Thought this might be an interesting topic.

Just re-read one of my favorite DC Comics Presents stories the other day that was in a recent Showcase trade that had Superman fighting with the Spectre where God talks to Superman at the end of the story.



This was back when Supes could do pretty much anything. In this story he's trying to rescue his cousin when he's stopped by the Spectre as he's about to cross a barrier that he's not supposed to nor is he allowed to. All he had needed to do was just ask. Nice ending to a good 3 part story that introduced Mongul and besides the Spectre also had Supes teaming up with the Martian Manhunter & Supergirl. I originally bought it because I had never read a story with Martian Manhunter at the time. The story drew me in and I was blown away that God actually spoke to Clark towards the end.

I remember buying this issue because at the time it was a big damn deal that Jim Starlin was drawing something for DC

Heh, and I had no idea who he was at the time! Even then I noticed he was better than the normal fare but it would be many years before I saw his really good stuff on Warlock.

Previous to the Supes/Spectre comic I suppose the other God in comics exposure for me would have been the Spire comics that had started out in the early 70's. Desperate for anything comic book related I bought a couple of these and even though it didn't have superheroes in it, they were very good.

Those were some good issues, and Starlin's time at DC was pretty brief from roughly 1978-1981. DC COMICS PRESENTS 26-29, and 36-37. SUPERBOY/LEGION 239 and 250-251. A Batman story in DETECTIVE COMICS 481-482. And a few scattered covers for these books and HOUSE OF MYSTERY, JLA, BATMAN FAMILY and others.
His time at DC was because of a clash with Jim Shooter, and he went to DC only because of that. And went back when Marvel started its creator-owned line, where Starlin could deal with Archie Goodwin at Marvel, without having to deal directly with Jim Shooter. From this came Starlin's "Metamorphosis Odyssey" in EPIC ILLUSTRATED 1-9 (1980-1981).
And DEATH OF CAPTAIN MARVEL (late 1981) and DREADSTAR (Summer 1982) graphic novels.
And the DREADSTAR continuing series beginning in late 1982 and continuing (by both Marvel/Epic and First Comics) for the remainder of the 1980's.

The graphic novel that occurs between "Metamorphosis Odyssey" and Marvel's DREADSTAR graphic novel is THE PRICE graphic novel, published in Oct 1981 by Eclipse.

Starlin also did "Darklon the Mystic" for Warren in EERIE magazine 76 (Aug 1976), 79 (Nov 1976), 80 (Jan 1977), 84 (May 1977) and 100 (April 1979). Collected later by pacific Comics in 1983 in a one-shot DARKLON THE MYSTIC 1.


I met Jim Starlin at a Miami show in February of 1993, and he let on that the consistent themes of death, God and the afterlife that ran through the above works, as well as his 1970's CAPTAIN MARVEL and WARLOCK runs, and also stories in STAR REACH 1 (1974) and ECLIPSE magazine 1 (1981), was brought on by the impact of his father's death.

The two stories that for me most directly answer the portrayals of God in the above listed works are Starlin's stories in EPIC ILLUSTRATED 6 (where Aknaton summons his culture's God to seek advice and approval of his genocidal plans).

And THE PRICE graphic novel (also reprinted in color as DREADSTAR ANNUAL 1) on the protagonist mystic/priest Syzygy Darklock's sacrifice that was more about personal revenge, but was also about personal sacrifice in the name of pre-ordained destiny, to a pantheon of gods, and creatures of god-like power. With an interesting surface appearance of clothing and religious hierarchy similar to that of the Catholic church.


There are at least two directions this topic could explore.

1) Portrayals of the Judeo/Christian God (Yahweh/Jehovah, Father, Son and Holy Ghost)

2) gods of other cultures (such as Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist and other concepts of God)

and

3) possibly purely allegorical or fictitious portrayals of God, such as Crom in the Conan stories.

In the portrayal of Christianity, I really enjoyed the CRUSADERS comics, which focus on two Christian missionaries who go on adventures all over the world to aid Christians. And each issue tends to focus on a single theme.
Sporadically published at 1 or 2 issues a year from 1974 to 1983, they have beautiful art, comparable to either Wrightson or Alcala in the early issues. I have the first 17 issues, and haven't seen the others not pictured.

CRUSADERS comics.

The first issue Christians smuggle microfilm of the Bible into Rumania to bring the Gospel to Christians there, where the Bible is banned, and Christians brutally suppressed. (A delicious "Godless commies" story, with lots of cold war espionage elements.)

Issue 2 focuses on Satanic cults and murders in Southern California, and abducted runaways.

Issue 3 centers on the racist black president in a former British-colonial black African nation.

Issue 4 deals with demonic possession in India.

Issue 5 deals with a Jewish-Christian scholar in Israel, and Bible end-time prophecy, the anti-Christ, and tribulation period.

Issue 6 focuses on a Hollywood director creating a film that perpetuates secularist anti-Christian myths, specifically on the subject of evolution.

Issue 7 (my favorite) is THE ARK, on the history and evidence of Noah's ark, and archaological digging on Mount Ararat in modern Turkey. With some fun subplots of Soviet Communists trying to stop them.

Beyond these, Jack Chick seems to have undergone a transformation, and the issues after these are focused on the Roman Catholic church as a false form of Christianity, with testimony of former Catholic priests. They are less well-illustrated and are far more text-heavy. Wonderful stuff though, if your tastes run toward conspiracy theory. But the art and storytelling in these latter issues is a bit dry and less engaging.
Issue 17, the last I have, focuses on Islam as creation of the Catholic church to expand their influence in the Arab world, that backfired and spun out of control.

You can view these issues and a few sample pages of each at Jack Chick's website, http://www.chick.com , as well as pages of the smaller Chick tracts.

Here's the specific page for the CRUSADERS titles:
http://www.chick.com/catalog/comiclist.asp#crusaders

In Starlin's WARLOCK run (STRANGE TALES 178-181, WARLOCK 9-15, AVENGERS ANNUAL 7 and MARVEL TWO-IN-ONE ANNUAL 2) the title character in the future becomes the Magus, and becomes the god of a galaxy-wide religion.




Sometimes the category of "god" blurs.
As to whether it is a diety being portrayed, or a hero or villain who achieves god-like levels of power.

Possibly the first god-like portrayal in comics was the Lee/Kirby introduction of Galactus in FANTASTIC FOUR 48-50.
Of a creature whose power is so far above that of humans, that humans are almost on the level of ants, who can be stepped on by Galactus without even noticing the destruction he causes them.



In this powerful full-page segment the Watcher (a creature approaching Galactus' level of superiority and power) intercedes on the side of humans, and pleads with Galactus to spare Earth.
It's somewhat reminiscent of the scene in Genesis 18:16-33 where God reveals to Abraham He plans to destroy Sodom and Gommorah, and Abraham pleads for God to spare Sodom.



This page was selected for one museum comic book art exhibit I saw.

The SILVER SURFER: PARABLE story (1988) by Lee/Moebius hammered home the wrath-of-god metaphor one step further, with Silver Surfer taking on a Jesus role of sacrificing god-like to power save the people of Earth.

Despite not being overly much of a Moebius fan, this was one I particularly enjoyed.

But then he went back to DC (albeit as primarily a writer ) in the mid to late 80s. And iirc that was after Shooter left Marvel.

Well, I guess once Starlin had diversified to other publishers, he continued to keep the line open to alternatives, if things didn't work out at Marvel.

Starlin took his DREADSTAR series over to First Comics in October 1986. I asked him about that, he let on that Marvel was very slow with the checks in paying him, and that was why he took his series to First.

I recall Starlin writing and drawing 2 issues of BATMAN 402 and 403 (Dec 1986 and Jan 1987), right before the Miller/Mazuchelli's "Batman: Year One" story (404-407).

I stopped reading Starlin for a long time after his God-awful GILGAMESH series, and Warlock-re-tread INFINITY GAUNTLET stuff.


