Discussion Points: Region and Homosexuality

Over the last several years public discussion has taken up gays, gay marriage, gay culture, and of course, what is wrong with all of this because of prevailing religious views. A tattoo of thoughts is offered here on this subject. Perhaps they will provide a bit of perspective and balance to the topic?

• The Roman Catholic Church continues to issue theological dogma condemning homosexuality and very little, if any, pastoral nurture on the subject or the persons themselves. This in an era when Christianity is widely accepted as being about love and justice for fellow human beings, no matter their ethnicity, age, health or gender. Apparently this stance does not include love and justice for LGBTQ people in the Roman Catholic Church or many other protestant denominations, either. Is this because they fear what they do not know or understand?
• The Bible’s Old Testament is a loose collection of writings chronicling the history of mankind. The accounts are normative in the sense they instruct people on how to live so they can avoid evil, illness and punishment. To give weight to the symbols, metaphors and lessons, a vengeful God was added to capture attention and gain discipline.
• The New Testament chronicled the life of Jesus on earth and what it means for all mankind. It is a counterpoint to the Old Testament in which Jesus redeems mankind for its sins and exchanges an angry God for a loving Father. Why must we cling to a vengeful God?
• The books of Romans (New Testament) and Leviticus (Old Testament) provide instruction on how mankind should live so as to avoid sickness and social chaos. It is interesting how these “rules”, the ‘shall not’s, have been handed down by conservative religionists as though this is a moral code.  It is not.  Wide held beliefs at that time were more health oriented than not. So, for example:
• Eating pork was thought unclean and led to contagion and severe illness
• Touching pigskin was thought unhealthy for the same reasons as eating pork
• Eating shell fish followed in the same vein because shell fish as bottom feeders ingest feces of other fish life, and thus are unhealthy
• Committing adultery led to communicable diseases spread through intercourse among several unconnected persons; little medical treatment for these diseases existed
• I cannot imagine the point of not wearing fabrics of mixed origin!
• And the list goes on…….
• All of these ‘shall not’s’ called for the death penalty
• Funny thing is all the punishments for the ‘shall not’s’ no longer apply to modern mankind WITH THE SOLE exception of man lying with man as a woman; why is that? Why has that one taboo survived to this day in the mind of conservative Christians? The other ‘shall not’s’ are off the radar or still considered sins but without grave consequences
• Gay marriage is an issue because conservative religionists say they believe that it will devalue or destroy heterosexual marriage as an institution.  On the contrary, it strengthens it because it adopts a monogamous commitment as a perpetual union the same as heterosexual marriage. Straight marriages are destroying themselves without any help from the gay community. Furthermore, the state licenses marriage; where the ‘marriage’ term came from is in dispute, but probably originated in the church; however, the state has a legal bond to create between two consenting adults; the church adds a religious context to the union. Both are different from one another. The church can and should rule its own institution of marriage while the state should continue its constitutional purpose accordingly. The political connection is inappropriate and unnecessary
• America is not a Christian nation by design. It is a freedom of religion nation, so multiple belief systems are encouraged and supported. It is a travesty that this important concept has been misapplied to insist that just because a large majority of American settlers were Christians from England and other European nations, that therefore our nation is Christian.  It is not and the writers of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence made that quite clear. God fearing, yes; Christ following, no.
• Proposition 8 in California may have been voted into law by a small majority, but it was essentially driven by the Mormon Church in Utah; canvassers and funding came mainly from Utah, and thus is a gross interference by church in state affairs
• All churches who press a political point of view ought to lose their tax exemption because they are no longer teaching or worshiping religion but rather political science; that’s the role of schools, universities/colleges, and families.
• Churches are free to discriminate within themselves, not external to themselves. The former is a religion’s province; the latter is the province of government speaking for society
• Discriminating against gay people is only possible by way of moral positions advanced by religionists. That is perfidious because they are acting from church teachings, not law, and thus are in fact both unchristian and unconstitutional.

These thoughts may seem harsh to many people. But just imagine what the Gay community feels! Religion has a role to play in our society. That role, however, does not extend to governance of society at large. Persuasion and proselytizing, sure! But the force of law resides in only two places: first, within and among the church’s religious and faithful (they teach one another and seek adherents); second, in society as governed by elected officials, thus giving voice to a social ethos backed by laws.

The two are separate and apart as they should be. Those who choose to blur the line of separation damage the Constitution of the United States whether intentional or not.

When will we learn to respect this concept and each other?

November 10, 2011