Some of you reading along here may recall, I've been having a discussion with a friend of mine who has recently "come out of the closet" - at least partially (to trusted friends and family). This has sparked some articles here on the CathApol Blog. This friend of mine sent an article to read on this subject, perhaps in response to my posting of alternative profile pics for Facebook, but regardless, it's worth a look...
When I was a freshman in college, the GLBA–Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Alliance– organized an annual Gay Awareness week. What I remember most was “Jean Day.” The student leaders of the GLBA posted signs all over campus announcing that students could express their support for gay rights by wearing jeans on Thursday. Of course denim is a second skin for most college students, and it was obvious the GLBA was seeking to inflate their perception of support. The tactic was so transparent few people paid attention—until a conservative Christian student group began putting up their own signs. Their flyers called students who did not support gay rights to “wear a shirt on Thursday.Well, good question, "Is there a better way?" I would start off by saying this author did not need to use "stupidity of the Christians." Both sides were being a bit silly in this "debate" and those who did not support homosexual rights were actually being quite clever, probably not expecting some of the supporters, especially the female ones, to come to class without a shirt. The "response" was more to counter the silliness of the homosexual supporters who called for the wearing of jeans, which is quite common on a college campus. As if anyone wearing jeans that day were automatically supporting homosexual rights.
The battle lines were drawn. The silliness of the GBLA’s scheme was matched by the stupidity of the Christians’.
Thursday came and members of the GBLA went to class in blue jeans and topless. (Some women wearing only bras.) The conservative Christians marched to class wearing khakis and in some cases multiple shirts, proudly doing their part to “uphold righteousness.” Eventually the two groups got into a heated shouting match. The shirts accused the skins of being godless and immoral. The denims accused the khakis of being bigots and homophobes.
As I watched the scene unfold, the voice of my high school teacher echoed in my head. “Just remember,” he’d told me, “college isn’t the real world.”
Sadly the real world has proven to look more like my college experience than I would have hoped, only now the shouting between the gay community and Christians happens on cable news, talk radio, outside courthouses and in school board meetings. Still, there are many of us–both gay and straight, Christian and non-Christian, supporters of same sex marriage, and those like myself who hold to the church’s traditional definition–who do not identify with the culture war rhetoric emanating from either side. We stand on the periphery wondering: isn't there a better way?
That being said, I do not oppose "equal rights" - but what I do support is the "right" for society to "hold strong to that which we have been taught, whether by word of mouth or by epistle." (2 Thes. 2:15) It is through both that Christians object to and reject homosexuality. Verses which reference directly or indirectly the sin of homosexuality:
Genesis 19:1-11 Leviticus 18:22 Leviticus 20:13 Judges 19:16-24 1 Kings 14:24 1 Kings 15:12 2 Kings 23:7 Romans 1:18-32 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 1 Timothy 1:8-10 Jude 7In a discussion I has having with one of my sons, he stated that someone challenged that where the Bible speaks against homosexuality, it is only in the Old Testament (OT). Well, clearly one can see that there are ample verses in the New Testament (NT) too. Perhaps what has changed in the NT is how we are to deal with such sinners. In the OT the punishment for getting caught in a homosexual act was to be stoned to death. In the NT when Jesus is confronted by an angry mob wishing to stone to death a woman caught in prostitution (also a crime punishable by stoning to death in the OT), Jesus challenged them, "He who is without sin, cast the first stone." Those who were about to stone her dropped their rocks and walked away. But did Jesus end there? No, he turned to the sinner and said, "Go and sin no more." He did not excuse her sin and give his blessing to continue in the sinful lifestyle - no - He told her to not sin anymore. In short, it was an example in how to "love the sinner, but hate the sin."
Is Homosexuality A Choice?
Well, again, that question has been at the root of this debate for a long time - perhaps since the debate on the subject began. Ultimately one must conclude it is a matter of choice for someone to engage in homosexual -OR- heterosexual -OR- a celibate lifestyle. Anything we "do" is something we have choice in "doing" and thus "responsibility" for what we "do." Essentially ANY sexual activity outside of marriage is sinful. Sex before marriage is fornication and sex with someone who is not your spouse after marriage is adultery. Perhaps this is what motivates proponents of homosexual marriage. If such a "marriage" is accepted - then the next step would be to accept the sin as well. Through the backdoor they are getting us to accept not only the sinner, but the sin too. But back to the question of this section, is homosexuality a choice? Again, our answer must be a resilient YES! If we believe it is not a choice, then there can be no fault, no sin - but clearly God's Word on the matter is that it IS sin and therefore MUST be a matter of choice.
Is Homosexuality By Nature?
Well, if homosexuality were the natural course - "life" itself would last no more than one generation for there can be no procreation in a homosexual relationship. Nature demands heterosexuality in order for the species to continue. The argument of "I was born this way" just does not apply to matters where we CHOOSE to do what we DO. Does that mean that a man cannot be "turned on" by another man or a woman by another woman? By no means! In fact for some that "forbidden fruit" makes it that much more tantalizing to engage in. But again, nothing in "nature" dictates that homosexuality is a "natural" lifestyle and would be actually contrary to "nature."
How About the Facebook Profile Pic "War?"
Well, perhaps this meme puts it a bit into perspective: