Half the Gay Population is “Religiously Unaffiliated”.

Half of our gay people are not religious and those who are affiliated with a religion tend to go to church less often and don’t not consider their church to be important.  This unaffiliation is more than twice that of the general public.

One has to suppose this set of nonreligious gay people, while a small percentage of the general population, influences the general population.  Slavery and segregation affected directly a minority of the public.  But attitudes toward black people was a political issue elections turned on for many years.

We can all understand how gay people came not to like the church or what the church stands for.  The church pushed them away and much of it continues to this day.  The question is why?

It would be good for the faith to reach out to gays, embrace them and decide homosexuality is not a sin.  Biblical language gives them this option.  Anyone who doubts this needs to read interpretations of scripture by people who take this option.

I just came back from a hospital visit of an old friend who had heart bypass surgery.  This gay man and his partner joked about the new spartan diet and exercise regimen that would be in their household.

While my friend said his experience was frightening, he assured me he remains  an atheist.  He and his partner would be good for the life some church.

I’m glad we get to have them in our atheist community.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/survey-percentage-of-religiously-unaffiliated-gays-more-than-twice-the-general-population-98042/

P. S. The Red River Freethinkers Solstice Potluck is at the Rogne farm this Sunday at 1 PM.  Bring some food and enjoy the conversation.  Directions to the Rogne farm are at www.redriverfreethinkers.org

Avatar of Jon Lindgren

About Jon Lindgren

I am a former President of the Red River Freethinkers in Fargo, ND, a retired NDSU economics professor and was Mayor of Fargo for 16 years.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Half the Gay Population is “Religiously Unaffiliated”.

  1. entech says:

    Mutual rejection?
    Obviously not total but fairly widespread.

  2. Michael Ross says:

    “The church pushed them away and much of it continues to this day. The question is why? ”

    “This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”(John 3:19-21)

    Its not so much that the church has “pushed them away”. More like they are walking in darkness and there sinfulness is exposed by the church if they are faithful to proclaiming the truth.

    Maybe I shouldn’t talk. I’m not much of a church goer myself.

  3. Brad says:

    “Its not so much that the church has “pushed them away”. More like they are walking in darkness and there sinfulness is exposed by the church if they are faithful to proclaiming the truth.”

    I think almost the exact opposite is true. I think it’s the churches that are walking in darkness and being sinful. Being faithful to proclaiming the truth is not about blindly believing some jibberish written centuries ago by political hustlers with an agenda of power and control. Seeking the truth is about looking at reality, looking at all the facts and not just the ones that support a particular belief.

  4. Ray says:

    This statistic comes as no surprise. The Bible’s stance on homosexuality as sin is much more clear than Jon would have you believe.

    • entech says:

      It is also firm and clear on genocide, slavery and working on Sunday and so many other things.

      • StanB says:

        St Paul may argue the working on Sunday with you but why argue the point be because 1) you have no respect for Paul 2) he probably didn’t write it anyway 3) the whole Bible is a fake just meant to control people.

        Did I leave anything out?

        • entech says:

          Not really, but you are the one that takes it seriously, if you want to keep the anti-gay thing you need the rest; it is all or nothing. Because if you don’t accept it all as being true how do you know which parts can be rejected.

          • entech says:

            PS. Maybe I was a bit extreme in agreeing that 3) the whole Bible is a fake just meant to control people.

            But a large part of it is and it still serves that purpose today, perhaps especially today.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Ray 1:16 “The Bible’s stance on homosexuality as sin is much more clear than Jon would have you believe.”

      In addition to the things “clearly identified” as sins entech mentioned, there is stoning required for children who talk back to their children and unfaithful women. There is eternity in hell for what might be in your mind, lack of faith.

      Jesus didn’t seem to care on whit about homosexuality. There is no condemnation of gay marriage.

      • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

        Haven’t heard from you, Henry, for a while. Hope you are OK.

        In the Fargo Forum this morning is a letter from a teacher at South High. I’m calling him, Henry the Second:

        http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/403124/

        • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

          re: the argument that the Psychatric Society yielded to pressure from gay protests in the 1970′s.

          What happened was, gays asked the Society, “By what professional category do you determine we are mentally ill? If you use the definition used in other categories, we do not qualify. Tell us what qualifies you to say we are mentally ill?”

          The Society said more or less, “We’ll get back to you on that.” They never did. Finally, the Society was pushed to the wall and had no defense. Being gay was taken off the list of the mentally ill.

