"A certain man was going down from
Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who both stripped him and beat
him, and departed, leaving him half dead. By chance a certain priest was going
down that way. When he saw him, he passed by on the other side. In the same way
a Levite also, when he came to the place, and saw him, passed by on the other
side. But a certain Samaritan, as he travelled, came where he was. When he saw
him, he was moved with compassion, came to him, and bound up his wounds,
pouring on oil and wine. He set him on his own animal, and brought him to an
inn, and took care of him. On the next day, when he departed, he took out two
denarii, and gave them to the host, and said to him, 'Take care of him.
Whatever you spend beyond that, I will repay you when I return.' Now which of
these three do you think seemed to be a neighbor to him who fell among the robbers?"
He said, "He who showed mercy on
him."
Then Jesus said to him, "Go and
do."
I recall canvassing during Prop 22 to help it get passed. We'd go around and hand out "Vote YES on 22" leaflets and our main task was to make sure that people understood that voting yes meant you wanted to keep marriage between a man and woman. It was kind of fun because it reminded me of my mission days, going door to door but it seemed most people were supportive of our cause (I think it was generally a pretty conservative area to begin with) despite a few people who wanted nothing to do with us, there was a feeling that all would be right with the world and marriage would be safe.
My experience with Prop 8 was much different. Things were different. People's views were changing. My views were changing. During Prop 22, I didn't think much about the issue of homosexuality. It was not only a sin but a sin next to murder and we needed to protect society by ensuring that the official, state sponsored relationship was a heterosexual one. At the time I felt that people who are gay may be good people with a difficult struggle to overcome, but if same sex marriage were given sanction it would change society and not for the better. These arguments resonated with me in 2000 but in 2008, they left a pretty bad taste in my mouth. They certainly did not seem very neighborly and unfortunately at the time I, like the Priest and Levite who walked past the injured man on the road to Jericho, did nothing to help.
I, like the Levite and Priest, did nothing partially because of my religious tradition. The tradition in Jesus' time was such that to touch a dead body would defile one's self, particularly if you were of the priestly class. If the Priest or Levite were to check on the man lying in the street and by doing so touch his body, they risked touching a dead body, which would require an inconvenient cleansing ritual (Numbers 19:11-13). Handling a corpse was not the duty of a priest. The Priest and Levite not only avoided touching the body, they moved to the other side of the road to avoid having to even deal with the issue. Likewise, the LDS church was actively involved in the Prop 8 campaign, which gave me justification to avoid dealing with the issue, despite the pain occurring from the LGBT community.
At the time I am writing this now, in 2012, my views on same sex marriage and homosexuality have completely reversed. How did I get here? How did I go from going door to door, soliciting the idea that marriage should remain between a man and a woman to thinking that LGBT partners should also be allowed to be married?
I first came to the conclusion that people don't choose to be gay.
Did I
choose to be heterosexual? Could I, with enough will power, make the
choice to be homosexual? Not a chance. The idea of kissing another
man makes me more than a little uncomfortable... but it leads me to the
conclusion, anecdotally that as I did not choose to be heterosexual, it seems
unlikely that anyone would choose homosexuality... and why would they?
Bullying, rejection from family, friends, society and even God, feelings of
guilt and inadequacy are not enjoyable and the numbers bear this out.
LGBT youth are 4 times more likely to take their own life than heterosexual
counterparts with between 30% and 40% of them attempting suicide1. These are people beaten up and left on their
own road to Jericho. The following is taken from a friend, Shawna, who
struggles with many health problems yet talks of how much harder it is being
gay in a culture which doesn't make room for her:
"EVEN MORE DIFFICULT THAN JUST
BEING GAY,--- IS BEING A GAY MORMON. You have no idea how conflicting that is.
You think my health issues have been hard, try walking in my shoes, being gay,
and Mormon. Are you afraid cancer might kill me? Be more concerned that I will
take my own life, for there's not a day I don't fight with suicidal thoughts
because I struggle with being something I didn't choose to be, and a religion
that doesn't allow one to act on their sexuality. To my wonderful, faithful,
family-oriented friends, imagine if your heterosexuality were to be denied, and
you were told you could only marry someone of your same sex. How could you do
that if you're heterosexual, and not homosexual? People are born gay."
Is there a “cure”?
People don't choose their sexual orientation but can people be "cured" from homosexuality? I'll leave the philosophical question of whether there is actually anything "wrong" with being gay to the individual, but one thing is clear, that as of now, there is no evidence of any effective way to change someone's sexual orientation. In fact, all attempts at doing so appear to cause far more damage to the individual. Attempts at personal righteousness or trying to act in a gender appropriate way or dating those of the opposite sex or especially the more extreme measures like shock therapy, greatly decrease the emotional well being and often do irreversible damage to the individual. Oh, and they don't actually change a person's sexual orientation3. In trying to help these individuals in this way, we are only beating them up more.
