My pastor denied my gender v2

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

Thank you to those who offered support and encouragement in the earlier version of this thread; unfortunately, the thread got hijacked, moved to the Lion's Den, and buried under pages of arguments, so all of that is lost. Thank you also to those who supported my original thread either staying in this forum or being returned here; also unfortunately, that's not going to happen, so I'll try one more time. If another troll appears, PLEASE flag the post but don't respond! I really do need one place where I'm not being stifled by some deluded Christian!

 

I'm non-binary, in other words neither male nor female:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-binary_gender

 

I've known this my entire life. I used to think it was only me, but over the past couple of years there has started to be a lot of talk about it, and when I checked it out I realized that they were talking about me. All well and good, until my pastor finally heard something about it, and started making an issue out of it during services, that if you have a womb you're a woman, and if you don't you're a man, and that is that. Totally aside from the fact that there are millions of intersexed people who are born with non-standard combinations of parts that don't match male or female: 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex

 

there are many people who, like me, know perfectly well that we're neither male nor female. And of course many transgender people whose bodies don't match their genders. You just can't argue that away! I can't begin to describe the feelings of betrayal I had, sitting there at service expecting to be lifted up, and instead being crushed down! That was absolutely the last straw, as far as I was concerned, and believe me there have been plenty of other straws as well. What makes this even worse is that my church is one of those that teaches the interpretation of Genesis that the original human being created was both male and female, which would inescapably mean, not only that men and women were created simultaneously and are therefore equal, but that combinations of parts, and we assume awareness of gender, other than just male and just female are possible. That was it for me.

[Derek]

If you still wish to attend a church, is there another church fairly close by with a more open-minded Padre? Your current pastor sounds quite closed off to reality. Open-mindedness seems to be a rarity in religious circles, but I suppose it is possible.

[LogicalFallacy]

*Directs a withering glare to any Christian who would try and hijack this thread again*

 

In my first response I mentioned something along the lines Derek has and agree with the suggestion.

 

Your pastor appears to have a conservative interpretation. These types will happily point out science that agrees with them, but discount any that shows otherwise. Today we know that not everyone fits in a nice little box called man or woman. Some, as your pastor does, chooses to treat such as something akin to a disease to be eliminated rather than people who are different from the majority but who need the same support and love as anyone else. So finding that support I think is important for your wellbeing.

 

And if you ever decide to leave religion entirely there are plenty of people here if you wish to discuss anything.

 

 

[disillusioned]

Seriously, terribly shitty move for Christians to hijack a testimonial thread.

 

That aside, I agree with what has been previously posted. If you still want to attend church,  hopefully you can find one which is more open-minded. If not,  perhaps consider leaving religion behind entirely. No judgement from me either way; I just think you might find that a truly secular community is more amenable to your identity than a religious one. In any case, if you want to chat, let me know.

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

5 hours ago, Derek said:

If you still wish to attend a church, is there another church fairly close by with a more open-minded Padre? Your current pastor sounds quite closed off to reality. Open-mindedness seems to be a rarity in religious circles, but I suppose it is possible.

 

So very true! I'm way too burned to think about anything like that right now, but I'm reserving judgment until the current emotional storm passes, just to be sure, given that church represented my entire community and social life. The scary thing is that this church is considered to be a moderate and progressive one, for example women are allowed to preach, and a variety of people are allowed to come up to the podium and speak. Women are officially considered as equals, and the pastor models a high level of respect towards women. The non-binary issue is still new enough that other churches are not taking a stand about it yet, but I guess I'll see what happens as more time passes; so few people understand it currently, not just in the church world but in the world in general, that I'm not very hopeful right now.

[DanForsman]

I'm going to go further than LogicalFallacy and Disillusioned and actually suggest you take the time to look at Christianity and ask yourself honestly if you believe the message is true or if you are perhaps more inclined to think it is just another religion made up by humans. I say this because in the event that you were to decide that Christianity was just a made up religion (as many here believe) then you could look at all the issues surrounding your being non-binary without having to twist them around all the superstitions and primitive beliefs of the bronze age tribesmen who wrote the bible. This would probably save you a lot of frustration and complex deliberation because much of that would become completely unnecessary if you looked at yourself with a fresh perspective outside the narrow lens of Christianity. 

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

5 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

*Directs a withering glare to any Christian who would try and hijack this thread again*

 

In my first response I mentioned something along the lines Derek has and agree with the suggestion.

 

Your pastor appears to have a conservative interpretation. These types will happily point out science that agrees with them, but discount any that shows otherwise. Today we know that not everyone fits in a nice little box called man or woman. Some, as your pastor does, chooses to treat such as something akin to a disease to be eliminated rather than people who are different from the majority but who need the same support and love as anyone else. So finding that support I think is important for your wellbeing.

 

And if you ever decide to leave religion entirely there are plenty of people here if you wish to discuss anything.

 

 

 

Thank you for your support of my thread not being hijacked again! The non-binary issue is one that virtually no organization has dealt with yet; even the LGBTQ folks either ignore us, or lump us in with the transgender crowd (some non-binary people do identify as trans, but they are very different things), and sometimes are openly hostile to yet another group trying to jump on their bandwagon rather than fighting for acceptance from a standing start.

 

I think that pretty much everyone latches onto science or other verifiable information that backs up what they believe and ignores the rest, but certainly with something as important as religion, I think a higher standard should be adhered to… but it's not. The tricky thing about science is that you don't know what you don't know. Most people don't know about intersexuality, but since they don't know that they don't know, they aren't looking it up to demonstrate to themselves that there are more than 2 genders just looking at the bodies people are born with. But, if someone is going to talk about something in a public forum, especially when they are in a position of authority, I think they have a responsibility to do some research and make sure they have some idea what they're talking about before they take a position. And, before you take a public position in a large group that something is bad or wrong, maybe take a minute to think that what you're about to talk about might actually apply to someone in the group that has placed their trust in you?  Talk about a kick in the head! 

 

There are a lot of things that I have experienced that I can't find a rational or scientific explanation for. If I just blindly dismiss those things, I'd be guilty of the same sort of behavior that is rightly criticized in Christians on this forum. I've seen posts from other people as well, who have been repelled by their treatment by so-called Christians and churches, but have experienced this stuff and don't know how to incorporate it into a worldview. All of that is for later, though, because my brain is stuck really hard on coping with this betrayal.

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

6 hours ago, disillusioned said:

Seriously, terribly shitty move for Christians to hijack a testimonial thread.

 

That aside, I agree with what has been previously posted. If you still want to attend church,  hopefully you can find one which is more open-minded. If not,  perhaps consider leaving religion behind entirely. No judgement from me either way; I just think you might find that a truly secular community is more amenable to your identity than a religious one. In any case, if you want to chat, let me know.

 

Thank you for the sympathy, it's greatly appreciated! Georgia might have had some amount of good intentions, but a terrible lack of sensitivity. There's actually stuff in the Bible about not being a stumbling block to others, and one of the biggest ways to be a stumbling block is by pushing in where you're not wanted and stirring things up. You just can't harangue someone into sharing your beliefs! If I wanted to read rants on Christianity, I wouldn't be in this forum!

 

At some point, I have to figure out what I'm going to believe based on common sense, but also on my own personal experiences; I couldn't say right now where that will lead me. I'm currently in the throes of shaking off the "the church is my life" mindset that has held me down for so long. If you think you could stand that, I'd love to chat with you sometime!

 

[nontheistpilgrim]

I once attended a service at a UK branch of The Metropolitan Community Church. This may not suit you but it might be worth giving it a visit if there is a branch near you (if you haven't already). Just an idea.

https://www.mccchurch.org

 

[Myrkhoos]

        Well, sorry of this will sound as hijacking, or anything. It is not. Weirdly enough, it is something I got more from some buddhist teachers than anything else. Ajahn Sumedho in particular. But this my take on what he said, so feel free to check him out if it seems that what I said is true.

         Most us build/and or accept identities as real entities. Man, woman, female, male, homosexual, etc, Christian, Buddhist, Roman catholic, Hungarian, Romanian, etc. Mostly they are not, they just mental constructs. I am this, or I identify with this.

        However, that does mean that this conventional, created reality is not useful, or real in the sense of conventional reality. Conventional reality, most of the time, especially when talking in great communities, needs to be clear, concise and simple as be to be used widely. The male/female dichotomy is something like that, in a way. In the biological sense, it is, I hope obvious that the human species has two sexes, like many other species. Hermaphrodites are a kind of dysfunction/disability, not to offend anyone, but that it is what it seems. I mean if you saw a man who had an exterior liver, or a woman with three breasts what would you think, or with a breast that weight 15 kg? Not everything is a variation, there are dysfunctions. So for simple communication, of course, there is no such thing as NON BINARY. Objectively and conventionally speaking. I mean, it is like saying, well, why isn t simple conversational English more profound and nuanced? Because you cannot have fast, easy communication with it. Not every conversation is Plato s dialogues. That is why, on this label, simple labels are very useful. The danger, as I said, is assuming they are real, and not just created representations of reality, and/or describe all reality. I mean, it is that saying, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it must be duck. Like, if you have breasts , a vagina, and XX chromozome, there is no need to be offended of being called a woman. As I would not be offended of being looked at as strange in an all african tribe in Nigeria. 

        On the level of subjective reality, personal level, or what do you want to call it, things get a little messy. Here, yes, certain feelings/behaviours/thoughts/ attitudes are described as gender roles, mostly or a lot building upon that biological level. As in women being more sensitive because, you know, they need to care for the young.  Of course, one can feel that the particular role and all its baggage does not fit, does not resonate. This happen not only with gender, but with a myriad of other things. 

            Early psychonalaysis, from what I gather, was founded upon this idea, that the repressive super ego of the society causes people to repress certain elements of themselves, which then show up many unsual symptoms. Not that wildly acting on them is the answer, but recognising them is an important step. 

             As in, a woman should never have wild sexual fantasies. She has, however, but her programming does not allow for that to be lived and felt, and so that energy becomes trapped, unexpressed, even un-confessed, to speak in christian laymans terms. Germanic/Catholic and protestant countries still have a lot of this kind of issues, from what I can understand. One of the most weird sexual assaults happen in that area. Whereas the more sensual french tend to be more hectic on the surface, but little dark secretes. Of course,this is simplifying.

             And of course problems of identity are a hallmark or trauma, even pre natal trauma. I would suggest Viviavn Broughton https://www.vivianbroughton.com/  on this. 

My take is that, in a society, we will NEVER EVER be totally ourselves all of the time, there will always be roles, but a wise attitude towards them is a good step.

           So my feeling towards is, don t get too attached on your non-binary identity. And really look into it. Wars have been fought and people tortured because of the big emphasis on identity. Some people will call you a woman. Or a man. In my maternal language, Romanian, woman = femeie. In French femme. If I called you this would you be offended? No, they are a set of human constructs to represent realities in a simplified matter. If put here   this is a smiley face. Does anyone think ACTUAL smiles look like this? Not, it is a created symbol, but we can pretty much understand it. 

           If you reached this point of really questioning what is identity, what is sexuality, what is this self, I really support you in moving forward in your investigation, and not get dragged dow by the exact thing you seem to loathe, simple uncritical labeling. If you do not accept male or female lightly, do not accept non binary lightly. There is a lot of psychology, philosophy, biology, cultural anthropology, linguistics that are open. Tools that even begginners can use and understand, as Buddhist meditation and Francois de Saussure linguistics. These REALLY helped in this search. What I do think is this is really an exciting time, where a lot of good information and teachers are to somewhat available through the internet.

           And really, one of the useful things in you experience can be that, you know, all of the people, even the most close one will hurt you, with their opinions and views and you cannot really expect them to treat you like a fragile glass. If you are fragile glass, and believe me I know what that means, the way out is growing thicker skin. You might have had TOO MUCH trust and expectation in this priest. Really. He may have imposed that kind if idealistic thinking. No one, literally no human being will be completely accepting of you, and neither will you be totally accepting of you. As I said, tolerance and containment of that frustration is a better way, and that is possible . Chasing unicorns can be fruitful and tiring, self knowledge and developpment exilarating. Also, you WILL NEVER be too accepting of others. The whole buddhist approach, the base is not being lied to, physically harmed ,  and all that is what YOU SHOULD enforce and expect. The rest, do not put your hopes up. 

            Hope this is useful. It is not intended to be a sermon, but food for thought and encouragement. I I failed, I heartly apologize, may the good intentions behind this message reach you, and the bad ones to fly off, die, and become food for other animals. 

 

[nontheistpilgrim]

Myrkhoos, you seem to be suggesting that Hole-In-My-Heart should re-assess their identity. But this was clearly stated: I'm non-binary, in other words neither male nor female.. I've known this my entire life.

Of course we all should have a healthy questioning attitude to much of life but in many things we may have reached a conclusion where it is not necessary or helpful to question.

I hope I haven't misunderstood you.

Hole-In-My-Heart can stand up for themself, I'm sure; just wanted to be supportive.

[Myrkhoos]

29 minutes ago, nontheistpilgrim said:

Myrkhoos, you seem to be suggesting that Hole-In-My-Heart should re-assess their identity. But this was clearly stated: I'm non-binary, in other words neither male nor female.. I've known this my entire life.

Of course we all should have a healthy questioning attitude to much of life but in many things we may have reached a conclusion where it is not necessary or helpful to question.

I hope I haven't misunderstood you.

Hole-In-My-Heart can stand up for themself, I'm sure; just wanted to be supportive.

          Yes, I was actually saying that. I do believe that reassesing our identity is very helpful throughout our lives, and necessary. Psychology has demonstrated, or at least shown that what we KNOW for all our lives can be a big fat fie we tell ourselves. Haven t people who KNEW god existed for decades, were preachers even, made converts who still think they are christian, realize that they ARE wrong? 

          And I was going even further, to suggest that the whole idea of identity is mostly fabrication in our minds, which has suppporters from the likes of Sam Harris, atheist missionary, to buddhist ajahns and roshis from Thailand and Japan. And was suggesting to her to really the study this, for herself, or himself, and was offering ideas and directions for study. 

          I mean, really, do you really think OUR FEELINGS are to so easily trusted as giving such profound information, knowing how easily they can be manipulated. There are here people who can attest to the fact they really FELT the fear of hell and ECSTASY during prayer and really THOUGHT they were spiritual experiences, and then thought otherwise.

         I mean this is a site for deconversion. Questioning your most deeply held assumptions is, well, paramount to that endevour. People KNOW from childhood that God exists, many, many millions, and billions. Are they right? 

        Has Hole in the heart spent decades in intensive study of herself, through those instruments I said, examining her experiences in a community of like minded individuals. Probably not, so what reliability do her experiences really have?

       People who are most sure they have met the love of their life DIVORCE half the time. Well then, maybe a little more skepticism really helps. Skepticism , in moderate amounts is the foundation of truth. 

      Encouraging someone to go further and further on the road to self and general knowledge does  hardly seem like a bad idea. Especially as I have met many people with such superficial and plainly wrong ideas on everyday matters as the function and use of language, that I also fostered before I discusses and read linguistics and was kind of convinced by it. 

       And it is necessary because the story making factory that is our mind, with its many vulnerabilities and biases does tricks us very often. 

       Do really think just because someone say I have felt this way all my life that is has that much truth value? Traumatised war veterans feel decades after that someone is out to shoot them. It that real? And what does even mean? And why should I even respect that? Personal experiences, as even Matt Dillahaunty, another atheist missionary says, is not a very good truth claim. 

         And she can feel anything she likes, but, if you want to really be mature, by the way, she should, as I said as a cordial advice, stop pretending of others that they validate her feelings or opinions, or she will be in a whole lot of trouble. For he own peace of mind. You can say anything to me, I am not by no means obligated to confirm what you feel or think. I might even try to contradict you, if that seems suitable. That DOES not make the bad guy, just because I rejected the opinions of others, with proof. And in my previous point, I tried to allude to that kind of proof and where that can be further studied. 

          Many years ago, people KNEW the earth was flat and the center of the universe because it what they perceived and felt, and many considered it plain stupidity to question that belief, and in some cases, unhealthy and dangerous- Galileo Galilei anyone...

          Personally, I think any knowledge is temporary knowledge and can be further refined.

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

5 hours ago, DanForsman said:

I'm going to go further than LogicalFallacy and Disillusioned and actually suggest you take the time to look at Christianity and ask yourself honestly if you believe the message is true or if you are perhaps more inclined to think it is just another religion made up by humans. I say this because in the event that you were to decide that Christianity was just a made up religion (as many here believe) then you could look at all the issues surrounding your being non-binary without having to twist them around all the superstitions and primitive beliefs of the bronze age tribesmen who wrote the bible. This would probably save you a lot of frustration and complex deliberation because much of that would become completely unnecessary if you looked at yourself with a fresh perspective outside the narrow lens of Christianity. 

