Originally Posted by DrPhilG
I'm not saying that supporting one another and speaking out against bigotry and homoohobia together is a bad thing. I'm just surprised that the LGBTQ community support Islam, but condemn Christianity.
I can totally understand them condemning both, as both religions teach that homosexuality is wrong/sinful. I just don't get why one is supported and the other is not.
Again, this is a genuine question that I'm curious about so please don't drag it down to a mud slinging match.
To put my bias cards on the table, I'm an evangelical Christian.
The problem is that our discourse in the West is broken on this issue because of a fear of not being politically correct.
We also seek to blunt tensions in a simplistic manner, kind of like in the post below:
Originally Posted by ancapailldorcha
Probably because one community which suffers discrimination and hatred can empathise with other demographics who experience the same.
There is a tension. Christianity in its Biblical sources, and Islam in its Qur'anic sources are opposed to any sexual acts outside of a heterosexual marriage. Islamic rules about marriage do differ significantly to Christian ones in some ways. For example - Christianity doesn't have a concept of temporary marriage
(there is some discussion around how legitimate this is in Islam).
What do you then do with that tension?
There's a couple of choices.
Shut down the tension by saying that disagreement is hate speech. This seems to be how Western liberal society progresses when Christians express a public position on this. This includes attempts at character assassination so that people lose their jobs and so on. The specific example I can think of recently is in respect to Israel Folau in Australia
. It will be interesting to see how the courts decide on this.
Suppress the tension by denying its existence. Deny that there is any significant difference, or claim that it is just a bunch of hardcore fanatics hold to it. The reality is of course, that the so called "fanatics" are the ones who actually hold to what the Bible (or the Qur'an in the case of Muslims) says. (This seems to be the option that most people take with Islam).
Respect that people disagree and accept their liberty to do so. This seems to be the traditional Western view on this before the introduction of "hate speech" laws. It accepts that people have the liberty to say what they want and believe what they want. This seems to be the model that America on a federal level holds to in its constitution. It seems to be the right one from my perspective. Why? Disagreement on sexual matters is genuinely not hatred. You can disagree with me on that and offer your reasons if you wish.
Now - why do people choose the second option for Islam more often than the first. The reason is because Islam is more tightly coupled to race. Christianity because of its great advancement largely during the Victorian era and in the 20th century is obviously not tied to race. If one had to tie it to race one would incorrectly assume that it is a Western religion. Therefore it cannot be perceived to be racist to criticise it. Of course that neglects the understanding that there are plenty of white Muslims in places like Chechnya or in the Balkans, but by and large the majority that live in Western countries are from Asia. If people chose the character assassination option then it would be incorrectly derided as being racist, rather than simply being prejudicial towards the belief system of conservative Muslims.
The best way to deal with the issues directly is to take the third option - accept liberty of speech and beliefs and to thrash the issues out in the public square in the pursuit of understanding.
Choosing the first or second option only gives us a superficial and shallow understanding of the issues which is why the OP finds himself frustrated over the lack of engagement on the issues.