Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Read & Discuss: TruthDig: "Inventing Sin: Religion and Homosexuality"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » GLBT Donate to DU
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 01:24 PM
Original message
Read & Discuss: TruthDig: "Inventing Sin: Religion and Homosexuality"
Edited on Sat Dec-03-05 02:07 PM by Nothing Without Hope
http://www.truthdig.com/dig/item/religion_homosexuality

Inventing Sin: Religion and Homosexuality


No matter their own scandals, religious institutions through history have a consistent scapegoat: homosexuals.

A Dig led by Larry Gross
Dig posted on Dec. 1, 2005



(snip - article begins with several recent examples of denouncement of male homosexuality by spokepeople for major religions)

These apparently disparate events reflect a current reality: At the start of the 21st century, religion remains intertwined with politics, and few topics arouse as much religious fervor as those concerned with sexuality-as we are witnessing in the battle today over gay marriage. Indeed, for the three Abrahamic religions, as they’re sometimes called, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, homosexuality has provided a rare example of a truly common cause-the unusually harsh and virulent condemnation of homosexuality by religious authorities through the ages.

In nearly all societies throughout human history, religion offers answers to fundamental questions concerning the origin and meaning of things. Religious systems of explanation offer accounts of the creation of the world, as well as specifying the rules for proper behavior-and the consequences for infractions-that have been imposed by the Creator. In “Civilization and Its Discontents,” Freud summarized what “the common man understands by his religion-the system of doctrines and promises which on the one hand explains to him the riddle of life with enviable completeness, and, on the other, assures him that a careful Providence will watch over his life and will compensate him in a future life for any frustrations he suffers here.”

In Western culture, the dominant religious traditions for the past two millenniums have been Christian, built upon, but significantly differing from, Judaism. In contrast to most other major world religions-Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism and Islam-Christianity has been marked by what sex historian Vern L. Bullough terms a general antagonism toward sexual expression. However, homosexuality has been singled out in Judaism and Christianity for condemnation far greater than that directed toward most other forms of sexual behavior.

Old Testament views on sexuality were shaped by principles that resulted in hostility to homosexual acts. The first was a focus on procreation as a necessary goal and duty, embodied in the commandment to “be fruitful and multiply.” This fundamental injunction led to the expectation that everyone would marry as early as possible and engage in marital sexual intercourse on a regular basis. In this context, any sexual act that could not promote appropriate procreation was sinful. Thus, because conception was viewed as the product of male semen planted in the female womb, lesbianism did not evoke the same sort of condemnation: As one Biblical scholar put it, “In lesbianism there is no spilling of seed. Thus life is not symbolically lost, and therefore lesbianism is not prohibited in the Bible.”

(snip - MUCH more at link; this is a long article)


By the way, TruthDig (along with the SF Chronicle) is where Robert Scheer is now devoting his insight and energies since he was replaced at the LA Times with a mealy-mouthed wingnut. You'll see articles by him under the banner "Ear to the Ground" on the right side of the TruthDig home page: http://www.truthdig.com

Edited to add: I have cross-posted to Progressive Independent here:
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=127&topic_id=1343&mesg_id=1343
and, in an attempt to draw in more discussion to this current GLBT thread, have posted brief headsup crossposts in the DU Religion/Theology forum
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x38711
and the General Discussion forum
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5509819

I'd like to see a full, rich, insightful discussion by people with a range of viewpoints and information to offer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. It should be "Inventing Sin: Religion and Sexuality"
because all these clowns in the robes and funny hats have had an even deeper dread of women for a far longer time.

Every revival of religious fervor has alwasy been felt by women, first, and this is long, long before the fools in the funny clothes would ever admit one reason they always dreaded women was that they preferred men. Most of these guys seem to spend most of their time thinking up silly and inconvenient rules, 90% of which are directed towards denying women full participation in life.

Religion has never managed to come to terms with sexuality, at all, and nearly all preach against it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Yes, they don't call them "patriarchal religions" for nothing. In forcing
a world view of women as necessarily subservient to men, doctrinal rules follow culture and presiding bias. I suspect the denial and suppression of lusty, joyful sexuality - in some cases even within marriage, as I was trained in grade school Catholic religion classes - has to do with this terrible suppression of respect and any kind of shared power with women.

For this any many other intolerable doctrinal views I left long ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. In faiths where women are strong,
and have influrence and leadership positions, is there this bias against glbt? In my own experience, this isn't the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kweerwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Sexism and homophobia are often intertwined
The "patriarchal" view of homosexuality is that men are "acting as women" when they engage in homosexual activity.

If they already view women with disdain, it logically follows that any men who "act like women" in seeking out sex with other men will be equally dispised ... possibly even more hated because they can "choose" to act like real men, but reject that and take on the "woman's role" in matters of sexuality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Yes, they are, which is why I find myself
posting on the GLBT forum when I'm none of the above.

You're exactly right, the horror of the pure male being defiled by the filth of the female is projected onto gay men who would let other men do "that" to them.

You can't talk about the religious horror of gays without addressing the deeper and more fundamental horror of women. They're one and the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
3. Yet there are some religious groups who welcome everyone
Gays and lesbians are welcome in some Sufi orders, and are teachers and people of rank. I think one reason this is so is because of the openness of these orders, who welcome all sincere seekers.

