Question the altars of intolerance

Two weeks ago, the Davidsonian ran an article by Michael Spangler ’10 entitled “Homosexuality Against Christian Tradition.” Mr. Spangler shared his opinion that homosexuality is a sin and has no place in Christian life. In addition to stating his personal religious opinions, Mr. Spangler rebuked Davidson College for being supportive of homosexuality, specifically for sponsoring the National Coming Out Day faculty and staff panel discussion on October 7. While Mr. Spangler is certainly entitled to believe whatever he wishes, I believe that his charge to Davidson College to “direct them [Davidson students] toward the path of life: repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ” represents a dangerous and irresponsible attempt to foist his own religious views upon a community of his peers.
I believe that evil is born when one individual attempts to force his or her opinions onto another. If Mr. Spangler wants to follow a strict interpretation of “God’s word,” then that’s his prerogative. Why, though, should he attempt to dictate college policy? If he wishes, he can engage in civil intellectual debate with another individual (as he and I did not so long ago), for in that situation both individuals are on an equal playing field and are mutually interested in exploring the subject being debated. But for Mr. Spangler to ask Davidson to discontinue certain events, such as the National Coming Out Day panel and to embrace an intolerant philosophy is to eradicate that level playing field and to force the issue at hand on every Davidson student, many of whom may not agree with his suggestions.
The truth is that Mr. Spangler’s biblical literalist philosophy is out of touch with modern society. Though I have no data to support this claim, I guarantee you that a vast majority of Davidson College students are supportive of homosexual people and do not believe that there is anything elementally “wrong” with homosexuality. Why should Davidson alter its acceptance of homosexuality to suit the demands of a minority of the student body? The control of Davidson College policy lies with the students; and until such time as a majority of the student body holds disapproving opinions of homosexuality, Mr. Spangler’s suggestions will have no support.
Now I would like to present my own personal views on the relationship between religion and homosexuality. Unlike Mr. Spangler, I am not demanding that anyone change his or her mind; I am merely presenting my own views for contemplation. I think Mr. Spangler is right when he says that homosexuality is against the Christian tradition; honestly, anyone who is Christian and who supports homosexuality has to be aware of this discrepancy. Many individual Christians have made a separate peace with this issue; they would agree with me in that they intuit, primally and simply, that homosexuality is not wrong. They call themselves “liberal Christians” to accommodate their viewpoints. But why should they do this? It is obvious to me that Christianity, according to its official teachings, rejects homosexuality. If this is true, then Christians must either believe that homosexuality is a sin or realize that the faith they practice is not true Christianity; as Mr. Spangler says in his article, “such a god is an idol of our own making.”
Mr. Spangler, however, assumes that making our own god is a bad thing. I say that it is not. I am not Christian, but I believe in God. My beliefs are guided by my sense of what is right, by my own knowledge as a human being that love is the chief end of all our pursuits and that evil is whatever harms another or restricts his or her agency and free will. The God I worship is the God of beauty, of life, of love, of the knowledge that all we need in this world is to give our love away with as much passion and fervor as we can and to ask for nothing in return. I will not apologize for love. I know in my heart of hearts that love could never be a crime; and unless theological precepts of intolerance are surgically removed from Christian dogma, then I can never endorse Christianity.
Some may condemn me for my views and say that I will end in Hell; to them, I can only say that I hope so, for if for the sake of love I am cast down to their Hell, then it will seem Heaven to me.

Nolan Boyd ‘12 is an English major from Dalton, GA. Contact him at noboyd@davidson.edu. 

• Facebook Comments
• Site Comments

3 comments

Davidson Alum

Mon Nov 23 2009 20:35

Davidson isn't going to quit doing anything. The article sparked some healthy debate, but that's about it. Clearly the "official" Davidson stance is contrary to what Mr. Spangler writes, or they wouldn't continue to celebrate National Coming Out Day or even have any kind of support for homosexual activity. And thank God for it. If Mr. Spangler wants a place where his interpretation of sin is adqeuately punished, I would suggest he attend Bob Jones. Or BYU.

Your name

Thu Nov 19 2009 23:56

Nolan, in addition to stating your belief that the fabrication of one's own "god" is not a bad thing, you have modeled perfectly for us what that process looks like. In your own words, your "god" is a god that is self-made and that is (by implication of your own logic) not God. You say that you "believe in God" and then proceed to articulate the beliefs that stem not from God, but from your "god": a belief in your own sense of "what is right", in love as the "chief end of all our pursuits", in evil as "whatever harms another or restricts his or her agency and free will." Your god is just that: your god. It is not God, for God is God apart from who man says He is.

Whether or not "making our own god" is a good or bad thing, it is at the core a glaring reflection of your (and our) utterly foolish notion that any self-made god could ever actually be the true God. How could it be? You made it. Moreover, if I make a different god, then whose god is God? You see, such a worldview has no stability whatsoever. And it certainly would not lead to any more "tolerance" (a term that, from every corner, has been both laughably and sorrowfully misused and misunderstood in all of these debates) than that which you suggest would result from the exclusion from the public forum of well-articulated opinions such as those of Mr. Spangler.

The god (as you should have referred to it), not "God", that you worship is not a god of “beauty, of life, of love, of the knowledge that all we need in this world is to give our love away with as much passion and fervor as we can and to ask for nothing in return”; rather, it is an opinion, or perhaps more accurately an idol, of Nolan Boyd’s. It is an idol that is so “loving” that it is arguably tolerant of the very things that cause us harm. And quite frankly, if you claim to believe that “all we need in this world is to give our love away with as much passion and fervor as we can and to ask for nothing in return”, then it would serve you well to read the biblical narrative in depth. For regardless of whether or not you believe the Bible to be truth, it is arguably the greatest and most enduring story of the very belief you claim to hold. It is the account of One who has freely given away all of His love to a world that has never and will never deserve it; and for all of this He has asked and needs nothing in return.

Your name

Thu Nov 19 2009 00:39

So civil intellectual debate is fine, as long as he doesn't question college policy.

Add comment


I am not posting spam. I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Enter the characters in the image above:

log out