Is it Wrong2bGay?
- Their behavior is unnatural.
It's natural that male goes with female, not male with male or female with female. What they do with each other is kind of disgusting, not to mention that it is against God, against tradition, against family and against society.
Strong argument?
Rock solid!
Or refutable?Who is to say what is "natural"? Are we all scientist who really know what is natural in human or animal behavior?
A lot of other things might be called unnatural in a biological sense, but we still do them.
We wear clothing. We are the only living things on the planet that do so.
In our distant past we did not wear much, if anything at all. So how is wearing clothes natural, in a natural science sort of way?
We drive cars and move along everyday at 100 km per hour. What's natural about that?
Come on, we're human--we're not natural! We're beyond nature. We do what works for us, as a society and as individuals.
Ok, so maybe a lot of things that we do are unnatural.
That's so disgusting!
So is eating sushi--for some people. For others sushi is the greatest culinary treat ever invented. Disgusting is a totally relative concept.
Many children would find a sloppy, wet kiss from grandma very disgusting. That doesn't mean that sloppy, wet kisses are wrongful things to plant. That same kid grows older and becomes obsessed with the notion of a sloppy, wet kiss--maybe from a girl or a guy, or maybe from both.
The point is one man's disgusting is another man's taste of heaven.
Now the God question--you can't just explain that away.
He told us so, right?
He didn't create humans or our sex organs for that.
Ok, I'm a lilttle stumped on this one. A penis goes into a vagina. In time a baby grows and pops out. Another penis goes into a man's mouth and something comes out, and then... and then, there's no rhyme or reason in that, is there?
Maybe someone gets an STD, or even worse AIDS.
God must be telling us something. He doesn't like that gay stuff.
People really think this way, don't they?
They reason things out this way. But this isn't really a God question.
It is the same as the first question. It is a question of what is biologically natural.
So, I'll make the assertion again:
We humans are beyond nature. That is not to say that we are above it or not subject to it, but it means that there is more to our existence than that which the natural, biological order dictates.
The God question is a theological one, not a biological one.
Who is God, then?
What does he like or dislike, and does he really even exist? These are profound metaphysical questions.
I really don't see how anyone can presume to say what God wants without being prepared to back that up with a deep discussion of who God is.
And I'm afraid I'm not really that prepared at the moment. Are you?
The reality is that God is many different things to many different people.
It isn't a whole lot different from the sushi paradox. Some people believe sushi to be heaven on earth, while some others would nearly throw up at the thought of it. Some believe this about God, while some others believe that.
The moral of the story is that we should not try to impose our own understanding of God (and what we think he wants) on others. Live and let live ought to be the mantra, as we allow each person to be his own arbiter of what is good and what is bad.
Now there's one more powerful argument, which raises issues of tradition, culture, society and family.
Confucius, Socrates, Paul of Taursus, Thomas Jefferson--what have the wise and the powerful through the ages taught us?
Ok, I have to give in a bit on this one. The legacy and the values of a society-at-large, and any sub-groups within that society, cannot be minimized.
Things that have persisted over time have done so for a reason, though perhaps not always one that can be defended as morally correct.
Does the mere existence of a traditionally held belief offer a valid rationale for its continued acceptance?
One question is whether there is a cultural or social validity to homosexuality. And the answer might be Yes, in some times and places, and No, in other times and places.
 |  |
It seems the 21st century is one of those times when Yes is becoming the norm in more and more places, but not yet in all. Sri Lanka, arguably, is not yet among the Yes places. Anti-gay laws are still in place, even if rarely enforced.
India decriminalized homosexuality in 2009, but the social stigma has yet begun to fade. In liberal Dubai, as part of the UAE, homosexuality is punishable by death--it is in the legal code.
Homosexual acts remain punishable by death in Iran, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, some parts of Nigeria and Somalia.
Wikipedia
Lo and behold the wonder of Sharia law.
There is a second part to this question.That is, balancing the good of the larger group and larger society with that of the individual.
