I was born a pastor's child deep in the heart of the Southern Bible Belt. As a pastor's child there are certain responsibilities and moral standards that you are expected to live up too. Aside from being a member of a highly religious, Christian family, being born a pastor's child also means that you are automatically placed into a strict system of biblical politics and Christian ideals. Growing up I was raised by the bible almost as much as I was raised by my biological parents. Our tight knit, religious family made it clear to pray before every meal, show up every Sunday on the front row and made a point to fill conversation with as many religious references and biblical metaphors as possible. We existed in our Christian bubble without interruption, until the fateful day my oldest brother came out of the closet to my parents and community. 

At the time, it was crushing. Having been raised on the fundamentals of a non-affirming religion I felt as though I had no other choice but to excommunicate my brother. I watched as my parents struggled to handle and grasp the situation, failing to give my brother the support he so desperately needed. I watched as our church community, turned its back on him, ostracized him, and excluded him, no longer wanting any part of his awkward "sin" and its consequences. I watched as our public school, humiliated, persecuted and tortured him, unable to accept his differing sexual orientation. I watched all of this, I soaked it up, it permeated me to the core, it                                  shook every religious fiber in my being and called into question every fundamental Christian belief I was raised on. I came to a place where I was able to see these "religious", anti-gay teachings for what they were and saw what a congregation of individuals who failed to value the core human rights of LGB was capable of.

It was Bishop TD Jakes who once said, "There is nothing as powerful as a changed mind" (Saviuc). For me, it was the outing of my older brother that changed my path from a life dedicated to fundamental religion and set me on the path of LBG advocacy. I used my brother circumstance as a means of asking questions and gathering research. I became curious, what is it about homosexuality that makes it so despicable? Why is something as trivial as sexual orientation the reason for the breaking of families, communities, religious groups, schools, and government? 

I came to understand that in order to significantly decrease this prejudice and discrimination, non-affirming religious groups must morally accept homosexuality. As a major contributor to anti-gay attitudes and beliefs non-affirming religions stand heavily in the way of homosexuality's acceptance within modern society. Even though these values and beliefs have been held for hundreds of years it is no longer viable. Since the foundation of this country it has been this way but in light of recent legislation and a modern culture, non-affirming religions must adapt to the times. This paper will seek to analyze and expose negative religious messages in light of their contribution to sexual prejudice and heterosexism. This paper will also show the benefits of a culture where religion and homosexuality are merged together. 

Traditionally non-affirming religions cling to their beliefs and reject homosexuality because they believe that it is a moral wrong and an attack on their moral standards, and belief system. Non-affirming religions point to the written texts upon which they were built as justification for their anti-gay beliefs. This creates a disconnect between homosexuality and non-affirming religions because religious members are unable to sympathize or accept LGB individuals because all they can see is a moral issue with the individuals sexual preference. Though some religions have changed and now accept LGB the majority of non-affirming religions remain unchanging and strongly oppose LGB's place in society. In order to show how these messages and anti-gay ideals are negatively effecting society firstly sexual prejudice must be defined and analyzed in its relation to religion. 

Gregory Herek, in his lifetime of impressive work, has written multiple essays on several diverse aspects of Homosexuality. It is in within his essay "The Psychology of Sexual Prejudice" that he defines this modern, societal disconnect towards LBG as being "the perception that gay people and the gay community represent values that are directly in conflict with one's personal value system" (Herek "The Psychology ... ").  Herek uses this definition to define what he calls "Sexual Prejudice", or basically, the negative attitudes and discrimination toward homosexuals because of their values (Herek). This is huge because it takes homosexuality out of a moral context and places it under the ethical standards of a Nation that provides safety, freedom and equality to all values.

