Saturday, December 13, 2008

Open Forum: What If Heterosexuality Was An "Abomination"?

This open forum question is open to all, whether a straight non-supportive of gay rights, a straight ally and for queer people to hypothesize as well. (Most of all this is for those who read/comment here who espouse views against LGBT equality).

What would happen in a world where the Bible had a verse that said "man shall not lie with woman for it is an abomination."

What if you opened the Bible to a chapter with Adam and Steve, or Aida and Eve and God instructed that all made in his image should follow the natural order of homosexuality.

Close your eyes for a moment and contemplate this, imagine this is considered the absolute truth in society and you are now a part of the minority or majority.

If you are straight, and believe in the Bible, would you be able to suppress your heterosexuality? Could you overcome your heterosexuality and become an "ex-straight" or would you just give in to the way you were made?

If you are queer, how do you think we would be treating the heterosexual minority being that we would have been privileged. Do you think heterosexuals who are currently anti-gay would become "ex-straight", celibate or would they defy the Bible and promote a "heterosexual agenda"?


Anonymous said...

I think I'd probably just be celibate, to be honest, even though I'm not religious. My desires to "be with" other people in that way are not especially strong, and in fact, I'm pretty afraid of relationships in general even though I'm in one (with another coward). If my sexuality were widely seen as an abomination or a perversion, I'd probably be more afraid, likely not even willing to experiment.

Anonymous said...

But that wouldn't rule out the possibility for me of being active in or sympathizing with a Het Rights movement.

Queers United said...

I think being gay that if heterosexuals were the minority and considered sinful, I would be about fighting for their civil liberties. I do think though that I wouldn't think of it as big as other civil rights movements because I think I would keep thinking it is about sex rights, having not experienced the struggle for family etc, I think it would take education to make me comprehend the issue is so much broader.

libhom said...

I would support the rights of the heterosexual, being an atheist who doesn't take religion seriously.

I really like these questions from a rhetorical perspective. More heteros should read them and think about them.

Nat said...

Well, since all of our ancestors would have been sinners, seeing that we are here today, I'd say that the Bible would have lost favour long ago and Christianity would be a dying religion.
Hmm, that would be a good world.

emissary said...

I think Nat makes a good point. If, in a civilization, the perpetuation of society depended on an "abomination", that society would quickly die out, or would change their idea of what an abomination is. Maybe that's why so many heterosexuals have a hard time accepting this movement as anything valid; from a societal perspective, what advantage is there to promote a relationship that doesn't yield the same "fruit" as heterosexuals relations? (rhetorical question)

Laurie said...

Those thoughts go through my mind all the
time...And at work when someone says something
off key....I bring it up....ALL the
'WHAT IFS'.....


Anonymous said...

Who would be able to continue society? If it were the other way around, and two men or two women could create children then I would see more of a need to control my sexual behavior. Although it would be at a GREAT pain to me, if my desire is to please God, then that is what I would have to do at any cost. This is the reason that many unmarried Christians are celibate. We believe that sex is ONLY ordained by God through the union of one man married to one woman. But we all know that not everyone that professes to be a Christian remains celibate until marriage. Thus they are sinning, no more and no less than today's LGBT, and they are still accountable to God and need to repent. I don't think many gay people believe that others can truly love God so much that they would risk their earthly happiness to follow his Word.

That's probably the reason why in all of your posts you put quotations around the term ex-gay. I wonder why it's ok for a formerly straight person to suddenly DISCOVER that they are gay, but a gay person can never be straight again (I believe you label those individuals as bi-sexual, closeted or confused). I gather you don't believe (like many Christians do) that God has the ability, if asked, to change the wants and desires and behavior of a gay person and it can be REAL and forever LASTING. But that's what Christians do: When we struggle with our sin (whatever it is), we PRAY about it and asks that God's will be done in our lives. Jesus was our example in this area (The Bible says that he prayed that God's will be done before his crucifixion).

The way I see it, anyone who proceeds to continue in such behavior is more concerned about their wants, needs, and desires and less about God's. In the Bible, the Lord says "If you love me keep my commandments". This applies to all men and women whether you feel comfortable with them or not. In today's world it not easy to live a life that is holy and acceptable to God, but we must at least make an attempt.

If the world were upset down, and gay was straight, sure you'd get your straight-rights supporters. But I can guarantee that the majority won't consider themselves Christians. A lot of the more God-pleasing Christians would live as homosexuals or resign themselves to a life of celibacy.


Post a Comment