Although I really enjoyed the THING AND THE HULK graphic novel Starlin scripted with art by Wrightson.

I just ran across this other site for Jack Chick's CRUSADERS books, that allows you to read the complete stories online!

http://www.fmh-child.org/Chick_Christian_Comic_Books.html

I think this actually might be the former Chick website before they updated to the new one.
Enjoy.

I guess for me Starlin's Warlock was his best stuff. Not to long ago I read through both of the masterworks of Warlock and it was really hard reading through the Roy Thomas one. I've read and enjoyed a whole bunch of his stuff but that run just stunk IMHO.


Maybe it read better in it's time?

I have a few of the Roy Thomas/Gil Kane WARLOCK issues, and I agree. Roy Thomas in general was an acquired taste for me, as his dialogue in those days definitely leaned toward stilted and overly-Shakespearian melodrama. I think it worked best in CONAN, but turned me off in other titles like THOR and WARLOCK.

I actually hadn't realized that WARLOCK had been cancelled, and then was revived several years later when Starlin took over the series in STRANGE TALES 178-181, and then in a revived WARLOCK with issue 9.

I'd agree that WARLOCK is Starlin's best work, not only for sporting his best art, but also for the level of closure the series had. CAPTAIN MARVEL (and the later DEATH OF graphic novel) were good but he was still developing when it began, and is a bit more open-ended.
DREADSTAR, while I love the painted art and sophisticated story in EPIC ILLUSTRATED 1-9 and the two painted graphic novels, is diminished by the later DREADSTAR ongoing series, that declined with issue 6, that ceased at some point to be an epic sci-fi series and devolved into just another episodic superhero series.
It could be said that DREADSTAR was destroyed by its own longevity and success.

I have Starlin's WARLOCK series in its original issues, and also in the 1982 6-issue WARLOCK SPECIAL EDITION reprint series, and at one time had the FANTASY MASTERPIECES (1980-1981) reprint series, so with all those already, I never got around to buying the Marvel Masterworks hardcover. But it is infinitely worthy of the hardcover treatment.

God is a regular character in the current Phantom Stranger comics (obviously). I do love that they've chosen to portray Him as a little scottie dog.

I think the best portrayal of God in comics is currently in Clive Barker's Next Testament, over at Boom. It explains where he's been since creation and his intentions upon returning. The last issue featured him at the center of a massive orgy in Paris.

I don't enjoy deliberately blasphemous portrayals of God.

Here's an image by Kirby titled "Jacob wrestles an angel", from the scene in GENESIS 32.

Where Jacob wrestles one night with an unknown man, that is in truth God appearing in the form of an angel. After the struggle he is told his name is no longer Jacob, and is now Israel (which translates to "he who struggles with God").
This print was used as the source material for a sculpture released in 1989, and advertised in COMICS JOURNAL 134, Feb 1990, prior to its release.

I own one of the sculptures, although it took me years to find it.

Needless to say, there is a Biblical theme that runs through much of Kirby's work.

DEVIL DINOSAUR, for example (issues 4-6) has an interesting take on "the fall", where Adam and Eve left the garden of Eden. Very "Chariots of the Gods" interpretation of the Genesis account.

From a 1970 "Interpretations of God" portfolio, Kirby's vision of God. (At least on that day, Kirby has done a lot of interpretations of God, over many years. )

Of course, one person's blasphemy might be another's canon.

Speaking of alleged blasphemy, I'm surprised Garth Ennis' Preacher hasn't come up in this thread yet. God was not just a supporting character but, basically, the strip's main villain.

Uh...



We're not talking about a finer point of history or scripture. But malicious delight in a portrayal that degrades and deliberately tramples on what is sacred to others.

I wouldn't consider Ennis' god in Preacher to be the main villain. It was his ineptitude and arrogance that lead to a lot of the problems, but he wasn't really someone that the protagonists need to beat. I think the main villain for that series was the system (be it the hosts' or the people's.)

Contrast it with Cliver Barker's Next Testament, where the god of colors (god the father/old testament god, there's actually three of them there, with the other two hinted at as the holy ghost and the son, who were responsible for imprisoning the god of colors) was clearly portrayed as malevolent and capable of genocide just for shits and giggles.

More of Kirby's "Chariots of the Gods" take on the Garden of Eden, from DEVIL DINOSAUR 7 (1978). Where the provided garden to Adam and Eve, and the "tree of forbidden knowledge of good and evil" gain a whole new aspect.

Needless to say, Kirby had a similar Erich Von Daniken take in his series THE ETERNALS, particularly in the first two issues.

So...prehistoric man looked exactly like every other Kirby designed person, except covered in a thick brown fur everywhere but their face? Mm'kay...

Like monkeys. That's probably a fetish for somebody.

Hairy boobies!

I wonder what Rex is doing these days?

Speaking of Cro-Magnons, I guess...

IN THE BEGINNING... there were generically built Kirby-drawn people,
except covered in a thick brown fur everywhere but their face...

So in that case comics should never portray anything in a negative light as it might upset someone.
Christian beliefs are no more important than other religious beliefs, political beliefs, sexual orientation, gender, musical taste or sock loving.

I dont like anything that maliciously mocks dinosaurs and portrays them as devils.

Except that the reverse conservative political POV is never given the same freedom.

The last story I can recall that was even remotely critical of gays for example, was Jim Shooter's story in HULK magazine 23.



For which in the letters section, it was clear that Marvel received a targeted backlash from gays for publishing the story. Despite, as Shooter makes clear, that there was a seed of real experience for the story.

I could refer you to several dozen links in the "Canada Allows Same Sex Marriage" topic that, despite that homosexuality cannot even be proven to be a scientific/genetic/natural condition and not just an obsessive disorder, dissent and counterpoint to gay marriage is often not permitted, and dissenters intimidated, fired from jobs, and otherwise silenced.



More to MY point, I don't mind if a skeptical POV of Christianity is given in a story, but it should be done in a way that presents a respectful counterpoint or dialogue on the subject, as opposed to just being as insulting and deliberately offensive as possible to people of religious faith.

Back to M E M's theme for this topic -- portrayals of God in comics -- one portrayal I enjoyed in the Alan Moore/Bissette/Tottleben SWAMP THING run had Swamp thing on two occasions (SWAMP THING ANNUAL 2, and SWAMP THING 50) visit Heaven. And Hell.

Although Moore portrayed anything he showed as "one aspect" of God or Heaven, and each Hell as a personal thing that, as The Demon describes it to S.T., of "halls men carved while yet they breathed."
Moore presents an intelligent and ambitious portrayal of both.



It strikes me that portrayal of evil is actually easier (to portray succumbing to primitive emotions of jealousy or hatred or revenge).

To portray an image of God and Heaven (that gives a philosophy and purpose to the world and individual existence) is actually quite difficult.
Moore is not a Christian, but he still presents a reverent and provocative portrayal of Judao-Christian concepts, and a few other spiritual/paranormal concepts he pours into the mix. Although his views may have changed in the 30 years since what he portrayed in SWAMP THING, back in 1984-1987.

https://readcomiconline.to/Comic/Swamp-Thing-1982/Issue-50?id=3513

Well I think the whole point of showing God in that situation is probably to be blasphemous. They have that right but WB also has a right to say what he genuinely thinks about it.

I don't remember the Hulk story but would agree with Shooter that it's about rape and not about gays anymore than if the two guys were trying to rape a woman that it was somehow about heterosexuality. I can also understand why writers at the time were upset though. There had been an unwritten rule that a gay character could never be portrayed in a positive manner.

I remember an old column in the Comic Buyer's Guide about how comics depicted the devil a whole bunch but very little of God. Can't remember who wrote it but it was interesting and true to a degree. When it comes to depicting God it becomes very easy to offend even if that wasn't the intention.

This is why I like Mike Carey's Lucifer so much. It managed to portray Lucifer and many of the other main characters' problems with God as understandable/valid without portraying God as malevolent nor dumb. Even God abandoning his creation came off as a logical, if not just, decision more akin to a mentor leaving because he's no longer needed (as opposed to a bad parent abandoning his kids.)