Similar to Herek's definition, Kris Coonan in his essay on understanding sexual prejudice introduces something called "Heterosexism" (Coonan). Though you're probably aware of the term "Homophobia", which refers to a certain individual's hatred and disgust of homosexuality, "Heterosexism" is used to describe an institution or culture's hatred of homosexuality (Coonan). When you connect this to Herek' sexual prejudice (Herek) you get a picture of a society that as a whole, harvests hateful and discriminatory attitudes towards homosexuality because of a difference in value systems (Coonan). Though many would wish to hide this behind a theological curtain, making it not only acceptable within society, but believable within a religion, it remains an unjust, negative position, which effects the community around it. 

So in light of these societal outlooks and definitions from Herek and Coonan it becomes much easier to detach homosexuality from its moral rooting and  look at it through a lens of ethicality in relation to a free and accepting country. The big question that must arise from this "perspective change" is where are these underlying feelings of hate and discrimination coming from? Or more importantly, are the teachings of non-affirming religious congregations actually harvesting attitudes of sexual prejudice within the United States? For though we are a nation built on freedoms and equality, where everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and value systems, if a widely practiced belief is the direct cause of unjust harm and unwarranted discrimination towards another group, than it seems those particular values must be called into question. This has been the course of civil rights and liberation throughout history.

Though it could appear clear cut and the "easy" presentable solution would be for non-affirming religions to simply "accept" homosexuality into their values, several complicated issues arise when targeting fundamental religious group's teachings. The idea of homosexuality becomes one of extreme sensitivity and delicacy because personal moral convictions and beliefs become the focus point for argument and analysis. There are those that will argue the importance of "live and let live" and will argue that as long as non-affirming religious followers and LGB members stay separated everyone benefits and the issue is resolved. This could be acceptable but because of the correlation between strong anti-gay messages coming from the non-affirming religious community it is no longer viable for the two values to coexist.  Through my research I have encountered two different kinds of religious opposition to homosexuality: One, the hardcore, radical rejection that leaves no room for a moral acceptance of homosexuality; Two, that idea that a religious group has the ability to "accept and reject" homosexuality. Though differing, both of these stances lead to increase sexual prejudice and heterosexism.

Though many would agree that falling too far one way on any subject or spectrum will usually lead to dangerous and unbalanced viewpoints, it still helps to provide examples of such radical hate and disgust. Just as Herek concluded that individuals with a lack of exposure to homosexuality are more likely to reject it or find wrong in it (Herek), individuals who have had a lack of exposure to radical non-affirming religious protest of homosexuality are more likely to become complacent with it and not find an issue with it. 

On Dr. James Dobson's "My Family Talk" website you can find Dobson's religious perspective on a veritable plethora of controversial issues. In one section of James Dobson's responses he addresses the shocking and inappropriate question "AIDS God's Punishment for Homosexuality and Promiscuity?" (Dobson). Throughout his response Dobson uses several biblical scripture verses to build his case and ends his response by saying "AIDS is only one avenue by which sickness and death befall those who play Russian roulette with God's moral imperatives"(Dobson). Dr. Dobson comes to the conclusion that yes indeed AIDS is a punishment for all homosexuals, because well, in the mind of Dobson when you go against God you deserve it (Dobson). I think the issues with Dobson's moral point of view are obvious and the effects it has mentally on his followers will surely lead to a negative perception of homosexuality. 

Similarly to Dobson, Bible.org provides information on anything you could ever want to know about the bible, its standings, different pastoral takes on different passages of scriptures, as well as different leaders stances on popular moral issues (Tucci). Under the section on homosexuality, Tony Tucci writes a piece dedicated to answering all of the questions regarding homosexuality and the bible (Tucci). One response that stands out among the rest is Tucci's answer to "why should two people who sincerely love each other not be allowed to get married just because they are of the same gender?" (Tucci). Tucci answers this by explaining that based on the bible and Gods decree it is impossible for two people of the same gender to sincerely love each other because if they really loved each other they would recognize how they are going against God and that would be enough to break them apart (Tucci). Similar to Dobson, Tucci's messages are severely negative and will place anti-gay attitudes and themes of sexual prejudice within any followers.

