Moral Obligations
Here's an interesting random quote that was printed in the margin of Saturday's Dallas Morning News, Religion section:
"We have a moral obligation to balance our budget."
U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (Rep. - Kansas), a conservative Christian, on why he voted for a budget bill that would cut assistance to the needy.
It's always interesting to note where moral obligations lie.
Angela and I attended an ex-gay conference in Burleson, Texas over the weekend, and the group of predominantly white conservatives who were there also seemed to possess some definitive moral obligations which they did not hesitate to impart. They seemed to consider it their duty to let the world know about the root causes of homosexuality (brokenness in the model of the perfect family, for example), why homosexuality is an attempt to "fill a legitimate need in an illegitimate way," how the church should respond to gay "strugglers," why the culture is partially to blame with the increase in the acceptance of gay images in the mainstream, and so on.
It's impossible to condense the pages and pages of notes that Angela and I took in this small space, but for now suffice it to say that through all of this talk, there was no account for "healthy homosexuality." Of course, they would say there is no such thing. But relationships that are good at the core and from which goodness springs forth do exist and God works powerfully in them. They also seemed to believe that if only a gay person would turn to God and fully commit to a life of righteousness rather than a life of sin, there would be a radical transformation in that person's ideas about sexual orientation. In their eyes, Jesus' love becomes redemptive in this way and allows for the transformation from gay to ex-gay. Although one ex-gay speaker admitted, "Without Christ I would be back in the gay bars tomorrow," so perhaps one never truly reaches the level of "ex-gay." In that case, I'm sad for this fellow, who has become convinced that wholeness in God cannot be achieved as a gay man. I beg to differ.
According to them, brokenness is "defining myself in ways other than God would define me." I don't disagree with that in the grand scheme of things, but coming from them it includes the assumption that being gay is one of the ways "other than God would define me" and that conflicts with what I have already discovered to be true about God. When fruit of the Spirit is evident (peace, joy, generosity, kindness, etc.) sin is absent, because fruit cannot spring forth from sin. They see automatic brokenness in homosexuality while I see the potential for wholeness. It's a difference in our conviction and experience as Christians.
I'm about to start writing an article about this for the Dallas Voice and I'll post it here as soon as it's published.
"We have a moral obligation to balance our budget."
U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (Rep. - Kansas), a conservative Christian, on why he voted for a budget bill that would cut assistance to the needy.
It's always interesting to note where moral obligations lie.
Angela and I attended an ex-gay conference in Burleson, Texas over the weekend, and the group of predominantly white conservatives who were there also seemed to possess some definitive moral obligations which they did not hesitate to impart. They seemed to consider it their duty to let the world know about the root causes of homosexuality (brokenness in the model of the perfect family, for example), why homosexuality is an attempt to "fill a legitimate need in an illegitimate way," how the church should respond to gay "strugglers," why the culture is partially to blame with the increase in the acceptance of gay images in the mainstream, and so on.
It's impossible to condense the pages and pages of notes that Angela and I took in this small space, but for now suffice it to say that through all of this talk, there was no account for "healthy homosexuality." Of course, they would say there is no such thing. But relationships that are good at the core and from which goodness springs forth do exist and God works powerfully in them. They also seemed to believe that if only a gay person would turn to God and fully commit to a life of righteousness rather than a life of sin, there would be a radical transformation in that person's ideas about sexual orientation. In their eyes, Jesus' love becomes redemptive in this way and allows for the transformation from gay to ex-gay. Although one ex-gay speaker admitted, "Without Christ I would be back in the gay bars tomorrow," so perhaps one never truly reaches the level of "ex-gay." In that case, I'm sad for this fellow, who has become convinced that wholeness in God cannot be achieved as a gay man. I beg to differ.
According to them, brokenness is "defining myself in ways other than God would define me." I don't disagree with that in the grand scheme of things, but coming from them it includes the assumption that being gay is one of the ways "other than God would define me" and that conflicts with what I have already discovered to be true about God. When fruit of the Spirit is evident (peace, joy, generosity, kindness, etc.) sin is absent, because fruit cannot spring forth from sin. They see automatic brokenness in homosexuality while I see the potential for wholeness. It's a difference in our conviction and experience as Christians.
I'm about to start writing an article about this for the Dallas Voice and I'll post it here as soon as it's published.
posted by Jen Austin at 7:20 AM
1 Comments:
Hello Ms. Austin,
I want to thank you again for coming to the conference. And while we may disagree on some issues, I don’t believe it needs to be a point of dissension or give us any reason to refrain from building community with each other.
I do appreciate you quoting me, however, I do believe it’s important to quote me in context. You wrote:
Although one ex-gay speaker admitted, "Without Christ I would be back in the gay bars tomorrow," so perhaps one never truly reaches the level of "ex-gay." In that case, I'm sad for this fellow, who has become convinced that wholeness in God cannot be achieved as a gay man"
I did in fact say this. It’s also important to note that I also said it was, at one point, not my intention to be anything but gay and Christian. I framed what I said by explaining that in the process of regaining an intimate relationship with God, I drew the conclusion that I was not gay. My aim was not “gay”, it was and is God. I left my identity on the altar and asked Him to respond. I know this is hard to believe for some, but nonetheless it is my experience. I would add to that statement that I am neither gay or ex-gay and that these types of labels are limiting terms that don’t describe the whole “self”. I’m happier than I’ve ever been, so please don’t feel as if you have to show me pity. As an American, I enjoy the privilege of self-direction and my life decisions follow suit. I noticed on your website here that you list the personal qualities you admire most as:
Qualities you admire - Self-awareness, reflection, individuality
Qualities you don't - Narrow-mindedness, narcissism, self-righteousness
It seems to me that we would get along just fine if we had the opportunity to know each other. Which reminds me, by the way, I’m still waiting to hear from you about my invitation to have coffee and discuss your views on the conference. You see, I really don’t have an agenda. I really want to know. Would you be willing at the very least to let me lend you my ear in hopes that we can build bridges to understand each other rather than drawing inaccurate conclusions about one another? In my view, the gay/straight debate has gone on long enough. Our focus as Christians is to reveal the love and compassion of Christ to those who have yet to know it. We are exhorted by the directives in the New Testament epistles to love each other purely and to be devoted to each other completely. Let’s mutually decide to move past the agendas and exemplify The Kingdom of God. I hope you will give me a chance by hearing what I really have to say.
Post a Comment
<< Home