Homosexuality and Reason

In the whole sexuality discussion, focusing on Scripture is not to concede reason to the other side. Reason in Anglican tradition, is to be used within the framework of Scripture. The idea that reason is equal to scripture is not valid. Reason is used to understand Scripture and Tradition it does not stand alone.  I have generally taken the tact that if Scripture is clear, not to engage in the discussion using reason. For the most part, I have only engaged in the discussion about reason when charges of being unreasonable have been put forth.

Nevertheless, there are good and shall I say secular reasons that homosexuality is a social problem. I here present a short summary of my thinking on how homosexuality defeats comradeship. I with this suggest that comradeship be a very necessary social function.  This is one reason the homosexuality is not good for the social structure, there are others.

There are sometimes when the sexes are to be separated. To me this is proper when comradeship is a required element. I know of nothing that can hurt a unit’s view of its common purpose than sexual attraction. The most clear examples are things like combat units in the armed forces.

As I am using the term, comradeship is a close personal attachment without sexual desires. This can be with an individual or a group.  While I am not saying that comradeship with a person of the opposite sex cannot occur, I am saying that sexual attraction destroys comradeship. Large group comradeship of mixed sexes is very difficult if not impossible.

Homosexual attraction also destroys comradeship. If I am part of a group of all men, I feel more open to comradeship, and I think that this is true of most men. This is where a even homosexual proclivity becomes a problem I need to be sure that my comradeship is not viewed as sexual attraction or a sexual advance. When I go on a men’s retreat, I do so in large part for comradeship. Homosexual attraction being part of the group destroys comradeship. This idea can be generalized and should be.

If I am part of a larger group of comrades, I want to think that the decisions of all in the group are made devoid of sexual attraction. It is not my original idea, but I contend that in any group of people where leaders or members of the group are required to make decision which effect the group in less than two seconds, need comradeship and must not have sexual attraction. This is why mixed sexes and homosexuals should not be in things like combat units.

I close with the reminder that homosexual acts are sin.  Holy Scripture tells us this, so the above is additive.   Even if the reader feels the logic of this posting is wrong, it does not change the sinful nature of homosexual acts.

I write this post because the topic has come up on the email group I am a member as well as posting by Brad Drell on his blog.

Mount Soledad Cross

It was until recent times that the United States could have been called a Christian country. It was not that Christianity was the only religion, but rather it was the force which created the morals by which people interact. Every government has morals which underpin the laws of the country. Sometimes these morals are fear, as in Iraq before the invasion. The laws of the United States are based upon the morality of the Jewish and Christian religions.

The idea that the government could not establish a Church is not saying that religion has no place in government. It is a job for religion to maintain moral order, and in that respect it overlaps with the role of government. Let us all be honest, government is all about morals. Morals are what make laws acceptable to people. There is no such thing as a government that does not have morals. They may be what I would call bad morals, but they have their moral none the less.