While I'd agree that even the most respectful religious or political stories will offend some, regardless of how respectfully they try to present their arguments, certainly those who present their arguments in an insulting antagonistic bomb-throwing manner will offend far more.

A funny example you might enjoy hearing about, I was at a church meeting in 2003 and was discussing 9-11 with a Christian guy I'd just met who was a non-comics collector. I mentioned a story I read in the two-volume 9-11 artist tribute books. I mentioned one story (page 142 of the 200-page volume with an Alex Ross cover, a story by Peter Gross and Darick Robertson) that portrayed a mother and daughter visiting a museum built on the site of where the towers collapsed, around the year 3200. The woman says to her daughter that it was the turning point of history, where people of all nations transcended their governments and united the world in peace. The names of the 9-11 dead were etched in stone, and the 19 terrorists from 9-11 were forgotten, and even the reason they destroyed the towers was forgotten. All the world remembered was the good that resulted from people of the world uniting.
I started to explain this to the Christian guy, and I saw him flinch with resistance to the ideas of the story, and I finally stopped and said "You don't like the ideas, do you? You think the story is in contradiction of Bible prophecy..." And he said yes. I said to him that I agreed it contradicted Bible future events, but I still enjoyed it as a story. It's just a nice story! But his reaction was like I was trying to convert him to Satanism or Islam.
Geez!

So yeah... Some people offend pretty easily. And as purist as some here might think I am, there are people I run across who are far more ideologically rigid than I am.
I think the internet and the conservative/liberal chasm that has developed in the media have definitely increased that polarization, and widened the ideological chasm.

But hey, c'mon. Sometimes a story is just a story. In comics, as we've discussed in many previous topics, some of my favorite stories are written from a liberal perspective by folks like Dennis O'Neil and Neal Adams, Roy Thomas, Gerry Conway, Mike Barr and the like. If it's portraying ideological liberals and their principled views, without demagoguing or insulting those who disagree, I still enjoy it. Sometimes I can even laugh to myself or with the writer, when reading some passionate demagoguery.

A few short stories I've re-read along these lines recently, both by Harlan Ellison, are "Santa Claus vs. S.P.I.D.E.R." and "Hitler Painted Roses".
You don't have to accept the ideas presented as gospel truth, just to enjoy a well-written story, or read and understand ideas written from another point of view.

You wasnt talking about being critical of christianity, you was talking about portraying in a negative light. Overly camp, stereotypes could be seen as negative portrayal. For instance the character Extrano (or whatever his name was) in that shitty New Guardians comic. Many could say that he was insulting to the gay community. Especially as he was attacked by an AIDs vampire .. a fucking AIDs vampire, could they get anymore insulting than have a gay characters mortal enemy being a vampire that spreads AIDs?

Unfortunate use of rainbow colors for that particular comic's background.

Thats also the colour of Wonder Boys wardrobe.

and his heart

Well, rainbow patterns are OK and fun, even sexy, for women...



...but for myself I prefer to wear a rainbow in my heart.

As for the HULK magazine cover overall, beyond just the colors, I think it's a pretty damn cool page of (rare) Walt Simonson painted art.




Well, again, that requires some interpretation and oversensitivity on the part of gays. AIDS is not necessarily a gay disease, although about 85% of cases are gay men, particularly gay white men.
There are also cases transmitted through IV drug use, through blood products and blood transfusions, through female prostitutes, and even heterosexual transmission. (Although as I've cited before, the "heterosexual cases" are overwhelmingly women who get HIV through men who are secretly bisexual, so those could more accurately be labeled "homosexual contact".)

I was thinking back to a Saturday Night Live Halloween skit with Adam Sandler as a vampire, and he was seductively asking his intended female victim AIDS/HIV screening questions about her former sex partners, possible hemophelia, etc., before drinking her blood! If such a skit is acceptable for SNL, then an AIDS vampire in comics is arguably just as playfully innoccuous.

People who choose to be offended about something intended to be playful and frivolous will always feel a need to be offended, I guess. I haven't read the story, but it sounds like it was done with humor, and not demagoguing gays.

An example of something that SHOULD rouse an offended response is a Syrian children's show, teaching kids to hate Jews, and a little girl answering a costumed host, saying she hopes she has the chance to kill a lot of Jews when she grows up.
Or the muslim brotherhood-connected Egyptian successor to president Mubarek, comparing Jews to "apes and pigs".
Both examples of rhetoric similar to that of Nazi propaganda, intended to stoke and rationalize genocide against Jews.

Acknowledging with humor in a fantasy vampire story that gays are a large (but not exclusive) risk group to AIDS is not in the same category.

There's nothing sexy about a skeleton wearing rainbow print leggings.

there's also the implication that the woman in that pic has never seen a sandwich in her entire life, which means it's very unlikely that she knows how to make me one. Very unsexy. 1/10, would not bang.

Thank you for that.


As I said, I have no problem with stories that offer a dialogue between the two sides on the subject. But when creators of a story live in a country that identifies in annual polls as about 78% Christian, and more broadly over 90% "believe in God" in some form, it is not reasonable to just rabidly/angrily attack Christians in a story. But to instead more respectfully approach the subject. If the creator of a story critical of religion has no interest in civility, they might at least want to tell the story in a way that has a chance of persuading someone, beyond simply insulting the reader's beliefs.

I think that is a problem both religiously and politically in the U.S., is that both sides often go for "red meat" rhetoric that only appeals to their political base who already share their beliefs. But the rhetoric is so poisonous that it could not possibly persuade anyone who doesn't already share their beliefs.
Needless to say, as a conservative, I see the rhetoric of the left as far more often insulting, hate-filled, demagogic and spiteful. But it embarrasses me when people I agree with use the same kind of poisonous/partisan rhetoric.

I dunno. She's got an extremely flat stomach but the thighs and the butt look like she's got enough meat on her bones.

I'd agree she doesn't have much body fat.
But she still looks pretty round and muscular, particularly in the legs. I agree with G-man on that.

I would definitely take what you leave on the plate, SoM!

I left Lothar on the plate!

Getting back to "God in comics", I really like the SECRET ORIGINS 10 issue (January 1987) that gave four alternative origins for the Phantom Stranger, by four different creative teams.
Three of the four were religious/Christian (if not Biblical) in nature.



I like the Barr and Aparo one the best, centered on a priest of lagging faith, who Phantom Stranger tells his origin to. Where Phantom Stranger was living in the time Jesus was crucified, and for his participation in the crucifixion is condemned to wander the earth for eternity, deprived forever of the family and friendships that others have. This one is the most reverent of the 4 stories.

The second by Paul Levitz and Jose Luis Garcia-Lopez, also set in Biblical times, while spiritual, is less overtly Christian.

the third story, by Dan Mishkin and Ernie Colon/Pablo Marcos, is a more futuristic/alien origin, where his origin and powers are the byproduct of a scientific experiment. Somewhat reminiscent of a Green Lantern/guardians type story. The art is a bit Gil Kane-esque.

The last origin (probably the highlight for most), by Alan Moore and Joe Orlando, centers on when Satan (Lucifer) and the other angels plan a rebellion against God. Phantom Stranger is an angel, and is invited to take part in the rebellion, but stays in the sidelines to not alienate himself from either side. Aspects of the story take on a "better to rule in Hell than serve in Heaven" aspect. Although for the stranger, it isn't better.

The Barr/Aparo and Moore/Orlando stories are both provocative spiritual explorations. I tried to explain the nature of them, without giving you spoilers, if you haven't read them. But regardless, some religion-in-comics stories, or just plain good stories to add to your collection. I think it fills the bill in both categories.

Heh. I have no idea what Short Round is saying.


anyhoo




God was a big deal in this series. It's a good story and I recommend it to everyone.

Kamphausened!

I didn't know you had posted that because I have you blocked.

