Thinking Out Loud with Alan Shlemon - Should You Violate Your Conscience to Maintain Your Relationship with an LGBT Person?

Episode Date: November 10, 2023

People who identify as LGBT routinely ask their Christian friends and family to accommodate various requests. Are you justified in declining to go along even if it might damage your relationship with them? Alan unpacks his thoughts on this thorny dilemma.

People who identify as LGBT routinely ask their Christian friends and family to accommodate various requests. And often, I think we feel like our relationship might suffer if we don't go along with what they're asking us to do. So, should you accommodate the request? Well, I'd like to answer that question in this episode of my podcast, Thinking Out Loud with Alan Schliemann. Christians are routinely pressured to compromise their convictions. And sadly, it's actually other Christians who leverage a good faith principle to achieve what I believe is an unfair end. And I want to encourage you, though, if you're feeling pressured to accommodate a request from an LGBT person in your life, and that request violates your conscience, I want you

to know that there's a line that you do not have to cross. And one of the principles I've taught for nearly two decades is that we ought to maintain our relationships with friends and family who identify as LGBT. And so, I mean, I've said it before that I think it's wrong for us to end a relationship or to distance yourself from someone merely because they identify as LGBT. And part of the reason is that I've argued that relationships connect people like a bridge by which you can communicate love or show your compassion or even share the gospel. And so therefore, I've routinely argued that you should sort of lean into your relationship with a friend or family member who identifies as LGBT.

into your relationship with a friend or family member who identifies as LGBT. Now, lately, though, I've been seeing this principle misused, although I'll admit it's not always misused intentionally. And here's what's happening. Christians are being told that they should never jeopardize their relationship with a friend or family member who identifies as LGBT. And if they're asked to affirm or accommodate something that violates their conscience, they're told to just go along with it anyways, because they must like, quote unquote, maintain the relationship.

Now, that to me is a problem. Yes, we should absolutely strive to maintain the relationship as best we can, but there's a limit, right? I mean, if you must violate your conscience to accommodate another person's preferences or opposing values, then I think it's reasonable to decline. Tell them, look, I'm sorry, I can't do that. You know, I care about you, but you're asking me to deny my own values and convictions. Now, might that cause your relationship to suffer or perhaps even to end? Well, yeah, possibly. And although that's not ideal, I still think it's okay

because you can only go so far to accommodate other people's values or worldview. Now, many Christians, however, I think are getting guilted into violating their conscience because maintaining their relationship has been elevated to an unreasonably high priority. And so what happens is this sort of forces them to reluctantly participate in, for example, social rituals, and that ends up making them feel supportive of ideas that they know are harmful. So, for example, Christians are often pressured to use a transgender person's preferred pronouns, even though many are uncomfortable with doing so. Now, it's said to be this sort of like benign, yet simple act of love to practice, you know, quote unquote, pronoun hospitality.

nine, yet simple act of love to practice, you know, quote unquote, pronoun hospitality. And oftentimes these Christians are told that using the incorrect pronoun will damage their relationship. So they feel like they're held hostage. You know, failure to go along with this request will destroy the relationship. So they must comply. But let's grant for the sake of argument that declining to use preferred pronouns would damage a relationship with a transgender friend or family member. Though I'll admit, I don't think it always does or always has that effect. I still think it's appropriate to decline to use preferred

pronouns if you've reasoned it's wrong and doing so would violate your conscience. And even though the relationship will suffer, and of course that's not ideal, I still think your decision is still appropriate. And here's why. You shouldn't make maintaining the relationship the highest goal. It is important, don't get me wrong. And I think we should strive to nurture healthy and lasting relationships as best we can. But that pursuit should not trump your fidelity to other important aspects of your life. For example, fidelity to biblical values, fidelity to reality, fidelity to what you think is right, and other things. It's, I think,

unhealthy to deny those components of your life just so a relationship doesn't suffer. Now, it's one thing to deny your preferences for the sake of others. Like, I mean, for example, you might not like mushrooms, but you'll go along with your friend's insistence on putting them on a pizza. Right. Or you might not like science fiction films or hiking in the desert. Right. But notice these are preferences that don't have a moral quality to them. It's an entirely different thing though, to deny your own values or your own convictions. And, you know, even if you compromise your convictions and use your friend's preferred pronouns, will that be enough? Is it sufficient really to just simply practice quote unquote pronoun hospitality, even when you don't believe that they are the opposite sex or would a transgender friend or family

member also demand your sincerity, right? In other words, if you accommodate that, then what's next? When will they be satisfied with you, right? As long as you don't accept transgender ideology wholesale, you'll always be at odds with their values and worldview. And in reality, you will never be able to do enough. So therefore, what's the point of appeasing them in this way? All it does is compromise your own convictions to uphold a false ideology you know is dangerous and damaging to them and others. And besides, pronoun hospitality, as they

call it, is anything but hospitable. And the reason is, is because it's insincere, right? When you use a preferred pronoun, you're saying something with your words, that they're a different sex, that you don't believe with your heart. And would they really genuinely want that from you? I don't think so. It's patronizing. Now, if the roles were reversed, I would never expect a non-Christian friend to be insincere simply to appease me. Say, for example, I invited them to my child's baptism, but let's just say also they were opposed to Christianity. Well, I wouldn't want or expect them to pay lip service to a theological truth that they didn't believe, I wouldn't want or expect them to pay lip service to a theological

truth that they didn't believe. I wouldn't demand they attend the ceremony against their convictions or else I will end the relationship. So I don't think there's any moral principle that elevates relationships to a point where they trump your deeply held beliefs. Therefore, there's no duty to accommodate every request made by a friend or family member who identifies as LGBT. The same would be true of relationships with non-LGBT people. So instead, do your best to love your friends and family and honor those relationships as best you can. Remember though, that fidelity to God and your convictions is also important. Well, that's all I have for you today. If you've enjoyed this episode, I encourage you to share it with a friend.

And also don't forget to subscribe to my podcast on your favorite podcast app so you don't miss any episodes. And thanks for listening. I look forward to thinking out loud with you next time.