Homosexuality as a Religion

Well now, there's a headline sure to raise some eyebrows. Unfortunately, if you think I will be talking about the infamous gay agenda or how gay parents are indoctrinating young children into their cult, you would be very wrong.

After the recent Iowa same-sex marriage ruling, I remember a very accurate quote in an article from a moderate expert on how this has become such a decisive issue. Her basic statement was that gays and lesbians view this issue as one of civil rights while most social conservatives view gay marriage as an attack on their religion. I wish I could give credit to this woman because I really think this hit the nail on the head. While there are plenty of non-religious opponents of same-sex marriage, the exit polls show that voters who identified themselves as religious are much opposed to the issue when it has come up in various state initiatives.

As someone who was raised Christian, I understand the line of thinking. The church I attended was affiliated with the Southern Baptist Association and when it comes to church doctrine and rules, ultra-conservative is the first word that comes to my mind. There was right and there was wrong and God's Word doesn't allow for any gray areas. I was even told by one of my pastor's that Catholicism was not a true path to salvation through Christ; so much for that John 3:16 scripture that's been burned in my brain since Sunday school.

The point I'm trying to make is that mutual respect and tolerance isn't always at the forefront of organized religion. A person's deeply embedded beliefs and faith can sometimes be at odds with social or political changes. It's important to remember that for someone who opposes abortion or same-sex marriage on religious grounds, these issues may violate their faith and would be perceived as an almost personal attack and for them, that IS their reality.

The arguments made to support a religious, anti-gay position usually involve scripture, however intelligent minds understand those scriptures are open to interpretation and thus it's not a valid argument in a logical discussion. Instead, the debate usually falls into whether or not homosexuality is a choice and if it is, it is not worthy of the legal protections afforded to categories such as race, creed or gender. Case closed.

The common rebuttal I see is that if homosexuality is a choice, so must be heterosexuality. I believe the message that people are trying to get across is that if you could make a straight person understand that they didn't have a choice in their sexual orientation, by logic gays and lesbians didn't either. While that may be a very logical position, I think it's getting lost on the recipient because they feel being straight is simply normal and therefore they didn't really have to make a choice to be straight, they merely had to decide not to be gay.

I'd like to propose a different method for handling the situation. Rather than trying to battle religious dogma with logic and science, be willing to concede that homosexuality is a choice. The truth is that although being gay isn't a choice from what I can tell, a person is always in control of their own actions and so there certainly is some choice...even if unfair...that person could just remain single and celibate their whole lives and not be considered 'gay' by religious standards.

However, once you've given up that point, rebut with the ultimate counterpoint: homosexuality is a choice, but so is their religion. Do they believe that we should be tolerant of other religions? How would they feel if they are...one of the protestant denominations for example...and Catholics want to pass a law that only Catholics can get married? After all, it's fair to everyone...blacks/whites, men/women, republic/democrat, everyone can marry, they just have to be Catholic.

No? What's that? That would be unfair because you shouldn't have to change your religion to avoid discrimination? Your religion is....as the CASC said in their opinion....an 'immutable trait' which the government has no business forcing you to change to guarantee equal protection?

Sounds an awful lot like what the GLBT community is saying about their sexual orientation. More importantly though, it challenges a gay rights opponent's position by at least making them think that if the government can discriminate based on a person's choices (their whole secular argument), their religion is no longer safe as well. If the leader's of the GBLT movement could only get the majority to understand the issue with this framing, I believe they could make even greater strides with fewer setbacks.

Of course, this is all just one man's opinion. In the context of social issues and personal interaction, my logical brain cannot come up with the perfect formula, there are simply way to many variables involved. However I want to see us get past this issue as a species.

I also want to point out that I believe both sexual orientation and religion should be on equal footing when it comes to laws of discrimination and the right of one to believe how they see fit. Organized religion should not be penalized for their stance on abortion or homosexuality. As long as they are not promoting or acting out physical violence it's a free country, they have a God-given right to their beliefs. What I would like to see, is organized religions showing the same level of tolerance to gays and lesbians as what they have learned to give other religions.