Comments on: You do know the Irish same-sex marriage referendum got ugly, don’t you?

By: Anthony Venn-Brown

Anthony Venn-Brown — Sat, 24 Sep 2016 13:24:45 +0000

Good article Mike Reading it reminded of this extract from the epilogue of A Life Of Unlearning
“It’s important to remind churches that having a conversation about us without us will usually be nothing more than a recycling of preconceived ideas and misconceptions. Imagine a group of male church leaders discussing the role of women in the church without females present? We would call that misogyny. Or church leadership discussing indigenous issues without consulting indigenous people themselves. How could they have any insight into what their life experience is really all about? We would call that white supremacy/racism/elitism. The church has done a great deal of talking about us but rarely has spoken with us. So when church leaders discuss LGBT people, relationships and the community without speaking with or spending time getting to know LGBT people it does beg the question why. What is there to fear? Why the exclusion? Is this further evidence of homophobia that is regularly denied?

It’s time for the church to invite LGBT people into the conversation. For some this is a conversation about their thoughts and beliefs but for us it is about who we are.”
http://www.abbi.org.au/2016/09/church-and-homosexuality/

By: Richard Carson

Richard Carson — Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:16:36 +0000

Thanks Mike! I would add there was a paradox in play in Ireland in that it was healthy conversation that won the vote yet those on the victorious side believe an Australian plebiscite would be inappropriate because of the impact of the conversation that was required to make it happen. Here is my friend Tiernan on SBS illustrating that very paradox of the Irish referendum. http://www.sbs.com.au/news/thefeed/article/2016/07/14/plebiscite-or-not-tiernan-brady-weighs-australias-marriage-equality-debate

Also what is key in my comments is that I believe Christians are called to guage division and the level of health in a conversation from a “margins-in” perspective rather than a “centre-out” perspective. So straight (generally male) Christians only get to make the call on whether a conversation is healthy on this if they have submitted to the New Testament one-anothering with their LGBTI brothers and sisters in Christ. It is this reality and its impact that was so markedly absent from the Irish debate.

By: Mike Frost

Mike Frost — Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:03:08 +0000

In reply to Si Lee. Richard's point, I believe, is that LGBTQI Christians were the ones most hurt by the process. Also, I think he was frustrated by the sadly typical practice of evangelicals communicating in an echo chamber on such an important opportunity for a national discussion.

By: Si Lee

Si Lee — Thu, 22 Sep 2016 08:50:20 +0000

In reply to Rebecca. Here is another Irishman's perspective. The referendum was somewhat devisive but no more so than any referendum relating to an important issue. These divisions/attitudes/priviledges were there, and remain regardless of the referendum taking place. I suspect that advocate avoiding referenda on such sensitive and controversial issues often do so because they are happy with the status quo. Those living with intolerable discrimination feel differently. IMHO I would say it should therefore go ahead.

By: Rebecca

Rebecca — Thu, 22 Sep 2016 08:33:54 +0000

Talk with me 🙂
I am willing to have conversations to help people see and understand *this* LGBTQI Christians perspective.
Grace and Peace.