posted on October 25, 2004 10:01:00 AM new
Op-Ed Columnist: God and Sex
October 23, 2004
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
So when God made homosexuals who fall deeply, achingly in
love with each other, did he goof?
That seems implicit in the measures opposing gay marriage
on the ballots of 11 states. All may pass; Oregon is the
only state where the outcome seems uncertain.
Over the last couple of months, I've been researching the
question of how the Bible regards homosexuality. Social
liberals tend to be uncomfortable with religious arguments,
but that is the ground on which political battles are often
decided in America - as when a Texas governor, Miriam "Ma"
Ferguson, barred the teaching of foreign languages about 80
years ago, saying, "If English was good enough for Jesus
Christ, it's good enough for us."
I think it's presumptuous of conservatives to assume that
God is on their side. But since Americans are twice as
likely to believe in the Devil as in evolution, I also
think it's stupid of liberals to forfeit the religious
field.
Some scholars, like Daniel Helminiak, author of "What the
Bible Really Says About Homosexuality," argue that the
Bible is not anti-gay. I don't really buy that.
It's true that the story of Sodom is treated by both modern
scholars and by ancient Ezekiel as about hospitality,
rather than homosexuality. In Sodom, Lot puts up two male
strangers for the night. When a lustful mob demands they be
handed over, Lot offers his two virgin daughters instead.
After some further unpleasantness, God destroys Sodom. As
Mark Jordan notes in "The Invention of Sodomy in Christian
Theology," it was only in the 11th century that theologians
began to condemn homosexuality as sodomy.
In fact, the most obvious lesson from Sodom is that when
you're attacked by an angry mob, the holy thing to do is to
offer up your virgin daughters.
Still, the traditionalists seem to me basically correct
that the Old Testament does condemn at least male anal sex
(scholars disagree about whether the Hebrew phrasing
encompasses other sexual contact). While homosexuality
never made the Top 10 lists of commandments, a plain
reading of the Book of Leviticus is that male anal sex is
every bit as bad as other practices that the text condemns,
like wearing a polyester-and-cotton shirt (Leviticus
19:19).
As for the New Testament, Jesus never said a word about
gays, while he explicitly advised a wealthy man to give
away all his assets and arguably warned against bank
accounts ("do not store up for yourselves treasures on
earth".
Likewise, Jesus praises those who make themselves eunuchs
for the Kingdom of Heaven, but conservative Christians
rarely lead the way with self-castration.
Theologians point out that that the Bible is big enough to
encompass gay relationships and tolerance - as well as
episodic condemnations of gays. For example, 1 Samuel can
be read as describing gay affairs between David and
Jonathan.
In the New Testament, Matthew and Luke describe how Jesus
cured the beloved servant of a centurion - and some
scholars argue that the wording suggests that the pair were
lovers, yet Jesus didn't blanch.
The religious right cites one part of the New Testament
that clearly does condemn male homosexuality - not in
Jesus' words, but in Paul's. The right has a tougher time
explaining why lesbians shouldn't marry because the Bible
has no unequivocal condemnation of lesbian sex.
A passage in Romans 1 objects to women engaging in
"unnatural" sex, and this probably does mean lesbian sex,
according to Bernadette Brooten, the author of a
fascinating study of early Christian attitudes toward
lesbians. But it's also possible that Paul was referring to
sex during menstruation or to women who are aggressive
during sex.
In any case, do we really want to make Paul our lawgiver?
Will we enforce Paul's instruction that women veil
themselves and keep their hair long? (Note to President
Bush: If you want to obey Paul, why don't you start by
veiling Laura and keeping her hair long, and only then move
on to barring gay marriages.)
Given these ambiguities, is there any solution? One would
be to emphasize the sentiment in Genesis that "it is not
good for the human to be alone," and allow gay lovers to
marry.
Or there's another solution. Paul disapproves of marriage
except for the sex-obsessed, saying that it is best "to
remain unmarried as I am." So if we're going to cherry-pick
biblical phrases and ignore the central message of love,
then perhaps we should just ban marriage altogether?
posted on October 25, 2004 06:45:33 PM new
Twelve, have you ever considered, it is just a reproductive deformity? A real nasty bugger, too. It destroys the propagation of the species.
Or maybe their mother's swooned over Rock Hudson as being a real man. Whadda we know?
Maybe they sniffed too many mimeographed sheets in school, if you catch my drift.
For whatever reason, they're here and they are what they are.
Don't pop a blood vessel, it just makes them giggle. Just kick back and be amused by them.
posted on October 25, 2004 07:26:02 PM new
john kerry is AGAINST gay marriage. Wonder where the lefties think he formed that belief system IF NOT from his Catholic upbringing.
I'd bet HIS Bible, HIS church and HIS upbringing was where he formed his ANTI-gay marriage platform.
posted on October 26, 2004 09:37:18 PM new
Linda, that is sort of an empty statement. Kerry has stated plainly that he opposes the gay marriage, but he agrees that people should have civil unions that allow the same protection as marriage.
He also has broken from HIS church in the FACT that he supports abortion, stem cell research. Again your statement is empty.
Bigots are miserable people. Prevent Bigotry through Education.
posted on October 27, 2004 04:56:43 AM new
10 states will be deciding this issue... betting 9 out of 10 pass... but right now it does look like 10 out of 10... interesting that in Oregon, they brought in a Black Woman for a spokesperson... so much for that civil rights drivel...
posted on October 27, 2004 07:30:56 AM new
Twinkle toes, why don't you just your Valtrex medication and your problem will go away.
There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." —George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
---------------------------------- "Give it up for George W. Bush, the best friend international jihad ever had."
posted on October 27, 2004 09:07:13 AM new
I disagree yeager. It once again shows a man who will take ALL sides of an issue, trying to please everyone.
That's not empty, that lets voters see the man doesn't really mean what he says. You lefties like to view it as he's just separating one from the other. It's all a farce....he's a phoney....he just uses his religion to hopefully gain more votes from the moderate righties.
posted on October 27, 2004 09:16:20 AM new
I hold no doubt that the anti-religious people here think it's a wonderful thing that kerry is able to fool some of the people, some of the time. But there are many he doesn't fool at all. His moral beliefs = whatever will get him another vote.
-------------
John Kerry, preacher-man
Jeff Jacoby
townhall.com
October 27, 2004
I have been following John Kerry's career for 22 years, ever since his 1982 run for lieutenant governor of Massachusetts. I have encountered him in small private gatherings and in large public settings. I have spoken about him often with people who know him well. I have read innumerable accounts of his non-political passions and pastimes. And if at any point during all those years you had asked me whether I thought Kerry was a religious man, I would have answered without hesitation: "No, not at all."
I would have had plenty of company, too. A Time magazine poll in June found that only 7 percent of voters would describe Kerry as a man of strong religious faith. But over the past few months -- ever since that poll came out, come to think of it -- a whole new Kerry has emerged.
The senator who had never shown much public interest in religion suddenly can't seem to stop talking about it. Biblical quotations now lace his speeches. He makes a point of referring to himself as a former altar boy. He frequently attends church -- particularly churches in battleground states. He (or his staff) put it about that on the campaign trail he wears a crucifix and carries a rosary, a prayer book, and a St. Christopher medal.
At the Democratic convention in Boston, religious references abounded -- from Barack Obama's keynote address ("We worship an awesome God in the Blue States" to Senator Joseph Biden's reference to "Joshua's trumpets" and "the walls of Jericho" to former Senator Max Cleland's introduction of Kerry on the final night ("The Bible tells me that no greater love has a man than to lay down his life for his friends".
In his own acceptance speech, Kerry declared that "faith has given me values and hope to live by, from Vietnam to this day, from Sunday to Sunday."
And since then, the "religification of John Kerry," as Steven Waldman, the editor of Beliefnet, has termed it, has grown even more pronounced.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"And they, the interrogator went through all of these statements from John Kerry. He starts pounding on the table. 'See here, this naval officer, he admits that you are a criminal.'" Excerpt from "Stolen Honor"
- James H. Warner
Former Vietnam POW
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I will never submit America's national security to an international test. The use of troops to defend America must never be subject to a veto by countries like France. The President's job is not to take an international poll -- the President's job is to defend America." --President George W. Bush
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Re-elect President Bush
[ edited by Linda_K on Oct 27, 2004 09:19 AM ]
.
Prevent Bigotry through Education.