This suggests that even when the response to homosexuality in a given society or in any subset within that society is No, then the question of how the individual responds to this is still a very relevant one.
It is unrealistic and quite unfair to suggest that the individual must just ascent to the expectations of society when that entails a bitter suppression of one's own understanding of self. This would be an unacceptable response.
The fact is that the gay person in the No society needs to find a middle way.
Perhaps it is that great middle way that the Buddha talked about.
The middle way might be the way of love that Jesus Christ talked about. I don't know what, if there is any, middle way which the prophet Mohammed might have spoken of.
Perhaps Sufism is an expression of the middle way within the Islamic context. Would anyone care to enlighten me?
I don't doubt that in Hindu or Hebrew scripture there would also be a middle way of sorts.
Even Humanism and secularism have at their core a sense that the right path is not an absolute, but something more subjective or interpretive.
The gay man, woman or youth in an anti-gay, homophobic society must find a way to continue to live within that society while remaining true to oneself.
Or else, he or she should strive to leave that society in order to be able to become a more self-fulfilled individual somewhere else.
If you stay, then you have to learn to cope, to manage, to express and to fulfill yourself in whatever ways that you can understand to be fair and legitimate.
 What you do not do is suppress the being inside of you. In some cases you join with others to push for change in the society, to attempt to amend the laws and attitudes within that society that are homophobic. |
 | The question isn't What's wrong with our being anything? The real question is What's wrong with the world? What the heck is wrong with them? |
Beat me, hate me
You can never break me
Will me, thrill me
You can never kill me
Jew me, sue me
Everybody do me
Kick me, kike me
Don't you black or white me
All I wanna say is that
They don't really care about us
All I wanna say is that
They don't really care about us!
 | The Middle Way (बोधिसत्त्व) Ask the Bodhisattva... Can you take me by the hand? |
I must say I don't know from where I came to associate the expression of the middle way with Buddhism. I am not a Buddhist and have never really studied it, although I have lived in Sri Lanka and Japan, where Buddhism flourishes in some regard.
The middle way is not the way of compromise, according to the Wikipedia entry.
The middle path does not mean a mid point in a straight line joining two extremes represented by points. The middle path represents a high middle point, like the apex of a triangle. Thus the high middle point is more value filled than a mere compromise.Now that is profound.
I suppose it takes some effort to find that high middle point.
It suggests reaching a position that is more noble, studied and contemplative than simply taking and rejecting a bit from either side.
It is the fabled way of enlightenment, but let us hope that it does not require the sanctitude of a Buddha, a Ghandi, a Martin Luther King, Jr. or a Nelson Mandela to attain.
There is no wrong in being gay.
I believe I have argued that soundly in this post. But one must appreciate the stances that some may take to the contrary.
We need to be able to acknowledge their lines of reasoning, but see and argue beyond them.
There are legitimate explanations--even if no justification--for the homophobia that still exists in many parts of the world.Final analysis:
One needs, at first, to address his or her own need for self-fulfillment.
Then one must seek to balance this, in some noble way, with the constraints imposed upon him or her by family, other affiliations and the society-at-large.
Finding a Balance The Middle Way | |
Do you accept being gay, but struggle with how to be accepted by family, friends and colleagues?Is it a matter of keeping a job and protecting others, one's children for example?
Do you struggle with issues of self-acceptance?
Is the real struggle against a larger society that would belittle, ostracize, banish or even imprison you?
Is it life or death at the hands of homophobes in Wyoming, New York... or at the hands of the state in Uganda, Saudi Arabia, Iran...?
 |
← The Sunshine Twins • They're Back in 2010 →
Top ↑
Labels: commentary, gay, religion, society
| If prompted, become a follower--then REFRESH and vote. |  |
posted by B.D. at 5:00 PM
1 Comments:
Mmm that guy standing in the river is soo FIT, his abs are so strong, luv to feel his body so bad xxx
check out http://pakiluver.blogspot.com
enjoy!
Post a Comment
Something you liked or didn't like in this post? A favorite image? A complaint...?
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Sri Lankan Male Home