Dan Emurian wrote, in part: "I would agree with Thomas Howard, who, as I
recall, wrote in Christianity Today magazine back in the 1980s that male
and female bodies were obviously designed for one another, and not for
extraneous objects or activities. Even Redbook magazine, in the late 1970s,
ran an article entitled "What men really want in a woman." The author
asked, "Who would want to go to bed with a carbon copy?"
I don't recall the CT article (and Redbook is hardly a useful source). But
I agree with the CT observation. As for the Redbook question, apparently a
fair number of folks do wish to do so. The fact that I (or the author)
cannot understand why is hardly relevant.
Dan continues: "I'll mention three resources and then will be happy to drop
the subject unless anyone wants to continue online or offline.
1. <exodusinternational.org> which has a wealth of information from a
Christian perspective on attaining freedom from homosexual involvement;"
The exodus people have, apparently had some success, as well as some
failures, in helping people who wish to change do so. I have read attacks
on their ministry and those attacks often seem to be missing the mark. I
conclude, however, that people's sexuality preferences come in a variety of
modes of operations, and that the exodus process (what a wonderful name!)
cannot handle the majority of cases. For those they can handle, I applaud
their work.
"2. A book entitled _Friends_, which I ran across in the Wheaton College
library in the 70s, which described notable man-to-man friendships which
were not complicated by sexual involvement;"
I cannot tell from this description whether or not this book is relevant.
It may be.
"3. _Getting the Love You Want_, by Harville Hendrix, Ph.D. (Henry Holt &
Co., 1988; pb. Harper & Row, 1990, ISBN 0-06-097292-0), which argues that
monogamous heterosexual marriage is the best environment for personal
growth. My wife and I--"total exact opposites"--would agree. :0)"
That's another book I've not seen. I'd agree with the argument you cite. It
seems to parallel the Thomas Schmit book I have notes on on my website.
Study of the issue(s) here is, IMHO, of key importance, and that means
reading arguments from those who make claims one does not endorse. If you
had asked me a few years ago for my own opinions on this issue, I'd have
been in lockstep with Dr. Dobson. Then I studied the issues, and, even more
importantly, discovered I knew some persons with a homosexual orientation.
ABout 3 years ago I finally concluded that the issue was, at least, not a
"slam dunk" for one side or the other. In August of this year, for no
particular reason except that I decided it was time to get off the fence, I
took the position described in my position statement, posted here and
available on my website. I agonized over that statement for some time; I am
still unsatisfied with it but it stands as it is for now. I can do no less
without being unfaithful to the call of our Lord as I perceive it.
On my website I have links to the Religious Tolerance website, which takes
about the same position I do, and to George Hopper's web site, which does
the same. George is a Methodist minister in England.
Recently I came upon a very good book in which both sides debate the
issues. I highly recommend this one -- CAUGHT IN THE CROSSFIRE, HELPING
CHRISTIANS DEBATE HOMOSEXUALITY, edited by Sally B. Geis & Donald E.
Messer, Abington Press, Nashville, 1994. ISBN 0-687-09524-7. About a dozen
different Christians, all with academic credentials, some "conservative,"
some "liberal," address "What does the Bible say," "What does Science say,"
"how to Minister to Gays," and other aspects of the issues. If you read
only one book on the issues, read this one. At least you will see both
sides and understand the arguments from each side.
Burgy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Sep 04 2001 - 12:27:17 EDT