1. Religion & Spirituality

Discuss in my forum

Austin Cline

Jim Rudd on Gays: Arrest, Imprison, and Execute Gays in the Name of God?

By November 9, 2007

Follow me on:

Jim Rudd, director of the Christian Street Preachers Alliance and the editor of Covenant News, doesn't think that Christian Nationalists are doing enough to stop the horrors of homosexuality in America According to Rudd, "most of these groups do not publicly address sodomy as a crime and then demand that our civil authorities arrest, prosecute, and punish the sodomites." After reading his arguments, it's difficult not to conclude that he ultimately wants to see gays executed in order to cleanse America of an abomination.
Many pro-family groups are capitulating to the false notion that "gay rights," in fact, exist and therefore, are not maintaining their focus on addressing the truth that sodomy is a crime.

Source: Covenant News (via Ed Brayton)

Two critical premises are contained in this one sentence: first, there is no such thing as a "right" to be gay or engage in "sodomy" and, second, that "sodomy" is a "crime" and therefore must be treated as such. The importance of that second premise is easier to understand when we remember that there are no longer any enforceable civil statutes against sodomy; Jim Rudd is referring instead to a "crime" under religious laws allegedly written by his god. At the same time, though, he is also insisting that sodomy be punished by civil authorities.

Therefore, Jim Rudd is making an explicit call for the civil government and civil officials to enforce the laws of a religion which he, but not everyone, subscribes do. Jim Rudd wants the establishment of a repressive, totalitarian Christian theocracy in America and this essay helps explain why he thinks this would be justified. First, Jim Rudd argues that it isn't permissible for Christians to think that civil government and civil official do not need to enforce Christian religious standards:

Sodomy is a crime, and for Christians to publicly refer to this criminal activity as "gay" or as a "life style" is an anti-Biblical presupposition that suggests to the public, and to our civil officials, that the laws against sodomy can be ignored. To ignore what God says is to mock God, and for Christians to suggest that it is permissible for civil officials to ignore the Commandments of God is iniquity -- anomia -- Greek for lawlessness (Matt. 7:23). [emphasis added]

Then, Jim Rudd conveniently forgets that sodomy is an action which can be performed by heterosexuals as well as homosexuals:

Sodomite is the correct term for people who commit the crime of sodomy -- not homosexual or gay. ...Sodomy is not a light or transient crime. It is an abomination (Lev. 18:22). It is the culmination of man's apostasy and hostility toward God and His Church (Rom. 1:18-32).

Then again, maybe Rudd hasn't forgotten — maybe he knows that the primary definition in regular dictionaries and the secondary definition in legal dictionaries is "oral or anal sexual contact" between members of the same sex. How could he not be aware of this? This would mean that knows very well that his arguments will ultimately apply to heterosexuals who engage in sexual activity that falls under the "sodomy" label, but chooses to ignore this. Why? Maybe he wants his readers to focus on their hate of gays and be surprised later that they, too, may get caught in the theocratic net Rudd is trying to spread.

Regardless, I didn't know just how easy and enjoyable it could be for me to express "apostasy and hostility toward God and His Church" — talk about making fun activities even more fun!

Next, Jim Rudd makes it clear that civil officials who refuse to enforce Old Testament laws aren't legitimate civil officials at all, but criminals who must be removed from office because they put everyone in danger of God's Wrath:

For lawmakers and judges to approve of sodomy brings eternal damnation upon themselves (Rom. 13:2) and God's righteous judgment of death on the society as a whole (Gen. 19:24, II Pet. 2:6). Therefore, such lawmakers and judges are not only anti-Christian by approving of sodomy, they make the civil government a vile cesspool from which the abominations vomit out across the land. By displaying such a contempt for the administration of Justice, such civil officials are not only the source of the defilement (Lev.18:24-25), they are the criminals (Rom.1:32), and a hostile enemy authorizing the destruction of the society in which we live (Jude 7).

And what about people who engage in sodomy? They must be punished in the strongest way possible:

Not only should Christian men fight for the safety of their families by demanding that these civil officials repent, or resign from office immediately, Christians should be demanding the strongest laws and punishments against sodomy be put into effect so as to cleanse the pestilence from our society. (Lev. 20:13)

Sodomy is an "abomination" (Lev.18:22), and those who engage in sodomy are so vile that their very presence defiles the land (Lev. 18:22,25). Through the administration of Justice, God gives the civil officials the authority to prevent society, the land, from being defiled. The civil officials swing the sword to "...execute wrath upon him that doeth evil" (Rom. 13:4) -- and in this case sodomites -- "...shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them" (Lev. 20:13). [emphasis added]

So, how is this not a call to execute gays? Is there any possible way to reconcile the above recommendations with also saying "but I don't actually want any gays to be killed"? I don't think so — I think that Jim Rudd has stated quite clearly that he would like to see the death penalty imposed for the "crime" of sodomy. Remember, that won't just affect gays but also heterosexuals who engage in oral and anal sex, though Rudd avoids openly noting this fact. Given that the entire basis for his position is the Old Testament, it would be implausible that he wouldn't support the death penalty for other capital crimes in that text — including, for example, abortion and disrespecting parents.

Notice where it says "...their blood shall be upon them"? By the administration of Justice the sodomites' defilement is prevented from defiling society as a whole. (Lev. 18:24) ...It should also be noted that because of the pro-active, intrinsic nature of God's judgments upon any society defiled by these abominations (Lev. 18:25-30), it is impossible for Christians to passively coexist in such a vile society. Our demand that the civil officials administer Justice is based upon the concern for and protection of innocent people, and what iniquities will come upon us all should Justice not be upheld. [emphasis added]

It is true that our justice system exists, in part, for the protection of innocent people. One reason why we lock up murderers, for example, is so that they don't go out and harm more innocent people. Take a closer look at what Jim Rudd is saying, though: the recommendation that gays be executed isn't to ensure that gays don't do out and harm innocent people, but to prevent Rudd's god from harming innocent people.

Rudd is admitting, quite openly and unapologetically, that "God's judgments" on a society "defiled" by the "abomination" of homosexuality wouldn't just visit punishment on those guilty gays, but also on entirely innocent citizens. To put it more simply: Jim Rudd worships and obeys a god that doesn't just punish "guilty" people, but innocent people as well.

Rudd's recommended course of action is to do whatever this god wants in order to avoid being punished for nothing we've actually done ourselves. Isn't that the behavior of people suffering under capricious, authoritarian leaders who punish randomly in order to instill fear in people? That's the sort of system Jim Rudd thinks he's living under and, it appears, wants everyone to live under — and it may be the clearest demonstration that I've yet seen of just how evil, immoral, unjust, and just plain wrong a religion like Christianity can be.

Comments
November 9, 2007 at 1:09 pm
(1) cowalker says:

Rudd sounds like another pea in the Phelps pod. That’s exactly the kind of reasoning used to justify picketing funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq.
U.S. has lost intensity in persecuting gays.
God is punishing U.S. by letting our soldiers get killed in Iraq.
Bring this to everyone’s attention so we can take steps to correct it.

This guy just doesn’t look quite as insane and mean-spirited because he doesn’t stalk grieving families to get publicity for his insane beliefs.

November 9, 2007 at 1:33 pm
(2) Child of Thorns says:

“This guy just doesn’t look quite as insane and mean-spirited because he doesn’t stalk grieving families to get publicity for his insane beliefs. ”

I don’t know. Hitleresque ideas about “cleansing” society are pretty loony. Then again, I am sure Fredd Phelps thinks exactly the same, plus the picketings, and so is still more evil in my book.

November 9, 2007 at 1:51 pm
(3) BlackSun says:

Just like militant Islamists can be arrested for advocating terrorism, this guy should be arrested for basically making Christian death threats.

After all, he’s basically telling people that God will reward those who execute ‘sodomites’ and punish those who do not. How much more specific do you have to get before it becomes legally actionable?

November 9, 2007 at 1:56 pm
(4) Marc says:

Once again, a very scary article, especially considering that this lunatic has followers.

November 9, 2007 at 2:11 pm
(5) DaveTheWave says:

Once again this shows it…THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT IS OBSESSED WITH SEX!!! Gay sex, mainly. They probably are not getting any sex, gay or straight, to be so uptight about it. Perhaps a new charity should be founded: SEX FOR CHRISTIAN NATIONALISTS. It can be a place for sex-starved christian theocrats in America to go when they need some release, and while there they will not only receive sex, but also a deprogramming seminar, and emerge fully deveoped, well-rounded adult human beings! Might be fun and interesting to provide councelling and funzies to those who truly need it. AHH THE FANTASY.

November 9, 2007 at 2:26 pm
(6) Gerald says:

BlackSun comments:
“Just like militant Islamists can be arrested for advocating terrorism, this guy should be arrested for basically making Christian death threats.

After all, he’s basically telling people that God will reward those who execute ’sodomites’ and punish those who do not. How much more specific do you have to get before it becomes legally actionable?”

I don’t know if I would be in favor of a criminal charge for a threat here, but if one of his looney followers acts upon Rudd’s general pronouncements, then Rudd could and should be charged as a principal or an accessory and should be sued in civil court. I really hope that the civil court judgement against Phelps stands; constitutionally it’s a much more sound way of going after these nuts.

November 9, 2007 at 3:21 pm
(7) vannie2 says:

Excellent article. It seems to me as if we allow this logic to succeed, it would mean far more people than sodomites would need to be killed. After all, doesn’t the bible require that any working on a Sunday be executed (stoned to death if I remember correctly.) Damn, there goes half the people I know!

Obviously, I agree with the above posters. This guy is insane.

November 10, 2007 at 12:24 am
(8) k9_kaos says:

DaveTheWave said: “Perhaps a new charity should be founded: SEX FOR CHRISTIAN NATIONALISTS. It can be a place for sex-starved christian theocrats in America to go when they need some release, and while there they will not only receive sex, but also a deprogramming seminar, and emerge fully deveoped, well-rounded adult human beings!”

Good idea! Or perhaps they should visit Yiffburg! ;)

November 10, 2007 at 10:53 am
(9) BuffyT says:

People like Rudd are hateful and dangerous. It’s sad that their “deeply held religious beliefs” are given so much respect in our country considering how much harm they do.

November 10, 2007 at 1:59 pm
(10) Marc says:

I think people like Rudd are a little[?] mental. Unfortunately, they often speak louder than the rational folks.

November 10, 2007 at 8:57 pm
(11) Eric says:

See Levitius 11:11, calling eating seafood that lacks fins and scales an abomination.

By Rudd’s logic, we should imprison or kill anyone who eats at an oyster bar. Maybe it’s clam chowder that’s angering God!

November 10, 2007 at 10:32 pm
(12) Ron says:

Clam chowder?
Nah! I think it’s people like Rudd

November 11, 2007 at 2:00 pm
(13) Gotweirdness says:

Better yet, send this fellow to the Blue Oyster Bar to rattle his cage.

November 12, 2007 at 8:13 am
(14) Reverend Red Mage says:

I’m going to make a prophecy.

This Rudd fellow will be caught in a gay prostitution scandal sometime within the next three years.

Okay, let’s see… ambiguous, “predicts” the inevitable, made by someone with the title of “Reverend”… yep. It qualifies as prophecy, all right.

November 16, 2007 at 4:40 pm
(15) dan says:

Out of self-defense, it seems necessary
for gays to staqrt killing people like
Jim Rudd and Fred Phelps.

November 16, 2007 at 5:01 pm
(16) Bebecca says:

The bible is more adamant in its opposition to divorce than to homosexuality. It’s rare that any xtian speaks out in any meaningful way against divorce except to say something benign about family values. What is this thing they have about gays? I think this guy is in the the ranks of Ted Haggard, Larry Craig. Mark Foley and probably Fred Phelps. I read somewhere Phelps had some gay adventures in his youth.

November 16, 2007 at 5:29 pm
(17) John Hanks says:

Things are done in the name of the Bible or the Koran. God remains silent and anonymous.

November 16, 2007 at 11:05 pm
(18) Bob says:

If you are going to execute homosexuals why not go the whole hog and clean up the sexual world. Adulterers and fornicators in fact all who engage in sex outside of a God joined relationship should be executed.

November 17, 2007 at 4:03 am
(19) God Isn't says:

There are some christians who’ve come to their senses — such as the folks who run Beyond Ex-Gay. They used to be part of Exodus, a group that tries to “cure” gays. They’re doing wonderful work (Beyond Ex-Gay), and should be encouraged by those of us who care about civil rights.

