I consider myself a realist in every sense of the term. I see the world as it really is and tend to make fun of it. We all do what we can to survive. I grew up in an accepting household, and went to a Christian school because my mother was concerned about my education. I have to say, my education at a private Christian school really did open my eyes to religion. I didn't realize it until much later. I've always been a very faithful person. Meaning I believe in God and ask him to guide me in what I do and to be the best I can be, however I'm also very sensible and open. Therefore I am non-denominational, besides according to several denominations I'm going to hell anyway so I may as well do what I want anyway. I don't claim to be perfect: I swear, I drink in excess sometimes, I can be spiteful, I sometimes don't treat those I love with the respect they deserve, I'm obnoxious, loud, and don't think before I speak.
Well I've gone off on a tirade, lets get back on track shall we?
You may be wondering what on earth the title of this weeks column means. Well my friends I'm going to tackle that darned controversy of homosexuality. I can hear the groans now, come on guys you KNEW I was going to get on this train sooner or later. I love controversy. Plus I recently watched an amazing film called “For the Bible tells Me So” Which I HIGHLY recommend to everyone (http://www.forthebibletellsmeso.org/indexb.htm), its where I'll be getting most of my information from. I took notes. Yes I'm a nerd, I know.
When you talk to a super-conservative Christians about LGBT (LGBT = Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals, and Transgenders) people they often quote the following verses from the Bible: Romans 1:26-27, Leviticus 18:22, and Genesis 19 (The chapter dealing with Sodom and Gomorrah). They sit all high and mighty on their throne of biblical knowledge staring down their nose at you. I can't help but think of the Pharisees when they do, which in case you didn't know, the Pharisees were the people who were pretty much the bane of Jesus' existence (Check out Matthew through Luke). Allow me to quote directly from the NIV version of the bible what the Romans and Leviticus verses say:
“Do not lie with another man as one lies with a woman; that is an abomination” - Leviticus 18:22
“Because of this, God gave them over to their shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged their natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion” - Romans 1:26-27
So you're probably thinking 'Wow Lauren, you just totally killed your case.' Oh my dear friend, that simply is not the situation here. I've only just begun. Lets start with the Leviticus verse because it ironically has a longer explication.
If you read the book of Leviticus, you'll find it's quite literally a rule and procedure book. This particular chapter is about 'Unlawful Sexual Relations' and goes into all sorts of nasties from bestiality to incest (which they decided wasn't a good thing later on because there were more people to populate the earth with and their children were most likely having sever psychological problems when they learned that Aunt Margaret and Mom were the same person.). However if you read further you'll find the other following commands:
“Do not mate different kinds of animals”
“Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed.”
“Do not wear clothing of two kinds of material”
“Do not eat meat with the blood still in it”
There's also several references stating not to eat seafood and how women can't wear pants, but I really don't think that I need to quote them because I think you guys get the idea. These were laws made specifically for the ancient Jews, they were put in place because they were doing what they had to do in order to survive. We are not nomadic tribesmen, thank God because I'm very fond of indoor plumbing and hygiene. Just because its written in the bible does not mean we still practice it today. If you can find me a person that does every single thing the bible says I will stop wearing pants, allow my father to choose my husband, and stop eating the food the bible tells me is an abomination. Abomination. What does that word even mean? Today it is defined as 'to hate, loathe or dislike'. But when you study the texts you'll find that the biblical authors simply defined it as being unlike their culture. So how can you take the text literally without taking that literally? Some cultures are so much different that ours, does that mean you should hate them? If your answer is 'yes' or 'depends on which culture...' then you may as well stop reading because nothing I say is going to matter to you.
Now on to the Romans verse which, like most of the bible, (except for the parts that make us uncomfortable, like Song of Solomon. It happens to be my favorite book because its more about sex and less about politics. If there's one book in the bible that should be taken literally its that one.) is taken literally. It, like the Leviticus verse, is all about what is customary and non-customary in some cultures. Paul was remarking about the Greeks and their paganism. The things he saw were simply not a part of his custom. Our customs are different from other countries. Its non-customary in American culture for parents to circumcise their son (and I'm sure most good ole' American boys are very grateful that is so). It is customary in American culture to go to baseball games and have hot dogs.
On to Sodom and Gomorrah. The cities were destroyed because of 'sin', and some people have told me when I ask them about homosexuality that is the very sin that destroyed them. Never mind the fact that people were cruel to one another in unspeakable fashions (meaning torture, rape, theft, and sodomizing for sheer humiliation), the violence was worse than both World Wars put together, and you probably could find more hospitality in a graveyard. It was because a bunch of gay guys opened up shop and caused a gay plague. They often quote the line in the section that deals with Lot welcoming the angels . Some of the local welcoming party comes pounding on the door and tries to get in on the fun by saying (depending on which translation you're reading) 'bring them out here so we can have sex with/rape them.' In ancient times, sodomizing and raping the losers of a battle was not uncommon. It was done for the sheer humiliation, to add more shame to the loss. Just because they weren't in a battle didn't mean that it didn't happen outside of a war-like setting. Where do you think the term 'sodomy' came from? That really funny song from 'HAIR'?
These references are inappropriate and irrelevant because, really, people have no knowledge about it. How can you? The bible has been translated and re-translated, there's several different versions of it, and it was written by mankind. Many people get highly offended when I say this, but I've come to the belief that the bible is not the Word of God but the influence of God on man. God had way to much on his plate to sit down and write a book. So he got man to do it, which I'm sure by now he's probably rubbing his temples going 'Oh my Me...maybe I should have just done it myself...' People take one part of the bible literally but not the entire bible literally, misinterpret, and twist it to suite their own standpoint. Lets not forget that the bible was also put together by men of a very traditional culture. There's a set of gnostic gospels, which are much like the poor souls who try out for American Idol and don't make it on. The authors of these gospels range from Mary Magdalene to Judas. Now some people may ask 'Well why didn't Mary make it in the bible?' the answer is very simple: When they were organizing the bible, being traditional men of the time, they did not want a book authored by a piece of property. I mean...what does she know anyway? She's a woman. As honorable as some of those men were, they were not without their prejudices. If you're asking why Judas' book didn't make it in, then you've either never been to Sunday school or you've been struck by the stupid fairy. Google it, I've got more stuff to talk about.
Now on to the whole 'Homosexuality is a choice!' argument. But before I go on, let me ask you this: Why would anyone choose to be a certain way if that lifestyle was met by bigotry, ostracizing, and death? Many people fall on this argument because they feel there is no proof. Apparently they have never been to the American Psychiatric Association website. Some people feel that with enough therapy, people can go from gay to straight within a matter of time. Well, the APA states differently:
“...To date, there are no scientifically rigorous outcome studies to determine either the actual efficacy or harm of "reparative" treatments....Firstly, they are at odds with the scientific position of the American Psychiatric Association which has maintained, since 1973, that homosexuality per se, is not a mental disorder. The theories of "reparative" therapists define homosexuality as either a developmental arrest, a severe form of psychopathology, or some combination of both (10-15). In recent years, noted practitioners of "reparative" therapy have openly integrated older psychoanalytic theories that pathologize homosexuality with traditional religious beliefs condemning homosexuality (16,17,18)......The potential risks of reparative therapy are great, including depression, anxiety and self-destructive behavior, since therapist alignment with societal prejudices against homosexuality may reinforce self-hatred already experienced by the patient. Many patients who have undergone reparative therapy relate that they were inaccurately told that homosexuals are lonely, unhappy individuals who never achieve acceptance or satisfaction. The possibility that the person might achieve happiness and satisfying interpersonal relationships as a gay man or lesbian is not presented, nor are alternative approaches to dealing the effects of societal stigmatization discussed. Several major professional organizations including the American Psychological Association, the National Association of Social Workers and the American Academy of Pediatrics have all made statements against reparative therapy because of concerns for the harm caused to patients. The American Psychiatric Association has already taken clear stands against discrimination, prejudice and unethical treatment on a variety of issues including discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Therefore, the American Psychiatric Association opposes any psychiatric treatment, such as reparative or conversion therapy which is based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based upon the a priori assumption that the patient should change his/her sexual homosexual orientation.”
