Volume 91, Issue 25

Thursday, October 9, 1997

about face


Modest proposal about immodest acts

By Michael P. Carroll
Professor of Sociology

I'm no bigot and I have no objection to people doing what they want in the privacy of their own bedrooms, no matter how bizarre or distasteful. But I do object to having things pushed in my face and I do object to a particular group asking for special privileges. Politically incorrect though it may be, then, I object – and I object very strongly – to the determined campaign now being waged by heterosexuals to promote their special form of "sexual orientation." Their actions are, quite simply, offensive. You can't go to a movie or watch a TV show without seeing a man, naked, jumping into bed with a woman, also naked and you can't read a magazine or a newspaper without finding someone talking about heterosexual "love." But it's more than just the media. Overt acts of heterosexuality are EVERYWHERE. Walk down almost any street in any big city and you'll see men and women holding hands and (often) kissing. And remember: these people are flaunting their "sexuality" not just in front of me or you, but in front of our children as well.

In the end, we have to make a moral decision: is heterosexuality just an "alternative lifestyle" (to use the jargon favoured by sociologists) or is it, to use plain language, immoral? For me, it's not a difficult choice since I think the Bible is quite clear in its condemnation of heterosexuality. After all, when God kills someone in the Bible for their sinfulness, who does He usually kill? Heterosexuals. Most of the people he killed with the Great Flood (Gen 7: 1-24), for instance, were practicing heterosexuals. And what happens just after Onan has sexual intercourse with Tamar? God kills him (Gen 38: 9-10 ). And what about when God wanted to kill Egyptian children? Did he send the Angel of Death to kill the children of homosexuals? No, He did NOT. Only the children of heterosexuals were killed (Exodus 7: 1-24). (Today, of course, if God sent the Angel of Death to kill the children of heterosexuals, some unctuous bureaucrat from the Ontario Human Rights Commission would probably complain that the "rights" of those people, or maybe even the "rights" of their children, were being "violated"; it just shows you how far we have fallen from the sort of thinking that pervades God's Holy Word). And what about the Commandments, those 10 rules which epitomize God's Law (Exodus 20: 1-17)? I don't know what it says in your version of the Bible, but in my Bible not a single one of the Commandments says a thing against homosexual behavior. By contrast at least two Commandments very clearly prohibit HETEROsexual behavior.

It is with the coming of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, of course, that God made his condemnation of heterosexuality most clear. In His wisdom, God permits us the choice to chose between sin and righteousness. If we want to, then, we can choose the perversion of heterosexuality. (I know that we're not supposed to say "perversion" these days, but when I think of what those people do...well, perversion just seems right.) But when it came to His OWN Divine Son, God made sure Jesus came into the world without his mother having been tainted with the sin of heterosexuality. Could He have been any clearer in telling us how He regarded heterosexuality? I think not. And what about Jesus himself? Certainly, He recognized that women had a place – kissing and anointing his feet (Luke 7: 37-46), sitting at his feet while he preached (Luke 10: 29), grabbing hold of his feet and worshipping him (Matthew 28: 9), etc. But when it came to his inner circle, the Apostles, he chose only MEN. Would Our Lord have chosen to surround himself only with MEN in this way if he had wanted to endorse HETEROsexuality? Again, I think not. And at the Last Supper, we are told that a disciple whom Jesus loved (and please note that "loved" is PRECISELY the word the Bible uses) was lying close to the bosom of Our Lord (John 13: 23). And was it a WOMAN that Our Lord chose to let lie close to his bosom on this important occasion? No, it was not; it was a MAN.

The Bible then, is clear in its condemnation of heterosexuality and I personally believe that we turn away from God's holy word at our peril. But even those who know not of the Bible have to admit, if they're honest, that heterosexuality is corrupting. It is a well-known FACT, for instance, that most Emperors around the time the Fall of the Roman Empire were practicing heterosexuals (they were also, it is true, Christian, but that's different). It is also a FACT that most murderers, serial killers, rapists, wife abusers, thieves, bank robbers, child molesters, corrupt politicians, etc. in our own society are practicing heterosexuals. Eliminating the scourge of heterosexual perversion, then, would not just be doing God's will – it would eliminate most of the criminals who plague our society.

It is time for decent people to stand up against heterosexuality and do what needs to be done. A-MEN.

To Contact The Letters Department: gazoped@julian.uwo.ca

Copyright The Gazette 1997