Bigots and Bibles


Bibles (Photo credit: GeoWombats)

By Robert Mann

What if I told you that, based upon my reading of the Bible, I believe deeply that slavery is an institution sanctioned by God?

I’m not telling you that you should own slaves, or that I wish to purchase one myself; just that it’s my personal belief that slavery — the owning of another human — is Biblically approved.

I suspect that I’d be called a monster. My abhorrent views would not get a pass just because I averred, “Hey, the Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it.”

So, why are so many people willing to give Phil Robertson of A&E’s “Duck Dynasty” a pass because his bigoted views on homosexuality are seemingly endorsed by the Bible?

I do believe that had Robertson simply said, “Homosexuality is inconsistent with my faith,” few people would have noticed.

But maybe we should start noticing and start pushing back.

Maybe it’s time to start condemning those who use the Bible as a cloak for their bigoted, hateful views.

Personally, I don’t care what the Bible says about homosexuality — any more than I care what it says about slavery or the treatment of women or the stoning of disobedient children. Indeed, the jury is out on whether homosexuality is really regarded as a sin by the very flawed 1st Century people who wrote the Bible.

But I’m no longer willing to give bigoted Bible thumpers a pass when they use the Bible as a tool to incite hatred and fear and division.

If you want to be a bigot and make bigoted statements, you have that right. But for God’s sake — For. God’s. Sake. — quit misappropriating the Bible to do it.

If you want to smear gay citizens as deviants and compare them to people who have sex with animals, then have the courage to own your bigotry.

Quit hiding behind the Bible.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Bigots and Bibles

  1. Bob in BR says:

    On the bright side the Robertson family has said they won’t go on without Phil so maybe this whole mess will fly away like a pintail in summer. I’ve only seen about 5 minutes of their “reality” show and that was enough to confirm my suspicion that it’s just another one to paint all our citizens as a bunch of, and in this case warranted, ignorant rednecks. The sad irony here is that A&E is being accused of stifling free speech rights. They didn’t tell Robertson he couldn’t conduct the interview with CQ. Our brilliant governor, with his title of losingest litigant in LA history, chose to defend Robertson out of his sense of outrage over this. That and the pull the Robertson family seems to hold with the voters in north Louisiana. He and Neil Riser learned that one the hard way. Jindal neglects to mention that had he or any other employed person in this country made these type of public bigoted comments that they would be immediately fired for it. Yes Robertson had the right to make his ignorant comments and A&E has just as much right to can him for it as we’ve seen countless times in the past. Adios Duck Dynasty. Don’t let the door hit you where the good lord split you. You do know that is dont you Phil.


    • Stephen Winham says:

      Amen, Bob. It’s time for this extension of reality TV in the guise of news to go away along with Megyn Kelly’s beliefs about Santa Claus and Jesus.


  2. Annette C. says:

    The bible has been used as an instructional manual for hundreds of years. It says specifically what a person can and cannot do if they want to get to heaven. All Phil Robertson did in his GQ interview was give examples of some of those things that a person should not do. He was not acting as judge and jury he was just referencing the instructional manual he and so many other people follow. He never said anything that was hateful nor would I consider him to be a bigot from those words. There is an old saying that God wants us to love the sinner, but hate the sin. That is what Robertson was explaining. He never pointed out homosexuals (sinners) themselves, but that homosexuality (sin) is wrong. There are several scriptures that state to the fact one being Romans 1:26-27 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. If people stop and think about what are we as humans are supposed to do while on earth, well that is simple. We are supposed to tell others about God and his instructions, and we are suppose to reproduce. Two men or two women cannot do the later. I am not a promotion of hating people and have friends that are homosexuals. Jesus even had sinners around him as a chance to let them see the error of their ways. This did not mean Jesus was a bigot, but that he was trying to show them the proper way to get to heaven. Robertson was doing it by words.


  3. Woodyandjack says:

    It’s almost funny how irrational this piece is. I’m sitting here reading the T-P and looking at the editorial cartoons that show Phil Robertson saying gays are evil and “Git them gays” and “Blacks was happy then.” Clearly a misinterpretation of his quotes from GQ. Anyone with a brain can read the quotes & see that those were not his sentiments. But, apparently, not everyone has a brain; some seem to be half-wits posing as intellectuals. The Palin quote stating that there is a “larger battle to secularize our culture,” is called absurd by Mann, yet in nearly every other editorial & cartoon in the same edition we see Phil Robertson’s Bible-inspired opinion being ridiculed. As all statistics show, government — therefore governmental influence — is growing; and with the governmental requirements comes the separation between church & state. So where, traditionally, we’ve said the Pledge of Allegiance, sung the National Anthem, said prayers before events, and so on, these traditions are gradually, one-by-one, being banned. If that is not leading to the “secularization of our culture,” then what is it leading to? Atheistic Marxism?


  4. earthmother says:

    Bob, this is one of your finest commentaries ever. It should be required reading for anyone who calls him/herself a follower of the Lord.

    I have been complaining for some time, as a southern, female, moderate-to-liberal social justice advocate, mother, spouse, professional, AND evangelical Christian – these are not mutually exclusive adjectives – that so-called Christians who are right-leaning hate mongers who do everything in their power to destroy the poor (who, according both the Old and New Testaments are to be cared for – Matthew 25:36-40), are NOT true Christians, but in fact are co-opting the faith. They give us all a bad name.

    Please forgive the run-on sentence.

    Thanks so much for having the courage to express something that needs to be said. It needs to be shouted from the mountaintop. Especially during this season where we call for “peace on earth” as we commemorate the birth of Our Lord.


  5. I wish our culture and society could step back and take a collective deep breath. But, of course, if wishes were horses. . . . No, today, thermonuclear annihilation is our default setting.

    Therefore, we’ll all do to Phil Robertson exactly what he’s been accused of doing to gays, et al, and we’ll think ourselves righteous for doing it.

    My Christmas wish for Phil Robertson is the gift of nuance — that and the ability to see the ugliness of Jim Crow now that he couldn’t see then.

    My two cents:


  6. Milford Fryer says:

    Bob, I understand your concerns about people who want to use the Bible as a weapon. I fully believe that many of the people of the religious right are generally not religious and seldom right. The Bible makes a terrible blunt instrument, and the Great Commissions tells Christians to go and teach, not beat people into submission like the minions of al Quida hope to do.

    But people who know Phil Robertson know that is not his goal, his stance on such issues aside.

    And I must disagree that the Bible promotes slavery; I see most of the comments about it as it being a fact of life in those times. If God approved of it, He would not have sent Moses to free his people from it, killing untold thousands of Egyptians in the process.

    And Bob in BR, you deduced all that from five minutes of the show? Really?

    But it would behoove some Christians to read up on where their namesake broke with many of the previous teachings.


    • Robert Mann says:


      I agree with you. The Bible doesn’t sanction slavery. That was my point in the lead of the post, i.e., the Bible’s purported words about homosexuality no more apply to us today than whatever it might say about slavery or women or eating shellfish.

      Wishing you a wonderful holiday season.




      • rsteinmetz70112 says:

        I may be wrong here but having read the Bible cover to cover a few times (along with the Quran, the Book of Mormon and Dianetics among others).

        I don’t think there is an explicit condonation nor condemnation of slavery, but general admonitions for master and servant to act ethically according to their roles. This seems more an acceptance of the social convention than endorsement.

        There are specific admonitions against homosexuality in the Bible.

        Reading the interview in it’s entirety, even as edited by a sophisticated and enlightened organization such as GQ, the sense I get is much more “love the sinner, hate the sin”.

        As for the validity of Mr. Robertson’s view I refer you to this article:


  7. Stephen Winham says:

    Merry Christmas, Bob and best wishes for the new year.


  8. Pingback: Something Like the Truth | Why Bobby Jindal will never be president (part 2)

  9. Deu 23:1 “He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord.”

    If their church doesn’t check for the perfection of their male members – they are not a bible-believing church. They are heretics and must needs be stoned to death.


  10. The concept that the bible justifies slavery is not a novel thought in American society. In fact, it is the founding principle of the second-largest religious sect in the United States today.


  11. Pingback: Phil Robertson, Freedom of Speech and some other thoughts | The Widdershins

  12. Pingback: Explaining Bigotry to Bigots | SoshiTech - Social Media Technology -

  13. Pingback: Something Like the Truth | Fighting bigotry

  14. Jg Benn says:

    ya know, how did Phil Roberston miss the same writer’s, Paul, same book, Corinthians, …
    1 Corinthians 11:14

    King James Version (KJV)

    14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

    .. So what does Paul’s “vice list” say about homosexuality? That’s the tricky part.

    “The first word Paul uses is “malakoi,” which means “soft” in Greek, according to Allen. By analogy, the word came to mean “effeminate,” which is how the King James Version of the Bible translates it.

    “In the ancient world, it would refer to a boy in a relationship with an older man,” Allen said. “It was pederasty, not homosexuality as we think of it today.”

    The other relevant word on Paul’s “vice list” is “arsenokotai,” which means “male sex.” It refers to the other half in the man-boy relationship, common in Greece at the time, Allen said, the older male having sex with the “soft one.”

    “It isn’t anything to do with what we would see today in an intimate, mutual relationship between gay adults,” said Allen, who is co-authoring an upcoming book on homosexuality and heterosexuality in the church.” (quote from Brietbart blog)


Comments are closed.