In a recent comment on another post, someone who is Christian and questioning their sexuality asked the million dollar question:

“Can someone be Homosexual and Religious?”

Oh, that hurts me.  Right in my gut, I feel it.  If someone can be addicted to Porn and religious, a gossip and religious, be cheating on their spouse Saturday night and still preach with conviction Sunday morning- how is homosexuality different?  “But wait, Lindsey”, I can just hear someone say.  “Those people are clearly not all that religious, or they wouldn’t be guilty of such obvious sin.”

Oh, Really?

As long as there has been faith, there have been flawed people of faith.  As long as there has been sin, there has been sinners.  And as long as there has been Jesus, there has been God’s love poured out on a weak and undeserving people.  Who was it that said that thing about healthy people needing no doctor?  Who was it that said, “he who has not sinned…”  When we start to put prerequisites on faith we abolish the need for it entirely.  Broken and hopelessly flawed people have to be able to live out religion, it’s they that need it!

Now, to continue on to some of Renegade’s other questions, we will go on a journey together.  It starts with conception and birth.  God is weaving together all of the fine strands that make the potential for who a person is.  He weaves A with B even though A and B mean “gay”.  Do you think he meant to?  I think he probably did.  Now we can argue about whether or not this is “unnatural” or whether God meant it as permission or a test all day long.  Some people contest that Homosexuality is not found in nature- they are wrong.  I’ve seen very nice, cuddly, obviously gay dogs that prefer to sniff the underparts of other boy dogs more than girls.  (Whether or not that is a fair comparison to human sexuality is another post entirely.)

Is the act of homosexual sex inherently sinful?  I’m not a scholar, so I will refer you to a wonderful page on SisterFriends-Together.org, which discusses in depth the meaning and intent of passages used to describe homosexuality as sinful.  This page, “The Bible and Homosexuality“, makes a far better argument than I would expect to on my own.  I will repeat the words of that site’s founder and simply say, “Christian and Gay?  It’s not a contradiction, and neither are you.”

I realize that not everyone agrees.  Some Christians will say that homosexual feelings are not sinful, but acting them out is.  Or they would say that the feelings are sinful.  They would say that we must “unbend” our sinful nature and return to the straight and narrow that God intended.  Perhaps this is what you, oh commenter, feel.  Perhaps it is not.

This is what I would suggest:

Find a quiet place.  Sit down, and center yourself with God.  Pray.  Ask these questions:

1. God, do you see me struggling with this?
2. What was your intent in giving me this burden?
3. Who do you want me to be?
4. Should I be gay, straight?  Stranded in between?
5. Am I sinning?

You may not hear an audible answer right away.  You may spend days, weeks, months, even years continuing to ask these questions of God over and over.  But trust in the fact that when we ask in sincerity God always answers.  It may not be the answer you expect, I expect, anyone expects, and it may not come in a form that is easily recognized.  But the answer is out there.

In the meantime, rest in Christ’s love for you.  Rest in the people who love you.  Rest in the knowledge that you will be cared for, and your needs will be met.

You will find love.

God is love.

You will be held by God.

How many women whose eyes will touch this post have benefitted, in some way, from Women’s Suffrage?  How many prize their right to vote, enjoy wearing blue jeans, are enamored of the fact that they can stay home with their babies or choose to continue careers or never have babies at all if they don’t want to?  How many feel stronger as a result of their rights?  Feel validated and taken care of by their country?

Every woman, I would hope.  Because the rights we all recieve as humans in a free society are one of God’s greatest gifts.  God gave us free will, and in America God’s gift of free will has been translated into free enterprise and civil rights.

Yet…  How many women reading this blog post also mourn the rigidity of marriage laws?  How many have a sister or a friend who loves another woman?  How many are women who themselves are in love with a person of the same gender?

