"Dirty", but not wrong
Perhaps most people will agree that picking your nose is gross and disgusting. Others might say it's dirty. But just because it's dirty , just because people find it disgusting, doe not really mean it's wrong. In some of the Chinese rural towns, people eat dogs, snails and cats. In my recent trip to Thailand, the streets are laden with foodstalls that tout some of the most curious snack - deep fried crickets and grasshoppers. I grab a small yellow-paper-bag full of these munchies seasoned with salt and spices and gobble it up in no time. These fried insects are crunchier than McDonald fries! Do they look gross? Absolutely! But they taste much better than they look.
I digress again.
The point is that dirty and wrong do not necessarily go hand in hand. The same uncomfortable feeling often associates with sexual matters. Descriptions like "dirty" or "gross" or "impure" still surround these sexual talks. The people who feel most uncomfortable about sex are those who fail to appreciate the difference between what is dirty and what is wrong. Most people's attitude toward homosexuality is just like that. They think it's wrong because they feel funny about it. Pressed to explain why it's wrong, a friend of mine couldn't come up with a good reason. All he does is squirm his face.
Some bust out their religious beliefs and condemn the homosexuals. Unfortunately many of the existing arguments are merely religious, not ethical or moral. For example, the the most quoted passage from Leviticus was meant to separate the Israelites from the Gentiles in order to remain holy. The passage, known as the Holiness Code, prohibited same-sex acts because of religious considerations, not because of sexual ones. Therefore, no thought is given to whether the sex in itself is right or wrong.
This post will agonize many - but the point is that we have to recognize the difference between the real wrong and the mere taboo. We cannot be obdurate to treat an ethical issue as if it's just a mere convention.
I digress again.
The point is that dirty and wrong do not necessarily go hand in hand. The same uncomfortable feeling often associates with sexual matters. Descriptions like "dirty" or "gross" or "impure" still surround these sexual talks. The people who feel most uncomfortable about sex are those who fail to appreciate the difference between what is dirty and what is wrong. Most people's attitude toward homosexuality is just like that. They think it's wrong because they feel funny about it. Pressed to explain why it's wrong, a friend of mine couldn't come up with a good reason. All he does is squirm his face.
Some bust out their religious beliefs and condemn the homosexuals. Unfortunately many of the existing arguments are merely religious, not ethical or moral. For example, the the most quoted passage from Leviticus was meant to separate the Israelites from the Gentiles in order to remain holy. The passage, known as the Holiness Code, prohibited same-sex acts because of religious considerations, not because of sexual ones. Therefore, no thought is given to whether the sex in itself is right or wrong.
This post will agonize many - but the point is that we have to recognize the difference between the real wrong and the mere taboo. We cannot be obdurate to treat an ethical issue as if it's just a mere convention.
1 Comments:
Great post Fern. My understanding is the biblical opposition to prostitution, incest, and adultery does not forbid male-female acts as such. What it opposes is the abuse of heterosexuality. On the same ground, condemnation of "arsenokoitai" does not forbid male homogenital acts as such. In first century, Greek-speaking, Kewish Christianity, arsenokoitai referred to exploitative, lewd, and wanton sex between men. To me, these exploitative acts, and not M-M sex in general, is what the term implied. I appreciate your discussing this so openly with me. Thanks my friend.
Post a Comment
<< Home