Re: Gay Marriage/Homosexuality

From: George Murphy <>
Date: Fri Jun 11 2004 - 08:03:30 EDT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Perrett" <>
To: "George Murphy" <>
Cc: "ASA Discussions" <>
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 2:59 AM
Subject: RE: Gay Marriage/Homosexuality

> George M:
> Given that there is non-volitional homosexual orientation, how are
> their sexual desires to be "controlled or defeated"? As I pointed out in
> earlier post, heterosexuals can marry. The Reformers pointed out in
> connection with the marriage of priests that celibacy is not a gift given
> all. If homosexuals can't have recognized unions and if they can't be
> expected to be celibate, what then?
> Shalom
> George
> Don P:
> How are they to be "controlled or defeated", the same way that a desire to
> have adultery is, or to commit murder, when one is in danger, or to steal
> when one has no money to buy food for one's children, or to worship
> GOD when one doesn't find the answers he doesn't find looking at one's
> One must look deeper still. Just because you have not found the answer
> one of the opposite sex does not give one the right to look elsewhere.
> because one has not found money in one endeavor does not mean that one
> look elsewhere. Those in the past who have succeeded have done so through
> their determination, even if ungodly. Why because they believed it to be
> so. On the other hand those who believe in something wrong may succeed,
> it appears homosexuals are, but that does not make it right. Unions? Why
> not? Then again, why not any other thing that is not specifically
> in scripture? Celibacy is a choice, then again, so is heterosexuality,
> homosexuality, unless one believes otherwise, then one must consciencily
> choose to not procreate. But for whose right? One's own, or Gods'?
> Righteousness is for GOD and not me. In the end one must only make the
> CHOICE to let GOD decide.

        Your response does not attend very carefully to the specific problem
that confronts a person with s homosexual orientation that she or he has not
chosen. It is not equivalent to the situation of a heterosexual person who
would like to have sexual relations with a specific person but for some
reason can't. If Billy can't marry Amy - because she doesn't want to marry
him or is already married - then he still has the possibility of marrying
Betty, Cathy, Debby, &c. He is not simply precluded from marrying period.
A homosexual person is.

        "Celibacy is a choice" - well, sort of. But again, as the reformers
pointed out in connection with the requirement of clerical celibacy, it is
an unnatural choice for most people. It would be nice if people who oppose
any sort of recognition of same-sex unions would suggest a helpful
alternative for homosexual persons - more helpful than "Tough it out."

        "then again, so is heterosexuality, and homosexuality, unless one
believes otherwise." Heterosexuality a choice? Really? I don't remember
ever deciding to be heterosexual? Of course a heterosexual person can
choose to engage in a homosexual act & vice versa but we're not talking (or
shouldn't be) about essentially experimental behavior but about sexual
orientation. & that doesn't seem to be the result of deliberate choice.

Received on Fri Jun 11 08:35:06 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jun 11 2004 - 08:35:07 EDT