Wednesday, April 24, 2002

Gay rights: The 'agenda' is fairness

By JOHN THOMPSON
jthompson@thecitizennews.com

During the past few weeks, a culture clash has erupted on The Citizen's editorial pages.

From columnists criticizing gay adoption, to letter writers accusing the paper of having an "anti-gay" agenda, we've had a little bit of everything in the discussion of gay rights in 2002.

And that, to me is the core issue ... rights.

It always amuses me when I hear somebody talk about an "agenda."

Folks, we all have agendas every day of our life. If I walk into a fast-food restaurant, my agenda is getting served quick and courteously, which is turning into a rarity these days.

Letter writers to this paper have an agenda. Far left liberals and right wing Christian Coalition folks have an agenda that we encounter every day.

What's wrong if the gay rights folks have an agenda? Nothing.

And their agenda is pretty simple ... equality.

Of all the folks who work at this newspaper, I would be willing to bet I come into contact with more gay people on a daily basis than anyone else. My facts come from conversations, and not from propaganda put out by both sides trying to scare people.

All most gay people want is a chance to do the same things that heterosexuals take for granted every day.

Say you want to go to a romantic movie and snuggle with your sweetie on a Saturday night. You can. If two men or women would try to do that at Tinseltown, you can probably imagine the catcalls that would ensue.

Imagine your husband or wife is seriously injured in a car wreck in Fayette's crazy traffic. You rush to the hospital to nurture your soulmate, and are led back to the recovery room after surgery.

Well, if you're gay and your partner is injured, it's going to be nothing but a struggle to see him or her, since you don't have a "legal" hand in the game. You're not married, so you really don't matter in many people's minds, including the law.

As for wanting homosexuality being proclaimed as something equal to the more traditional heterosexual practices, that's totally true.

In the same way that African Americans and women fought for their equality during the 1960s and 1970, the new civil rights warriors simply want a chance to live their lives without fear of reprisal.

Now, let's get into meat of most peoples' argument, religious prohibitions.

Let me start out by saying that I think Jesus Christ is probably one of history's greatest role models. He truly cared for the less fortunate and was not consumed by material possessions. His main philosophy involved preaching love.

Now, take out your Bibles and look for those words of Jesus in red; where does he condemn homosexuality? Nowhere.

Well, you say, it's clearly addressed in the Old Testament. Let's take a closer look.

In his book, "What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality," Daniel Helminiak deconstructs Biblical passages and puts them in their historical concept.

Helminiak is a priest with a Ph.D in systematic theology from Boston College and Andover Newton Theological School.

The arguments he presents are quite fascinating, and make a lot of sense.

One of the most oft-quoted verses for condemnation of homosexual behavior is Leviticus 18:22; "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination."

Helminiak points out the reference is part of a section Leviticus called the Holiness Code and was a list of requirements for Israel to remain holy.

Part of the covenant with God was for Israelites not to take part in the religious practices of the Canaanites, and to remain different from the Gentiles.

Helminiak's point is same-sex acts were frowned upon because of religious considerations and not sexual ones. The concern was to keep Israel from taking part in Gentile practices, he said.

Abomination in Biblical times referred to unclean, Helminiak says. Other "unclean" practices were eating pigs, lobsters and shrimp.

So, if you're wolfing down seafood at a buffet or frying bacon for breakfast, folks, you're just as "unclean" as homosexuals. Food for thought, hmm?

In talking about New Testament references, Helminiak makes a damning indictment.

"A long-standing and naive reading of the Scriptures has led many sincere followers of Jesus astray. They oppose and oppress lesbian and gay people in the name of the apostle Paul. Bolstered by societal prejudice and zealots in their sexual self-righteousness, Christians have been misreading Paul's letter to the Romans and rejecting members of the Christian community because of it," he said.

The other argument people attempt to use is evolution.

As far as evolution goes, yes, if there were only gay people around, society would perish. But if only African Americans or blonde people bred, we would have a society with just those two groups.

Studies in the last 20 years have come close to isolating the "gay gene." One study compared sets of twins and found that a certain chromosome inherited from the mother was present in the homosexual twins.

I personally know two sets of twins who are gay, and knew early on they were attracted to people of the same sex.

Perhaps people don't want to acknowledge a genetic possibility, because than they would have some responsibility for their gay child, instead of blaming it on society and choices.

Discounting the gay rights movement because it has only been around in the last 50 years also presents me with difficulties.

Since the Civil Rights movement started in the 1950s, is it not valid? What about women's rights? Do we need to treat them like property like they did in Biblical times?

Do we only accept things as gospel if they're around for 2,000 years? Hmm, looks like the achievements of the last few generations don't matter because they haven't stood the test of time.

Oh, and by the way, remember the Greeks? Homosexual practices have been traced back to their ancient civilization, which predates Christianity by a few thousand years.

The Bible can be a wonderful mechanism to guide our life, if we really follow its teachings. This is one of those lessons you will find in red words.

"And the second command is like the first, "Love your neighbor as you love yourself."

Jesus didn't say only love your neighbor if he or she follows your belief system or is the same color, gender or sexual persuasion.

The message is clear; get rid of the hate and try a little love. You'll find you're more at peace with yourself and can live a fuller life.

Back to Opinion Home Page | Back to the top of the page