In Defense of Homosexuality on the Jim Rome Show
August 27, 2008 29 Comments
Homosexuality is fast becoming (at least in America, Europe is far “ahead” of us in this) one of the most well-protected blights on humanity. One cannot say anything even remotely critical of this vice without facing criticism and the shrill cries of “intolerance”.
Speak out against other evils (child abuse, exploitation, racism and sex trafficking) and a rousing “Amen” will be heard from almost every direction.
However, show any concern for the widespread normalization (acceptance) of homosexuality by the mainstream and you’ll catch serious heat. Ironically enough, one will be judged by those who deem themselves most “tolerant” and “non-judgmental”. This phenomenon has spilled over into the strangest places.
Take sports radio for example. Yesterday, a woman called Eileen called the nationally syndicated Jim Rome Show. Rome is funny, has pretty solid takes and interviews the biggest names in the sports world (except for Tiger Woods and apparently Manny Ramírez).
Eileen shared that she takes her daughter to WNBA games. But Eileen is concerned that the WNBA is solely marketing to lesbians. I don’t know how accurate this is, probably not very. After all they’re trying to make money (and keep a struggling league afloat) and they’ll target whatever demographic helps them do this(this was pretty much part of Rome’s take).
However, the implication of Eileen’s statement was clear: she didn’t want her daughter exposed to that “lifestyle” being presented in a manner which makes it seem harmless (at best) or even moral (at worst).
After the call, Rome, predictably busted out with an emphatic “Come on Eileen” (from the classic by Dexys Midnight Runners, right) 
then proceeded to break out in hives. He even used the word “offensive” in response to Eileen’s take. Why? Because the caller took a stand and is concerned for the endemic acceptance of this particular vice.
I found Rome’s indignation interesting especially since:
- He denigrates the WNBA on a regular basis and has indirectly referred to the players as “horses” (let it be said that the fact that it is unwatchable is no reason to do this)
- His takes often involve calling out athletes who disrespect something as worthless as “the game”
- His takes often involve judging athletes/celebs who engage in activities as grievous and sinful as homosexuality [for example rape, disregard for one’s own children, fornication, drunkedness because thankfully these sins are still recognized as such and haven’t been normalized]
- He repeatedly pokes fun at Michael Jackson’s alleged pedophilia yet balks when a caller dares to show a modicum of indignation towards homosexuality
Last Row 
“one of the most well-protected blights on humanity.”
Explain how it is a blight, and people may agree with you.
The explanation will mean nothing if one is sold out to a worldview which can take no true moral stands
Give a good, solid, scientific, evidential reason that homosexuality is bad. Child abuse, exploitation, racism and sex trafficking all have these to show why they are bad.
So solid, scientific, evidential reason is the be all end all? By the way, how would you define bad?
If you can’t come up with one for homosexuality, then you have no credibility in your position.
“So solid, scientific, evidential reason is the be all end all? By the way, how would you define bad?”
Yes. It’s how we determine our laws.
Really? So we had to conduct scientific experiments to come up with our laws? So when Jefferson wrote “We hold these truths to be self-evident” you think he came up with that in a lab?
Bad equals harmful. Harm can be determined scientifically.
So what’s “harmful”? By what standard are you going on?
Homosexuality harms no one. You’re only against it because your book happens to speak against it. And for that, I feel sorry for you.
Actually it harms the one who practices it so in that you are mistaken. I’m against it because yes, it is contradicts God’s revelation. It is not my book, I had little to do with recording what God inspired those men to say. I’m glad that though you reject God’s Word you at least recognize the fact that God speaks out against it.
For the greater part of human history it has been looked at as a vice because deep down we know it isn’t right. The fact that it has been practiced since antiquity doesn’t erase this. It hasn’t been until recently that it has been deemed acceptable.
I’m with the commenters above me, on this. If you believe that homosexuality is immoral, then that’s great, but all evidence points to it not being a choice. There are your angsty teens out there declaring that they’re bisexual, but for the most part people wouldn’t WANT to be gay in today’s society; it’d be far easier to be straight.
So if alcoholism isn’t a choice (it might have genetic predisposition) then when one indulges and causes harm then is the defense going to be “sorry couldn’t help it?”
Or say being unfaithful to one’s spouse. Say a man has a predisposition to do this, can this be a valid excuse for it? Better yet, does it justify infidelity?
If it’s truly a lifestyle choice taken just as a big “**** you” [Sorry man no f-bombs here] to the man, then it does deserve condemnation [condemnation? on what grounds?]. Unfortunately, it’s not. There are physiological differences in the brains of gay and straight men discovered recently. I won’t call it a brain disorder, but there’s a biological basis, clearly.