-The American Psychiatric Association (The full text can be found here: http://www.psych.org/Departments/EDU/Library/APAOfficialDocumentsandRelated/PositionStatements/200001.aspx)
So you may be asking “Well...what about all of the people who underwent reparative therapy and ex-gay ministries and came back straight?” I hate to break it to you, but they're still gay, they only change the sexual conduct, not the desires. If you instill enough fear and guilt in someone they tend to suppress their feelings and desires in order to find the so-called salvation that their 'therapist' is preaching. Not only are they doing damage to the patient, but they're sending a message that Gay = Freak and with enough therapy you can be cured. So people who undergo this therapy are forced to stay in the closet. Closets are a place of death and shame. Many LGBT people are forced to live double lives because of the shame and guilt they feel, and sadly they ultimately end their lives because they just can't live with it anymore. Not only that, but if those places really work why don't they all use the same technique? Why do they experiment differently? Why have so many members and leaders recanted their statements saying they're 'changed'? They're sapping away money, time and ultimately damaging these people who have nothing wrong with them.
Now on to the scientific evidence. Unfortunately most of the confirmed studies have to do with male sexuality (sorry ladies), but there are ongoing studies that haven't been released. In the study they look at three main factors: genes, hormones and birth order. Lets take the phenomena of identical twins. If one twin is born gay, 70% of the time the other is also gay. That's a huge fact because that shows that genes play a greater role in sexual orientation than they do in determining if a person is left or right handed. Another startling statistic: if a boy has older brothers that increases the odds of him being gay. One would argue that 'Moms baby the youngest!', nice try but no. Mom's babying has nothing to do with sexual orientation (the only traits I've seen from incredibly babied boys are laziness, unmotivated in doing anything, arrogance, obstinance, and the uncanny ability to be a total asshole to the girl they're dating). When a woman is pregnant with a boy, her body sees the fetus as a foreign object. Her body then begins to produce antigens and antibodies against it. The more boys a woman has, the more adept her body becomes at feminizing the fetus. This explains with every successive boy, the odds of him being gay go up significantly. I am not making this up. Google it, you'll find I'm right. So now that I've dumped all of this information on you, allow me to explain why I've spent hours of research and editing to this weeks column.
I am a straight girl who likes boys. I have the right to go down to a courthouse and sign a piece of paper and marry who ever I want. My friends, boys who like boys and girls who like girls, don't have the same right as I do. Not only are the deprived of marrying who they want, but the can't be honest about who they are in the military, they face endless prejudice in their jobs and are denied some positions because of their orientation, and if they are married they cannot see the person they love on their deathbed because its not recognized as a real marriage and in that same mindset they cannot inherit any of the benefits their partners leave them. Does that seem right to you? Forget the homosexuality part, think about how you would feel if you were denied those rights because you were different or you chose a lifestyle that everyone deemed 'unnatural'.
These statements from the bible are used in a fashion that promotes violence and fear. People feel empowered when the bible is used to declare that something is wrong. Its used as a justification for violence and hatred, which is exactly what the bible is against. The bible is a message of love, hope and forgiveness. It is not a shield for you to hide behind in your homophobia. When you think about it, homophobia in itself is a sin because it promotes fear, hatred and bigotry. James Dobson (the dude who's head of Focus on the Family) is probably the best example of a homophobic bigot. First of all I find it funny that he has NO theological training so he has NO idea what truth is. Secondly he has claimed that gays are the equivalent to Nazis as far as spreading their evil ways (Okay because gays are going to rise up and put us in 'queer-converters' and we're all going to come out wearing tight pants, fussing about our hair and listening to Barbra Streisand all the time). Third, he has stated time and time again to reject your gay child. That's funny because I always thought that family meant loving accepting and embracing your child. Sure you have to discipline them every once in a while to keep them in line, but to punish them for being gay?
I always thought that God loved you for who you were, only asking that you believe in him and be the best person that you can be. According to them, that's not the case. You have to be a straight, perfect individual in order to get to heaven. One of the preachers in For the Bible tells me So stated: “I can't for the life me me think that God would punish someone for being black when they should have been white, or being a woman when they should have been a man, or being homosexual when they should have been straight.” Why would he punish the very thing he created?
At least that's how I see it.
Cheers!
Sources:
For the Bible Tells me So - http://www.forthebibletellsmeso.org/indexb.htm
The American Psychiatric Association - http://www.psych.org/
The American Association of Social Workers - http://www.socialworkers.org/
Is Homosexuality a Choice? - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYMjXucTFaM
Equality Across America - http://equalityacrossamerica.org/
Broadway Impact - http://www.broadwayimpact.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment