percy-l AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Percy-L: Literary, Religious, Scientific, and Philosophical Discussion of Walker Percy
List archive
- From: David Alan Beck <dabeck AT iupui.edu>
- To: "Percy-L: Literary and Philosophical Discussion" <percy-l AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: Re[2]: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux
- Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:28:41 -0500 (EST)
Ken writes:
> As for the argument that because "God creates us," homosexuality must be
> God-given, we recognize that handicaps -- physical, mental and emotional
--
> are not in that sense God-given. Genesis tells us that creation has been
> radically altered by human sin. and that's a basic tenet of Christian
> theology. I'm very skeptical too of claims that Christianity smiled on
> same-sex relations until recently. Others scholars take issue with that,
to
> say the least.
The "God created us that way, so it is ok" argument is a dangerous one.
Because as Ken states, creation IS altered by original sin. Thus, if one
has a sexual preference for, say, children, then it's ok (granted,
children are unable to give consent). While that doesn't mean the person
has to act on it (and shouldn't), he can easily argue that the desire is
"God-given" and isn't wrong.
Some may say that I'm presenting a slippery slope argument, but just
because an argument is fallacious, doesn't mean that it is untrue. For
example, some argued (fallaciously) that if we permit a woman to abort her
child (due to incest or rape), we open the door for abortion as a way of
birth control (and that is what happened--last I heard was that 96% of
abortions had nothing to do with incest or rape).
The case that homosexuality was ok in Church history was ok until now is,
of course, ridiculous. Boswell's final work discredited him as a historian
and scholar. He allowed his agenda (of promoting homosexuality) to get in
the way of his scholarship. His "findings" were panned even by the most
secular reviewers. To say that the Byzantine Empire (the Orthodox Church)
"blessed" same-sex unions is a joke. The Byzantines were "intolerant" of
homosexual behavior. Those who practiced homosexuality were excommunicated
and condemned by the Church. Unfortunately, Boswell, before dying of AIDS,
went out on a note of disrespect within the academic community, because
he gave his agenda priority over historical truth.
One can argue whether homosexuality is a "sin" or not. But no one can
make an argument that homosexuality was approved by the historical Church.
It just wasn't and still isn't by those who hold on to Church tradition.
I'm not a patristic expert, but I have read enough of the ancient
writings of the Church Fathers to know what used to be so obvious is now
being called into question.
For the revisionists, they should at least say that Church tradition is
nothing but intolerant and narrow-minded. Then they could argue that we
should start over, but they can't argue that we need to "re-visit" the
early church, because--believe me--they don't want to be there.
-David
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Ken Wilson wrote:
> I'm not completely sure what to think of homosexuality, but in the few pages
> available online this author makes a couple of statements that won't wash.
>
> "There is no reason to believe that homosexuality in itself is in any way
> unhealthy."
>
> Technically I suppose that's true, but anal sex is unhealthy, and the
> promiscuity that many gays today describe as an essential part of their
> sexual nature is physically very dangerous, as we know, and is condemned in
> the Scripture.
>
> As for the argument that because "God creates us," homosexuality must be
> God-given, we recognize that handicaps -- physical, mental and emotional --
> are not in that sense God-given. Genesis tells us that creation has been
> radically altered by human sin. and that's a basic tenet of Christian
> theology. I'm very skeptical too of claims that Christianity smiled on
> same-sex relations until recently. Others scholars take issue with that, to
> say the least.
>
> But at least Helminiak is treating homosexuality through the lens of
> Scripture. Many Christian defenders of homosexuality try to sidestep the
> Biblical passages by talking about "love" and "tolerance" and "inclusion."
> As a friend of mine said recently, just after he told me he planned on
> leaving the Episcopal Church -- "I love gays just like I love anyone else."
> Love and tolerance and inclusion don't preclude calling sin "sin."
>
> Ken
>
>
> --
>
> An archive of all list discussion is available at
> http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail
>
> Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy
>
>
>
David Beck
-
[percy-l] homosexuality, redux,
Karey L. Perkins, 09/20/2003
-
Re: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux,
Karey L. Perkins, 09/20/2003
-
Re[2]: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux,
Benedikt, 09/21/2003
-
Re: Re[2]: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux,
Ken Wilson, 09/21/2003
-
Re: Re[2]: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux,
David Alan Beck, 09/21/2003
-
Fallacious but true? Re: Re[2]: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux,
Ken Armstrong, 09/22/2003
- Re: Fallacious but true? Re: Re[2]: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux, David Alan Beck, 09/22/2003
-
Fallacious but true? Re: Re[2]: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux,
Ken Armstrong, 09/22/2003
-
Re: Re[2]: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux,
David Alan Beck, 09/21/2003
- RE: Re[2]: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux, Tim Cole, 09/21/2003
-
Re: Re[2]: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux,
Ken Wilson, 09/21/2003
-
Re[2]: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux,
Benedikt, 09/21/2003
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- RE: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux, Parlin, Steven, 09/24/2003
- RE: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux, Bryon McLaughlin, 09/29/2003
- RE: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux, Parlin, Steven, 09/29/2003
- RE: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux, Parlin, Steven, 09/30/2003
-
Re: [percy-l] homosexuality, redux,
Karey L. Perkins, 09/20/2003
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.