Fun Size Bytes (from @Tj)

At the risk of being jumped on by people, I say this with sincerity.

Note: I have edited down indefensible’s original post because I assume that y’all are following him already anyway. If you aren’t, a) you should and b) you should definitely read what he wrote on the link here.

Also: the utterly fantabulous jessabelle2o7 wrote a reply that addresses this issue from a legal standpoint, and I think she raises some hugely correct and important issues. But I think Ross was addressing more of a “informal conversation wherein you might be talking to your uncle/grandmother/friend about gay/lesbian people” and in those conversations, legality isn’t front-and-center. (Is it clear that I want you to read both of those pieces and that I agree with both of them? It should be.) Legal issues are important for addressing the “separate but (un)equal” issues, as well as other issues such as hospital visitation, etc.

But again, that’s not in the forefront of what I’m talking about below.

Here’s an excerpt of what Indefensible said:

However, there’s one that supporters must stop using right now if they wish not to play into the hands of their opponents. They must stop defending homosexuality per se, and especially they must stop saying versions of “it’s natural”, “I was born this way”, and “homosexuality is not a choice”.

This is not because these things are not true. Frankly, I’m ambivalent about whether they are true or not. I don’t care that you’re gay, and I care less why you’re gay. It’s not germane to the discussion of rights, and it is frankly damaging.

Because when you employ this line of thinking, it invites comparison with other human behaviours that people are arguably born into, but that society has no compunction in regulating and banning. To put this in your opponents hands is to pitch them a wonderful slowball that they will smack out of the park by saying “nobody chooses to be a pedophile either.”

I quote this for two reasons, well, maybe one reason with two parts:

I used to be someone who believed “the Bible says it’s a sin”.

(Sorry if this hurts anyone’s feelings. Hopefully it is obvious that I no longer believe this. I was fairly young and impressionable, and some people I respected told me that it was and I believed them. Now I do my part to make sure that others don’t accept that line of reasoning, and have fought for full-inclusion and acceptance of gay/lesbian folks whenever possible. Hopefully this is a sign of hope that people can grow out of these bigoted perspectives. Still, I look back on that time in my life with no small amount of shame.)

That’s part one.

Part two is that when I held that perspective and someone tried to convince me that homosexuality(1) must be OK because they were born that way, I would tell them this:

“My father was an alcoholic. His parents were both alcoholics. Genetically that gives me something like a 75% chance of becoming an alcoholic. Would you say that it would be OK for me to be an alcoholic because it’s genetic?”

Of course no one could answer “Yes!” without seeming ridiculous.

Now you may very easily (and correctly) point out that these are two very different things (alcoholism is inherently destructive, whereas sexual orientation is not) but that’s a subtlety of argument which is going to be lost on most people.

(1) This may be “part 3”: I didn’t realize that (some) people who are gay/lesbian dislike the term “homosexual” because it was originally a diagnosis of a psychological disease (back in the DSM III or something like that). A friend who is the pastor of a Metropolitan Community Church taught me a great deal about this. I still notice that a lot of conservatives use the term “homosexuals” and folks on the other side use the term “gay/lesbian” (although there are also bisexual and transgender folks who ought to be included as well).

This is not simply a matter of semantics. It is the difference between saying “these are a certain kind of people” or “these are people who are somehow ‘ill’ or ‘wrong’ or ‘not normal’.” (Well, assuming that you are aware of why the word ‘homosexuals’ is offensive to some. I’m absolutely sure that lots of people who are supportive of equal rights for gay/lesbian/bi/trans people may use the term simply as an ‘umbrella’ without any intend to offend.)

Lastly, I have been to churches all around the world, and the best, most inviting, most racially integrated and inclusive of the widest range of people of different ages, etc was at the Metropolitan Community Church in San Diego. They also had an awesome choir. I think it was my wife who said, “This is the church Jesus would go to.” To put it in church-y terms, the Spirit was alive.

(The MCC was formed in the 1970s as a place for those who were not welcomed by other Christian churches because of their sexual orientation. It continues to thrive and grow as most ‘mainline’ churches — Methodist, Episcopal, Presbyterian — shrink.)

For what it’s worth.