The Peace of God to all that belong to the Light,
It comes to my attention the words of President James E. Carter in an interview given to the media this week, in which the former State head , who is
an extremely active member of the Baptist Church in Georgia, is saying the following words"
I think the so open opinion of a Politician that has distinguished his career since even before to be President for his unique way to conciliate
separation in between Churches and State and a so active role in his own religious congregation as preacher every weekend in the Sunday school offered
in Atlanta by the Baptist Church is really interesting and inviting to reflect about this so controversial topic from a non fanatic perspective,
trying to find the middle point of balance to moderate a discussion that has divided so much the world and the nation in the last years.
"Jesus would encourage any love affair if it was honest and sincere and was not damaging to anyone else, and I don't see that gay marriage damages
anyone else," President Jimmy Carter said in a HuffPost Live interview with Marc Lamont Hill published Tuesday.
"I believe Jesus would approve gay marriage," he said. "That's just my own personal opinion."
What are the facts here:
First at all, few weeks ago the Supreme Court of the United States has officially determined that the Civil same gender marriage is valid in all the
country in spite of the bans that existed in some states against it. The decision is founded in the Civil rights laws and the Bill of Rights. Now,
America is one of the most recent countries to join to a world trend that in moving around the world at impressive pace.
So in order to propose an impartial and objective meditation in the topic, let me try to analyze some important aspects to consider:
1) What the supreme court has approved is the legality of a civil union , so a contract of community of goods in between two people in spite of their
gender, two persons that decided to share their future together living under the same roof and sharing intimacy and affection. This decision is
not substituting at all the religious marriage, that is the one that is a sacrament or a rite by the Churches, and also the decision is not trying
invalidate the right of the religions to marriage people or to force them to offer marriage to same gender couples.
2) The legal frame of the same gender civil marriage it is not explicit in what corresponds to sexual duties of the spouses in this kind of
union. As a matter of fact it is extremely vague in sexual roles, even open the space for asexual cohabitation in between Partners.
It seems that
the definition of civil marriage refers to intimacy in general and mutual affection but their scope is not clearly defined , so we can assume that the
law in general is just talking about free will for association based in mutual love in between partners.
3) The prohibition of Leviticus is used by conservatives to condemn same gender unions linking it with Homosexuality as a sin, However, here we
must recognize that there is no universal definition about what is sexuality. In an ample sense sexuality is not just only coital activity, but any
kind of sensual expression in between two persons.
Leviticus is clearly against exclusively to sodomy , although there is also the debate that it
can cover specially ritual prostitution, but it is not clear that goes against all kind of affection or love that can emerge in between people of the
same gender. If by homosexual behavior we refer to intercourse well Leviticus can be applied, but it does not seem the same when we talk about
other physical expressions of love that two persons of the same gender can have: kissing, petting, to hug, to touch.
4) Is all the people really called by God to enter in the traditional definition of marriage or not?
I think in this point there is a lot of
awareness along centuries that it is practical impossible to have the entire society involved in marital life, many people for different reasons
can't marry a person of the opposite gender or simply do not have the vocation to make a traditional family. if it is not the case what rights
have the people that can't go in to that kind of Marriage? their only right is to live the rest of their lives in solitude or enter in a monastic
5) are the homosexuals already deprived of chance of salvation even if there is scientific evidence that they have a natural attraction for the
so what is the meaning of the following words of Jesus?
St Matthey 19, 10 The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." 11But He said
to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. 12"For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their
mother's womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom
of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."
6) What happened with a minority in the diversity spectrum that usually few people talk about, the so called Asexuals , people that is not
naturally sexually attracted by anybody?
what happened if some of them accept the same gender marriage as a way to look of companion of somebody,
in terms that are strictly of affection? This is a possibility that the ones that oppose same gender marriage even don't consider, and makes evident
a so clear contradiction in the argument that Same Gender civil unions means necessarily homosexual unions.
7) what is Adelphopoiesis? This was a kind of brotherhood or same gender Sacramental union sealed by a blessing of a priest that existed in the
ancient Christian communities and was preserved modern times by the Catholic church until the XIV century and also by the Eastern Orthodox church
until the XVIII century.
Is this the answer of religion to the people that are in search of same gender socially and religiously accepted bond?
Why it was supressed? why a religious rite that existed in the tradition of the church was erased in modern times? was that decision possible moved
by an anti same gender attitude in the religious organizations, in the churches?
8) What if the wave of same gender unions is a natural response in sexual or affective behavior to the human overpopulation of the planet?
the earth continue supporting a population growing at the rates of the XX century? what could happen if we continue the trend of 1 billion at 1800, 2
Billion at 1920s, 3 billion at 1960, 4 billion at middle 1970s, 5 billion at end of 1980s, 6 billion at the change of millennium and more than 7
billon right now? is the demographic growing correlated with increase in frequency of broken marriages and families, abandoned children, grave
recessions, violence, criminality and wars everywhere?
This is a thread for a serious compassive reflection on the topic not to assume judgmental positions that in my opinion correspond only to God decide
to assume or not. I am going to remain neutral among the different thesis or opinions and with a lot of open mind.
Thanks for your attention,
The Angel of Lightness
edit on 7/11/2015 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)