Peter Hubbard, a head pastor at North Hills Community, recently collaborated on and came out with a book called Love into Light, a Christian response to the issue of homosexuality. In his book Hubbard appeals to a fundamental religious society to reject homosexuality because of biblical text but to do so in a manner of love, and respect (Hubbard). Interestingly, though Hubbard preaches a substantial message of acceptance, his article is full of strongly worded, emotionally charged text that continuously paint the image of homosexuality as destructive, unnatural, and immoral (Hubbard). Phrases in Hubbard's article such as "intentionally dismantling the family", "children will pay the price for our country's moral suicide", and "the meaning of marriage is stretched to near meaningless", all degrade and blame homosexuality for our countries failures, despite the label and title of love (Hubbard). Peter Hubbard's "hopeful" text is a perfect example of how without moral acceptance, confusing religious contradictions will continue to produce messages of prejudice and hate. 

Non-affirming religious leaders have now been exposed for being one of the largest contributors and predictors of sexual minority discrimination, sexual prejudice, and heterosexism. Still, In order to bring about change to a certain aspect of life it remains primarily important that a definite problem exist. Many might be tempted to say the issue of anti-gay violence and discrimination is no larger an issue than violence facing heterosexuals, minorities, or any sub group within the United States. Others might make the argument that there is no proof that non-affirming religions have any connection to anti-gay violence and discrimination. The truth of the matter is, that due to anti-gay themes from non-affirming religions that lead to sexual prejudice and heterosexism, sexual minorities such as lesbians, gays, and bisexuals are at a higher risk of violence and acts of aggression than the average, U.S. heterosexual (Girshick). So it remains that the best way to decrease discrimination is for the non-affirming religious congregations to morally accept homosexuality into their values. 

It is hard for many to admit that homosexual and lesbian individuals face discrimination as a result of their sexual orientation because when you admit something is real, that an issue exists, you must also begin to look at solutions and answers to the issues. A key factor of not recognizing an issue is to have zero or little expose to it (Herek).  Crosby Burns and Philip Ross composed a piece of LGB testimonies that expose anti-gay discrimination outside of the common workplace (Burns). Among these testimonies several shocking, powerful quotations standout. One individual William Hubert, a quadriplegic, testified he was leasing an apartment in Southern California when he hired a live-in attendant, Cindy Kelly, to tend to his needs. Hubert said he was swiftly and inexplicably evicted from his apartment when the landlord found out Cindy was a lesbian and Hubert associated with gay people (Burns). Another individual Guadalupe "Lupita" Benitez was denied infertility treatment by the North Coast Women's Care Medical Group because she was a lesbian. Her former doctors were conservative Christians who claimed that their religious beliefs gave them a right to withhold care from Benitez that they routinely provide to heterosexual patients (Burns). 

Though Hubert, Cindy and "Lupita" are just several examples, in a 2001 Survey done in the state of New York it was found that in public spaces, 27 percent of the gay respondents reported inappropriate treatment and hostility,  25 percent were verbally harassed, 6 percent were denied service, and 5 percent were physically harassed (Burns). The Survey also found that Eight percent of gay people report an outright refusal of health care services, 12 percent said they were personally blamed for their health status, and 11 percent said their health care professional refused to touch them (Burns). It should also be noted that it has been determined that gay or lesbian individuals are more likely to end up obese, more likely to contemplate suicide, and more likely to show addictive habits with drugs and alcohol than other individuals (Burns). 

A video segment was done by The Nation who determined that LBG youth were being incarcerated at an alarming rate (The Nation).  The Nation found that due to familial circumstances and the rejection of their way of life LBG youth are making poor decisions and being detained at a higher and higher rate (The Nation). The video goes on to explain how while behind bars, LBG youth are also forced into government programs that aim to "turn them straight" and change who they are (The Nation). This research done by Crosby Burns, Philip Ross, and the Nation all point to the undeniable fact that individuals who identify as lesbian, homosexual, or bisexual all face increased levels of violence, discrimination, verbal harassment, and imprisonment, as a result of sexual prejudice and heterosexism. 