What about the children?
In the most recent General Conference of the church, Elder Dalin H. Oaks said in his talk about protecting children:
Most of the children born to unmarried
mothers—58 percent—were born to couples who were cohabitating. Whatever we may
say about these couples’ forgoing marriage, studies show that their children
suffer significant comparative disadvantages. For children, the relative
stability of marriage matters.
We should assume the same disadvantages
for children raised by couples of the same gender. The social science
literature is controversial and politically charged on the long-term effect of
this on children, principally because, as a New York Times writer observed, “same-sex marriage is a social
experiment, and like most experiments it will take time to understand its
consequences.4” (Elder Dallin
H. Oaks, "Protect
the Children," General
Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints2012)
The framing of questions in studies is important and the problem is that there is a huge difference between a child who has a parent who has "ever had a romantic relationship with a member of the same sex" and a child who is raised by committed, same-sex parents. While he acknowledges this limitation, the author downplays it. Included in the sample of people raised by a parent who was gay are all sorts of scenarios that probably are damaging to a child's development and which in the past at least were more prevalent to children who were raised by a parent who is gay. It is important to remember, however that people who were gay were often forced through social pressure into heterosexual relationships which are far more likely to fail, leading to split families and instability for their children when they would separate.
This study does not control for children raised by two same-sex parents from infancy, which would be the equivalent to children raised by traditional parents. In fact, the study never asks if participants were raised by a same sex couple so there is not even data to compare. Instead it lumps them all together. To Elder Oak's main point in his talk, the study does confirm that children do better in stable environments by two committed parents who love each other. If anything, this seems like a good argument to elevate same-sex partners with children to a legally recognized status: marriage. It would be good for the children.
This more appropriately fits with past studies on same sex parenting. In a 2006 review of the studies to date of the social implications of same sex couples, on the question of children raised by same sex couples the review concluded:
Despite considerable variation in the
quality of their samples, research design, measurement methods, and data
analysis techniques, the findings to date have been remarkably consistent.
Empirical studies comparing children raised by sexual minority parents with
those raised by otherwise comparable heterosexual parents have not found
reliable disparities in mental health or social adjustment. Differences have
not been found in parenting ability between lesbian mothers and heterosexual
mothers. Studies examining gay fathers are fewer in number but do not show that
gay men are any less fit or able as parents than heterosexual men (Herek,
Gregory. “Legal
Recognition of Same-Sex Relationships in the United States: A Social Science
Perspective,” American
Journal: 2006).
Why is homosexuality considered such a serious sin in the first place?
The short answer is because the Bible says so... at least at first glance. Closer inspection and a clearer understanding of the context as well as translation misunderstandings, brings into serious question many of the verses which seem to be clearly stating that homosexuality is condemned. I would love it if all these verses could be explained away but there are a couple which are hard to argue are not condemning, namely Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 as well as Romans 1:26-27, though even for those there is more ambiguity than at first glance. The website religioustolerance.org has a fairly comprehensive section called, "What the Bible says and means about same-sex behavior."
Latter-day Saints have a few other problems if they want reconciliation between their beliefs and a view that supports gay rights: following the prophet. Fundamental to Mormonism is the belief that modern prophets communicate with God, just as the prophets of old and because of this, there is strong pressure in the church to conform views with pronouncements from these leaders. To further complicate the issue, all the members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and First Presidency are also considered "Prophets, Seers and Revelators." The message from these LDS leaders has been quite clear, even going as far as to give resources to push ballot measures advocating traditional marriage.
There is a saying that, "Catholics say the Pope is infallible but don't believe it. Mormons say the Prophet isn't infallible and don't believe it." Biblical prophets were not perfect, why should we expect modern day prophet perfection? Terryl Givens, a Mormon scholar writes in his "Letter to a Doubter":
Abraham lied about Sariah being his
sister. Isaac deceives Esau and steals both his birthright and his blessing
(but maybe that’s ok because he is a patriarch, not a prophet strictly
speaking). Moses took glory unto himself at the waters of Meribah, and was
punished severely as a consequence. He was also guilty of manslaughter and covered
up his crime. Jonah ignored the Lord’s call, then later whined and complained
because God didn’t burn Ninevah to the ground as he had threatened. It doesn’t
get a lot better in the New Testament. Paul rebuked Peter sharply for what he
called cowardice and hypocrisy in his refusal to embrace the gentiles as
equals. Then Paul got into a sharp argument with fellow apostle Barnabas and
they parted company. So where on earth do we get the notion that modern day
prophets are infallible specimens of virtue and perfection? Joseph [Smith] said
emphatically, “I don’t want you to think I am very righteous, for I am not very
righteous.” (Givens,
Terryl. “Letter
to a Doubter,” From a Fireside Presentation to the Single Adult Stake,
Palo Alto, CA: 14 October 2012. Revised on October 22, 2012)
Over time, I could not square their
[gay parishioners] stories and experiences with the theology I had inherited.
So I re-opened the issue, read a lot of books, re-studied the Scriptures, and
eventually came to believe that just as the Western church had been wrong on
slavery, wrong on colonialism, wrong on environmental plunder, wrong on
subordinating women, wrong on segregation and apartheid (all of which it
justified biblically) ... we had been wrong on this issue. In this process, I
did not reject the Bible. In fact, my love and reverence for the Bible
increased when I became more aware of the hermeneutical assumptions on which
many now-discredited traditional interpretations were based and defended. I was
able to distinguish "what the Bible says" from "what this school
of interpretation says the Bible says," and that helped me in many ways. (McLaren,
Brian. “A
farewell, Brian McLaren moment, or not,” http://brianmclaren.net)
I know many in the church, if they've made it this far, will not agree with me. They may even condemn my point of view. I hear so often that same-sex marriage being legalized is a sign of the world becoming more and more wicked and evil. At this point, I need to express that it is because of my religious upbringing, combined with the truth I have learned about homosexuality and the painful stories I've heard, that I feel I must come to new conclusions on this issue. I don't, however, feel that I must abandon my faith to do so.
How do I make sense of what is of God and what is the prophet's (modern or ancient) opinion?
Thankfully, Jesus himself answers this very question. In Matthew 22, Jesus is asked of a lawyer what the greatest commandment is (v.36). Jesus answers first that we are to love God with all our heart but volunteers, without being asked, the second greatest commandment which is like the first: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." (v.39) The next part is key: "On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (v.40) Loving God and loving our neighbor are like unto each other. Jesus is showing how we show love to God: through loving your neighbor. It is clear from the text that Jesus is teaching that these twin laws supersede statements in the Bible or statements by modern day Prophets.
Who is our neighbor? In another version or in a similar situation found in Luke and at the top of this page, Jesus uses the story of the Good Samaritan to illustrate not only who our neighbors are but who we should be neighbors to. Samaritans and Jews hated one another. They were rival religions who both believed the other were perverting the ways of God. At the time of Jesus, tensions were especially high. Jesus, being a Jew and having a Jewish audience, used the Samaritan to push the point that it is through showing mercy and compassion and kindness that we can be neighbors to our fellow man. He flipped the lawyer’s question, from who is my neighbor to how can we be neighbors to others, despite our differences? Conversely, He used the Priest and Levite to show that religious beliefs and practices can keep people from being a neighbor to someone in need and therefore break the two most important commandments of all.
I can't judge others for their views, only myself. I don't seek to change anyone's mind here but lets review what is known about the issue. People don't choose their sexual orientation. Sexual orientation can't be changed and attempting to do so is often harmful. People engaging in same-sex relationships don’t actually hurt anybody. I would like people to ponder this: Can we truly be neighbors by showing love, compassion and kindness if we treat them as second-class citizens and withhold rights that seem very likely to improve their emotional happiness? Can we truly be neighbors to Gay and Lesbian members of society if we do not make them part of our community and allow them to live lives as full and happy as we seek to live? Can we truly be neighbors to our fellowmen if a good portion of them are forced to choose between their religion and fulfilling lives with families of their own like my friend Shawna:
"I am alone, and always will be in
this life, because I am prohibited from loving who I am attracted to. I have
never been attracted to men. I've dated guys because I was ashamed and didn't
want anyone to find out I'm attracted to females. I wanted to have the faith that
marrying a guy would bring blessings to me as I raise our children unto the
Lord. But I just couldn't go through with marrying anyone. I still feel ashamed
that I'm attracted to the same sex, and I am pretty scared putting myself out
here like this. I have decided I can't turn away while one more gay youth,
young adult or adult (especially Mormon) takes their own lives, or feels they
have to leave the church because they can't reconcile their homosexuality with
their faith."
Endnotes:
1. Suicide Prevention Resource Center (2008) Suicide risk and prevention for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth. Newton, MA: Education Development Center, Inc.
2. Frankowski, Barbara. “Sexual
Orientation and Adolescents,” PEDIATRICS: June
2004.
3. Haldeman, Douglas C. (1991), "Sexual
orientation conversion therapy for gay men and lesbians: A scientific
examination", in Gonsiorek, John; Weinrich, James, Homosexuality:
Research Implications for Public Policy, Newbury Park, California: Sage
Publications, Inc.