Beyond Ex-Gay
http://www.beyondexgay.com/

November 17, 2007 at 5:45 am
(20) Robert says:

How will this Rudd know what a person(s)are doing in their own bedrooms,unless he’s going to peek into your bedroom ?
Talk about lack of privcy !!

November 17, 2007 at 4:12 pm
(21) weemaryanne says:

I once tried to read “The Pilgrim’s Progress” but had to stop about a quarter of the way through. John Bunyan apparently had nothing original to say but he did a real cut-and-paste job on the bible; it’s actually impressive as he was working long before word processing. Rudd’s screed reminds me of exactly why I dropped Pilgrim in disgust — he can’t even be bothered to make his own argument (if he even has one) before he starts to spin and throw off chapter-and-worse like some kind of scriptural centrifuge. Ecch.

November 24, 2007 at 6:08 pm
(22) Daubi says:

This guy is an idiot and somebody should sho(u)t him/his mouth….

January 18, 2009 at 8:22 pm
(23) Graham says:

Dear Austin,

I am amazed that at the end of this article, you lump all Christians into the same category as this poor, misled Jim Rudd. I’m a Christian – I don’t want to kill gays, nor do I think they should be punished for the sake of the innocent. God’s wrath comes in the end times anyway. Both Mr. Rudd and yourself don’t seem to be reading scripture very well.

You should think twice before you categorize millions of people as all being of the same evil characteristics of one of their members. I think that has a name, doesn’t it? Prejudice.

January 18, 2009 at 8:27 pm
(24) Graham says:

DaveTheWave,

You said regarding creating some sort of a camp for Christians: “It can be a place for sex-starved christian theocrats in America to go when they need some release, and while there they will not only receive sex, but also a deprogramming seminar, and emerge fully deveoped, well-rounded adult human beings! Might be fun and interesting to provide councelling and funzies to those who truly need it.”

Gee, to me that sounds, I dunno, kind of like a concentration camp, or at the very least some sort of thought police organization straight out of “1984″ – and you guys are afraid of a Christian totalitarian regime?

January 18, 2009 at 9:14 pm
(25) Austin Cline says:

I am amazed that at the end of this article, you lump all Christians into the same category as this poor, misled Jim Rudd.

Feel free to show where I do that.

You should think twice before you categorize millions of people as all being of the same evil characteristics of one of their members. I think that has a name, doesn’t it? Prejudice.

You might want to read the material twice before making such accusations.

January 22, 2009 at 3:05 pm
(26) Graham says:

You know what, Austin? You’re right. I took your advice, read through the article again, and can see that what you wrote is not necessarily applied to all Christians, but specifically Jim Rudd. I think I became confused when you said things like “Jim Rudd’s god,” and I made the incorrect assumption that you were simultaneously attempting to undercut the Christian God in general. I can now see that this was not necessarily the case.

I am sorry for the accusations I have made. I hope you can forgive me, and let this pass by. I appreciate your blog, even though I don’t agree with your philosophies about God and such. I think there is much to learn from reading your posts. And, I happen to agree with you about Jim Rudd – he is wrong, and people like him can be dangerous. I thnk I was more upset with “DaveTheWave”‘s comment anyway.

Again, sorry about all that. God bless you today, and I’ll try and keep reading – even twice ;)

Graham

January 22, 2009 at 3:36 pm
(27) Austin Cline says:

Thanks, Graham. It has happened many, many times that a Christian falsely accuses me of generalizing about all Christians/theists, accuses me of saying something I didn’t, or otherwise grossly misreads what I’ve read. I always insist that they point exactly to where I’ve said what they claim in an effort to get them to think more carefully about what they are saying. Never do they actually substantiate their allegations or retract/apologize for their allegations.

Which makes you the first. Thanks again.

January 28, 2009 at 10:41 pm
(28) Jim Rudd says:

Hi, my name is Jim Rudd. No, not the same lunatic who is out there spewing hatred.

Ironically, while I share the lunatic’s name, I am an Atheist.

I just had to make a comment because of the name.

February 18, 2009 at 10:52 pm
(29) Jim Rudd says:

My name is also Jim Rudd, and I am also a Pastor. But I am ashamed to share the same name as this guy.

Leave a Comment

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>

©2014 About.com. All rights reserved.