 

My problem now is twofold, Dan. The first part is that I've been so badly burned that logical analysis and decision making just isn't possible right now. The other part is that I've experienced things that make it clear that, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio." That leaves me with just two possibilities: 

 

1) I've experienced these things because I'm crazy, in which case nothing I do or decide really matters 

 

2) I've experienced these things because they are real, in which case I need a worldview that explains them

 

I've seen other people on this forum talking about experiencing the same things, asking for help in explaining them, but no answers have been forthcoming thus far. This leaves me, with no independently verifiable facts, to try to determine the nature of reality in a vacuum, keeping in mind that I might be crazy. As far as religion is concerned, there is no way to scientifically prove or disapprove anything. One of the most powerful statements I heard in my formative years was that it was as intellectually indefensible to be certain that God does not exist without proof as it was to be certain that God does exist without proof, with the upshot being that only agnosticism was intellectually rigorous. Maybe that's the only rational way to go…

 

I've never had any problems with being non-binary until now, and for me it's really a non-issue in general; for some people, their gender is the most prominent feature in their landscape, but for me it wouldn't even be worth a second thought, since I can't do anything about it and it doesn't actually affect my life, if I had not been put in this unexpected situation. My family and friends have no problem with it, and other people have no idea, because I don't make an issue of using the right pronouns, or present myself as any flavor of gender other than what my physical body appears to be. I never had any conflicts with being non-binary and being Christian, because my church taught that both God and the first human, and in the Old Testament Adam just means person, not man, were both male and female, demonstrating that the binary genders are not all there is. Most churches, however, teach the primacy and superiority of the male gender, which is hostile territory indeed...

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

4 hours ago, nontheistpilgrim said:

I once attended a service at a UK branch of The Metropolitan Community Church. This may not suit you but it might be worth giving it a visit if there is a branch near you (if you haven't already). Just an idea.

https://www.mccchurch.org

 

 

They look like nice people, it's good to see people in authority of both genders... but even at my most impassioned about church participation, they would've just been too rainbow for me, if you see what I mean. For some people, their gender and/or sexual orientation are pivotal points around which their life circles, and more power to them, but that's not how it is for me. I used to go to church eager to hear about God, not about politics or other secular issues. Again, other people like those things to be combined, and that's great for them, just not for me. But thanks for the thought!

[nontheistpilgrim]

Hole-In-My-Heart, I get that. Fine. I hear you clearly saying that your non-binaryness (is that a word?!) is not an issue for you but for some other people. From what you have shared, I fear that your church may not drop the matter, 'though I hope I'm wrong.

I like your 'too rainbow for me' that's exactly how I felt when I visited MCC.

Concerning atheism/agnosticism: I describe myself as non-theist which means I do not recognise any god for / in me but I do accept that others have created their gods from within their imaginations (and that is not a put-down) which are real, meaningfull and helpful for them. Of course, it's not as simple as that but it is a convenient 'short-hand' for me.

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

4 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

In the biological sense, it is, I hope obvious that the human species has two sexes, like many other species. Hermaphrodites are a kind of dysfunction/disability, not to offend anyone, but that it is what it seems. I mean if you saw a man who had an exterior liver, or a woman with three breasts what would you think, or with a breast that weight 15 kg? Not everything is a variation, there are dysfunctions. So for simple communication, of course, there is no such thing as NON BINARY.

 

Actually, it's NOT obvious. Saying that hermaphroditea, a word which is no longer used and does not describe most intersexuals in any case, are that way because of something that you could call dysfunction doesn't change the fact that they are human beings, they exist, and they are neither male nor female, demonstrating that there are not just 2 genders.

 

I have limited interest in simple communication, but a great deal of interest in accurate communication, and in order to do that, the term non-binary does need to be used.

 

I appreciate all the other information that you passed along, but that kind of philosophical stuff is totally not my thing; maybe somebody else who likes philosophy will come along and discuss that with you.

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

3 hours ago, nontheistpilgrim said:

Myrkhoos, you seem to be suggesting that Hole-In-My-Heart should re-assess their identity. But this was clearly stated: I'm non-binary, in other words neither male nor female.. I've known this my entire life.

Of course we all should have a healthy questioning attitude to much of life but in many things we may have reached a conclusion where it is not necessary or helpful to question.

I hope I haven't misunderstood you.

Hole-In-My-Heart can stand up for themself, I'm sure; just wanted to be supportive.

 

Thank you, and well said! I greatly appreciate the support!

[nontheistpilgrim]

21 minutes ago, Hole_In_My_Heart said:

 maybe somebody else who likes philosophy will come along and discuss that with you.

Not on this thread, PLEASE.

[Myrkhoos]

39 minutes ago, Hole_In_My_Heart said:

 

Actually, it's NOT obvious. Saying that hermaphroditea, a word which is no longer used and does not describe most intersexuals in any case, are that way because of something that you could call dysfunction doesn't change the fact that they are human beings, they exist, and they are neither male nor female, demonstrating that there are not just 2 genders.

 

I have limited interest in simple communication, but a great deal of interest in accurate communication, and in order to do that, the term non-binary does need to be used.

 

I appreciate all the other information that you passed along, but that kind of philosophical stuff is totally not my thing; maybe somebody else who likes philosophy will come along and discuss that with you.

Being interested in accurate communication and not being interested in philosophy is an oxymoron. It is like saying you are interested in making correct arguments but are not interested in logic.

       That comment alone should make you aware how much you need philosophical studies. But that is your choice.

         I am sorry to say, but it is obvious from what you are saying that your grasp of language is not adequate , nor is your grasp of psychology for what you are saying, but you say you do not want to study. Too bad, that is the same reaction I usually get from some devout Christian that decide to attach themselves to their ideas uncritically. I hope you change your mind and try to devote your time and attention to serious pursuit instead of just blindly accepting your lack of knowledge. 

         I do not want to start a debate here and make a point by point analysis of your arguments.  I rest my case here and will not on this thread again. Hope you will be good whatever that means. Just know that freedom without knowledge is the freedom of the paralyzed to walk whereever they want.

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

23 minutes ago, nontheistpilgrim said:

Hole-In-My-Heart, I get that. Fine. I hear you clearly saying that your non-binaryness (is that a word?!) is not an issue for you but for some other people. From what you have shared, I fear that your church may not drop the matter, 'though I hope I'm wrong.

I like your 'too rainbow for me' that's exactly how I felt when I visited MCC.

Concerning atheism/agnosticism: I describe myself as non-theist which means I do not recognise any god for / in me but I do accept that others have created their gods from within their imaginations (and that is not a put-down) which are real, meaningfull and helpful for them. Of course, it's not as simple as that but it is a convenient 'short-hand' for me.

 

For the sake of those who are still showing up there every Sunday, some of whom might also be non-binary, or know someone that is, I do hope the pastor decides to stop making an issue of things he knows nothing about, but now that I know what his opinion is, whether he expresses it or not, that puts an unsurpassable boundary between us.

 

We all need different kinds of shorthand to talk about ourselves and each other, otherwise we'd be giving paragraphs of explanation every time, which would be impractical. You found a term that works well for you, and that helps people communicate with you; it's all good!

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

14 minutes ago, nontheistpilgrim said:

Not on this thread, PLEASE.

 

I hear you! It looked like Myrkhoos was making some interesting points that might have been of value to explore, but then they posted again and switched to arrogant and elitist nonsense, so let's hope they keep their word and are done on this thread.

[nontheistpilgrim]

I came to live in a UK city many years ago after serving in a very remote part of our world. One of the first things that caught my attention and then became a philosophy for me was a saying attributed to Guido Anselmi:

 

Accept me as I am. Only then can we discover each other.

 

I wonder if your pastor would react favourably to that suggestion?

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

Great quote! Acceptance is such a basic thing, and yet too often amongst Christians it is in short supply, no matter how much they claim to love everybody. Like I think many  Christians, my pastor's response to anything that he thinks is wrong is love the sinner, hate the sin, pray for God to change their heart… and I'm just now realizing that there's nothing about acceptance in there, which is not necessarily a part of love, although it should be. I guess in his defense, the Bible doesn't talk about acceptance much beyond stuff like accepting people who eat different things than we do… Kind of unfortunate, but I guess in those days the idea of total acceptance just didn't exist.

[nontheistpilgrim]

You getting me to read the Bible? Well, OK. Off the top of my head, though. Didn't Jesus accept all sorts of people who were not acceptable to society? What about the parable of the Good Samaritan? Some of the people he chose for disciples were humble people who would not have been considered particularly important by society. He also had harsh words for those considered 'respectable' in society. I think there's enough in the New Testament to support Guido Anselmi.

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

Jesus did in fact include and serve some of the humblest and least socially desirable people in his ministry… but those people weren't proclaiming to have a different sexuality or gender, in other words not violating the basic rules of their society. The majority of his followers were low-income, but that didn't mean they were social rejects that required any special acceptance. The lepers that Jesus healed WERE undesirable, but he didn't ask any of them to join his team. Jesus talked a lot about loving and forgiving, and of course serving, but I can't think of anything he said about accepting… can you?