Homosexuality and Reason

By Scott

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.

9 Responses to “Homosexuality and Reason”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    Sounds like you have some sexual attraction problems of your own. Maybe you need to get over the fact that, oh my gosh, some or at least one of your friends might be gay. This does not mean that you cannot be comrades. It only means that you need to be secure in your own sexual desires not to let it be an issue. If you were really secure in your masculinity, you 1. would not care what the other guy thinks of you, and 2. be able to tell the guy, “Nope, I like girls, but you’re still the same person that you were yesterday so it doesn’t really matter anyway. Did you see that game the other day on TV?”

    Reason, when applied properly can garner good results.

  2. Douglas Lewis Says:

    I disagree with #1. Both sexes need a venue for friendship that does not spill over into sexuality, particularly because our culture is so sexualized. Interpreting a statement like this as an indicator of ’sexual attraction problems’ is a common fallacy.

  3. traditionalanglican Says:

    Thank you David. I have runout of creative answers to this charge.

  4. traditionalanglican Says:

    I got to thinking, if I were a repressed homosexual because I am a Christian, what is wrong with that being so. Holy Scripture tells us that homosexual acts are wrong. Suppressing that which tends to cause them to sin is proper for people.

    Sorry, to blow his theory but a repressed homosexual I am not. If I were for the sake of Christ, I would proudly so state.

  5. NancyP Says:

    I have to say, what makes you think that gays are automatically attracted to every individual of their own sex? Straights aren’t attracted to every individual of the opposite sex. Some individuals are less picky than others, true. And attraction varies according to venue – a man might not look twice at a sweaty dusty woman doing construction chores on a Habitat for Humanity site, but might be interested in the same woman in the clean state in a swimsuit at the beach, or in a sexy dress at a club. And individuals have the ability to repress their attraction in situations where that is necessary, eg, at a retreat, or at Mass, or at work, or…. Even if Jane thinks Father John is hot, she oughtn’t to be thinking about hotness if John+ is married, gay, priest of her parish, or in the middle of priestly duties at the time.

    I happen to agree with #1 – the concern with other people’s sexuality is often an insecurity in handling your own sexuality – whether a heterosexual p0rn user or a repressed heterosexual or a repressed gay.

  6. traditionalanglican Says:

    One of my points is that I should be allowed the assumption that when with a group of men, there will not be sexual attraction. If there is sexual attraction between certain members then they should be excluded from the group. I know this offends liberal orthodoxies, but so be it.

    I could expand this idea but will not do so here, choosing to stick to the topic of comradeship for the secular discussion. This is a religious blog. Tradition and Holy Scripture condemn sodomy, so even if you do not like my logic, sodomy is still wrong.

  7. franksta Says:

    Scott,

    I am coming late to this dialogue, as I just found your blog today, so I don’t know if you’ll read this.

    Of course, sodomy is a sin–Scripture, tradition, and reason all bear this out–the acceptance of sodomy is the reason I left TEC. And I will even agree with your thinking up to a point, namely that the presence of a sexually active homosexual in a group of men threatens comradeship. BUT, I am curious…are you saying that the presence of ANY man who has EVER experienced homosexual attractions also threatens that comradeship? Does it matter if that man has homosexual attractions but has never acted on them? Or if he has, but it was in the distant past? Or if his homosexual attractions are fleeting or infrequent?

    The reason I ask is two-fold. First, I am an “ex-gay,” once practicing homosexuality but repentant of that and seeking to live a holy life. The thought that my presence in a group threatens comradeship would surely come as a surprise to my close, intimate friends and fellow churchmen (all of whom know my past). Their comradeship, which at times has involved working together closely or sharing close quarters, has not proven destructive for any of us, but in fact has been a significant avenue of “recovery” for me as I have come to find a better understanding of masculinity by being in the company (and acceptance) of men.

    The second is like unto it. I have led a support group and counseled men with homosexual attractions. The overwhelming majority of those seeking my assistance were married, churchgoing men. Their struggles were unknown to anyone outside of the support group–their comrades had no idea of their battles. My point is simply that in any company of Christian men, it is impossible to know for certain that no one there has such attractions.

    So, if this makes sense, I’m curious for your response.

    Every blessing,

    Frank

  8. Ariana Parker Says:

    Listen. I’m Bisexial and let me tell you something.

    ITS NOT A SOCIAL PROBLEM

    Im that way because I WANT to be. I like girls and guys

    I like penis and vagina.’

    I love the body of a woman and of a man

    Thats is how I will allways be and its people like you who ruin the lives of people like me. I think your just IGNORANT!!!!!

  9. Scott Says:

    Ariana Parker Says: Friday, 10 October 2008 Listen. I’m Bisexial and let me tell you something. . . .

    I have been waiting for some time for such a narcissist response to my posting. Your personal lust is a social problem. I would suggest that having comradeship with you is nearly impossible for anyone as it seems you lust after everyone.

    Make no mistake about it, your response is narcissist in the extreme. It has, in all societies, been a function of society to control sexual lust or at least the acting upon such lust. It is not my intent to ruin your life, but I cannot support or condone your lifestyle.

    Again this is a religious blog and the Christian answer to your post is clear. Please let me tell you something in all love and charity. You are in willful conflict with the teaching of Christ and the Church. Please consider seeking help to guide you in repentance and amendment of life.

Leave a Reply