Skip to main content

Some Thoughts on Homosexuality

Heterosexual promiscuity in the world today has done far more damage to society than homosexual promiscuity has. Homosexuality is no more "gross" than heterosexuality. It is a way of life for some people.  While I think it is not a healthy way of life, I am much more convinced that it is wrong to belittle people who  happen to live that lifestyle.
Share/Save/Bookmark


I don't know enough about homosexuality to be sure whether "homosexual marriage" would be a detriment to society.  I tend to think it would be, though. It's probably more important, in this now politically charged arena, to agree to disagree on that issue.

There is something much more important, though, in the short term at least, that we can agree on without worrying about anyone winning or losing the debate, and without anyone being put in danger.   Regardless of how we feel about homosexuality, we should be united in helping homosexuals to feel valued, accepted, and loved.

Many in the homosexual lifestyle have feelings of conflict and distress. It's my opinion that (a) some of those feelings are spiritual, based on the fact that they are living a less-than-optimal lifestyle, but (b) by far most of those feelings are as a result of how they are treated negatively by family, former friends, and others around them.

When I was younger, we used to play a game of free-for-all tackle football called "Smear the Queer".  We all knew that "queer" was used by many people as a derogatory term to refer to someone who is homosexual.  We laughed about it.  Looking back on that, I can see now how that was a really dumb thing to do.

I grew up with about a half dozen male friends (that I knew about) who eventually chose the homosexual lifestyle.  Ironically, considering the unfortunately named football game described above, one thing these friends had in common is that they didn't--some very often, some ever--play sports with the rest of the boys. The other thing that most (and actually perhaps all, but I'm not sure) of them had in common is that they had very poor relationships with their fathers. I've since read several stories by homosexuals or former homosexuals who noted similarly negative or distant relationships with their dads.

I know of a family that lives nearby that has ostracized one of its members because he is gay. They feel very uncomfortable being around him and do not like it when he comes to family functions, because they are afraid that his homosexual inclinations put their children in danger. Even if that were true, this is no way to treat a family member. Even worse, however, is that it doesn't seem to be true.

If many former homosexuals have been very successful at choosing not to live a homosexual lifestyle anymore, I'm unclear why it is so often claimed by homosexual advocates that because homosexuality is not a choice, it is impossible to choose to no longer be homosexual.  As Dennis V. Dahle, JD, says in the book Understanding Same-Sex Attraction
Many people who identify themselves as homosexual would rather have been heterosexual, and, given the opportunity to "change," they would do so.

Perhaps much of the discomfort for homosexuals at allowing others to leave the homosexual lifestyle is the way that homosexuals are often treated. Homosexuality should not have to be a dark burden of shame or guilt, especially for the many homosexuals who cannot think of any time in their lives where they "chose" to be homosexual.  Homosexuals should never be disowned or ostracized by family or friends, which often happens when their homosexuality becomes known.

What if one of your children announced to you that they were gay? Would you love them any less than you did the moment before? Would you love them any less than a daughter who announced that she had become pregnant out of wedlock?

We often look at "what if" as an enemy, especially after what if becomes reality. We try with all our might to push certain events aside and wish that they had never happened to us. But in doing so, we also push aside and denigrate others to whom these events happened, whether we mean to or not.

What if we make "what if" our friend? We can still hope that certain events will never happen, but if they do, we can be prepared for them, so that we don't push them--and the people inside of them--out of our lives. With preparation, we can look at each "what if", should it happen to become reality, as an opportunity--or a starting point--to take those that we still love by the hand and mutually try to do better.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Red Clothing and Resurrection: Jesus Christ's Second Coming

The scriptures teach that when Christ comes again to the earth, that he will be wearing red apparel. Why red ? They also teach that at Christ's coming, many of the dead will become resurrected. Will this only include members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Not by a long shot, no matter what some Mormon might tell you.

To Have the Compassion of an Ogre

At least when it comes to using government as a weapon of compassion, I have the compassion of the ogre. I will explain below why I think government cannot and should not be in the business of compassion. The force of government has caused many people to show less compassion to their fellow men. On the other hand, some of the best things happen when government is not compassionate. In such circumstances, individuals personally begin to display more compassion. One such instance of this happened recently in Utah when the governor asked the legislature to convene a special session in order to (among other things) provide special monies to pay for dental care for the disabled . If they didn't fund the governor's compassion project, it would make the legislators look even more heartless in a year where the budget surplus was projected to be at least $150 million. In spite of these political odds, the legislature did not grant the $2 million that 40,000 members of the disabled

Hey, Senator Buttars: "Happy Holidays!!"

Utah Senator Chris Buttars may be a well-meaning individual, but his actions often don't come out that way. His latest lament, with accompanying legislation that businesses use the phrase "Merry Christmas" instead of "Happy Holidays", is at least the third case in point that I am aware of. First, we were entertained by the faux pas made by the Senator in the 2008 Utah Legislative session, when referring to an In reality, America has a Judeo -Christian heritage, so maybe Senator Buttars should change his legislation to "encourage" businesses to advertise with " Happy Hanukkah and Merry Christmas"...? analogy of a human baby, of declaring that " this baby is black ". Then there was the attempt to help a friend develop his property in Mapleton, Utah, by using the force if his legislative office . Let's see if we can top that... Who cares that businesses hock their Christmas wares by using the term "Happy Holidays"? I