A Voice in the Wilderness In Defense of "Mere Conservatism"

Steve Cornell
June 4th, 2012 - 05:40

I realize that in a pluralistic nation differences must be respected within lawful boundaries. But responsible citizenship calls each of us to pursue what is in the best interest of society as a whole. And I realize that reaching conclusions about such matters will entail limits to someone’s sense of individual liberty for the general good.

On this narrative, I am not opposed to any group of citizens putting their desires on the table for discussion and debate. At the end of the day, however, some people will have to live with limits. This is how ordered and civilized people must live.

So, for those who prefer something different from heterosexual relationships, I understand that they feel slighted because they face limits in living according to their desires in ways that heterosexuals are not limited. This may seem like injustice but someone will always be able to make that claim because absolute freedom for all would destroy civilization.

Like other groups, those who want rights and privileges for gay marriage should be permitted to make a case for why they want the same rights or benefits that come with heterosexual marriage. Yet they should acknowledge that they are asking for significant changes from how things have been for centuries. I am not saying that history should trump all changes but it should at least be respected. They also must realize that their voice cannot be the only one permitted and that coercion is not the true path to freedom.

As I have tried to listen to the case for gay marriage, even apart from my faith convictions, some of the arguments are just difficult to validate. If, for example, I am asked to view homosexuality as an unalterable condition of birth along the lines of race or gender, I cannot rationally or pastorally accept this way of seeing things. I believe that a better case can be made to treat sexuality of any kind in a context of choice.

When resolving ethical and legal questions about expressions of sexuality, individual choice must be considered as a primary factor. Arguments for sexuality based on possible genetic predisposition do not advance discussions about right or wrong or what is best for society. Although it’s possible to be physiologically inclined toward many different types of behavior, such impulses cannot be used to define personhood or to justify behavioral choices. On purely rational grounds, a society that intends to condemn certain forms of sexual conduct as illegal must treat sexuality in general in a context of human choosing – not as a predetermined condition.

Consider, as an example, an adulterous woman who complains that her act of adultery (i.e. her wrongful heterosexual behavior) was because of her distant and uncaring husband. While feeling truly compassionate toward her for the difficulty she faced in her marriage doesn’t require validation of her act of adultery as the morally right choice.

Further, what should be said to those who (on principle) left a homosexual lifestyle? If these individuals have chosen to see their former way of life as wrong and immoral (as many have), how can they articulate their choice? How can we respect their decision as valid? Are they free to hold their view of homosexual behavior?

If we accept the suggestion that being gay is equal with being of a particular race, no one will be permitted to morally oppose homosexual lifestyles. And, if being gay is an unalterable condition of birth equal with race or gender, one should not be permitted to morally renounce it. But this comparison is faulty and there is simply no conclusive evidence that supports it.

The majority of citizens in this Country believe that anti-discrimination cases should be limited to unchangeable issues of nature like race, gender and matters of disability. Religious based discrimination is viewed as a separate issue addressed by the first amendment. Most Americans are either hesitant or strongly opposed to including people’s sexual desires and behaviors under anti-discrimination law.

The push on the part of homosexual activists to widen laws and ordinances to include their sexual orientation is perceived as an effort to force their lifestyle on others. People are fearful that a widening of laws and ordinances to include people’s sexual desires and behaviors is to acquiesce to an agenda designed to force the sexual lifestyles of a few on many.

Consenting adults are free to live in a homosexual relationship in this nation. If they make this choice, even though I disagree with the morality of it and I do not believe it is best for them, it is not my place to impose that opinion on them. If those who choose to live in homosexual relationships are mistreated by others, existing laws are adequate for restraining and punishing wrongful treatment. If we promote the true virtue of tolerance than those who disagree with the morality of homosexuality will learn to treat respectfully those with whom they disagree. Forced agreement is not true tolerance and will only backfire in a nation dedicated to freedom. I fully support more instruction and promotion of the true virtue of tolerance.

Although I morally disagree with homosexual relationships, I don’t look down on those who choose them as if they are inferior or below others. I am well enough aware of my own need for grace to restrain such self-righteous attitudes. Yet this should not mean that I cannot speak my viewpoint and live according to it. Since we’re talking about morality and not matters like race and gender difference of viewpoint must be respected when held respectfully.

If the State chose to give gay couples the same benefits and rights associated with marriage as heterosexuals without any legal obligation for this who morally oppose homosexual behavior, it’s not my place to impose on the State my morality. Like all other citizens, I should be permitted to voice my concerns if I don’t believe this is the best choice for society and, in a democracy, the State should not impose things that trump the wishes of majority of citizens.

If, however, the State exalts the sexual choices of those who want gay marriage to civil rights status comparable to race or gender, it will open a social and legal Pandora’s box. Citizens will not be permitted to morally oppose homosexual lifestyles without risking accusations of discrimination and racism.

Steve Cornell

philo1
June 5th, 2012 - 10:25

I saw a documentary a few years ago called “Sound and Fury” about deaf culture. When I think about “gay” culture, it’s amazing how similar the stories sound. I think the problem with the discussion of gay marriage is most of the people involved on both sides are too emotionally involved to rationally approach this issue.

I think it’s probably not prudent to rate homosexuality as a psychological condition. First, psychology is still a pseudo science and will be until we have better neurological and physical models of how humans function and think. So if we discount any input from psychologists, we have to ask ourselves, “is this a physical condition or disability”? Of course, most people don’t even think about this deeply enough because they have a strong emotional block against examining the issue dispassionately.

