I have always heard that Southern Baptists were about some of the most racist and bigoted people on the planet and to the point where some Baptist churches would categorically deny being in the same religious sub-group as SBs. So, when they elected a Black president, I was mildly surprised.
But it’s a good thing the SBC doesn’t decide on what is a civil right and what isn’t. Oh, I don’t know… last I heard, this is the United States of America, one of the few places in the world where people actually do have rights so I guess the SBC has the right to decide who doesn’t have civil rights… like their saying so makes it so.
Or is this their way of being heteronormative to the point where they’re saying that if you ain’t like us – straight – then you have no civil rights? They say they won’t stand for any anti-gay sentiments or gay bashing… but they denounce a whole lot in a way that could be construed as anti-gay – how’s that for some double-talking?
In their denouncement, they speak to classes of individuals and that’s some scary shit and shit I haven’t heard since 1964 and then again when MLK was assassinated. So it would seem that once again, having rights as a citizen of this country is depended on… class? Whether you’re straight or gay?
Officially, there is no class system in this country… but we sure as hell behave like there is. I mean, really, is there still such a thing as a second- or third-class citizen here, in the United States? And, hmm, who gets to decide that gays are in a class that shouldn’t afford them any civil rights, seeing as how “gay rights” are really a civil issue and also some obscure fact that gay Americans are still Americans.
Maybe the SBC will pass a resolution saying that they aren’t because, oh, I don’t know, by denouncing them and saying they have no civil rights, you might as well take the next step and denounce them as citizens and have them deported… oh, wait. You can’t deport them… because they are Americans.
Okay, so that the SBC tossed their resolution out there – which really doesn’t mean anything other than that’s how the majority feels and they put it in writing – isn’t all that surprising, being all religious (and Old Testament) about this; it really tickles me that when it’s something they like, they’re all New Testament about things, misquoting Jesus, stuff like that but when it’s something that offends them in any way, break out the Old Testament and then behave as if the New Testament never existed.
So much for loving your fellow man, huh? Oh, wait… that didn’t sound gay, did it?
Kdaddy23's Blog 
themercyfuck
21 June 2012 at 01:28
Absurd! Unless they want to take away citizenship from people in the LGBT community, their rights are civil rights because that is exactly what it means. Yet, so typical for idiots to use religion to support their bigotry.
LikeLike
kdaddy23
21 June 2012 at 02:07
Yeah, it is typical, huh? And sad, too…
LikeLike
MysteryCoach
21 June 2012 at 02:26
LOL … I’m sorry “Oh wait, that didn’t sound gay did it?” just struck me as funny .. not the blog post itself.
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
21 June 2012 at 09:08
You got a whole lot of mis information on here. Southern Baptists are not racist. I belonged to one of the biggest SBC churches out there, First Baptist Jacksonville Florida in the heart of downtown and we had a whole lot of blacks who were welcomed with open arms as sunday school teachers, as singers in the choir as soloists and in leadership positions.
As far as being anti gay and anti civil rights we are not as well. We stand for what the Bible says period. Civil unions recognize everyone’s rights. Just because we don’t accept the LBGT militant view that we have to reform tradtional marriage does not mean that we are anti gay or anti civil rights. The Southern Baptists are also anti abortion and that would be like saying we are anti woman’s rights. We are for the civll rights of the unborn baby.
I am all kind of offended here because you are way too intelligent to be making these statements
LikeLike
kdaddy23
21 June 2012 at 12:36
You’re offended because I mentioned something that I heard? Interesting… since hearing it and believing it are two different things and, yep, you should know that I knew you were a Southern Baptist and while you might be a lot of things, racist and a bigot isn’t included in that. Oh, yeah, that they elected a Black man as their president kinda belies the racist/bigot thing, huh… DUH!
But, dude, if only you had heard what I heard! It started with me asking what I thought was a simple question: What’s the difference between Southern Baptists and the Baptist that I am? What I heard was kinda shocking and equally baffling and, frankly, I logged the response and didn’t pay much attention to what I felt was a prejudicial answer; apparently, there are “Northern” Baptists that aren’t fond of Southern Baptists.
Okay, so, let’s talk a moment about perception and the fact that some people would, in fact, take the SBC’s resolution as being anti-gay, the point here is that perception is often worse than the truth itself. The SBC felt it necessary to speak out on the issue, affirming their beliefs and in a way that it wouldn’t take a whole lot for some activist to read as being anti-gay, anti-woman, and of critical import, who has the right to have civil rights.
So don’t be offended unless it offends you that I’m picking on them and more so if they think their resolution, at the end of the day, is going to make any difference other than deepening a rift that doesn’t need any more deepening, more so in light of that one dude who wanted to round all the gays up and let them die; and, yeah, the SBC was quick to denounce him (just in case you forgot that I knew that).