To determine where these acts of aggression and discrimination are coming from The Human Rights Campaign did a study on Anti-Gay Hate Crimes and found that the greatest predictors of anti-gay violence were white males, religious fundamentals, and conservatives (Girshick). The Human Rights Campaign also found that unlike any other category of violence, LBG members were blamed more for being attacked and instigating violence than any other social or ethnic group (Girshick). Similar to The Human Rights Campaign study, Paul Poteat and Ethan Mereish in their piece "Ideology, Prejudice, and Attitudes Toward Sexual Minority Social Policies and Organizations" found that Right Wing Authoritarianism, Social Dominance Orientation, and Conservatism were all major contributors to attitudes of sexual prejudice (Poteat). It is interesting to note here that the survey found that fundamental religious beliefs usually go hand in hand with right wing authoritarianism and conservatism (Poteat).

The United Nations Human Civil Rights Council met for the first time in 2012 to discuss an end, worldwide, to violence and discrimination against gay and Trans people (Gray). Ban Ki-Moon opened  the meeting by addressing the council and discussing acts of violence and discrimination against LBGT members, calling it "a monumental tragedy" and referring to it as "a stain upon our collective conscience" (Gray). Anti-gay violence, discrimination, prejudice, harassment, and inequality is real. I have witnessed it firsthand in my community, in my schooling, in my family, and ultimately in my religion. Through my personal experience and through my research I have reached the ultimate conclusion that in order to decrease sexual prejudice and heterosexism, decrease anti-gay violence and harassment, and increase the modern society's acceptance of homosexuality, non-affirming religions must morally accept same-sex attraction. 

The only way to provide safety and equality for LBG individuals is to provide acceptance. There should be no radical rejection, there cannot be room for "acceptance with rejection", there must simply be acceptance. So many religious leaders are working tirelessly to make sure that homosexuality stays out of our society. It was Bishop TD Jakes who said "There is nothing more powerful than a changed mind", and it was also Bishop TD Jakes who went on to say "You can change your hair, your clothing, your address, your spouse, your friends, but if you don't change your mind, the same experience will perpetuate itself over and over again because everything outwardly changed but nothing inwardly changed." (Saviuc).

In the past decade the LGBT group has seen a major change in support for their movement. In the summer of 2015 the United States Supreme Court passed a law legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states. This was a huge landmark for the LBGT movement and is a definite result of a changing society. In light of the recent, favorable legislation multiple religious sectors have switched from a non-affirming viewpoint to one of acceptance of homosexuality (Allen). Changes like these are increasing homosexuals place in modern society and decreasing sexual prejudice and heterosexism. Though change is occurring and growth is visible, the process is taking time and has no foreseeable end in the future. The acceptance of homosexuality within our borders would be massively increased if more non-affirming religions were to come out and morally support the practice of same-sex relationships. Religious messages carry a substantial weight within individuals. If the change were to happen within non-affirming religious teachers and passed down to the followers, we would, as a result, see a more accepting and loving community.

There will be those who will always oppose homosexuality. There will be those that from the moment they are born till the very day they die will view homosexuality in a negative light, in disgust, with hatred, and with misunderstanding. That to me is far more tragic than any single act of violence, any act of harassment, or any act of discrimination and judgement. In her interview with The Daily Beast GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis said, "More than 100 million Americans still say they're uncomfortable just seeing a gay co-worker's wedding photo, and staggering rates of hate violence continue to devastate the transgender community, We must not only advance policy, we must also accelerate acceptance of the LGBT community -- because laws alone don't end discrimination, people do." (Allen). There must be a change within the way non-affirming religions see homosexuality, a change of mind, and a change of heart. Imagine the pain that could be saved if the only knowledge children had of sexual prejudice and heterosexism was what they read in history books, not what they experienced for themselves at home, at school, and at church. 

