SBC considers race vs. 'sexual preference' language; young people consider another church
We've heard groups like NOM work the talking point on an almost daily basis. Now, the Southern Baptist Convention is considering adopting language that would not only shun gay "behavior" in an even more condemnatory way, but would actually reject connections between race and sexual orientation:
-- A "Resolution on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Rights," jointly written by Dwight McKissic, pastor of Cornerstone Baptist Church in Arlington, Texas, and Eric Redmond, pastor of Reformation Alive Baptist Church in Temple Hills, Md., was posted at the SBC Voices blog site.
The authors acknowledge that marriage "is an institution established by God rather than simply a human social construction" and that "homosexual behavior is sinful, including what this current age calls 'same-sex civil unions' and 'same-sex marriage.'"
They also note that "support of same-sex civil unions has been portrayed as a Civil Rights issue akin to the overturning of slavery and security of equal treatment under the law of African Americans."
The resolution, if brought to the messengers in its current form, would have Southern Baptists "reject the notion that race, as a by-product of birth given by the Creator's design, and gender-orientation, as a behavioral choice made by individual persons, are to be compared as equal social issues, or that acceptance of the equality of races necessitates the equality of sexual preferences."
'Sinner's Prayer' among proposed resolutions [Baptist Press]
McKissic is the same man who last month warned that if we don't stop marriage equality for same-sex couples, then "our children and grandchildren will pay a far greater price in suffering from a governmental sanction of same-sex marriage than we would have under segregation." So when it comes to race and who is and is not stirring up nasty, ahistorical comparisons, you'll have to forgive me if I'm less than open to Mr. McKissic's ideas.
But is the SBC open to this deeply offensive, highly divisive rhetoric? Well, it wouldn't be the first time.
comments powered by Disqus