You dont want to accept my point because you hate gays (self loathing maybe).
The point that AIDs is not exclusive has nothing to do with my point, which is that if you have a gay character, why do you specifically have an AIDs related villain unless you are trying to say its a "gay disease"? Why not have an AIDs vampire attack Batman? Oh I know why, he isnt gay. Thats the logic they were using. Its cliched hack writing, and homophobic.
You then compare to an Adam Sandler sketch which is the complete opposite. He is a vampire who did not want to catch AIDs, and was asking heterosexual women if they had it. How is that the same as a vampire with AIDs specifically created because a character was gay?

He isn't?

Tell that to Dr. Wertham!

But seriously...





I don't "hate" gays. I have a number of friends, classmates and business associates over at least 30 years I've never hesitated to associate with, despite that I disagree with them politically, and believe that homosexuality is (as it was diagnosed until the 1970's) an obsessive disorder and not an "alternative lifestyle".
As a minority of the psych professional community still treats as the obsessive disorder that it is.

They are otherwise often good people, but in some ways flawed. Like the rest of us. But emboldened in their delusion by an agenda by the radical Left to use them as pawns in pursuit of a radical agenda.




A) I've never read the frigging story, so I don't know beyond your sayso what it is, or implies.

B) As I've said elsewhere, I often like stories, and even rank them among my favorites, even though they are by liberal writers with a liberal perspective. I can think of many stories by guys like Dennis O'Neil, Gerry Conway, Mike Friedrich and the like, as well as stories like "Santa Claus vs. S.P.I.D.E.R." and "Hitler Painted Roses" by Harlan Ellison, that playfully mock specific conservatives like Reagan and Nixon, and more broadly Judao-Christian conservative beliefs. But while diametrically opposed to my beliefs, I still enjoy them as well told stories.

So conversely, even if I agreed with the sentiments of the AIDS vampire story you cite (I don't know, I've never read it), that doesn't guarantee that I would endorse the story, just because it allegedly might share my opinion of gays. It might still be crap (close to 100% of comics I've read in the last 10 years are) so even if I agreed with its politics, it could still be a poorly told story.
I recall a gay vampire story back in the late 1980's in CLIVE BARKER: TAPPING THE VEIN, that I found cheap and annoying. (I think illustrated by Craig Russell. It was 30 years ago.)

Conversely, a story among my favorites that had gay characters in SABRE issue 3 (1982), by Don McGregor, Billy Graham and George Freeman. They were characters in a neighboring jail cell, with a universal message about freedom, persecution and friendship, that I felt portrayed the characters with nobility, but without beating the reader over the head with the fact the characters were gay.

Heavy-handedness having replaced any subtlety whatsoever is my biggest complaint with comics of the last 25 years or so.
I'm very old-school.

cod piece? Tights? A boy ward in green hotpants and pixy boots? Its a wonder Bryan Singer didnt reboot the Batman franchise!

And, of course

Y'know, even in a more innocent era, how did they not see the possible interpretation of this stuff?
And it passed the Comics Code inspectors too!

Shouldn't Christian WB be the one starting a thread about God and out and proud MEM be the one turning it gay?

I don't know what your talking about G-man?

That was a good issue. Never had much interest in the Phantom Stranger before than but presented with these different origins the character became interesting to me. The science one was the least interesting for me but just for the fact it was different than the other 3 gave it some merit. It's been a long time since I've read those stories but wasn't the Moore story less about ruling in hell since PG was basically shunned by both sides for not choosing a side? As a kid it just blew my mind that PG had essentially went to hell after being rejected by those in heaven.

I think the point in Alan Moore's story is that Phantom Stranger was not willing to commit to either the angels of Heaven, or the rebel angels of Hell, and as a result was not accepted in either realm, and was thus destined to wander the Earth alone, accepted nowhere else.

Uniquely, this SECRET ORIGINS 10 issue presented 4 different mutually exclusive origins, and perhaps only 4 possible origins, maybe none the Phantom Stranger's actual origin. But 4 good, interesting, and thought-provoking stories.