Michigan Churches Stop Serving Homeless Because of Homosexua

So much for that Biblical principle of “Blessed are the poor.” For a few churches in Kalamazoo, Michigan, that passage has been rewritten to say, “Homeless people shouldn’t get any food because of homosexuality.”

It what is becoming one of the grossest maneuvers by the religious right in this country, three churches in Kalamazoo have severed their ties with an eenical homeless ministry due to disagreements about homosexuality. This comes in the wake of the Archdiocese of Washington D.C.’s threat to stop serving needy families and the poor should gay marriage become legal in the District.

In Michigan, the three churches at the center of this storm are Agape Christian Church, Word for Life Church of God, and Centerpoint Church. They were part of a ministry known as Martha’s Table, which brought together eight different faith congregations to provide meals and worship space to the homeless. Only for these three churches, the fact that some of the other participating faith bodies take a progressive stand on homosexuality is enough to say to Kalamazoo’s homeless, “We don’t want you.”

How very Christian.

Speaking to the Kalamazoo Gazette, a lay pastor from Agape Christian Church, Kim Sandelin, said that her church couldn’t work together with other churches to fight homelessness because they don’t want to stand next to faith traditions that look kindly on LGBT people.

“An immoral lifestyle has eternal ramifications in Scripture,” said Sandelin. Another pastor from Agape Church added that for their church, they couldn’t tolerate working next to people of faith who violate their biblical worldview, even though the homeless ministry itself has seemingly nothing to do with the issue of gay rights.

What is it with conservative churches who feel they can barter the lives of the poor in order to wage political warfare on the issue of gay rights? How do you justify that morally and spiritually?

That’s where the reasoned comments of another Kalamazoo pastor, who also happens to be conservative, comes into play. Rev. Ken Baker of the Third Christian Reformed Church, told the Gazette that his church would still participate in the homeless ministry, because theological viewpoints about homosexuality shouldn’t be a factor when it comes to taking care of the poor and needy.

“I feel very sad about the decision of three partner churches to pull out,” Baker told the Gazette. “Everything about the ministry of Martha’s Table reflects the heart of Jesus, who came to preach good news to the poor. Surely, all our churches would agree that mercy and compassion were at the heart of the ministry of Jesus.”

In theory that last statement of Rev. Baker’s should be correct. But not for the three Churches pulling out of serving the homeless. They’re willing to use homeless folks as political pawns in a chess game over whether governments and churches can respect the civil rights and celebrate the inclusion of LGBT citizens or faith members. Their homophobia might run deep, but their committment to the biblical principles of mercy and compassion run pretty damn shallow.

Again, how can this story also not be a reminder of the Archdiocese of Washington D.C.’s threat to bail on the poor should same-sex marriage become of the law of the District. Yesterday the Human Rights Campaign launched an action calling on the Archdiocese to keep serving needy families, the homeless, and those without health care in the District no matter what theological differences the Church may have with civil government. If you haven’t signed the Human Rights Campaign’s petition to D.C. Archbishop Donald Wuerl, mosey on over this way and sign up.

Churches can take varying viewpoints on homosexuality — nobody is really arguing that. But using the poor as a political weapon? That’s what you call moral bankruptcy.

Michael A. Jones

Integritas0 said:

You'd lose count trying to keep track of the hypocrites in this little debacle.

Click to expand...

Wow, nothing ever ceases to amaze me...thats some article, Hammer.

You couldn't be anymore correct Intergitas...and that last statement is so right on...and it would apply to "any debacle."

Hypocrisy, prejudice and bigotry alive and well. SMH

It is disgusting, and these churches should be targeted, along with the ones illegally violating their non-profit status to fund anti-gay marriage ballots across the country. Though not the subject of this article, it is true that a lot of homeless young people are in the GLBT community, and it becomes even worse that they are made to rely on the services of a hateful religious elite which then will withdraw at being associated with a natural expression of love/sexuality.

I really have nothing to say to that, Integrasio. The point of my post and this article is when specific churches and religious organizations make overt attacks on the GLBT community; my view as I expressed, is that the community should respond to that (and hopefully the wider community, not just the gay community); living in the US, where we do not have full equality under the law, it is strongly relevant to take an active stance against such attacks; I will not excuse them. You can place religion and religious people above the gay community all you want, but that is not the topic here at all. I am proud to say that yes, I do take the side of the GLBT community in our struggle for equality and acceptance in a bigoted society.

Maybe some scientists will invent a way to delete homosexuality, for the right price?

Unlikely ! That's "Brave New World" territory and I'm not so sure that it would be possible to wipe out the history of mankind in the genes, which effectively is what we carry in there. It would also mean there is a "gay gene" which I believe is ridiculous any more than there is a murderer's gene.

You both make very valid points above, I could come down on either side. In one way I get sick of being tollerant to bigots (& I don't just refer to anti-gay situations) and would like nothing better than all out war with them, on the other hand sitting back and thinking logically and without any emotional attachment it would only mean you are becoming like them and in the end would probably not achieve very much.