For purposes of discussion, let’s say somebody at NIH or a serious scientific institution actually did do an objective scientific study into hormone levels and how they physically affect a person’s development and sexual identity. Let’s build off this and make the assumption that there in fact is a physical basis for homosexuality. How would this change anything? I think people are scared that this would provide a basis for acceptance of gay culture. However, I think if there is a physical basis for this disordered state, you could the following;

a) finally provide real compassion for people who are born into this condition
b) treat this condition like a disease and look for the root causes (imbalance of hormones in early development). Tests could be developed for detecting the root causes and treatment would follow.

As the author mentions, the rate of true homosexuality in society is quite small compared with the attention it gets in the media. But I think a large part of the problem is the majority’s willingness to judge such a small minority by far higher standards than they judge themselves. I’m amazed that gay marriage gets much higher media attention than the atrocious divorce rate in the US and the amount of sex outside of marriage. I think if we didn’t have those issues in the first place, gay marriage wouldn’t be such a big issue in the media.

Dustin
June 5th, 2012 - 12:11

Its all fun and fashionable till ya get down to the nitty gritty. Kinda sad its come to this. Most people just think they hold hands and give a little smooch here n there. Not so however. Ill leave it at that.

Vernon Kapler
June 5th, 2012 - 19:44

I don’t understand how christians can offer their opinions on this subject without ever exposing the root cause of all perversions. There is a force of evil in the world whose sole aim is to corrupt all the ways of God. As every Bible believer knows, his name is Satan. His minions are constantly at work attacking the minds and emotions of all mankind, especially the selfish, the weak, and the ignorant. Lust is a powerful spirit, and all addictions are demonic, often acquiring total control of the person. The only power we have against this evil force comes to us through a relationship with Jesus Christ. In His name deliverance is possible for all who wish to be set free.

Ann
June 5th, 2012 - 21:45

Why do the activists rage at the opportunity to change their homosexual behavior? Why do they love God and cry that He has given them their hearts desire in their homosexual relatonships? The real reason they resist Jesus is that His transforming power will change them and He will become their Lord. Their lives will change over time as they let go of their flesh life and enter in to God’s purposes and plans that give glory to Him. They must resist the Holy Spirit and give an allegiance to God that does not embrace the Christ. This is the “born again” mystery of God’s grace and Love for us. The transforming power of the resurrection is what we know that changed our lives. We must see this clearly and not argue or debate. god is asking us to just stand and speak the truth. This very well could provoke rage. Even still God is a consuming fire and we have nothing to fear.
The activists want to be called Christian because they are made in God’s image, but without the “born new” salvation they have not become the child of God with the Father as their Lord. They will not accept His Lordship over their sexual behavior. Because of their logic and aggressive boldness, many christians are convinced and do not even desire to have them know the freedom in Christ. Are we our brother’s keeper, do we care what their spiritual condition is? I believe that we love them enough to stand on the truth and endure for Jesus sake and why He died for them. We know the His Peace and can be confident that truthfully nothing can separate us from Christ.
Why doe the Christian become angry and resent this movement. It is our pride. We are angry and afraid that we will be called “unloving”. I wept when the Holy spirit showed me this. If Pastors would boldly speak the truth from their pulpits and Christians would stand their ground knowing full well they could be called “unloving or self righteous” there would not be a pushback, ther would rather be a stand for our Savior.
I am not afraid any more. My daughter is transgendering and insists that I call her my son. She has threatened me that she will disown me if I do not comply. As my heart broke at her request, some advised, just call her by her male name. As I prayed, God’s comfort came to me in this thought, “when she appears at the judgement, I will call her forth as April.” I cannot disown my Lord. I love my daughter, but I cannot deny my God and call her Jacob. He created her for His purposes and love. I took counsel with the Pres. of our Classis. He said that she thinks I am selfrighteous or better than her because I will not call her my son. My answer to him was that the activism movement has told her that is what I am. God has chosen me to be her mother. I am the worst of the worst but because of Jesus Christ ia ma forgivien and He has placed His Spirit in me as I welcomed Him in. Because of that I have His wisdom and power to love her as He would. He would not call her my son. Do you hear the apain, not just mine, but her’s as well? What will happen to her in the long run when she is hormonally induced into a man and still a woman. She will not be a straight man who like women(as she says she is) nor will she be a lesbian. Pscycology calls this a disorder. I believeit is even worse. God have mercy on her and help all those who are slowly slipping away from reality.

Many Christian parents are suffering and do not know what to do. They are angry and confused. The chruch cannot help them as long as it refuses to take a stand. God help your people stand for You and your great way in Jesus Christ.

Many Christians are swayed to support LGBT as a civil rights issue. They say just love them with God’s unconditional love. Love your neighbor as yourself. They forget that the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts when we make Him our all and submit everything in our lives to Him. God’s unconditonal love is there for them ready to be accessed, but it is done in surrender and obedience. Those who are supportive of the lifestyle and are Christian are not willing to share this with them. They see social justice that brings glory to man, but will not accept God’s justice and righteousness that gives glory to God.

Dee
June 6th, 2012 - 00:16

Ann, I am so sorry to hear about your pain as a mother. Consider St. Monica who prayed and cried for years for her wayward son ..the one who eventually turned to the Lord and became one of our early Church fathers.. St. Augustine. Never stop praying!!!

For those who say that Homosexuality is genetic: The best response I ever heard to this argument was from a Pastor in Texas. “It’s irrelevant if you are BORN with a desire to behave a certain way.” He said, “I, myself, was born with an innate desire to sleep with every beautiful woman I see! No one is going to tell me THAT is ok… My 3 year old son has an innate desire to hit others every time he doesn’t get his way! No one is going to say that THAT is ok, either.” We are all BORN sinners. Of course we have innate desires to do things that we shouldn’t. That, my friends, is why we all need Jesus.