For everyone's sake, it's long past time to stop claiming that right-wing Christian revulsion in response to same-sex romantic love has anything to do with the Bible. Nothing in scriptures prohibits a kiss between two men.
I have a vivid memory from a Bible class in the late 1980s in which we were learning the classic formulations, seen in this week's Torah portion, that if the Israelites obey God's laws, the rains will come in the right season and all will be well.
Placing her reflections on "peace-building" in dialogue with the Bible, I am carrying forward a long-standing conversation with a beloved conversation partner of long standing about a text and a topic that are both dear to my heart.
While focusing in many sections, like last week's portion of Emor, on practices and obligations of the priestly class, Leviticus addresses all Israelites as a 'nation of priests' whose relationship with holiness is nothing less than a matter of life and death.
This unfair, freeloader-encouraging formula is exactly what it means to leave society's beneficial, essential projects to charity. The only hope for a fair formula is to require contributions. That is why the Torah funds the safety net for the needy by required contributions.
The teaching that we must stop judging and "shoulding" is like a tourniquet to the out-of-control ego, designed to stop the constant chatter of judgment so that the fresh air of unfiltered experience can enter. Here is where the teaching of "no judgment" turns catastrophic.
The fact that a fetus is inside of Jane does not mean that Jane is morally responsible for the fetus. If she has become pregnant through rape or contraception failure, she has made no promise to the fetus, and so abortion would not be promise-breaking. Abortion is not wrong in either case.
If a sacrifice can take the place of a relationship, then the giving may not be a manifestation of a relationship but a replacement for it. If a sacrifice can bring about atonement, then perhaps the giver will repeat the offense.
To be quite frank, I can't see how two women purchasing a sweet wedding cake or two men sharing a romantic meal in a nice restaurant could offend God, for if God exists, what would be most offensive is using God's name to justify oppression.
Together, we can choose to celebrate this Valentine's Day by expressing unconditional, real love in its deepest and widest sense -- truly affirming love for our LGBTQ selves, for each other, for our allies and even for our "enemies."
Anyone getting a tattoo really needs to ask themselves, why am I getting this and what is the meaning of this tattoo? Is the tattoo an expression of witchcraft, idolatry or pagan symbolism? If so, as Christians, we need to reconsider...
It is still early in the campaign for New York City mayor, primary is not scheduled until in September 10, 2013, but the candidates are already pandering to ethnic and religious blocs as they maneuver to scoop up as many votes as possible.
Minding my own business. That's all I was doing when I came across an article about a pastor, Kevin Swanson, who warned on his radio show that inside of ten years, gay people will likely be burning Christians at the stake -- because, you know, that's how the gays do ... at least since Nero.
This is a fire of devotion, connection, awareness. The flames bring light that helps us see where we are and who we are meant to be. We tend this fire through practice, through mitzvot: acts of connection and love.
To see a Republican lawmaker and a prominent Christian pastor try to outdo each other in their bigotry and murderous hate puts in unpleasant but clear relief the moral health of the organizations they represent.