In A Word - Homophobic: Our president wants to use the constitution to take away a freedom. Why?
Gerald Eisman
June 06, 2006
Homophobic: Aversion to gay or homosexual people or their lifestyle or culture. 2. Behavior or an act based on this aversion.
In order to understand homophobia it would be best to begin at the source, that is by defining a homosexual person. The simplest definition is, a person who relates to, or has a sexual orientation toward other persons of the same sex.
Now, in this great nation, comes a voice from the wilderness who decries homosexuality, condemns same sex marriage, and is campaigning to have a constitutional amendment passed making marriage mandatory only between a man and a woman. For the first time in our history, a sitting president wants to use the constitution, a document that has always stood for freedoms, to take one away.
According to many, God has declared homosexuality an abomination, and the Bible cannot be wrong, can it? After all, isn't it the word of God? Or could it be that it was written at a time when little if anything was known about homosexuality so superstition and ignorance formed the basis of the writings? After some research, I have come up with these interesting findings.
Not a single word in Hebrew or Greek lends itself to a simple word-for-word translation of "homosexual." The word appeared in English for the first time in 1912 and in the Bible for the first time in the 1946 RSV in 1 Corinthians 6:9. That doesn't sound to me to reflect the word of God.
Biblical texts do not deal with homosexuality as a psychosexual orientation determined at birth or developed as a relationship between consenting adults.
In no Biblical text does there appear an extensive discussion of same-gender behavior or same-gender relationships.
There is no reference to homosexuality in the four gospels, all of which were written years after the fact, even as was the rest of the New Testament.
Homophobia, then, resides far less in the Bible than in the minds of those who have either an inordinate fear of a different culture and sexual orientation, or an insecurity concerning their own orientation. The Buddha said, in the Dhammapada, "Mind is the forerunner of all actions. All deeds are led by mind, created by mind." Therefore, how we think will also affect our process of interpreting what the Bible says about homosexuality. There are three directions you may go.
You may tend to approve or disapprove of people based on your values, the values of your friends or a group. You may think that gays and lesbians are bad because they don't follow your beliefs concerning God's law for human sexuality. You might also decide that gays and lesbians are acceptable because they cannot help the way God created them since the creator doesn't make junk.
Or, you may think that people should be evaluated based on how they do or do not contribute to society. You may feel gays and lesbians should have no laws to protect their rights because they threaten social stability by undercutting family values. On the other hand, you may think that the rights of gays and lesbians should be protected because they make significant contributions to society.
The third direction would be to think that people should be seen as individuals with intrinsic worth, as ends in themselves. You might think you should distinguish between responsible and irresponsible homosexuals as we do heterosexuals and treat them accordingly. Maybe we shouldn't label persons at all, but treat all people with respect and love.
An Episcopal General Convention, which begins on June 13, must respond to fellow Anglicans worldwide who were outraged when, three years ago, the movement consecrated an openly gay man as a Bishop. Concerning the violence and vitriol of the debate, Kendall Harmon, in his blog, called it "blood sport."
"I think people are dreading possible outcomes and when you're dealing with unknowns, fear kicks in in a big way," he wrote. How true.
Homosexuality isn't a communicable disease. Associating with gay and lesbian people will not taint you any more than shaking hands with an African American will discolor the color of your skin. We are all members of the same race – it's called the Human Race.
I fear George Bush is one of those who, contrary to belief, really isn't calling for an amendment because he's homophobic, or from a deep seated feeling of insecurity. God knows, he is smart enough to realize homosexuality is a non-communicable condition that threatens no one. He also realizes gays and lesbians have given and will continue to give service to their country. So, this call for constitutionally taking away a freedom must be politically motivated. Shame on you, George.
In order to understand homophobia it would be best to begin at the source, that is by defining a homosexual person. The simplest definition is, a person who relates to, or has a sexual orientation toward other persons of the same sex.
Now, in this great nation, comes a voice from the wilderness who decries homosexuality, condemns same sex marriage, and is campaigning to have a constitutional amendment passed making marriage mandatory only between a man and a woman. For the first time in our history, a sitting president wants to use the constitution, a document that has always stood for freedoms, to take one away.
According to many, God has declared homosexuality an abomination, and the Bible cannot be wrong, can it? After all, isn't it the word of God? Or could it be that it was written at a time when little if anything was known about homosexuality so superstition and ignorance formed the basis of the writings? After some research, I have come up with these interesting findings.
Not a single word in Hebrew or Greek lends itself to a simple word-for-word translation of "homosexual." The word appeared in English for the first time in 1912 and in the Bible for the first time in the 1946 RSV in 1 Corinthians 6:9. That doesn't sound to me to reflect the word of God.
Biblical texts do not deal with homosexuality as a psychosexual orientation determined at birth or developed as a relationship between consenting adults.
In no Biblical text does there appear an extensive discussion of same-gender behavior or same-gender relationships.
There is no reference to homosexuality in the four gospels, all of which were written years after the fact, even as was the rest of the New Testament.
Homophobia, then, resides far less in the Bible than in the minds of those who have either an inordinate fear of a different culture and sexual orientation, or an insecurity concerning their own orientation. The Buddha said, in the Dhammapada, "Mind is the forerunner of all actions. All deeds are led by mind, created by mind." Therefore, how we think will also affect our process of interpreting what the Bible says about homosexuality. There are three directions you may go.
You may tend to approve or disapprove of people based on your values, the values of your friends or a group. You may think that gays and lesbians are bad because they don't follow your beliefs concerning God's law for human sexuality. You might also decide that gays and lesbians are acceptable because they cannot help the way God created them since the creator doesn't make junk.
Or, you may think that people should be evaluated based on how they do or do not contribute to society. You may feel gays and lesbians should have no laws to protect their rights because they threaten social stability by undercutting family values. On the other hand, you may think that the rights of gays and lesbians should be protected because they make significant contributions to society.
The third direction would be to think that people should be seen as individuals with intrinsic worth, as ends in themselves. You might think you should distinguish between responsible and irresponsible homosexuals as we do heterosexuals and treat them accordingly. Maybe we shouldn't label persons at all, but treat all people with respect and love.
An Episcopal General Convention, which begins on June 13, must respond to fellow Anglicans worldwide who were outraged when, three years ago, the movement consecrated an openly gay man as a Bishop. Concerning the violence and vitriol of the debate, Kendall Harmon, in his blog, called it "blood sport."
"I think people are dreading possible outcomes and when you're dealing with unknowns, fear kicks in in a big way," he wrote. How true.
Homosexuality isn't a communicable disease. Associating with gay and lesbian people will not taint you any more than shaking hands with an African American will discolor the color of your skin. We are all members of the same race – it's called the Human Race.
I fear George Bush is one of those who, contrary to belief, really isn't calling for an amendment because he's homophobic, or from a deep seated feeling of insecurity. God knows, he is smart enough to realize homosexuality is a non-communicable condition that threatens no one. He also realizes gays and lesbians have given and will continue to give service to their country. So, this call for constitutionally taking away a freedom must be politically motivated. Shame on you, George.
Print
Email
