Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Some Thoughts

This should be a short post, but in my researching of some gospel musicians who "struggle" or just accept themselves (and do not think about the very real fact of sin being sin) I came across this website called theologynow. It is apparently an anti-theist/Christian site? I'm still not sure, it seems unclear at times.
In any case, they brought up a recent documentary called "Cause The Bible Tells Me So" and asked the question: Can love between two people ever be an abomination? The answer to that is obviously yes, if you understand that there are inordinate loves or improper expressions of love. You shouldn't love your car more than a person, and you shouldn't love children with romantic interest. These are pretty much agreed upon, and this was once the situation for homosexual relationships beyond pure friendship for much of the existence of mankind. While some cultures have been rather tolerant, no one has really accepted it. People believed in a natural law, and it seemed obvious to them that man and woman needed each other and that that was the only way that life continues to come into the world. Life is good, and a relationship that cannot reproduce is not a good one. It is against life. Before the inevitable objections come up, let me say that a barren woman can still, by some miracle have a child. A homosexual union can never do this naturally.
Now, it is true that science can now produce babies out of nothing, surrogacy, or donated sperm. However, I feel rather dubious about these methods because I have trouble seeing where love comes into the picture of making the child. The ideal is for a man and a woman to become one in love and for that love to produce children to be brought up in love and reproduce for themselves later. It has always been that way for every culture. It's nice that the barren woman can get her own child, but that also makes people with the ability to give an orphaned child a great home less inclined to do so, because there is something about a child being your own flesh and blood. That simply cannot be denied. In the case of homosexual unions, it gives them a chance to have something they cannot have naturally. For the world to continue to have humans requires child bearing and the simple fact is, you need sperm and an egg. It's great that these options are available, but they lack warmth.
This warmth and love that would be absent in a laboratory or doctor's office where the setting will always be less than intimate. I think this matters, while a lot of people will not. However, it seems like common sense to realize that the circumstances behind a birth will affect a child. I have a friend who was the product of a husband raping his wife. Unfortunately for her, after her birth she was often mistreated by her mother because she reminded her, most likely, of that horrific thing her husband did. One could argue that a laboratory or doctor's office are more innocuous, but think about the fact that people are selling their fertility. They are selling themselves, prostituting a gift that was given them. No one asks for fertility in the sense that no one asks to be alive. Sure, it's your body and you can do what you will, but selling one's self (of which the ability to reproduce is always a large part) seems wrong, doesn't it? It's prostitution. The selling of something essential to your humanness for gain. It's safer sure, like making porn, but still prostitution. Just because it's safer does not make it right. The same moral issues arise.
Hmm, this was supposed to be short, but I'm apparently feeling quite prolific. ONWARD, I SAY! Anyway, that applies to the majority of the cases I can think of (because the purchase of the other half of the equation is always necessary). One of the couple can provide one aspect (one woman in a lesbian couple her womb, and one man in a gay couple his sperm) but it, obviously, cannot do it all. They can even take turns, which in itself is kind of weird. Think about it? I mean, woman have joked about it, but think about switch who carries the baby from time to time and how complicated that would have to be (particularly for heteros). That is a funny thought. Anyway, the point is that someone must be bought and I've already given some thoughts on that.
The fact is, men and women still need each other, and that has always been part of the basis for the idea that heterosexuality is good while homosexuality either less preferable or not good. Because we are able to do things more synthetically we think that we have erased that difficult, when we really just created an industry for people to sell themselves. Dubious.
Finally, I'd like to say that this does not come from an realm of hatred. If this writing is stumbled upon, please know that my belief that homosexuality is a sin because it is a disruption of nature does not mean I hate them or want to kill them. I always approach every person with love because we're all sick, to be honest. That is one of the biggest Catholic truths. Christ is the cure for sick souls. Why else compare him to our physician? There are a wealth of metaphors about God and his relationship with us because there are a wealth of ways that he relates to us. The difference between a homosexual and a heterosexual sinner is this: one's sickness is expressed differently than the other. Make no mistake, it is the same illness; but, just as it is exhibited in our daily lives, everyone is different and will be affected different. There are different cancers, you know. The truest Christian argument against homosexuality is one that keeps in mind that we are all ill, all need Christ, and all will have to give up many a thing to be cured. The diabetic gives up sugary food, the heterosexual becomes chaste, and the homosexual becomes chaste. All are called to chastity, some will just not have the eventual outlet that marriage will provide. For any professing Christians who come across this, keep in mind that you're sick too and you would not be in the Church unless you too needed a cure. Be blessed, everyone.


  1. Zaire, I read through your blog posts.

    Prepare for tough love. I say the following things only out of love, but with urgency and conviction. It is not necessarily pretty.

    You are not a bisexual. You fucked up your own psychology with (1) porn, (2) bad friends with stupid ideas, (3) a perversion of the desire to be unique, and, (4) being an overly sexual attention whore. Bisexuality is not fundamental to who you are, it is a product of the damage you have done to your Self, which is the image of God.

    Some things I think you need to do:
    (1) Stop making excuses. Yeah, life can have sucky periods. Your dad was a punk, having to move as a kid isn't fun, you have self-esteem issues, etc, etc etc. It doesn't matter. Remember your Sartre: you are condemned to radical freedom and you are responsible for who you are and what you do. Making excuses is bad faith. I think this is a vitally important lesson for everyone to learn, especially for Christians. This also animates a number of my other thoughts.

    (2) Stop complimenting yourself. "I have a great sense of humor," "I'm really good at winging it," "I'm really good at basketball." It doesn't impress anybody or even make them believe what you are saying In fact, it probably just annoys them and makes them think you are arrogant (which is not incompatible with having self-esteem issues; in fact, it may well be that most arrogant people have self-esteem issues). Maybe you think you need to do this to shore up your flagging self-esteem, but you will never overcome self-esteem problems unless you stop doing this. You have to recognize that this shit by and large doesn't matter. Not how smart you are, nor how well you can play guitar or basketball, not even how well you can wing it or how great you are in the sack. These things are fleeting, pale glories which are lost with the wind. They do not define who you are as a person.

    (3) Recognize that your personhood is founded on the reality of God. You are worthwhile because you are a creation of God. He may have given you certain talents you ought to use for His glory, but you do not deserve credit for those talents... He gave them to you, after all. If you can recognize this, then than you can start to break the hold public opinion or attention has on you, as you can start to realize where the foundation of validation and meaning come from and the emptiness of these competing "sources."

    (4) Surround yourself with good influences. Being friends with immoral people is only for those blessed with the strength not to become like them. Yes, you may say that you are trying to be a Christian light to them, but if you end up getting drunk with them and making out with a guy it is WORSE that you know them than if they had never met you. You are in fact a scandalon on their journey to Christ, and you shame Him with your witness. Thus, if you cannot prove to yourself that you can keep a cool head while with these people, you need to seek out better influences with whom to keep company (and I think from your own testimony, you are not yet ready to be friends with immoral people).

    (5) Stop making excuses (again!) and exceptions! Nuance is for the morally refined, and before you can become morally refined, you must become morally experienced. If you cannot develop habits of morality, you cannot successfully navigate exceptions. (i.e., though on a diet, it may not be contrary to the spirit and the goal of the diet to have one donut now and again; but if having that donut causes you to stop dieting, if you are unable to handle the freedom of the donut, you ought not to tempt yourself in the first place, and keep to a more severe code).

  2. Posted comments on your Nov 7 entry