So another Republican turns out to be either a closet gay or bisexual man. I know, I know, shocking. :) Idaho Senator Craig, a 62 year old married man with 3 adopted children is the latest to fall.
What's amazing to me is that folks keep thinking it's a choice. Yes, the actual "acts" these guys did are choices. But the root cause, the inner feelings and attractions these guys have, could they really be choices? How could you preach against something, pass laws against it, publically say how discusting it is, and then suddenly "choose" to like it? And then choose to pursue it? And then plead guilty to it?
Let's look at some past things that we Christians saw as sinful.
It used to be a sin to be left handed. Biblically, they, radical christians, referred to the book of Matthew and old testament teachings of how the left is the sinister way. Being left handed was considered a rebellious choice. Heck, it's still deviant even today since it doesn't conform to the majority right handedness of our society.
Christians were simply wrong.
It used to be sinful and deviant for mixed marriages, expecially between blacks and whites. Scripture was recited to show how this deviant behavior was simply demonic and against God's plan. N. Carolina finally repealed it's no "black and white" marriage laws in 1974.
Christians were simply wrong.
Homosexual feelings and attractions are genetic. To actually pursue them, just as straight folks pursue dating, marriage, etc. are all choices. Do you wish to pursue happiness or not? That's really what it comes down to. Christians want to take away the pursuit of happyness from gay men and women. Could have sworn the Constitution protects that right.
Christians are simply wrong.
According to Christians, it's a sin to not accept Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior. Will they be passing laws to ensure that citizens won't be allowed to marry unless they are Christians? It sounds that way to me. Will they be passing laws to ensure that citizens aren't given equal rights unless they are a Christian? It sounds that way to me.
You see, Jesus freed us from the law. But the religious pharisees and sagicies wanted everyone to live UNDER the law. Radical Christians are present day pharisees. Pharisees were political, as radical Christians are today. Pharisees were a powerful social movement, as radical Christians are today. Pharisees were the ones who crucified Christ...just as the radical Christians are today.
Jesus said there were only two commandments and every thing else falls in line: Love your God with all your heart, mind, and strength and love your neighbor as yourself.
When did that become "relocate your neighbor", "outlaw your neighbor", etc.? Radical Christians are surprised that non-believers draw their hand back when introduced to a flame? That they spit out the bitter message delivered? Have they become so blinded in their self-righteousness that they've lost sight of both the sheep and the Shepard?
Sure sounds that way to me.
I don't condone what Senator Craig did, he's a married man and likely has a pact with his wife to be monogamous. But let's say this was a female he solicited rather than a male. Does that make it suddenly "normal", "non-deviant", and "blessed by God"? Absolutely not! Attractions aren't chosen...pursuing those attractions are.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Um no, that's idiotic. If you can't see the difference between two consenting adults and a predator and a child, you need to go back to school!
And no, attraction and acting on attraction are two completely separate things. Genetically, I love the taste of sweet candy, soda, etc. yet I choose NOT to indulge on those as much as my body craves it.
It's interesting you bring up Freud...he was both a genius and an idiot. So prideful in his discernment of understanding everything, that he assumed (clue word there) that women has penis envy when in fact, they do not.
Post a Comment