There seems to be a debate about whether or not it is okay to reveal that someone is gay if that person hasn’t admitted to being gay. Some people say it is never okay to “out” someone against their wishes, while others say that it is permissible if the person is a politician who votes against the interests of the gay community.
I suppose there could be circumstances where the latter logic applies to someone who isn’t a politician. Perhaps, if someone was prone to making anti-gay comments and harassing gay people, it would be allowable to expose their hypocrisy.
I don’t know.
I think hypocrisy is a very significant character flaw, and I think Jesus of Nazareth agreed with me, since the word “hypocrite” appears 25 times in the New Testament.
I am just going to quote from Romans, Chapter 1 and 2.
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. 2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed.
6 He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking[a] and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11 For God shows no partiality.
St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans isn’t remotely similar to the Gospels, and Jesus may not have agreed with St. Paul about a lot of things. But, what Jesus definitely did agree with St. Paul about is that people should be reticent to judge others lest they also be judged, and that there is a particularly hot place in hell for people who stand in judgment over people who are no more guilty than they are themselves.
“Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God?”
“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.”
So, a religious man, an upright Christian, cannot hide behind doctrine. They can’t, on the one hand, quote Romans to condemn homosexual acts, and on the other hand, ignore Romans when it comes to not judging others and not engaging in hypocrisy.
But does any of this answer the question here?
Is it moral to “out” someone as gay if, and only if, they are a hypocrite?
Are we allowed to “judge” someone for their hypocrisy?
I don’t really use the Bible as a guidepost to my moral decision-making, but I am ambivalent about “outing” people. I don’t think less of people who do it, but I’m not sure I’d feel comfortable doing it myself.