The study you refer to has been debunked by the scientific establishment. But in the event that there is a biological basis it still doesn’t excuse it. There could be biological basis for any number of vices (like the ones morse, you and I agree on) but that doesn’t excuse them.
When setting up our laws, that’s what we get to use. As many arbitrary moral “preferences” as we can come up with go right out the window when it comes down to how to legislate without crossing First Amendment lines.
I had a very similar conversation with a co-worker, and after explaining the above, he asked, “regardless of the law stuff, what do you think is RIGHT?” While a reasonable, emotional question, it has no place in deciding the course of our nation’s policy on the matter.
This post wasn’t about national policy.
“Really? So we had to conduct scientific experiments to come up with our laws?”
Yes. It’s called OBSERVATION. These truths are self evident because we can see how the world works, and how people live, and the consequences of their actions.
“So what’s “harmful”? By what standard are you going on?”
Scientific observation and study.
So what decides that this is the best way to determine this? So why do you (and every other human being on God’s green earth) engage in behavior that “scientific observation and study” has deemed harmful?
” I’m glad that though you reject God’s Word you at least recognize the fact that God speaks out against it.”
Well, no. I recognize you have an old book that says a lot of things that no longer apply to the world.
So what is your explanation for the fact that we don’t do what we know we ought to do?
” because deep down we know it isn’t right”
Evidence?
Deep down I don’t know it isn’t right.
Well that’s not hard to explain, I was in the same predicament 5 years ago.
Speak out against other evils (child abuse, exploitation, racism and sex trafficking) and a rousing “Amen” will be heard from almost every direction.
You lost me here. Homosexuality is the equal of child abuse, exploitation, racism and sex trafficking? Good grief.
Perhaps it is not equal in our eyes (For the record I didn’t equate them), but each of these things is a manifestation of our natural (post-Fall) propensity to rebel against God and His commands.
Do any of ya’ll listen to Rome’s show?
“So what decides that this is the best way to determine this?”
Experience.
Why? Says who?
“So why do you (and every other human being on God’s green earth) engage in behavior that “scientific observation and study” has deemed harmful?”
Because recognizing that something is harmful and caring whether or not it is harming you are two different things.
So that doesn’t tell you anything about human nature? You still didn’t answer the why…
“Well that’s not hard to explain, I was in the same predicament 5 years ago.”
And I’m glad you have a very active imagination. I prefer to deal with reality.
Yeah a ‘reality’ of your own design
“Yeah a ‘reality’ of your own design”
Says the person with a book that has talking snakes and men who do magic tricks.
It’s hardly magic. Magic is an intentional manipulation of the supernatural for selfish purposes. God’s direct intervention in His Creation could not be more different.
As for Satan’s manipulation of our ancestors, well, whether you mock the account or not, you are subjected to the consequences on a daily basis. Reality doesn’t really ask us for our opinions.
It’s strange to see your responses. It’s like going back in time and reading what I would have said before my conversion.
Did you take your blog’s name from John Shore?
Reality doesn’t really ask us for our opinions.
You’re on the right track, but…
Since you used to be an atheist, what evidence was it that convinced you of God, Satan’s etc. existence? It must have been pretty good!
I wasn’t an atheist per se. I believed that if (and a big if at that) there was a god, he/she/it was quite irrelevant. An atheist for all practical purposes but not an atheist who so assuredly proclaims that there is absolutely, positively no god.
It wasn’t the quality of the evidence so much as my eyes being opened to reality, and this is requires an act of God, and not the ones mentioned in insurance policies. No amount of human effort or cleverness of argument can accomplish this, Jesus made this clear and I found this out through experience.
It’s like a man born blind and is able to see. It’s hard for this man to refute the fact that he can now see or even question whether or not he sees or not. He doesn’t complain that it’s too bright, but is in awe that he is able to see what he couldn’t see in his past state.
One does not have to ‘assuredly proclaim that there is absolutely, positively no god’ to be an atheist; such a person is an atheists, yes, but also a highly irrational one. No doubt you’ve heard all of this before.
Yes I have in fact, I heard Dr. Dawkins say as much in a debate with Dr. McGrath
To be honest, I’m not impressed by your conversion story. I don’t think you meant for me to be, but it really is the weakest kind; the vague, ‘God opened my eyes’ kind. It’s not the kind of belief I have any respect for, yet it’s depressingly common.
You’re right I wasn’t trying to impress you with it. To be sure though, I didn’t go into details.
I agree with the post Laz.
There are things that we have urges for or weaknesses for that are not right or good. We must resist the temptation and run from it.
I have a homosexual couple that live next door to me. I have and will continue to, invite them to special church functions. I do not, however, want my boys to see this life style and behavior at such a young age. I can feel for Eileen.
We use the scripture to give us moral boundaries. Homosexuality, clearly, falls in the foul zone. If we say it is just part of our DNA, we are going down a slippery slope. Would this apply to people who are attracted to children?(I think there is a group called the man boy society or something like that, they advocate this as a real lifestyle) Or animals? Or dead bodies? or rape? or any other perversion you can name. If we are wired like that, why condemn us? This is the road we are on.
There are absolutes in this world, even if we as a society reject them.
ps: my husband was an atheist until he was 28.
kw
“If we say it is just part of our DNA, we are going down a slippery slope”
Yeah…that slippery slope of reality. Let’s just ignore what the evidence says and think whatever makes us comfortable. [/sarcasm]
“It’s like going back in time and reading what I would have said before my conversion.”
And what converted you? Satan came to visit? Jesus said hi?
No, God revealing Himself through His Word. This after years of staunch denial in the face of His revelation through Creation.
We use the scripture to give us moral boundaries. Homosexuality, clearly, falls in the foul zone. If we say it is just part of our DNA, we are going down a slippery slope. Would this apply to people who are attracted to children?(I think there is a group called the man boy society or something like that, they advocate this as a real lifestyle) Or animals? Or dead bodies? or rape? or any other perversion you can name. If we are wired like that, why condemn us? This is the road we are on.
The term that springs to mind when someone presents a moral system like this is ‘unrefined’. Do you people really see the world in such stark shades of black and white?
Unrefined or not it is what it is, reality doesn’t ask for our opinions or feelings. Don’t worry you see things in “stark shades of black and white” as well. Your question shows that much.
morsecOde –
my husband decided he had rejected something he had never looked into. as the scripture says: if you seek with all your heart, you will find. he has been on both sides of this debate and can say that a changed life and a renewed mind wins out, hands down.
also, this is just one of many slippery slopes that we as a society are slipping down.
forknowledge –
I have never been referred to a ‘unrefined’. and yes, there are many black and whites in this world.
“my husband decided he had rejected something he had never looked into.”
Um…good for him?
I rejected something I looked into for a good long time.
“yes, there are many black and whites in this world.”
I feel sorry that you feel this way, as you couldn’t be more wrong.
By this statement you have only made Kris’ point.
Unrefined or not it is what it is, reality doesn’t ask for our opinions or feelings. Don’t worry you see things in “stark shades of black and white” as well. Your question shows that much.
You keep saying that reality doesn’t ask for our opinions or feelings (an admirable sentiment) without following it through to its conclusion. You’ve mentioned ‘Creation’ and acts of God, yet I and hundreds of others have looked long and hard for these things in reality and have come up with nothing time and time again.
As for seeing in black and white, I’m afraid I don’t understand what you mean. This could be a good time to test morsec0de’s idea of scientific observation applied to non-scientific areas; if I’ve really demonstrated a belief in moral absolutes, it should be easy to prove this. Would you be willing to do so?
Do you think it’s wrong to see the world in “stark shades of black and white”?
kris:
I have never been referred to a ‘unrefined’. and yes, there are many black and whites in this world.
If your religious beliefs are correct, then that may well be the case. Unless someone can provide sufficient evidence in support of them, however, I am forced to conclude that no such moral absolute exist.
“Do you think it’s wrong to see the world in “stark shades of black and white”?”
Generally speaking, yes.
Just so we understand each other…
Wrong because it is inaccurate and leads to positions that turn nuanced issues into extremes.
So are you wrong in seeing this in black and white?
Do you think it’s wrong to see the world in “stark shades of black and white”?
I had a feeling that you were trying to turn this around and say ‘Ha ha, you’re seeing in black and white when you say that seeing in black and white is wrong! Eat logic, sucker!’ Your reply to morsec0de more or less confirms this.
No this isn’t an attempt to win an argument
But let me go into a bit more detail. The following are some beliefs that I’ve seen expressed in very ‘black and white’ ways; in each case, the speaker was clear that there was no room for discussion, no possibility, however small, that they were wrong:
“People of different races shouldn’t mix.”
“Infidels should be killed.”
“Letting women walk outside unaccompanied by a male is wrong.”
“Homosexuals should be executed for defying God’s will.”
“Conservatices are all backwards hicks.”
These are the kind of pronouncements that black-and-white thinking seems to easily give rise to, but the content is actually meaningless. What matters is that seeing the world in black-and-white – in terms of absolutes – shuts down rational thought. You cannot think rationally about anything if you believe that you can never, under any circumstances, be wrong.
So when I say that seeing the world in stark shades of black and white is wrong, I say it as the result of observation and reason, and with full acknowledgement that I may be wrong. Do you think kris would be willing to say the same of her opinions on homosexuality?
Yet the very things (observation and reason) you use to reach your conclusion can only exist in a world/universe/reality that at its core is black and white.
Those aren’t Kris’ opinions on homosexuality, she (and I) are merely reiterating what God has revealed regarding it. All of us can either take God at His Word or not.
“So are you wrong in seeing this in black and white?”
I don’t. I see it in general terms.
In very specific situations, absolutism works. But by the very nature of being only in those specific situations, it’s no longer absolute.
Are you absolutely sure?
No. But all my experiences up to this point have suggested that this is so.
I’m not absolutely sure of just about everything except that I exist. I’m willing to change my mind about anything provided you have evidence to show that I’m wrong and you’re right.
I don’t question your existence. Any evidence presented you will be for naught since you are committed to the naturalistic worldview. On this I do speak from experience because evidence presented to me when I was in your shoes, didn’t do anything either. As in my case, the only thing that will convince you is God shattering a heart set against Him.
Since you don’t object to people praying for you, I think I will begin to do this. It’s only appropriate since many prayed for my conversion.
Can you say the same?
I don’t question my existence either.
Forknowledge:
i am ‘wrong’ everyday at one time or the other…However, God is never wrong.
kw
Yet the very things (observation and reason) you use to reach your conclusion can only exist in a world/universe/reality that at its core is black and white.
Why?
For the reason that you’re able to even ask that question and mean something by it
Those aren’t Kris’ opinions on homosexuality, she (and I) are merely reiterating what God has revealed regarding it. All of us can either take God at His Word or not.
You reiterate what a book says about homosexuality. If you want to absolve yourself of responsibility for your beliefs, by all means claim that you’re simply bowing to the will of some god.
God’s Word, His Character is what it is whether any of us bow down to Him or not. He is.
I’ve listened to Rome before. He does have some good “takes,” however, he lashes out with the bite and sarcasm a bit much (as may be evidenced with his response to Eilleen).
I think that if Eilleen doesn’t want her child exposed to something, it’s her job as a parent to be honest with her child and explain why. When Eilleen called in to Rome, she opened herself and her ideas up to public scrutiny, and while I may not be the smartest man in the world, I know if I don’t want to get ridiculed, it’s probably not very smart to call in to Romey. True that
I won’t pretend to know everything there is to know about God, God’s laws, the Bible, Jim Rome, or Eilleen’s parenting choices, but I know that Jesus said the most important commandment was to love one another.
Well you’re almost right, the passage I’m assuming you’re referring (Matthew 22:36-40) to says this:
So my two cents: I love Jim Rome, Eilleen, the WNBA, everyone who’s posted here, gay peoples around the world, and God most of all, for giving me the capacity and the opportunity to live a life where that much love is possible.
Oh, and since Jesus said “Judge not, lest ye be judged,” I wonder if God has stored up enough “judgement” for Jim Rome…
handing down judgment, or better yet condemnation, on someone vs recognizing sin are two different things.
we do have some sort of judging when we tell someone they need a savior. we are making a judgment call that they are lost and need to be found.
when the scripture talks about judgment,, as in judge not or you shall be judged, it is reminding us that our neighbor might have a speck in his eye, but remember, you probably have a 2 by 4 sticking out of yours. all of us need to remember we are sinners saved by grace and that we are just telling others about that grace. we are not better than those who are lost. my husband stole a saying from our previous pastor.
Christians are not sinless, we just try to sin less…
kw
KW,
Good stuff!
The inability of folks to discern the difference never ceases to amaze me.
laz, i think we both know which one Romey makes his living off of…
and to say that i have a 2 x 4 in my eye is ridiculous! it’s more of a california redwood…and whilst i don’t know how much lumber Rome swings, I wonder if he holds himself up to the same standards he holds up pro athletes. not that athletes are above reproach, but there again, why is Rome?
I think Kris was speaking “you” in general terms not to you specifically. Of course Rome doesn’t hold himself to the same standards, to be fair to the man most of us don’t. Though the Christian should know better.
oh, and apparently, getting back to lesbians, the world’s oldest lesbian died, or something like that…she had been with her partner for like 40 years…i pray my wife and i can build happiness for that long and longer…
oh i know kris was speaking general, otherwise it would have been a living example of the point trying to be made…is that irony, epitome, both, or neither?
i like your blog, Laz, Donnie and I were talking about it last night, and we both agreed that you’re a very articulate writer with a very logical writing scheme. Donnie even compared it to “painting with words,” and dude, I’m totally not pulling your leg. You have a very developed writing style that’s unique and easy to understand, and you deserve to be complimented on it!
Thanks V-Yay for the kind words not to mention your contributions to this discussion.