7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
Epistles of St. Paul
1 Corinthians
The great thing about being secular is that your sexual outlook is your own and is not governed by what some asexual obsessive wrote thousands of years ago. Morals are what keeps us civilized, by keeping us from hurting one another; they shouldn't govern what is pleasurable and hurts no one. I bring all this up because of an article in the Los Angeles times about ex-gay leaders admitting that sexuality is innate and not a choice. This is a good thing: people admitting the obvious, but there are details from the article that drive me crazy.
Here's what they say about the head of an ex-gay movement, Alan Chambers:
With years of therapy, Chambers says, he has mostly conquered his own attraction to men; he's a husband and a father, and he identifies as straight. But lately, he's come to resent the term "ex-gay": It's too neat, implying a clean break with the past, when he still struggles at times with homosexual temptation. "By no means would we ever say change can be sudden or complete," Chambers said.
"Mostly conquered." Doesn't that sound like Bush pronouncement of the war? It's a good thing we've mostly conquered the Iraqi insurgents. He hasn’t conquered anything; he’s repressing.
But even gay counselors are backing this new pronouncement. The role of therapy is to bring happiness, I guess at any cost. Here's a quotation from an ex-ex-gay, Michael Bussee:
He and other gay activists — along with major mental-health associations — still reject therapy aimed at "liberating" or "curing" gays. But Bussee is willing to acknowledge potential in therapy that does not promise change but instead offers patients help in managing their desires and modifying their behavior to match their religious values — even if that means a life of celibacy.
So what's wrong with a life of celibacy? I know what it's like; I was married for a while. But here's the crux: sex is major component of love. You love a friend, mother or pizza, but love with a partner is partly erotic love. So those who choose celibacy are limiting themselves immensely. Plus, what about those poor religious women who have to put up with the Ted Haggards in their life? Who wants to be with someone who doesn't desire them? Can you imagine a society where heterosexuality sex is only for procreation and not for pleasure? That’s a view of strict religion. Seriously, fuck that.
Between the repressed sexuality that religion brings and violence it inspires, secular humanism is the way to go.
Epistles of St. Paul
1 Corinthians
The great thing about being secular is that your sexual outlook is your own and is not governed by what some asexual obsessive wrote thousands of years ago. Morals are what keeps us civilized, by keeping us from hurting one another; they shouldn't govern what is pleasurable and hurts no one. I bring all this up because of an article in the Los Angeles times about ex-gay leaders admitting that sexuality is innate and not a choice. This is a good thing: people admitting the obvious, but there are details from the article that drive me crazy.
Here's what they say about the head of an ex-gay movement, Alan Chambers:
With years of therapy, Chambers says, he has mostly conquered his own attraction to men; he's a husband and a father, and he identifies as straight. But lately, he's come to resent the term "ex-gay": It's too neat, implying a clean break with the past, when he still struggles at times with homosexual temptation. "By no means would we ever say change can be sudden or complete," Chambers said.
"Mostly conquered." Doesn't that sound like Bush pronouncement of the war? It's a good thing we've mostly conquered the Iraqi insurgents. He hasn’t conquered anything; he’s repressing.
But even gay counselors are backing this new pronouncement. The role of therapy is to bring happiness, I guess at any cost. Here's a quotation from an ex-ex-gay, Michael Bussee:
He and other gay activists — along with major mental-health associations — still reject therapy aimed at "liberating" or "curing" gays. But Bussee is willing to acknowledge potential in therapy that does not promise change but instead offers patients help in managing their desires and modifying their behavior to match their religious values — even if that means a life of celibacy.
So what's wrong with a life of celibacy? I know what it's like; I was married for a while. But here's the crux: sex is major component of love. You love a friend, mother or pizza, but love with a partner is partly erotic love. So those who choose celibacy are limiting themselves immensely. Plus, what about those poor religious women who have to put up with the Ted Haggards in their life? Who wants to be with someone who doesn't desire them? Can you imagine a society where heterosexuality sex is only for procreation and not for pleasure? That’s a view of strict religion. Seriously, fuck that.
Between the repressed sexuality that religion brings and violence it inspires, secular humanism is the way to go.
No comments:
Post a Comment