From the Archives of Stuff I Really Don't Care About: The Homosexual Debate May 04 '05    Write an essay on this topic. Tweet Popular Products in Books Rick Bragg - Somebody Told Me: The Newspaper Stories of Rick Bragg From $6 260 Drum Machine Patterns From $8 The Bottom Line As long as they are not having sex on my kitchen table, I don't care. Then again, I don't want anyone having sex on my kitchen table. My entry into the write-off. I'll let it speak for itself. What are your spiritual beliefs or religious affiliations? My family was mixed (Baptist and Catholic), and religion played no part in my life until I was about 11, when I was baptized Catholic and started to go to Sunday School. I got sent to the principal (or something like that) on my second Sunday there after saying something that offended the teacher (and probably God), and never went back. Also, note to parents: Getting a kid up at 8 am on a weekend to go to school is not a way to get him excited about religion. In any event, I consider myself agnostic. Maybe God exists. Maybe not. I am sure I don't know. If there is a God, I see him in more of a Deist sense, as kind of a clockmaker who made the universe and is letting it run its course. I believe most morals/ethics are secular in origin, not given from any divine source. Religious books, i.e. the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, the Sutras, etc. were people's ways of explaining what they did not understand about the world in the absence of scientific theory. What is your sexual orientation? Straight How do you see your own religious/spiritual views as influencing your opinion of sexuality? Sexuality is a natural function of evolution, designed to further the survival of the species. It is pleasurable because, obviously, it makes us want to do it, which makes us more likely to reproduce. As conscious beings capable of manipulating nature, however, we are able to enjoy the pleasure of sex while preventing the natural consequence. There is nothing wrong with that, incidentally, but I do recognize that the natural function of sex is to further the species. How do you define marriage? Two people who dedicate themselves to each other, and face life together, as a team. What thoughts or reactions do you have to these two pictures? (all completely safe for work, home, etc.) 1. http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2004/03/10/ba_knight01.jpg 2. http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2004/02/13/ba_gaywed_01_lm.jpg Very little reaction at all. I really don't care, to be honest. How does one of Christian faith reconcile these two pictures? Is one “right” and one “wrong”? What reactions do you have to seeing these signs? 1. http://www.sushiesque.com/photos/boston_common_031104/dscn1373.jpg 2. http://www.sushiesque.com/photos/boston_common_031104/dscn1419.JPG Well, I'm not really of Christian faith but I will answer it anyway. I am sure God doesn't give a rat's @ss if someone is gay, one way or the other. AIDS can be contracted through risky behavior, though certainly not always. A punishment from God? I sincerely doubt it. The product of bad and risky decisions? Sometimes. Either way, I am sure God and nature are completely indifferent to who catches AIDS. AIDS is a virus. A particularly potent one, but still just a virus. There are many viruses in the world which can be contracted in many different ways. None of them, however, make conscious decisions to punish anybody. They act how they act because it is the easiest way for them to multiply, which is their function. I agree with Justice for all, but also realize that the concept of Justice is different for different people and different cultures. I personally don't like changing the constitution unless there is a dire reason to, but the system was designed so that we could change it, if necessary, as our society changes. It's the nature of our system. Why do you think the topic of homosexuality is so polarizing in religious communities? Some people believe that religion prohibits homosexual behavior. Other people don't believe that. The Bible, as on many topics, is not clear. People believe things based on what they were taught, the society they lived in, and who influenced them. As such, it is polarizing more as a societal issue than as a religious issue. The religious issue is just tangential. Should the government be in the business of defining marriage? Why or why not? Well, yes. Marriage is a legal union, so ultimately somebody has to define it. However, I personally believe this issue should be left up to the states (obviously I am speaking from an American perspective). One of the great things about the state system in the U.S. is that it gives us the ability to live and let live at the state level, and come together at the national level when necessary. Like it or not, in spite of our Constitution, U.S. society in many places was founded by very religious people with a very strict moral code. Those roots survive today in many places. Gay marriage is a societal change that will take time, particularly in more religious parts of the country. In less religious states, that change may occur more quickly. Until then, we should accept that some states will struggle with the issue a lot, and others will accept it without as much difficulty. Would you support the legalization of gay marriage? Again, a state issue. If it were to come up in my state, then sure. It's not my business how people want to live their lives. If you answered no, what are your fears behind its legalization? If you answered yes, what are your fears behind it remaining illegal? To be honest, I don't really have fears either way. In fact, I am rather indifferent. Would you support government-sanctioned civil unions between homosexual couples? Again, I don't really care either way. If it came up in my state, it would be fine by me. Do you see any way of bridging this current divide in our country over "wedge issues" like gay marriage or abortion? Or should we even be trying? No. Both issues are what I could consider being in a gray area of individual rights vs. societal issues. I know people like to say you can't "legislate morality," but realistically, almost all laws are legislations of morality that our society agrees on. For example, you can't walk down the street buck naked in most places. You can't challenge somebody to a duel and kill him, even if he agrees to the duel. You can't sell a bottle of water and tell people it will cure herpes. You can't have sex with a cow. You can't have sex with people under a certain age. You can't beat your children. etc. Many of these things are accepted/legal, or have been, in other societies around the world. Our society, however, has agreed that we should limit the individual rights of people in these cases, and many others, for the greater good. Gay marriage and abortion are in a gray area. As such, unless one side manages to convince a very large portion of the country one way or the other, we probably will never bridge the divide. We should continue to debate these things. Debate is good. But again, I think both of these should be state issues. We will never please everybody, but we do have a system that allows us to be flexible on issues on which we can't all agree. What do you see America's view of homosexuality and gay marriage being in 100 years from today? What will those future Americans think of us in 2005, as they look back? I don't think it will change drastically. I think it will be more accepted in certain parts of the country, and other parts of the country will fight against it. People will look back at us in the same way they see themselves: struggling with an issue to which there is no clear answer. I don't think people will see it in the same way that we now look at slavery or women's rights, for example.

Read all comments (8)|Write your own comment

Write an essay on this topic.