Social Diseases

Q: “Can Mark 5:25-34 be used to teach us to accept people who have social diseases?”
A: The section that you refer to deals with Jesus healing the woman who had an issue of blood. The primary point of the entire incident is the evidence of Jesus’ deity by displaying his all-knowing ability in discerning her touch and his almighty power in healing her. In a secondary way we also have the example of the woman’s strong faith, which most certainly was rewarded by the Lord. But to use this text in the way your question suggests (which, incidentally, is the main point of emphasis in this text for many liberal-minded preachers!), is doing an injustice to the comprehensive treatment of this account.
It is true that the woman’s severe menstrual problem made her unclean according to Levitical Law (Lev. 15:25-27), and this malady prohibited her from touching anyone. But no way are we to assume that this affliction was at all due to her being sexually permissive. She is commended in the text for her Christianity, and Jesus has no special injunction to her to “go and sin no more,” as was the case with the woman caught in the act of adultery (John 8:11).
Yes, we are to “accept” people who have social diseases, provided this word “accept” is understood in the Biblical sense. If someone has contracted a social disease through sexual sinning and does not view that lifestyle as a moral wrong that needs to be repented of, it is our loving responsibility to draw this to their attention so that they may be accepted into God’s family of believers. True “acceptance” of people is always leading them to Christ, not reinforcing them in the immoral viewpoints they may have. Those who repent, as well as those who have acquired social diseases by other means not forbidden in God’s Word, should not be stigmatized. Loving people, according to God’s way, is what is needed.
True “acceptance” of people is always leading them to Christ, not reinforcing them in the immoral viewpoints they may have.