Today’s piece of outrageous bigotry comes courtesy of a blog on the Gospel Coalition website. It’s a rather long piece, and while I disagree with most of it, there are two pieces I want to write about.
I said, though it was very unpopular, homosexual marriage could not properly be called “love.” You could choke on the room’s tension. “How could I say such a thing?” I pointed out that the Bible teaches plainly that “love does not rejoice in wrongdoing” (1 Cor. 13). That the Bible also teaches that homosexual behavior was wrongdoing or sin. Consequently, though strong emotions and affections are involved, we cannot properly call it “love.” Love does no harm, and homosexuality clearly harms everyone involved.
I’m sorry, but you sir, are wrong. So wrong. How dare you denigrate the love that exists between homosexual couples? “we cannot properly call it love”? I’m sorry, but you live on a deluded plane of existence in which heterosexual love is deemed the only valid type. The rest of us know that love is love, and that the old piece of mythology that you take your prejudice from is obsolete. I could pull apart the problems with 1 Cor. 13, but that’s a rant for another day. Suffice to say, that passage does not show anything resembling normal, realistic, healthy love.
Having decided that and love that doesn’t fit his narrow ideas of what should and should not be, Mr Anyabwile goes on to the thing that so many Christians obsess so much about – gay sex. And he’s unapologetic about it, because he seems to believe that it’s the key to preventing marriage equality. “Return the discussion to sexual behavior in all its yuckiest gag-inducing truth”, he says, because obviously gay sex is icky and everyone is completely disturbed be the idea.
(Warning: Obscene descriptions follow. If sensitive in conscience, skip the block quotes below and go to the conclusion)
We are talking about one man inserting the male organ used to create life into the part of another man used to excrete waste. We are talking about one man taking the penis of another man into his mouth, or engaging in penis-to-penis grinding.
We are talking about a woman using her mouth to stimilute the nipples, vulva, clitoris or vagina of another woman, or using her hand or other “toys” to simulate sexual intercourse.
We are talking about anilingus and other things I still cannot name or describe.
That sense of moral outrage you’re now likely feeling–either at the descriptions above or at me for writing them–that gut-wrenching, jaw-clenching, hand-over-your-mouth, “I feel dirty” moral outrage is the gag reflex. It’s what you quietly felt when you read “two men deep kissing” in the second paragraph. Your moral sensibilities have been provoked–and rightly so. That reflex triggered by an accurate description of homosexual behavior will be the beginning of the recovery of moral sense and sensibility when it comes to the so-called “gay marriage” debate.
Marriage equality is not just about sex. It’s not even primarily about sex – gay people have sex whether they can marry or not. It’s about extending equal legal rights to a section of society that is very much discriminated against. It’s about them being able to express their love in the same way that straight couples can, if they want to. It’s about extending equal protection under the law to same-sex partners, so they can be legal health proxies or take advantage of tax benefits for married couples. In the grand scheme of things, sex is way down the list.
Sex is used as a weapon by conservatives because it’s the only one of those things that has what Anyabwile calls the gag reflex (we shall not waste time informing him what a gag reflex actually is). Straight people are the majority of the population, and they are attracted to the opposite sex, so the idea of two men/women does the opposite of turning them on (except two lesbians can be ‘pretty hot’ . . . hypocrisy rules). I gather it’s the same with gay people – the idea of heterosexual sex makes them go ‘eww’.
The idea of using this gag reflex is a bit sad. If people can’t get past their innate reaction to a particular sexual activity and consider the whole lives of the people who are affected by this, then they are sad, small-minded, shallow people. I want to believe that people are better than that. Even Christians, who I fundamentally disagree with, are better than this. Should be better than this.
In the end, these people are going to find themselves on the wrong side of history. We’re walking toward equality. In little baby steps, yes, but we’re trying. Fifty years from now, they’re going to look like segregation proponents in the fifties and sixties.
I think Winston sums it up nicely.