Don't wince. This is not a rant or a hatespeech. It is a search to understand more fully how to think about homosexuality. I want to seriously engage with people who have opposing views concerning homosexuality and how it is currently being handled by the Church, and also to hear some of your opinions about it.
The first thing to do when dealing with homosexuality is to separate two things: the actual act of having sex with someone of the same sex, and the inclination to be sexually attracted to someone of the same sex. I only want to deal with the morality of the first distinction. No one is in complete control of their urges. I can't help the fact that I'm attracted to women anymore than homosexuals can help the fact that they're attracted to people of their sex, so let's leave that at the door. What I want to address is acting on that impulse.
Politically speaking, I'm Libertarian (though not in all ways.) I think, from a government standpoint, people ought to be allowed to do whatever they want as long as they don't infringe on the rights of someone else. This means I think they aren't obliged to pray, observe a given sexual orientation, honor any sort of hierarchy relationshpi between husband/wife, or even love their neighbor, for that matter.
But when it comes to Christanity, things change. I don't think we as human beings are so corrupt and depraved that we cannot recognize good and evil when we see it. I do think however that we don't always know what is best for us. There is a certain way the early Christian faith establishes this basic point. If it isn't realized, people are free to basically do whatever they want.
It's a slippery slope to start to celebrate certain behavior which has unanimously been, traditionally, immoral. If you start accepting certain actions as right, if you "change with the times" so much that your system of ethics changes as well, the progressiveness that is espoused will eventually itself be outdated and traditional. I'm reminded of a line by Lewis. Someone told him that his views were too old-fashioned. He smiled and replied, "yours will be too someday."
I've yet to encounter any Christian-based logical arguments which support the notion that homosexual practice should be celebrated that do not undermine a) reason b)authority c) tradition and d) scripture. Of course, I've heard a lot of emotional arguments, but, as far as I'm concerned, our emotions aren't the best judges. They are too fickel; they change day to day and depending on what mood one is in.
Since I believe humanity to be fallen (though not totally depraved), I think we have been given fallen bodies that we don't have total control over. With these bodies come evil passions, concupiscience, and a general attitude of rebellion (though none of these "diseases" are unconquerable, and I don't think we ought to go to Hell simply for having them or being born.) If homosexuality is celebrated because it is "part of one's nature", at what point is the line drawn? Suppose a murder honestly felt he had a predisposition to kill? How do you condemn the one act, but accept the other? I know that in the one case, you are injuring another person, but that says nothing about the argument in terms of acting on impulse or according to one's nature. Suppose your predisposition is to hate people, or never pray, or think yourself better than everyone else. How can you, based on the argument that we ought to act on our own nature, criticize any of these dispositions?
Is Christianity about denying the self? If yes, we must actually deny something we inherently desire, otherwise, we wouldn't be denying anything. It's easy for me to deny gay sex, because I do not desire it. It's not so easy for me to deny heterosexual lust, because I do desire that. According to the progressive line of thought, at what point do you say a certain action is allowed, and another action should be denied?
My point is and main contention with the progress, liberal attitude of acceptance of homosexual behavior is that it undermines our understanding of human nature. It sets up its own system of ethics and does not act as if it is handling the truth. It creates its own truth. As I said above, such a view is a very slippery slope. One that, I fear, is bound to drop off into subjectivism/post-modernism.
I think the celebration of same sex behavior is a reaction against the horrendous discrimination of homosexuals in the past. Personally, I think homosexuals are just like everybody else. Every person has temptations that are not good for them to act upon. I struggle very much with my own fallen nature, and I've never experienced homosexual attraction, which is why I speak with great cuation on the matter. But I've yet to encounter any Christian-based logical arguments which support the notion that homosexual practice should be celebrated that do not undermine a) reason b)authority/tradition and c) scripture. Of course, I've heard a lot of emotional arguments, but, as far as I'm concerned, our emotions aren't the best judges. They are too fickel; they change day to day and depending on what mood we're in.
In my view, the current arguments set forth do not offer any reasonable reason to celebrate an act that has been viewed as sinful since the beginning of Christianity.
Thoughts?