G-d hates fag haters (?)

Standard

In light of the recent death of Frank Phelps, my mind has been occupied by reflections on queer bashing and hate.

There is a case to be made that the sin of Sodom may have been–nope, not backdoor entry. But homophobic violence.

If we allow just a fragment of queer imagination, we can read the angels as obviously gay men (fairies), and the response of the city wanting to gang rape them as the type of unconscionable violence committed against Matthew Shepard and Gordon Ray Church. (If you don’t know either of these names, you should. Google them. Then prepare to weep. Jesus does.)

In fact, let’s read Gordon Ray Church and Matthew Shepard as the angels.

This reading flips the otherwise-bizarro narrative on its head and actually makes it intelligible (unqueers it?). In this reading, with Shepard and Church as the angels, we are taught that any society so depraved that it would brutally sexually violate the messengers among them (read, queer people) is dangerously on the brink of being destroyed by YHWH, the war g-d.

So perhaps the takeaway isn’t that G-d/dess hates fags; but a warning that G-d/dess loathes fag haters.

I buy it.

Image

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “G-d hates fag haters (?)

  1. Leonard R

    Fascinating reading. I think this adds an interesting twist to what I believe is already the clear portion – that to the degree the story has a condemnation of sexuality, it is of forced sexuality, not homosexuality. To read the messengers as being homosexuals themselves adds a power and poignancy to the story. Including the aspect of acting on our own sxuality (regardless of orientation) not only forcibly, but from a place of self-hatred.

  2. Note, as well, that the angels (i.e., Matthew Shepard, Gordon Ray Church, and all other targets of violent intent, like Clair Harwood) are the ones assisting Lot’s family in fleeing Sodom. What angels are we turning away?

  3. Leonard R

    I hadn’t considered that angle, but I can see how that would intersect. Esp. As regards the idea of perpetual necessary celibacy vs. Inentional celibacy. (I.e. I’m not opposed to the celibacy I experienced as a teenager, which was a tempoary one during early sexual development, prior to marriage to my wife. But certainly the “never for you” variey faced by many believing homosexuals…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s