I shared an article that addressed my belief that forcing "Christian" law on someone is just as intolerable as it is to force "Islamic" law on someone. (I brought this up a few months ago too and had a few "defriendings" occur for holding such a position.) The conversation that followed was interesting to me and I think it shows examples of a lot of viewpoints.
I want to commentate on two items. First, my friend Kim brings up the issue that poorly behaving Christians in the present and in the past, by virtue of their behavior, do not get to lay claim to the name Christian. I hear this argument regularly in Christian circles (in fact, I just heard it again yesterday) and I don't think it is valid. It is just too easy to say that every bad Christian is not really a Christian. To me, it would be like saying that every communist economic system that failed wasn't really communist (after all, says the communist, if it were really communism it would not have failed). You can't just dissociate from every bad egg in your group.
Second, my brother Steve contends that most people's negative feelings in regard to gay marriage are not religiously based - religious folks are simply the loudest on the issue. I don't buy this point either. In fact, I have NEVER heard a secular argument against gay marriage made. If anyone is aware of any studies on why people are against gay marriage, I would love to see them.
www.huffingtonpost.com
Members of the Religious Right say they fear Muslims imposing Shariah Law on America. This isn't about to happen. But what is taking place is a home grown movement to turn America into their version of a modern day theocracy -- say, Iran.
10 comments:
Andy, your statement about never encountering a person with a non-religious reason for objecting homosexuality reminds me of the famous anecdote about the New York Times reporter who was absolutely stunned when Nixon beat McGovern in '72. She couldn't understand because as she put it, "I never met anyone who wasn't voting for McGovern."
One only has to see that the vast majority of the articles "you have recently read" on your blog, the ones you post to Facebook, and the books you read and reviewed tend to reinforce your own convictions.
I totally believe you when you say you have never met a person who objected to homosexuality for non-religious reasons.
After our FB discussion that you have posted, I had lunch with some of our teachers in the staff cafeteria and brought up the debate for their perspective. There was two Brits (a male & female), an Australian, and a Hong Kong Chinese at the table. I couple of them had nothing against homosexuality but naturally assumed that people's objections to it can be something other than religious. It was an interesting discussion but was pleasantly free of the Religious Right, Evangelical, Ameri-centric focus.
My prescription: Come teach out in Hong Kong or China for a few years. Get out of "the bubble" of American social issue fights and see the world
Here's the thing though Steve; through all of your talk on the Facebook page... and now here, you have yet to make the secular argument that you state is so pervasive. You point me to no links or articles where these arguments are being made.
The people you had lunch with have nothing against homosexuality but assume one could have a non-religious reason for having something against it. All non-Americans who can't see what the problem is, but are aware that someone could have a problem. I think you are making my argument. I never said such a person couldn't exist, I just don't think they exist in too many locations outside your assumptions.
I am aware that this is an evangelical, American, religious right issue... that is kinda the point. The only people who seem to care about this are right wing evangelicals and the Middle East. Most modernized countries have no problem with homosexuals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_same-sex_marriage
Andy,
My non-religious argument is the same for any sexual activity outside of a married man and woman. I mean we don't have a sister (so I can use this example with out being creepy) but if we were both adults I don't think, "Wow, I'd sure like to "BE" with her, but I better not because God wouldn't be happy." Do I really need to bring God into that equation. Can I just disapprove of it apart from God?
Now an argument could be made that we LOVE one another. Who can tell us the love we have is right or wrong if we are consenting adults?
There are MANY people out there that feel the same way about homosexuality. That a guy shouldn't BE with another guy and God doesn't really enter the equation.
Hey, but demographics are on your side. There will probably be homosexual marriage in America in our lifetimes...which I imagine,at the vey least, will improve window treatments across the country
I have to agree with your brother's point that there are people who disagree with homosexuality for non-religious reasons. You are right, however, to note that you can't find non-religious arguments for it simply because those who tend to hold this viewpoint don't (in my experience) have a logically thought out argument: they simply react to their gut which says that homosexual acts are unnatural and abhorrent. If pushed, you could make the claim that these people are reacting to the cultural and social influences around them.
My case in point, my roommate (Vietnamese) will swear up and down that she is very accepting of homosexuality... however anytime she sees a homosexual act (men kissing on TV, for example) she is very visibly (and vocally) repulsed by it. I have friends from China who would react the same way, consistently (although they don't make the same claim of acceptance).
