bring down Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (but Congress repealed the law just before that could happen). I understand that being gay doesn’t mean you are a liberal on other issues, but that so many of them are fans of politicians who are openly hostile to gay people is inexplicable to me. In my experience (and many discussions and reading their blogs, etc) they identify as liberal-haters more than they identify as conservative. If you can stomach it, check out the Gay Patriot blog. Self-loathing central (and from the comments most of the conservatives who read it are as anti-gay as the worst strawman right wing stereotype).

  • allein

    The “belief in belief” thing was Dennet.

  • Houndentenor

    Thanks! I know someone would know. (And I was gonna guess Harris and would have been WRONG!) I hear things almost daily that make me think a lot of theists (not all, but a lot) believe in belief more than whatever it is they claim to believe.

  • Ogre Magi

    and people say I shouldn’t hate christians