Wait until you run across someone who REALLY believes the SBC are racists and gets to riffing…
LikeLike
A Bi-Submissive's Journey in the Vanilla World
2 July 2012 at 17:34
I’m not sure what world he lives in, but there are racist Southern Baptists…..
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
2 July 2012 at 17:56
Hey Bi
I did not say that there are no racist southern baptists. There are racists in every demographic group but as a denomination we disavow racism and welcome blacks into our churches as equals.
LikeLike
A Bi-Submissive's Journey in the Vanilla World
2 July 2012 at 18:58
It wasn’t always that way, but I am glad things are improving 🙂
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
21 June 2012 at 12:55
Well being anti anything is in itself prejudicial is it not. Southern Baptists publish annual resolutions to clarify their commonly held beliefs although no one is required to subscribe to those beliefs as we believe in the doctrine of the “Priesthood of the believer”. Southern baptists are an assosciation of churches who pool their resources to send more missionaries to the mission field than all the other denominations combined.
You get a whole bunch of people screaming when their personal position is questioned or refuted. It is kind of like what one of my bible professors told us; “you can preach all you want to on generic sin and everyone is behind you but once you start preaching on individual sin then you have stopped preaching and done gone to meddling”. I still find this true today
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
21 June 2012 at 12:56
So I am curious, what did you hear?
LikeLike
kdaddy23
21 June 2012 at 13:27
What I heard was Southern Baptist were racists, bigots, KKK members and, oh, yeah, not real Baptist, whatever the hell that meant. Now, what I believe is that all that ranting and raving I heard when I asked the question is nothing more than one branch thinking theirs is better than the other and that they’re somehow different. Indeed, I had heard, in more modern times, that Baptists and Southern Baptists aren’t on the same page despite the name, no more than, say, Protestants and Catholics are… even though everyone calls themselves a Christian and believes in the doctrines of Christianity. So I didn’t give this much credence then even though, in light of things that have been happened, I find their resolution troubling because of what it looks like they’re saying; again, perception rather than the truth and if I find it mildly troubling, the hard-core gay activists will be livid and fit to be tied.
It just keeps the disharmony going in a time when we, as a people, should be trying to stand together more than we have been. Then, when you toss in the fact that the USA has always been on the forefront of civil rights and preaching to other countries about the necessity of said rights, it gives us a black eye because we want other countries to hold dear to this… but we don’t and, yep, some of us will even resolve to denounce civil rights to certain segments of our population and since we do this – and the rest of the world sees it – is there any wonder why we’re losing Brownie points in the eyes of the world?
I can see why the saying you mentioned would be true because, say, if you started preaching to me about MY particular sins, then you’re meddling because you’ve just made it personal and any time you make a position personal, be ready to duck and cover.
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
21 June 2012 at 13:31
Well southern baptists are the largest baptist denomination in the world. It would help if you could give the affiliation of the baptists stating this. For example Independent baptists are a small group who are not very intelligent and are bigoted and VERY LEGALISTIC. As an example of that they require all women and girls to wear skirts or dresses to church.
LikeLike
kdaddy23
21 June 2012 at 14:51
Affliation? It’s Baptist, which is what I tell people when the ask my religious affiliation. Not Southern, Northern, or any other designation – just Baptist, although I can’t say that I’ve ever heard of or seen a Baptist affiliation require women to wear skirts or dresses where I live. If there are other affiliations, I am not aware of them and I probably wouldn’t care if they did exist because I’ve always been of a mind that we all believe in the same God – we just don’t all believe in the same way and that’s just insane – but to each his own.
Just the same, in churches that I’ve gone to (and including my own home church), you can easily see shortages of intelligence, prejudice, bigotry, close-mindedness, stubbornness, and outright denial about a great many things and, I’d point out that the comment you made about independent Baptists could be said about Southern Baptists – you can easily see how supposedly related affiliations can find reasons to throw stones at each other. But, that’s neither here nor there; it is, however, a matter of a group of Americans standing up and saying that there are other Americans who don’t qualify to have civil rights and there’s just something bothersome about what this could imply.
Civil rights, unless I’m dead wrong, is a “legal” matter; it’s for lawmakers and maybe even the Supreme Court to decide so a religious group saying they don’t think some people should have civil rights means nothing other than this is what they think, feel, believe. For the longest time, my people fought for racial equality and challenged the premise that all men are created equal… but not treated equally; the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (and as amended) made this inequity go away (legally) but now the battlefield has changed and now we are made to determine whether a certain segment of Americans do, in fact, have the same rights as any other American. The religious faction says no; the laws against what gay folks want are predicated on religious doctrine (Old Testament).
And, really and seriously, is it okay for Americans to say that other Americans don’t qualify for rights that are supposed to be inherent and a matter of course for anyone who is, by definition, an American? The SBC seems to think so and my personal thoughts are that the shit is really going to be hitting a lot of fans over the issue because despite resolutions against gays having civil rights, the laws of the land are changing on the issue, slowly but surely.