        • Jinx says:

          Perhaps it is Henry’s “molting time’?

        • entech says:

          Love the way this guy describes himself as homo repulsive.
          While our Henry maybe hard to swallow this one is more extreme.

  5. Tyndale says:

    “It would be good for the faith to reach out to gays, embrace them and decide homosexuality is not a sin.”

    Who stands to gain with this? Not God, since by embracing sin He would make Himself an accomplice in undermining His own Holy Character. Not the Christian, since as an ambassador on earth of Christ Jesus he would undermine the authority of the very King he serves by deciding that his decision has authority over the King. Not the homosexual, since in being told on earth that all is OK with him, his soul will one day be faced with the sudden and terrible confrontation with his Creator and his eternity.

    The Gospel is the declaration that ALL should repent and believe on Jesus Christ, who died and rose again from the dead. To declare the Gospel to all is ultimately the purest expression of love and it is they who should drop everything and embrace it.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Tyndale 2:48 Thanks for the first time comment.

      “Who stands to gain with this? Not God..Christian..homosexual…”

      Everyone stands to gain. Everyone has gained from racial equality and gender equality. Instead of half the population working to solve problems, the brain power has been doubled.

      There are those, however, who have not liked our Constitutional concept of equality before the law. Those who feel threatened make up theological arguments that their god did not approval of this group or that group being equal to white males. Sin is a concept manufactured by the Christian faith in order to control people. To have an attraction to those of the same gender is not a sin.

      • Tyndale says:

        “Everyone stands to gain.”

        I missed the explanation of just how everyone gains from homosexuality.

        • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

          Tyndale 8:12 “I missed the explanation of just how everyone gains from homosexuality.”

          To begin with, homosexual people are here, and, so far as we know have always been here. So, just like people of many races, we have nothing to gain or lose by their presense.

          The more precise question is, how do we gain from giving them equal opportunity and full recognition by way to equal rights? Happier gay people, all other thing being equal, add to the total happiness of society. Gay people who form households and care for each other mean the cost of that care does not fall on others, like the taxpayer.

          • Tyndale says:

            “Happier gay people, all other thing being equal, add to the total happiness of society. ”

            So, because homosexuals are happy, therefore non-homosexuals become happier? How is this even quantifiable?

            “Gay people who form households and care for each other mean the cost of that care does not fall on others, like the taxpayer.”

            Does homosexuality promote health to the extent the taxpayer will contribute less to their health care?

            Do you promote the idea of sexual equality, that is to say, granting equal opportunity and full recognition by way to equal rights to all, irregardless of sexual orientation and/or preference?

          • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

            Tyndale 9:57 ‘How is this quantifiable?”

            This is a philisophical methodology used in my field of economics and elsewhere. If you changed something and then asked one hundred people, “Are you happier, the same or less happy?” and 99 said, “The same”, but, one person said, “Happier” than we could conclude improvement had taken place. That’s why I inserted the phrase, “All other things being equal.”

            Recently, polls show the majority approve of gay marriage. This does not establish there would be a net increase in happiness because, as you pointed out, we can’t measure the amount of happiness compared to the unhappiness. We can get close to determining is there has been, or, would be an improvement in what is often called, “well being”. We could inquire about who is better off economically and who is worse off and see if there was a net improvement for society. I think this would result in a net improvement because gay marriage has no negative effect that I know of on anyone not gay and has some improvements for gay people.

            “Does homosexuality promote health..so..the taxpayer will contribute less to their health care.”

            Gay marriage specifically will result in a tiny reduction in public costs. Homosexuality, per se, contributes the same as heterosexuality per se. That, I suppose would be none.

            “Do you promote the idea of sexual equality…equal opportunity and full recognition by way of equal rights to all, regardless of sexual orientation …?”

            Yes.

  6. Brad says:

    “The Bible’s stance on homosexuality as sin is much more clear than Jon would have you believe.”

    Yep, and like others have said, its stance on other issues is equally abundantly clear – and equally insane.

  7. Ray says:

    What amazes me is how far the gay rights movement has advanced without a shred of scientific evidence pointing to the origins of sexual orientation.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Ray 6:40 “…how far the gay rights movement has advanced without a shred of sc. evidence ..to the origins of sexual orientation.”

      Is that true of heterosexuality also, no shred of evidence as to where it comes from?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>