My word of caution to all women who enjoy equity under the law is to not become complacent.  We, blessed as we are with our own rights, must not forsake the sisterhood.  Yes, there is a sisterhood.  There is shared knowledge and shared pain, there is shared desire and shared regret.  We are all one body as sisters under God and under the law.  We must stand together.  Even as Christians we must remember Christ’s call to love and not forsake the sisterhood of believers-

We are humanity.  We must muddle together through the dark of night and the quiet of unspoken bias.  Every woman who cherishes her rights under the law must turn to those who are not considered equal under laws elsewhere and those who are not considered equal here at home, and lift each other up.

The last few posts I’ve done have shown me something.  Whatever people believe, for whatever reason they believe it- when they feel it is threatened they also feel they must vocally defend it.  That can lead to endless cycles of fruitless arguments and hurt feelings.

In some ways, many of us are the same.  Regardless of whether or not we believe homosexuality is sin, we still believe in loving and serving our neighbors.

So I want to have an experiment.  I will ask a series of questions that ANYONE is welcome to answer in the comments, and expound on as they see fit.  I do not want there to be a single argument in this thread, so any comment that attacks the words of another will be immediately deleted.  Feel free to say things such as, “person X- could you clarify this statement” or “person Z, are there Bible verses to back that sentiment” but do not say, “person Y, I think you are wrong” or I’ll delete.

We can all live together peaceably.  We MUST learn to.

So here are the questions:

1. Do you believe homosexuality is a sin?  Can you clarify why/why not?
2. Do you know anyone who is(has been) in a same sex relationship?
3. Have you known anyone when they were first discovering or questioning homosexual feelings?
4. If you are the member of a church body, do you agree or disagree with the sentiments expressed towards homosexuals in your church?
5. If you are a Christian or follower of a particular faith- if someone came to you expressing interest in your faith but was unwilling to leave a homosexual relationship in order to do so, would you still offer to teach them?

Let’s really think about these things, and think about their implications.  I’m interested to see what you all believe, and why.

Every time I see those two words beside each other in that order I wonder what in the world it means. “Unnatural Relations”. It implies, “relations that go against nature.” What is that? If you look at nature, like nature on a farm, you’ll see that nature seems to go for any relations it can get. Dogs will have sex with rubber balls, stuffed animals, a stray foot pointing out in a convenient direction, other male dogs or female dogs or whatever is convenient. Most animals are that way. They have a lust, they fulfill it.

In that way I’ve always thought of human sexuality as transcending “natural relations”, because we have made sex about more than fulfilling a lust or procreating. Sex, to me, is about two people learning to be one. It is about give and take, sacrifice and dominance, learning to be in control and out of it, giving of yourself and taking of another. That is far more than simply nature, it is a metaphor for all things real and spiritual. It is the dance of creation itself- not because it makes life but because it IS life.

So what is unnatural? Is it unnatural to have sex in a way that doesn’t lead to procreation? Is it a sin to use birth control? Is it a sin when a married and committed couple engage in mutual masturbation or anal sex? Where exactly is the line between natural and unnatural? Is the only holy sex that which is done in the dark with socks still on and both feeling a little embarrassed afterwards?

I really do wonder about these things. When someone tells me to beware of unnatural relations I always want to ask, “what defines natural?” That which is found in nature, that which is primal and crude, or is “unnatural” that which one simply finds distasteful?

Because in my opinion there are a lot of Christian couples that engage in distasteful relations. Maybe I’m still a bit of a heathen.

“So the church and state are separate… next thing you know they’ll be outlawing religion entirely.”

“So women want to vote… next thing you know they’ll have caucuses of crying babies.”

“So black people want civil rights… next thing you know we’ll be giving them to cattle.”

And on, and on, until, “so gay people want to get married. Next thing you know they’ll be marrying dogs.”

The sick and twisted irony of all of this is that the first one- outlawing religion- is one that is still felt oh so many years later. So I don’t doubt that when gay marriage inevitably is allowed, people will continue to fear that there will be framed marriage certificates reading “John Smith” is wed to “Fuzzy”- and it won’t be in an ironic sense.

There is a difference between redefining law and abolishing it completely. Saying that marriage can occur between two consenting adults of legal status instead of between any male and female of legal status is not the same as saying, “marriage is open! Call in the sheep! Anything goes!” Just as separating the church and state didn’t lead to the abolishment of Catholicism outright and women being able to vote doesn’t mean that ANYONE can and black people having equal rights doesn’t mean that dogs do, too.

I understand. It is uncomfortable thinking of law as fluid rather than rigid. The second we realize that law is fluid we start to feel the ground under our feet move. But we also have to understand that it is we as a society who define the land over which law flows. We, as a people, govern our nation. Remember that. So it is we as a people who can say, “okay, Jack and John but not John and Fido.”

And OUR word is law.

For people who believe that we as a society are evil I suppose that’s a scary thought. I, personally, don’t believe that I live in an evil society. Certainly there are problems and certainly there are times when I want to put a pillow over my head and sing myself to sleep, but ultimately I believe that given correct information, comfort, and enough time, all people are capable of doing the right thing. In this case I suppose I have a difference of opinion from a lot of Christians, because I believe the right thing is allowing people to be “affirmed” in their “sin”- but sin is a choice that we all can and do make, to varying impacts, every day. At least sin committed out of love has got one thing right: Love.

Just keep in mind that there is an insurmountable difference between two consenting adults who love each other wishing to be joined in a legally recognized and protected union, and having sexual relations with a beast. There is a difference, a huge difference. The difference is that any sane person can see that regardless of sex, affection between two humans is affection that can be returned in equal parts. Sex, as a result of affection, is not so different regardless of the genders engaging in it. And I do believe that most homosexuals do feel affection for their long-term partners. Sex with animals, on the other hand, is all about lust and control.

Homosexuality is NOT about lust and control.

If you, dear reader, disagree with me on that point I suppose there is no reason to continue the discussion. Just please, talk to a few gay people. Ask them about their hopes and dreams and expectations of life. Ask them the qualities they seek in a partner. See that aside from the gender issue, they aren’t so different from you and I.

Every time gay marriage is mentioned, someone eventually says something along the lines of:

“But think about the children!”

The nuclear family is eroding, family values are plummeting, one can only imagine how the next generation will turn out…

My inevitable response is, “yes, DO think of the children.”

Given the state of affairs in America, shouldn’t every single child that could have a loving family be placed with one? Shouldn’t gay people who want to be parents have that chance? What is better: that a child have no home, or two fathers? Personally, I believe that every family is flawed. Every parent has problems, every relationship has strain. It is impossible to raise a child in an environment where they will be exposed to no pain, no criticism by peers, no sin. There are going to be straight parents who fight and divorce, kids with two sets of parents, kids raised by people who are “less than seemly” to say it simply. Given that fact, I personally would say that anyone who loves a child and wants to raise it should be given the chance, assuming that there is no abuse or potential for deep harm.

I just don’t think that someone being gay is enough harm. What if the parent was straight, but a serial cheater? What if the parent was straight and left the mother of the child for a younger, sluttier model? Is modeling that behavior somehow WORSE than homosexuality?

So I say, please, DO think of the children. And ask yourself if the worst thing a parent does is love another person of the same gender, does that somehow disqualify them from parenthood? What if they love their kids, hold them when they can’t sleep at night, make them homecooked meals, send brownies to the teachers, do their homework with them, hem their pants, and also hold hands with another man? Does the last item make all of the others mean less?

I don’t think it does.

There are times I feel like I’ve written all I can on the subject of Christianity and Homosexuality. And then there are times, like today, when I feel like I haven’t. I’m not sure how my mind wandered to this particular topic, but I was laying awake with my son and all the sudden I thought, “I really don’t get this whole thing.” I understand why gays want to get married- I don’t understand why Christians don’t want to allow it. Well, I do understand the reasoning (don’t cheapen something sacred) I just don’t understand how that equates to gay marriage being wrong.

Allow me to explain myself. Right now, anyone can get married as long as they are heterosexual, not cousins, and not married to someone else. That means that it’s not just Christians who understand the “sacredness” of what they are engaging in who are getting married. Not all people get married in God’s house, either. I myself was married in a courthouse, by a judge, about ten minutes after receiving the marriage certificate. The service, the attire and the atmosphere were all far less than sacred and holy, right down to the stuffed crab in my back pocket and the fact I had a horrible case of the giggles and could barely say my vows. What makes my marriage holy is not the laws or the way in which it was made- it is the two people in it, their heart and their attitude. My marriage is not made less holy by the high divorce rate or the people who enter into it for the wrong reasons. The only marriage that effects the holiness of my marriage is MY marriage.

Gay marriage is not about whether or not heterosexual marriage is holy- it is about protection. It is about the protections afforded by a piece of paper that says “these two people are legally united.” It is about the way in which a couple is percieved who can provide that paper when legality is necessary. It is about little rules like hospital visiting hours in which two people with their names on that paper are afforded different rights than those who do not have it. It is about tax breaks, ownership, joint checking accounts, discounts and retirement communities. It’s about equality. It’s about the fact that any time two people decide to share a life, they are terrified. They don’t know what the future holds. They never can fully understand what signing their names beside each other really means. It’s about that sense trust and devotion that comes with the decision to share all things, including toothbrush holders and a carton of milk. It’s about the fact that I am not more privileged, more protected, in making this journey than anyone else should be.

If I have a piece of paper that says that I can sleep at my husbands side every night, even if he’s in the hospital and breathing his last, everyone else who wants that piece of paper should be able to get it. That doesn’t mean that pastors and priests will now be FORCED to wed gays, any more than they now are forced to wed every snot-nosed heterosexual kid who says he’s ready. Every individual always has and hopefully always will have the right to use their own judgment and say no. But just as I had the right to have my own marriage papers undersigned by my county judge, gay people should at the very least be afforded the right to that paper. That’s all I have to say for now.

For lesbiansaidwhat.

My brother’s third grade teacher was gay. We lived in a small rural town, and the elementary only had about 200 students- total. It was a mixture of regular “folks”, Mennonites and Amish. At first there was whisperings about why a forty year old man who was attractive and educated was single. Then the rumors started. Someone saw him in the city with another man. A group of students (mixed boys and girls) in his house saw a postcard in his sock drawer of a naked man. Boys in the classroom started to complain that he was hitting on them. I don’t know if this was true or not- but we were all pretty young and imaginations went wild.

Then it came out that he had HIV. The shit hit the fan in a pretty major way, and he was fired. The PTA would say to this day that it had nothing to do with the fact that he was in a homosexual relationship or that he had HIV, it had to do with him amassing sick days and they were afraid he’d bleed them dry if it wasn’t quickly settled and he went away. Maybe that is what they truly believe- that their actions were honest.

All I know is that on the playground boys played “beat the gay” mock games and threatened to kill the teacher if he ever came back to town, and no one stopped them. They said horrible things, the teachers turned the other way.

It’s really a shame. He seemed like a nice enough guy. He was quite, he was clean, he kept to himself. He was really passionate about English and would loan books out to the kids, and talk about them when we were done reading. I suppose some of the parents thought that he did it to get alone with the kids. They must have been afraid he would hurt us.

He can’t have ever behaved in a bad way, though. If he had, there’s no way they would have just sent him out of town.

Let’s imagine together. Imagine that there is a church holding a special banquet and everyone is encouraged to invite their friends, neighbors or coworkers. It’s an event pointed not at the fellowship of believers, but just some good old fashioned fun for the community. So Jane decides to invite a coworker of hers named Henry, and his boyfriend Tom.

The Church is not amused. Jane is given a strict talking to for exposing people’s children to homosexuality. Jane is also not amused, because she knows if she’d invited her other coworker, Betsy, and her live-in long-term boyfriend Roger with whom she has a baby, everyone would have blushed but simply ignored talking about their relationship. Henry is also not amused, because he’s curious about Jane and her beliefs and he feels rejected and hurt when she stops talking to him and inviting him to community events.

That church is guilty of putting the cart before the horse. I refuse to accept any of the possible excuses for rejecting Henry. Because they can’t expose their children to homosexuality? Their children may have been exposed to any number of unapproved things over the course of the meal. Someone may have left to go smoking. Old Bill may have been putting shots of whiskey in his Coca-Cola from the hip flask no one talks about. Some of the teenagers may have snuck out to kiss, someone may have cursed, Bob and Timothy may have gotten into another of their infamous fights that always seem to end in a wrestling match… There may be some really conservative people who don’t let their children watch TV, and others who do, and the conservative kids will eventually be exposed to the way the others are raised. My point is: no matter what you believe, your children will eventually be exposed to a differing way of doing things. Sin is inevitable. I refuse to accept that gay people cannot be invited because someone might “catch” the gay, as if it’s a head cold. The other common excuse is by tolerating their presence you are affirming their behavior.

Excuse me while I go in the other room and laugh. The point of tolerance is that one doesn’t agree, but one bears with another. Because if we affirmed everything, there’d never be a reason to “tolerate” anything. We’d all just agree! Gay people know that most Christians don’t like their lifestyle. Inviting them to a community banquet won’t make them forget something like Westboro Baptist parading around with signs reading “God Hates Fags.” Perhaps if we could just learn to eat a meal together, we could talk about why they have accepted their homosexuality and why most Christians can’t, and it could be the start of a beautiful conversation.

Churches need to stop doing things backwards. The path to holiness does not go:

holiness, welcoming, acceptance, discipleship.

It goes more like:

welcoming, acceptance, discipleship, holiness.

So. Let’s hang out a tile that says, “you are welcome here,” and see what happens. I think we have a lot to talk about. We could do it over a nice pizza.

I had a close friend, once, who was a lesbian. She confessed to me that she really liked me, she hinted at the fact that I’d never had a lasting relationship with a guy and that we’d (me and this friend) had once shared a very platonic kiss on a dare. There was this unasked question hanging between us, and for one split second I wanted to say, “yes, I could, at least I think I could, I could try.” It was insanity, plain and simple, because I’m not gay. Yet in that moment I pictured what my life would be like if I had been.

At first it would have been wonderful. I would’ve been able to enjoy the love of a good friend. I would’ve been in a relationship with someone with whom I had shared all of my innermost thoughts. Someone with whom I had a myriad of unspoken punchlines, where a hand-gesture served as well as a sentence. I would’ve been able to say, “this is like that one movie, with the thing,” and had my partner laugh instead of saying, “I don’t get it. You’re insane.” I would’ve had those things, those beautiful things, those things that never seem to exist in even the best of marriages…

But my parents were both raised Mennonite and I have Amish relatives. I would have been trading that single relationship for a possible loss of both my close and extended family. I would have no longer been welcome at church meals. Many good friends would have been afraid to have us around their children. I would be embarrassed to talk about my home life at work, referring always to my “partner” instead of my spouse, hedging around the fact that my “partner” was female, ashamed to say her name. People would look at me at first in confusion and then in understanding, possibly followed by revulsion. Instead of a casual acceptance of my life, I’d be followed by awkward questions.

Home would be wonderful, the rest of the world more sketchy.

I have always wanted children. If I’d chosen to get pregnant, I would have to daily look at my children and realize that although they were mine they weren’t Stella’s (not her real name). If we adopted, one of us would be the legal parent but not both. We’d live in fear of not being able to both be present with our kids were there an emergency. We’d both feel awkward. Our kids would probably be asked a lot of personal questions about their two mommies.

I’d always wonder if not having a father was somehow affecting them. I don’t know that I’d feel guilty… I’d just wonder.

I have to say- I can’t believe anyone would just CHOOSE that. I can’t believe that Stella simply woke up one day and said, “you know, I think I’ll be a lesbian now.” I’m not saying that somewhere in her brain there wasn’t a switch that got turned at some point. She had some bad experiences, she didn’t want to go through what her mom went through. I just don’t think that it was a choice. I don’t think any sane person would look at a life of acceptance and a life of awkward conversations and say, “my life is too easy. Let’s mix this up.”

Stella, at least, had to have really believed that was who she was meant to be.

She still believes in God, the last I heard. She just has a lot of questions. It’s just too bad that there aren’t very many churches where they’d let her in long enough to ask them.