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
2 July 2012 at 17:57
Southern Baptists and Christians alike don’t care about being liked by people who disagree with the bible, we stand on it as a moral absolute, others are free to disagree or not to believe but we don’t make peace with them at any price as you seem to suggest.
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
22 June 2012 at 16:03
I guess it depends on what you mean by civil rights. In what way does civil unions violate gays civil rights? As far as I understand the issue it gives them all the same rights as married people without prostituing the instituion of marriage and seems reasonable to me. And by the way, Romans 1 still says that it is an abomination against God but it took away the death penalty.
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
22 June 2012 at 16:06
And by the way, religious people still have the right to freedom of speech just like the Atheists do and the Atheists are trying to take away holidays and violate our civil rights. As to differing denominations of Baptists, there are northern Baptists, Hardshell baptists, Independent baptists, General Conference Baptists and American Baptists which by and large are affiliated with blacks as a rule.
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
22 June 2012 at 16:14
As far as where they play out politically and doctrinally, the Independents and the Hardshell baptists are very legalistic and hyper conservative, For example the Hardshell baptists require that you get baptized again just to join their church. American Baptists are the most liberal of the lot and Southern Baptists would be between those two extremes or in other words mainstream
LikeLike
kdaddy23
22 June 2012 at 17:36
See, I learned something; didn’t know Baptists were that diverse. It’s not what I mean as civil rights – it’s what society says are civil rights, what the law says they are. Far as I know, gay folks are a bit happier with what they’ve gained here lately… except the SBC says they shouldn’t have any and exercise their right not to acknowledge such things. I understand it but I don’t have to care for their view of things; we just continue to have problems when Americans decide that certain Americans don’t qualify for rights that they have.
Here’s the thing: There happen to be people who don’t agree with the SBC sentiments or their beliefs – Romans 1 means nothing to them other than something somebody said way back when the world was young. Kinda what you said; people are comfortable telling other people how to live their lives but when you start talking about them, then you’re about as wrong as it gets and fighting words are forthcoming.
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
22 June 2012 at 19:19
well I have been out of the loop for a while, tell me what the SBC said about gays
LikeLike
kdaddy23
22 June 2012 at 20:20
That they shouldn’t be afforded civil rights; you didn’t click the URL to see exactly what they said?
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
23 June 2012 at 07:21
Yea I missed it in reading your piece. I have now read it and agree that homosexuals don’t qualify as a legal class. I stand by my belief that civil unions are a fair compromise and gives them all the rights of marriage without prostituting what marriage is.
LikeLike
kdaddy23
23 June 2012 at 12:20
If we don’t have a class system – and, officially, we don’t – then your statement makes sense… except, unofficially, we do have a class system so homosexuals – some of whom are actually upstanding citizens of this country – get relegated to, what, second-class? Third class? No standing in the unofficial class system at all? Kinda smells like the same mindset that once said my people weren’t human beings and then we we human beings without class… in a supposedly classless society. So, instead of rounding them all up and letting them die off behind electrified fences, homosexuals should be reclassified as being classless? And since we’re talking about this, who does qualify as a legal class? Hmm?
Prostituting what marriage is… don’t you mean changing the meaning of what it is legally? See, this would be the moment where you start preaching and quoting Scripture to make your point – don’t preach to the choir again. This is a difference between biblical law and the laws of man, some of which are based on biblical law and that one, singular difference is that the laws of man can be changed where biblical law cannot. So, as I said, the SBC’s resolution is nothing more than their opinion as an organization, respected but, on the whole, immaterial because the law of the land is what it is where the law has changed.
I’ve kinda enjoyed this conversation even though it bothers me on a few levels…
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
23 June 2012 at 17:07
I will be the first to admit that the SBC resolution is exactly what you say it is. Nevertheless we have to uphold what the bible says and try to influence others. I frankly don’t think that we will legalize marriages for homosexuals because there is way too much feeling against and many people frankly support civil unions. I think that they should accept that, but it is a free country and the gay community has first amendment rights as well. So I guess we will all have to agree to disagree but I don’t see the court siding with the gay community on this one but then I could not understand how they could legalize the mass killings of millions of innocent babies either.
LikeLike
kdaddy23
23 June 2012 at 17:28
Just in my opinion, “civil union” is just an euphemism for being married; it’s semantics, a way to give them what they want without calling it what it is – but that’s neither here nor there because whatever you wanna call it, it is what it is.
How can they legalize it? Well, they did and like gay marriages (or whatever you wanna call them) some folks don’t like the idea that it’s legal. All anyone can do is not like it or follow their own conscious on the issue; if they don’t believe in abortion then it stands to reason they would never have a situation that could call for one, right?
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
23 June 2012 at 18:09
Or if they did, they would take responsibility for it like the Palins
LikeLike
marriagecoach1
2 July 2012 at 17:58
BTW Muslims still kill homosexuals in their country so the world is not all that gay friendly.
LikeLike