It's up to the quiet majority on each side to stop being so quiet and come out against their own bigots!!

I cant believe something like this can happen in america, well if they stop helping them then. The rest ofr the country will have to pick up the slack

In the 1980's when christian fundamentalist Anita Bryant went around the country stoking anti-gay politics, she was rightly branded a bigot by gay activists, who used that as their way of defeating the measure her supporters launched in California which would have caused all gay and gay-friendly teachers to be fired. So I like the tone being used by radical GLBT activists. And you are politicized whether you like it or not when the laws say you are a lesser being; though some people don't figure that out untill they lose a job, until they are gay bashed, untill they find themselves wanting children or a house with shared expenses, or citizenship and realize just how difficult life is made for them.

It is ridiculous to pretend we are talking about the same thing when you live in Ireland, Integrasio, but as long as there are political laws and measures standing in the way of GLBT equality, everything is political, and no, you don't have a right to go out and vote, spend, and organize against my minority's rights because of your religious homophobia. In fact, I don't extend that right in any cirstances; I'm not the type of person one is speaking about when they express a bunch of homophobic, hateful trash and then defend themselves by saying "I have a lot of gay friends..."

The Christian Right is not a minority in this country; they are an immensely powerful majority, they are many, and they do everything they can to attack my status. As someone who came of age in the 21st century, I freely exercise my right to reject pathetic old dogmas and homophobic, child-beating religions that are still the dominant message in the the US; where entire communities are still built up around forcing through any means possible to make young people practice abstinence until marriage and heterosexuality.

I'm fully aware of complexity; that there are for instance 'unitarian universalist' christian churches that fully welcome people of all sexualities as equals. Many religious people (whether "ordinary" or not--I don't absolve people under such a label) do reject the official anti-gay dogma of their churches, which is why it should be expected that they all do; when they don't, and take political and social action, GLBT people (whether "ordinary" or not) suffer.

I don't think you are over it, because you came into this thread talking about how churches in a foreign country attack and abuse and disown GLBT people, and you chose to take the catholic anti-defamation route instead. My point was, that just like you have an NHS but wrote on the forum that you hope that people in the US will never have good single payer healthcare, you express ambivalence about the enemies of GLBT equality in my country (it doesn't effect you, so it shouldn't be surprising that you don't care) where religious people are not only fully equal but have special protections and privileges that we GLBT do not. But you enter that discussion with your views on how religions are supposedly treated in Europe, and you wish to paint me and anyone else who criticizes the homophobic actions of the christian right as hating all religious people and wanting to wipe them out, force them to have casual sex.

I don't give credit to people who do "charity" but don't recognize food, housing, and good living wage jobs as a human right that everyone deserves and should be given by the community(/government) without respect to petty prejudices; that anyone should be left to the whims of homophobic, youth hating churches because of a lack of government services is appalling to me. And my GLBT politics goes right alongside my other views of human rights, but isn't flanked by them; it isn't necessary for them to be, either. There is a cynical form of populism that directs it's energies into imprinting the idea that GLBT politics are something elite; when in the country I live in, you can still be turned down for employment, housing, hospital visits to relatives, and a slew of other things for being non-heterosexual, so it is about the practical, day-to-day poverty issues (though I do lend strong credence to the critiques and subversion of authoritarian gender roles), and has to do with why so many GLBT teens are living on the streets, that these churches refuse to give food to.

I, as opposed to the churches in my country, have a real political battle that effects my every day life, and not a culture war, that I'm fighting. I don't have any fondness for culture wars.

Integritas0 said:

please stop purporting to hold a representative, balanced view or agenda with respect to the gay community

Click to expand...

No, I won't; because I do hold a representative, balanced, practical view on gay rights; and yes, in the country I live in, GLBT of all economic strata are just as liable to be hurt by these specific legal inequalities, and the question of whether they are overturned or not is a simple yes or no; two sides. I stand strongly by the statements I've made above. And yes, it is special, because these inequalities are enshrined by hard laws, just like they once were against African Americans here, and further, because I am gay, I do care about my community, and think that is a good thing to do. Oh well if you disagree.

But, again, since you are so wrapped up in defending religion (and more specifically the anti-gay religious) at all costs, and since you don't live here and thus can take the side of religious bigots who hate homosexuality and want to limit our rights as much as possible without consequence, I will take your points with a grain of salt. As for clever nonsense, that is what you have reverted to in your post above, though I would leave the 'clever' part out in your attempt to confuse the terms and resist the cogency of my argument when it is plain. I think we've reached the end of this, and I'm leaving it here.

dats not ryt those thats like not feeding a coloured person

... wait a second, I thought religions like that were *against* 'the ends justify the means' sort of thinking? Can't even keep their own gross iniquities to the usual stuff anymore, it's all going to pot, I tell ya.

ritsuka I agree with you 100 percent, there 501c should be pulled.