Steve - Ughhh.. the "well what if someone wanted to marry a goat, sister, mom" argument is just not applicable. A given percentage of the population is born homosexual in the same way a percentage is born heterosexual. They have no more decision in their attraction than you do. The difference is, they are not asking you to engage in a life long repression of your attractions so as not to give them the "ickies".
Emily - You are right. They are having a reaction and a response; and have suppressed their reason.
We are talking the same thing right Andy? I mean you may be thinking "gay" but really we're talking "sodomy"...right?
See, that feeling you have have expressed concerning incest, most of the world also feels about sodomy. You make me think of Tina Fey's book "Bossypants" where she admits she wanted her gay friends to "be there for her, console her, be her funny friends". She laments that she thought of them as "props" and didn't want to think of them actually having sex.
I'm also surprised that you find sexuality so simple as to suggest that someone is simply born a particular way. I see now why people keep making the comparison that "well people used to forbid interacial marriage" and other similar comments which I have never seen as being relevant. I believe there a host of reasons why some people engage in a gay lifestyle and admittedly I think people can have a predisposition towards same sex attraction but there are also emotional reasons, experiential reasons, psychological reasons etc.
How do you explain some celebrities that suddenly change. Can a black man wake up one day and decide to be white...no. But Melissa Ethridge's ex partner woke up one day and decided she wasn't gay anymore. See it,s too fluid and you make it sound so concrete...
"See, that feeling you have have expressed concerning incest, most of the world also feels about sodomy."
Which rest of the world are we talking about? If you look at that wiki article, it is primarily the backward, washed out, and fundamentalist nations. So you think the fundamental Islamisists are wrong pretty much everywhere else, but are a beacon of hope on this issue? They may be a bit extreme about how to deal with gays, but at least they are getting rid of them? Great comparison.
"I'm also surprised that you find sexuality so simple as to suggest that someone is simply born a particular way."
Uh yeah... me and pretty much the entire medical/psychological field... try a "little" research. At what point did you make the informed decision to be attracted to certain strains of females?
"How do you explain some celebrities that suddenly change. Can a black man wake up one day and decide to be white...no. But Melissa Ethridge's ex partner woke up one day and decided she wasn't gay anymore. See it,s too fluid and you make it sound so concrete..."
Sigh...Steve, could you please do a little scientific research, and quit taking your cues of how to interact with people based on what you read in celebrity magazines?
You must be right Andy...its only backward, Islamic nations and a few wacko Christians that are repulsed by sodomy...everyone else thinks its just swell...(you haven't been in a local bar lately have you).
'Uh yeah... me and pretty much the entire medical/psychological field... try a "little" research.'
My position on a complex process for reasons stems from an explanation on the subject given by a fellow actress-friend studying human sexuality at the University of Colorado. During a discussion at a wrap party she basically shut down a fellow actor who spouted the same view (they are born that way) that you shared. She went on to give in greater detail than I shared here the complexity of the issue and that there really was not any defining evidence that someone is simply "born" that way. And I must note she was (is) pro-gay rights. (Hey, it was a theater company in a college town. I think I was the only person there who didn't support gay rights)
And please, you accuse me of getting information from celebrity magazines (really do you think that's likely?) and then tell me to do scientific research by sending a wikipedia article which could have been edited by, you know, Bob the Plumber yesterday.
I'll give you the last word by not responding to your reply. The temperature on this debate is getting a little too hot for brothers...
I must add though that I am surprised that aside from "Emily" no one else has jumped in on this. They have really left you and I to spare...interesting :)
Andrew-I figured I'd give you my 2 cents worth. There is an argument out there that has nothing to do with religion and it has everything to do with money. Years ago, I was in a conversation with an insurance actuary. This lady was a heavy hitter, probably pulling in close to 600k-1m a year in salary. The conversation took place in the mid 90's so I'm a little stale on memory. But the issue had to do with insurance companies not wanting to have to insure non-traditional families and how it could actually break the banks of the insurance companies and they would never let that happen.
Another argument I heard from the LDS faith was that if they legalized same sex marriage then that would open the door to polygamy marriage being legal. This would put the LDS Church in a tough position. Could you imagine if polygamy became legal and the LDS church reestablished it?
Post a Comment