PHB Mobile



News Tips? Calendar Info?



"If you're gay, lesbian, or bisexual, would you sacrifice for your trans neighbors and siblings? If you're trans, would you sacrifice for your gay, lesbian, or bisexual neighbors and siblings? It's something worth knowing about yourself and those around you."
--Autumn Sandeen, 4/19/2010, the night before GetEQUAL's DADT repeal protest at the White House


Public Calendar

Press/media, organizations, and individuals send your time-based event info to: calendar@phblend.net

Full size PHB Calendar


About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Blend

Snail mail:
Pam's House Blend
105 West Hwy 54, Suite 265
Box #113
Durham, NC 27713









The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.



New attention-grabbing billboard campaign fights religion-based bigotry

by: Pam Spaulding

Mon Apr 16, 2007 at 13:00:00 PM EDT


Anyone have a stopwatch to see how long will it take for the fundies to erupt over this? I received a press release from Faith in America, a national organization devoted to ending the injustice of religion-based bigotry against gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people, about the new billboard campaign it is supporting with a church in Indianapolis.
A Metropolitan Community Church in Indianapolis, Ind., this week began a new media campaign aimed at challenging Hoosiers to re-examine their assumptions about what the Bible says about homosexuality.

Organizers say the 30-day campaign, which utilizes a series of billboard messages that were posted this weekend, is meant to highlight Scriptures that affirm gay people and their relationships. One billboard message boldly declares Jesus affirmed a gay couple.  Matthew 8 The campaign also is using yard signs, bumper stickers and  T-shirts to get its message out.

In addition, each billboard and yard sign invites viewers to visit a  web site that provides detailed support for the Scriptural claims -  www.WouldJesusDiscriminate.com.

Last summer Jesus MCC, Faith In America, and MCC conducted a pilot project in Indianapolis, using billboards and yard signs to ask a simple question: "Would Jesus Discriminate?"

Organizers say this year's project will be bigger and bolder, moving beyond a gentle question to propose a bold answer that some may find unsettling.  "In the past, many Christians misused the Bible to support slavery, oppose equal rights for women, and oppose interracial marriage," says Rev. Jimmy Creech, Executive Director of Faith In America.  "They went so far as to accuse people on the other side of being unbiblical.  The same thing is happening again with respect to same-gender relationships.  It has to stop."

Another of the billboards that will appear in Indianapolis proclaims, "Ruth loved Naomi as Adam loved Eve. Genesis 2:24; Ruth 1:14."  Rev. Jeff Miner, Senior Pastor of Jesus MCC, said, "I can already hear tires screeching across Indianapolis as folks see the billboards.  Most people have no idea that the Bible contains passages that powerfully affirm gay people."

The purpose of the Indianapolis Campaign, Pastor Miner says, is to change the whole tenor of the debate over homosexuality.  "Right now," Miner says, "most people think this is a debate between people who love the Bible - conservative Christians - and people who want to throw out the Bible - godless homosexuals.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  Our Church welcomes hundreds of devout gay Christians who love the Bible deeply.  Our goal is to rescue the Bible from misinterpretations driven by cultural prejudice, so its true message of grace, hope, and peace can come through."

The web site supporting the campaign also addresses Scripture passages sometimes used against gay people.  These passages, the web site suggests, are being lifted out of context and applied in ways the original authors never dreamed.

"We need to have an authentic dialogue about what the Bible says," Pastor Miner said.  "I would be willing to discuss this subject in a public forum with any credible pastor who is willing to have a respectful dialogue.  Let's shine a light on this subject, compare our different points of view, and let thoughtful people make up their own minds."

Says Creech, "In their hearts, people know that discriminating against gay and transgender people is terribly wrong.  We want to encourage people to speak up when religious bullies misuse the Bible to berate gay people.  Each of us has a responsibility to end the misuse of religion to justify discrimination."

The founder of Faith In America, Mitchell Gold, was named one of Persons of the Year by The Advocate, this year and landed on Out Magazine's recent 50 Most Powerful Gays in America list.  Gold is a philanthropost and co-founder and chair of furniture powerhouse Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams, based in Hickory, NC.

See other campaigns by FIA here, and learn more about this latest billboard campaign by visiting Faith In America and Metropolitan Community Churches Worldwide.

Pam Spaulding :: New attention-grabbing billboard campaign fights religion-based bigotry
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Nobody wear white!
It shows stains.  And be sure to wear lots of machine washable and stain-resistant clothes.  Lots of Freeper heads are gonna be exploding. 

Ruth and straight marriages
It is funny how straight people who get married use passages from the book of Ruth when those passages are about the love between two women. 

Yes, but--
If you read the Book of Ruth carefully, it's pretty obviously about family/filial love and devotion, and is overwhelmingly heterosexual in its focus.  Let's not forget that Ruth marries Boaz, and her child is a blessing to Naomi.  Ruth's devotion to Naomi is strong, but it's not like the bond between Adam and Eve. 

Check out my brand new Huffington Post blog http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

[ Parent ]
Without marriage, women didn't eat.
Women had to be married. Women too old to be fertile, who lost their sons and husband, were just expected to beg or starve. Ruth's child is a blessing to Naomi because the child cements the marriage to Boaz and hence solidifies Boaz' obligation to feed and house Naomi. People married at that time for purely prudential reasons, and rarely for love. Wives were not expected to love husbands, but to cater to husbands. Men viewed wives as business investments, valuable for fertility, skills, and family connections (not looks or personality), and got their lusts satisfied with concubines, if wealthy enough, or prostitutes, if merely getting by.

While we don't know the details why Ruth was so loyal to Naiomi, such loyalty was highly unusual in the annals of ancient times (largely written by men). Ruth took a risk of going to a land where she would be nearly unmarriageable (no valuable local family connections), and where she was likely to be a bondservant at best sooner or later. Moab was a bit unusual too, to gamble on a hardworking but poor and unconnected bride.


[ Parent ]
A Central Point
She's a convert to Judaism, and so her confession of loyalty and affiliation is not just to Naomi but to the religion and people she stands for. That's what it has traditionally meant to Jews, and it's central to the story. That doesn't mean one can't speculate that some other motives might have played a part, but I still don't feel comfortable with a GLBT campaign saying, in effect, "See--they were gay!" I think the story of David and Jonathan makes, right there in the text, a much stronger case. I'm also suspicious because the Centurian story from Mathew is weaker still.  I think we should argue from strength, not weakness.

Check out my brand new Huffington Post blog http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

[ Parent ]
Every argument is weak, face it.
The only fairly specific description of same-gender genital activity are condemning. The argument against these fairly clear condemnations is that the activity meant was sex with ritual pagan priests, or Grecoroman pederasty, or merely the wastage of semen in a nonprocreative manner, thereby failing to make little warriors and farmers to hold the land of Israel.

[ Parent ]
Weak arguments are weak, strong ones are strong
If they're all weak, there's no reason to make them.  :-)

All I'm saying is the GLBT movement makes itself look foolish if it bends texts to make them say what we want them to.

The David and Jonathan story says what it says quite explicitly, the Ruth and Naomi story is not as clear.

As for your other points, they're really not to the point, you're shifting ground.

You might want to probe deeper, since there are many more explanations of what the Levitical condemnations might mean, but since the main one uses a contested idiom, nobody can say for sure what it means or why. 

Check out my brand new Huffington Post blog http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...


[ Parent ]
NO argument can possibly be strong enough...
for the person who derives benefit from scapegoating/ hating. Only a signed and notarized photograph would be good enough.

[ Parent ]
oops
You know what I mean...
The person deriving benefit, of course, is the heterosexual religionist.

Perhaps it is a mistake to try to convince some people that we are humans. There are some people who need to have someone to hate, and nothing short of psychotherapy or meds will change that need.


[ Parent ]
Ruth and Naomi sittin in a tree
What we have to be careful of is not to see from our stance and reference and define history accordingly. It would be great to have a timeless definition or primer for gaydom thru the years, but we don't.

The argument is perhaps not that they were gay but could easily have been. That what also transpired between David and Johnathan could have also been sexual. And if they could have been, then the question is, would they have been any less great, or had any less impact? No.

But if they were gay and treated as many are today and have been thru history, what would history have been without them? Where would we be today?


[ Parent ]
History is written by the masters, not the servants
or the slaves. That's why there are rarely clear references to the "inferior" woman's point of view. Women's lives are mentioned when instructive to the nation. And gay sex, not producing children, was hardly worth speaking of in many countries. We know about the liasons of emperors and generals, but not those of the average people. If a relationship didn't affect inheritance, why bother saying anything about it unless the relationship was between an emperor and another man, and resulted in a zillion statues being erected in a zillion small towns.

[ Parent ]
Ruth and Naomi
I've read Ruth carefully.  My point was that in a straight marriage, sometimes the lines of Ruth are used in the marriage vows:
"Do not press me to leave you or to turn back from following you! Where you go, I will go; Where you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God.1:17 Where you die, I will die-- there will I be buried. May the LORD do thus and so to me, and more as well, if even death parts me from you!"
In straight marriage vows, a man says this to a woman, or a woman says this to a man, while the original context is a woman for a woman. I don't know if it is 'overwhelmingly heterosexual' in it focus, or in its original context.  We'll never know.  However, we do know that in its original context it is one woman saying this to another woman. 

[ Parent ]
Stretch
I've now read several different translations of Matthew 8:5-13 and I don't see how Jesus is affirming a gay couple.  A Centurian asks for help with his sick servant--is the implication they're a couple?  That strikes me as a gigantic stretch.  I think the campaign is terrific in other ways, and certainly hits the target with David and Jonathan, but it doesn't do our side good to make claims that are so off-base.

Check out my brand new Huffington Post blog http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

I say take a different approach....
Use verses that the fundies choose to ignore. For instance, have a billboard that says something like...
"Did you have your Easter Ham? Shame on you, you are abolished to hell."

Leveticus 11: They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.

Another one....

All you can eat crab legs? Shame on you!

  12Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.


[ Parent ]
Highly speculative
the greek is "pais", which has a variety of meanings. Servant, younger man/boy in the typical age-disparate gay male relationships of the period, catamite slave, young man or boy not having a specific sexual relationship in the household.

The speculation is supported by those who say that the centurion wouldn't be all that worried about some day laborer he hired, that the pais actually meant something to him (or possibly that the centurion was an highly unusually responsible employer).


[ Parent ]
Hmmm......
Slaves were valuable property.  If yours was sick, and he was a good, efficient slave, you might be worried, too.  The Centurion wasn't an employer, he was an owner.

This just seems to me to be catching at straws.

But I have to catch a plane to Vienna now.  This has been fun!

Check out my brand new Huffington Post blog http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...


[ Parent ]
the billboard would be more effective if they cited the right passage
I do not think that Bible verse means what they think it means... simple typo, but the Jonathan-David stuff comes from !! Samuel 1:26, not 2:26 (Then Abner called to Joab and said, "Shall the sword devour forever? Do you not know that it will be bitter in the end? How long will you refrain from telling the people to turn back from following their brothers?).

Between that and the interpretive stretch of the Matthew verse, I almost think they're shooting themselves in the foot here. I like the idea, but the execution needs to be spot-on for it to have a chance of opening minds.


St.John the Divine
The disciple JESUS LOVED.
John also attended the crucifixion when the other disciples denied Jesus and hid from the Romans. Jesus gave over the care of his MOTHER, to John and asked Mary from the cross to acknowledge John as her son. John was in the tomb assisting both Marys intomb Jesus.I know from losing my lover and 7 close friends and countless aquaintances to AIDS, how caring for a loved ones parents after they die, is extremely important to the one who is dying, and his surviving partner. I will always see the act of John caring for Mary until her death ,as a very personal act, a surviving lover would attend to, rather than entering the power grab of the burgeoning church, Peter and Paul pursued.

New attention-grabbing billboard campaign fights religion-based bigotry
billboards mean nothing to men better financed than men armed with billboards

It must be stopped IMMEDIATELY, and Gay Christians must denounce it
Gay people are as free as any other reader of the bible to interpret it for themselves. If you disagree with the ad campaign FINE, that's your opinion, NOT the opinion of all LGBT Christians.

cough-bullsh*t-cough
"Excuse me, but this is not "interpretation" of the Bible!  It is misinterpretation of specific Scriptural passages.  You are quite wrong that lay people are free to interpret the Bible any way they choose.  Such interpretations are uninformed, and have no credibility in theological circles.  If you're implying that Christians are free to interpret the Bible any way they choose, you are also quite wrong.  If their interpretation is theologically baseless, they have no credibility either! "

Just a G*D DAMN MINUTE!
The earliest Christian teachings were parables spoken by Jesus, meant to allow the listner to interpret them based on their life experiences. Not until almost a generation after Jesus lived, was a gospel even written. Gospels which were written, were selected or dimissed much later and were selected based of specious reasoning and their popularity. Then there is the various languages of multiple bibles, and how well a modern reader can acurately know how ancients regularly used various words in common usage.sounds like NO ONE can say for sure ANYTHING about a bible.


cough-bullsh*t-cough
"Excuse me, but this is not "interpretation" of the Bible!  It is misinterpretation of specific Scriptural passages.  You are quite wrong that lay people are free to interpret the Bible any way they choose.  Such interpretations are uninformed, and have no credibility in theological circles.  If you're implying that Christians are free to interpret the Bible any way they choose, you are also quite wrong.  If their interpretation is theologically baseless, they have no credibility either! "

Just a G*D DAMN MINUTE!
The earliest Christian teachings were parables spoken by Jesus, meant to allow the listner to interpret them based on their life experiences. Not until almost a generation after Jesus lived, was a gospel even written. Gospels which were written, were selected or dimissed much later and were selected based of specious reasoning and their popularity. Then there is the various languages of multiple bibles, and how well a modern reader can acurately know how ancients regularly used various words in common usage.To me it sounds like NO ONE can say for sure ANYTHING about a bible.


i wonder
how many people who identify as christians and see these billboards would recognize the debatable aspects of the verses as discussed in this thread?  most christians are bible illiterate.  i bet most people just whizz by, and think, "huh, jesus blessed gay people.  okeydokey by me then."  this does not excuse any errors in interpretation or judgement the advertisers may have made, but it is interesting to contemplate - the errors may largely not matter.  and besides, the highly bible literate and/or superhaters wouldn;t be swayed by a billboard campaign anyway.  but the ignorant masses, now there's juicy pickins for words of compasison, eve if they be stretched a bit.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.


Homosexuality is NOT AT ALL condoned by God
Homosexaulity is most definately not condoned by the Word of God.  You need to take in account the entirety of the Bible instead of striving to make a few minsinterpreted scriptures conform to your beliefs.  All of your scriptures are far stretches that convey they idiocy that one might even come to believe in your ways--but instead of them thinking like you they will be turned away by your ignorance. (i wouldn't want anyone to belive the way you do for that matter) In 1 Corinthians, it says:

"Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Is that not plain enough? Or shall i correct you on your misinterpretations?

The story of Ruth:

No where is Naomi and Ruth portayed as a homosexual couple. You are making your claim on Ruth 1:14.  You are quoting that scripture wrong. Nowhere is that mentioned in Ruth 1:14.  It actually says, "And they lifted up their voice, and wept again: and Orpha kissed her mother in law; but Ruth clave unto her."  you might say "they kissed". But infact, as it were, and is still today, the Bible says to "greet one another with a holy kiss." That is all that happened.  In Ruth 1:15-17, she is merely explaining her loyalty to her. And this does not at all imply homosexual relations.

Naomi was a Moabite who married a man named Elimelech. She had two sons. Both of the sons married Moabite women, Orpah and Ruth. Naomi's sons died after two years, leaving Orpah and Ruth widowed. In time, Naomi decided to return to Judah. (Ruth 1:3-5 NIV)

"Then Naomi said to her two daughters-in law "go back, each of you to your mother's home . . . May the Lord grant that each of you will find rest in the home of another husband." (Ruth 1:8 NIV)

"Ruth begged Naomi to accompany her back to Judah. (Ruth 1:10 NIV). After returning to Judah with Ruth, Naomi did her best to "fix her up" with Boaz, a relative on her husband's side." (Ruth 2:1 - 3:18 NIV)

"So Boaz took Ruth and she became his wife. Then he went in to her and the Lord enabled her to conceive and she gave birth to a son. The women said to Naomi: "Praise be to the Lord who this day has not left you without a kinsman-redeemer . . . For your daughter-in-law, who loves you and is better than seven sons, has given him birth. . . . And they named him Obed. He was the father of Jessie, the father of David." (Ruth 4:13-17 NIV)

Nowhere does the Bible even suggest that Ruth and Naomi had a lesbian relationship.

Jonathon and David
2 Samuel 2:26, "Then Abner called to Joab, and said, Shall the sword devour for ever? knowest thou not that it will be bitterness in the latter end? how long shall it be then, ere thou bid the people return from following their brethren?"  How can you possibly get the idea of homosexaulity being condoned in that scripture? Is your claim supposed to make sense?  I think you meant Samuel 18:1.  "We note the covenant friendship between David and Jonathan. This was a form of relationship made in the presence of the Lord, in which each party accepted obligations toward the other; it was regarded as being of the same order as blood relationship. It was such that it could be described as the knitting together of the souls of the two men" By which was meant that the very being of the one was extended into and embraced the personality of the other; each became the other's alter ego.

"After he left Hebron, David took more concubines and wives in Jerusalem, and more sons and daughters were born to him." (2 Samuel 5:13 NIV)

"David also had an affair with Bathsheeba and and fathered a child by her." (2 Samuel 11:1-28 NIV)

These are hardly actions of a gay man.

Your other claim that Jesus affirmed a gay couple does not make sense.  It was a Centurion and his servant. The Centurion was seeking healing from Jesus for his servant.  Is this supposed to mean they are gay? No, any child could figure that out.

Also, ever hear of Sodom and Gomorrah? Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of their homosexual behavior.  Some people claim that "Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed not because of homosexual behavior but because the people there ignored the poor and needy." (A program on the Discovery Channel said it was because the residents of the towns were inhospitable to strangers.) The various Canaanite tribes all had abandoned the God of their forefathers not long after the Flood of Noah. The people had gone after the worship of pagan gods, and they were highly sexually promiscuous. Sodom is a city which illustrates what Paul describes in Romans Chapter One: a culture with blatant sexual immorality, promiscuity, violence and open debauchery. One has only to read a bit further in Romans to discover that Sodom's sin is but one class of evil which God condemns and opposes.

"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." (Romans 1:26-27 NIV)

"In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire." (Jude 1:7 NIV)

Homosexuality is "ungodliness" and violates the order of creation--one man and one woman having sexual relations under the protection of marriage.

And to end, I leave you with a scripture:

"If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." (Leviticus 20:13 NIV)

My intentions are not to condemn, but to help.  I truly want to see people turn  straight and go to heaven. I love all of you so much, i don't want to see you go to hell.  So please don't think i hate you, i love you more than the people that accept homosexualtiy as an acceptable alternate lifestyle.  God bless and have a great day--Thank you too for taking time to read my post.



Considering I can guarantee that you don't understand
Hebrew, Aramaic, Koine (or any other Greek), or Koptic, and are therefore certainly depending on flawed human translators -  without even realizing how easy it is to misinterpret the meaning of ancient words from ancient cultures -

YOU HAVE BOTH MY UNDYING PITY - AND EVEN MORE MY UNDYING CONTEMPT.

MAY GOD FORGIVE YOUR BLIND, IGNORANT BIGOTRY.


[ Parent ]
YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW YOUR BIBLE!
You say Also, ever hear of Sodom and Gomorrah? Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of their homosexual behavior.

Ezekiel said:  Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.
- Ezekiel 16:49

Therefore, either Jude didn't know what he was talking about, or the Bible contradicts itself.

Either way, you are sinning by holding up your religious beliefs in ignorant self-righteousness, not even understanding the evil your ignorance, your bigotry, and your ignorant, uneducated blindness force upon people who harm you not at all.

GOD FORGIVE YOUR EVIL.


[ Parent ]
My revenge is
That you spent time writing all that.

<3 Sam

[ Parent ]
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Days left for Joe Solmonese's promise to donors of DADT repeal in 2010 to be fulfilled
Leave your comments here.


The President's State of the Union promise to repeal.



Report TOS Violations

Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox