Does Gary North want to stone homosexuals?

I doubt it.

Does he want to live under theonomy, in a state that administers Biblical Law?

I believe he does.

Would Biblical Law require the stoning to death of homosexuals?

I believe he believes that it would.

My next-door neighbors love me. They care about both my mortal future and the destination of my immortal soul. They think I’m going to Hell because I don’t believe in God. I don’t take it personally. That’s just how it works: I can’t accept Jesus Christ as my only path to Heaven if I don’t believe in an afterlife, and my soul won’t go where they want it to go unless I embrace Christ. Them’s the rules.

Unbelievers like me have no right to require believers to accept our non-belief — especially if we can’t acknowledge the facts or consequences of their beliefs. I’ve written about this before in two of my earliest blog posts:

According to my neighbors’ understanding of the Christian Bible, my soul is bound for an eternity of flames, and according to North’s interpretation, the Christian community has a right (an obligation?) to put sexual deviants to death — and adulterers, and blasphemers, etc.

When I was half-way through college, we got a new computer science professor who was what I learned in Israel to call a Black Hat — an ultra-orthodox Jew with the black coat, the covered head, the tassels (tzitzis) outside the jacket, the beard, the ringlets of hair, etc.

When he first came into the scheduling office where I was working, the lady who ran the place got up to introduce herself and shake his hand. He said, “I don’t shake with women, but I am very pleased to meet you.” I found out later that she felt quite insulted.

When the new professor invited his class over for dinner, a secular Jewish classmate of mine tried to shake hands with the professor’s wife. “Oh, I don’t shake with men.” So now my classmate was offended.

I, liberal-minded secularist, couldn’t understand why anyone would take offense at any of that. Why would they take it personally? These religious Jews weren’t singling people out for cold treatment — they were following their understanding of God’s law!

I may not be a theist, but I do believe in a higher law than culture or etiquette (or legislation) and I admire people who accept the social consequences of adhering to higher laws.

(I guess that makes me both an atheist and a religious conservative.)

Does that mean I’d forgive Gary North if he tried to seriously injure a gay friend of mine? No, I’d probably shoot him dead. But aggressive actions actually taken are different from religious interpretations of what God sanctions and wants — even when those interpretations seem to condone aggressive acts.

Yes, I’m a little uncomfortable with Gary North’s religion. But until he actually tries to impose it on anyone, I say there’s no ill will between us, and I continue to consider him a potential ally and an actual teacher. If I could learn computer programming from the orthodox Jew, why can’t I learn economics and history from the Christian Reconstructionist?


9 Responses to Does Gary North want to stone homosexuals?

  1. Well, I think you’re being far too reasonable. We should stone Gary North, and you as well.

  2. born to run says:

    It’s like the Bob Dylan song. Everybody must get stoned.

  3. Vache Folle says:

    I have confronted this issue as well since I have read criticism of Gary North that does not correspond to his writings for Lew Rockwell. Gary North’s views contemplate the possible stoning of homosexuals in some future Kingdom of God on Earth. Meanwhile, some other folks who condemn Mr North for these illiberal views support continued occupation of Iraq which contemplates actually killing people here and now in the real world as it is presently constituted. The latter views are, IMO, more dangerous and reprehensible than Mr North’s religion.

  4. Burger King, maybe I missed the link where you link to actual writings of North that show what he does or does not believe re stoning, etc., but I don’t see them. Where is your evidence for any of your assertions? I have seen a few things but have never seen proof that the answer to ANY of the following questions is yes:Does Gary North want to stone homosexuals?Does he want to live under theonomy, in a state that administers Biblical Law?Would Biblical Law require the stoning to death of homosexuals?I understand you believe waht you believe, but *why* do you believe it? Where is BK-daddy’s evidence?

  5. bkmarcus says:

    I found no evidence of Gary North addressing the capital punishment of homosexuals. Based on what he <>has<> addressed, I am making an inference about what he is commonly accused of. There is no difficulty finding evidence for his advocacy for theonomy in general and his making the case for capital punishment for blasphemers specifically (Lev. 24:16), as well as for those who curse their parents (Ex. 21:17). He has also reportedly addressed the question of stoning as the proper Christian means for a community-based capital punishment. The stoning of homosexuals specifically was not North’s example, but that of his father-in-law, < HREF="" REL="nofollow">R.J. Rushdoony<>.Does North support his father-in-law’s interpretation of Biblical Law? It’s only an inference, but I don’t think it’s an outlandish one. (And please note, in a post in which I’m saying I don’t care if he thinks this is part of God’s Law, I’m not going to seek the level of evidence I would if I were accusing him of something.)Anyone who wants to look further can start with these pages, which claim to quote North’s writings:* < HREF="" REL="nofollow"><>* < HREF="" REL="nofollow"><>* < HREF="" REL="nofollow"><>I’d rather point to the writings themselves, but when I try to pull them up at North’s website, < HREF="" REL="nofollow"><>, the links are broken. I have no personal investment in this question either way. I accuse him of nothing. I was trying to explain why the standard accusations don’t worry me. But if anyone has evidence that this is all just an anti-North smear campaign, I’m interested in seeing it. I am a fan of the man’s writing, albeit a wary one.

  6. Chris says:

    Anyone who can read Leviticus 20 knows that the Bible calls for the stoning — or its cultural equivalent (firing squad) — for sodomites, sorcerers, murderers and the like. But no theonomist (including Gary North) wants anyone to impose any negative sanction who has not been duly ordained to the office of the civil magistrate. He wants due process before any stonings of anyone, and has written extensively on the form biblical due process would take. It would seem you think we believe only parts of the Bible, rather than the whole thing at once. And yet, you know we believe that logical consistency and biblical fidelity need each other. All worldviews must try to maintain some semblance of consistency, even the goofier ones like materialistic Atheism (which cannot account for laws of logic, science or morality). It’s pretty much the whipping boy in our circles. Do you folks not realize that saying “I want them stoned,” and “I want to stone them myself” are not logical equivalents? Must be that public school edgemecation.Bottom line: You really should read up. And you’ll save yourselves a great deal of wondering “what we actually believe” if you assume we believe all the parts of the Bible TOGETHER as a worldview, not in a piecemeal fashion. Start by reading Romans 13 because Gary believes that part too. He even pays taxes.Pagans by and large know theonony only as a political theology, when in truth it actually comprises a literary hermeneutic, from which the political theology (or as you want to call it “theocracy”. For more on this, see Dr. Greg Bahnsen’s college course in hermeneutics available from Covenant Media Foundation.I am just amazed that pagans do not display the basic scholarship to recognize that the U.S. is not a democracy, and never was. It’s a constitutional Republic, with a crappy constitution and a lousy republic — which has collapsed into a quasi-democracy partly because of the academic spinmeisters who keep teaching the youth here that this “great democracy” flourishes with “tolerance.” But, of course, as in every society, tolerance has its limits. So theonomists will not be tolerated, neither will other non-pluralists. Instead, you’ll keep insisting — quite dogmatically — that we not be so dogmatic because by gum this is a democracy. Not. Hint: Madison hated democracy, and so did most of the “founding fathers.” They followed the Greeks for the most part (Plato and Aristotle). You will recall that Plato’s teacher was killed by a democracy for “corrupting the youth.”But, at least they didn’t stone him. Democracies put dissenters to death in more civilized ways. And by exporting “democracy” they can kill far more people than theonomists would — and few in this goofy war in Iraq receive due process before they eat lead.Oh the brutality of the Theonomists! Now lets go get them Terrorists all over the world and blow up the countryside. Democrats can diss dubya all they want, but their representative voted for this stupid war too –even Kerry admits this.They only real dissenters from the get-go were the Theonomists, Libertarians, and a few other splinter groups. You see, the Bible would have kept us away from this war, if we had followed it. That’s what it means, “The wages of sin is death.”And let’s be honest, people, Democracy is a sick joke. The U.S. has created the largest trade deficit in the history of mankind, most people in this country are up to their eyeballs in debt, our next president could (in principle) be a Sunni Muslim, and the people on death row will outlive all of us.And you say we have faith. The blind allegiance democracy lovers show to a manifestly stupid set of contradictory ideas might even one day make you all honorary Atheists. Bravo.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Have clean hands and a pure heart, and leave the wrath to G-d, its His world and His creation.

  8. Pingback: Okay, okay, mea culpa on religious crankery | Save Capitalism

  9. I am a big fan of Gary North’s writings on things like Austrian Economics and political issues like the National Debt, interest rates, etc. I would have a hard time believing he espouses the view that anyone should stone homosexuals, let alone an institution with a monopoly on force, but understand that I realize you are not making accusations. I am a hard line Calvinist myself but I have no trouble rejecting theocracy outright and adhering to the non aggression principle.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: