Gay, not Queer? Responding to Matthew Vines (Karl Hand)

Matthew Vines has spent many years making the case that Christians can and should embrace same-sex marriage — his book God and the Gay Christian helped a generation of people reconcile their faith and sexuality. So when he recently distanced himself from queer theology, first in a conversation on the Uncommon Ground podcast and then in a New York Times piece titled "I'm Gay, Not Queer. It Matters," it set off a firestorm.Karl Hand — pastor at Crave Church (Metropolitan Community Church), theologian, and longtime friend of the show — joins Will to sit inside the mess of it. This is a conversation that tries to hold two things at once: real, substantive pushback on where Matthew's argument goes wrong, and real gratitude for what his earlier work made possible. Along the way, Karl untangles what "queer" actually means across identity, activism, and theory, three things Karl argues Matthew's article quietly collapses into one.A note before you press play: this conversation touches on trauma connected to church rejection, queerphobia, and sexual ethics. Take care of yourself, and feel entirely free to skip this one if it's not what you need right now.The Matthew Vines NYT article:https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/30/opinion/queer-gay-rights.htmlBooks Karl references:Butler, Judith (1990).  Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.Rubin, Gayle (1984). "Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality." In Pleasure and Danger: Exploring Female Sexuality. Boston: Routledge.Halperin, David M. (1995) Saint Foucault: Towards a gay hagiography. Oxford University Press.Matthew Vines quoted Halperin without providing broader context. Here are those quotes in their original context:“Queer is by definition whatever is at odds with the normal, the legitimate, the dominant. There is nothing in particular which it necessarily refers. It is an identity without an essence. "Queer," then, demarcates not a positivity but a positionality vis-a-vis the normative—a positionality that is not restricted to lesbians and gay men but is in fact available to anyone who is or who feels marginalized because of her or his sexual practices: it could include some married couples without children, for example, or even (who knows?) some married couples with children—with, perhaps, very naughty children.” p. 62“Perhaps I should say that I don't intend this argument to be understood as advocating the adoption of the term "queer" in preference to the term "gay" or as providing partisan support for the politics of Queer Nation. First of all, it is not for me to suggest what words the members of sexual constituencies should use to designate or identify themselves. Second, the only thing that need be said about Queer Nation in this context is that it is significantly less queer, in the sense in which I am using the term, than, say, ACT UP, whose style of direct-action politics and activist glamor Queer Nation has attempted to replicate for the purpose of creating a movement of young lesbian and gay radicals defined by no other issue than that of sexual orientation.” p. 63Want to reach out and let us know your thoughts or suggestions for the show? Send us a message here; we’d love to hear from you.The Spiritual Misfits Survival Guide (FREE): https://www.spiritualmisfits.com.au/survivalguideSign up to our mailing list:https://spiritualmisfits.com.au/Join our online Facebook community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/spiritualmisfitspodcastSupport the pod:https://spiritualmisfits.com.au/support-us/View all episodes at: https://spiritualmisfits.buzzsprout.com