What I've never understood is why anyone should be afraid of gays and lesbians, and frankly I think a lot of the scapegoating is based on fear. I have known glbt people ever since I could remember, and sexual orientation never made a difference-in fact, my friends often laugh because I don't have a clue as to their orientation unless they tell me.

The other reason I think gays and lesbians are scapegoated is that it gives those who do it some sense of power or superiority, which they really wouldn't need to try and acquire if they truly knew themselves and were comfortable with themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Like you, I feel that the scapegoating has something to do with
Edited on Sat Dec-03-05 02:18 PM by Nothing Without Hope
fostering a sense of secure superiority, a kind of power game. That's part of what the traditional patriarchal world view is about. True mystics like some sufis don't need reassurance of worldly domination.

There is also the "advantage" of providing a visible "evil enemy" to unify and motivate the followers in opposition. This is also about power; I see it as a form of political manipulation. It takes on a life of its own when some supernatural force is being blamed for all evil - hence the very odd fact that Satan appears to promote gayness. Time was, he was also apparently behind voting rights for women and minorities and all matter of other eeeeviiillll doings.

I hope this discussion really takes off and is rich and broad as this topic deserves and needs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. It all has to do with concepts
the basic one being whether or not you are responsible for your own development in life. I think a lot of people cop out on this, wanting to give that responsibility to an authority figure-I've even known people who have run for the hills when confronted with having to find out who they really are. I think many people are more comfortable with seperation, with the concept of "otherness" because they think they don't have to face reality and their part in it.

BTW, I like your username.

Salaam.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sapphocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Some Native American tribes, for instance...
Edited on Sat Dec-03-05 11:24 PM by Sapphocrat
...honor Two-Spirits (a.k.a. "berdache"). :)

If I were inclined toward Christianity, the Society of Friends would be my first stop. Paraphrased from the book, "A Quaker View Toward Sex" (1964): "One should no more deplore homosexuality than lefthandedness."

As things stand, however, it's no wonder at all I belong to no organized religion, and probably never will. (I don't blame God/dess; I blame his/her/its most fervent followers.)

You're right on the button about fear. I've come to believe that the homophobia = homosexual arousal theory is solid fact, and explains everything.

Edited for clarity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. I think the fear is not only of homosexual arousal, it's also a very old
Edited on Sat Dec-03-05 11:54 PM by Nothing Without Hope
and deep-seated fear of the "uncanny." People like to categorize things - it's a way of controlling them, expressing power over them. Not for nothing do control freaks organize all the spontaneity out of their lives - it's motivated by fear of the unexpected and thus uncontrollable.

Things that don't fit into traditional definition boxes have tended to fascinate and also worry human beings for a long time.

In the Celtic lands, for example - though I doubt it's a unique phenomenon - things that are neither this nor that but some indefinable other are regarded as magic and also dangerous. The equinoxes are the times between seasons, dawn and dusk are neither day nor night. At these times, the "veil between the worlds" was thought to be thinner, weaker than normal, so that uncanny things might happen.

In some Native American traditions, shamans were often gay men. They were seen as god-touched, different. From what little I know of them, some of them were also expected to wear womens' clothes, so at least in some cases it sounds like they were molded more into an "in-between" person to suit expectations. Surely this didn't happen with ALL gay men, so I wonder how others were viewed in these cultures. Were they simply accepted as they were?

I would like to know more about how gay men and women have been viewed in traditional cultures around the world. We know all too much of how the patriarchal traditions view homosexuality - particularly male homosexuality. How about all the rest? What does it reveal about the underlying human pschology and what clues are there that could be used in promoting true acceptance?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roseBudd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-05 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
6. All that condemnation sure hasn't had any effect, there are still
homosexuals. I think we need to ask, what they hope to achieve since they cannot do anything to "prevent" homosexuality. If there actions and phobias can be presented as ineffective and achieving nothing, perhaps they would just chill and get over it.

When asked to sign a petition to get the ban of same sex marriage on the state ballot (OH) at a grocery store in a predominantly African American neighborhood, I burst out "that's ridiculous!" The clipboard wielder said "why?" I said because "they're about 3% of the population, get over it."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-05 06:08 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. people ban together when they perceive threat.
i.e. the catholic church today is trying to instill the notion of ''threat'' by banning gay priests.
the catholic herarchy is educated -- they Know that homosexuality and paedophilia have nothing in common -- but after the scandal they felt a need to scapegoat and this is how they do it.

the essential problem with male homosexuality is that it's easy to identify the ''effeminate'' male{if said male is gay} but impossible to detect the ''masculine'' male.

the ''masculine'' male might marry and procreate -- but have sex with other men.
creating a ghostly, subverting figure.

historically it's important to note that greeks at one point colonized israel -- they had tremendous influence there.
their occupation was not the heavy handed thing of rome.

they introduced ''naked'' competative athletics{nakedness was not approved of among those israelis at that time}

it was near enough to greek classical civilization -- so there were openly married greek men who also had male lovers{usually younger} -- these men had money, were influential, successful, etc.

so some of the strong taboos regarding homosexuality and ancient judaism spring from threats the culture perceived to it's young men.

i agree and disagree with some of the posters regarding women and male homosexuality.
and while i think there are some links -- the threat to gay males is pretty near explosive -- the advent of gay mariage will make some people fell exceedingly threatened.

i could say more -- but i'll wait to see what happens to this thread.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 10th 2024, 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » GLBT Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC