Following the bordering-on-the-frivolous announcement of my reaching the age of old age in my immediately preceding blogs, and gratefully having answered the dozens of personal greetings, I want to discuss a very serious issue.
This serious thinking is prompted by today’s Inquirer column by Dr. Michael Tan, the UP anthropologist-columnist, who writes on almost anything with great wisdom and insights into human nature -- and how some humans thwart human nature.
I write on sex-positive theology. My topics often have an anthropological angle, and when Dr. Tan writes about them, the terminology sometimes comes out different, but today I am amazed at the bottom line coming out so much alike.
Culture and Health
Mike’s topic today is “Culture and Health.” My interest often turn to culture, tradition, religious beliefs and spiritual health (which cannot be separated from emotional, intellectual physical health).
He says “we hear a lot these days about cultural barriers to good health.” I often write about cultural barriers gay and lesbian people, LGBT people in general, face not only to good health, but to survival.
The “Culture” of Prejudice
Let me digress for a moment to look at what happened when the people of California overcame racial prejudice and voted on November 4th to elect a black man president of the United States, but on the same day the people of California perpetuated prejudice against LGBT people by voting to deny them equal marriage in the state. Now there certainly are some mind-boggling issues involved in that phenomenon.
I have watched panels where it was debated that this is a terrible cultural contradiction as opposed to those who argued that the two are unrelated issues -- racial prejudice and sexual orientation prejudice.
Reproductive Health
The underlying issue of Dr. Tan’s column is the Reproductive Health Bill currently being debated in the House of Representatives. I choose to believe the authors that it has absolutely nothing to do with abortion. That is does have to do with the health of adult human beings.
That bill is being opposed by the same religious entities who oppose recognition of the rights of persons with same-sex attraction to have the mental, emotional, physical, and emotional health of expressing their same-sex love in a manner appropriate for their God-given sexual orientation (which is indeed, a given, not a choice, as one prominent TV commentator said just today). Note: see the “list of donors, including the Roman Catholic Bishops, posted on our SAeFfriends Yahoo Group by our Friend George DiCarlo
Repressive and Oppressive: Moral Slavery
In connection with reproductive health rights, Mike uses the terms repressive and oppressive to refer to certain cultural influences.
In recent years I have been using “moral slavery” to put a label on the oppression that is used to cut off the rights of people in sexual matters. We have been made moral slaves by such cultural (religious) norms as
*“The Bible condemns same-sex love.” FALSE
*“Masturbation is a sin.” WHY? (Thou shalt not commit adultery.)
*“Only heterosexual love and sex is not sin (under the right circumstances).” Why? Adam and Eve were told to increase and multiply.)
*“People with same sex attraction are not allowed any sex, at any time, in any way, in their entire life.” WHY? (Because Adam and Eve were told to increase and multiply and not commit adultery.)
When a couple comes to me for a same-sex wedding, I have a discussion with them, illustrated by a PowerPoint presentation, about the formation of conscience and the role of conscience in combating repression and oppression. I ask them if they think their love is a sin. Very often they ask, “How can love be a sin?” Simple and beautiful answer.
Conscience
I proceed to show them how that simple answer is the product of their good thinking . They have made a decision of conscience and did not even know it.
Conscience is the moral judgment, the decision, which is made after considering the facts, the “evidence,” available to make the decision. For a Christian, conscience is a “Christian Moral Judgment.” So you look at the factors which make it “Christian.” You listen to the church, the Bible, Jesus. You listen to human nature, the real life human situation, the psychological and economic factors involved. Your decision depends on the evidence you find.
“Is Your Love a Sin?” Is it a sin to kill?
Is it a sin to kill” Yes, of course. But somebody always remembers that ‘it depends…” If a one year old child picks up a gun and kills someone, it is not a sin because it depends on the child’s ability to commit sin. If a murderer is about to plunge a knife into your heart or your sister’s heart, or a an innocent victim’s heart, can you pull the trigger and kill that would-be murderer? Yes. It depends, on self-defense, defense of the defenseless, etc. That’s conscience.
Thus, not even killing is black and white, yes or no, “It depends…”
Is it a sin not to use condoms?
Is it as sin to use condoms. Yes, of course, the church says so. But that depends, too. Here’s what Mike Tan says that 69 Ateneo professors have to say,
“We ask our bishops
to respect the one in three (35.6%)
married Filipino women who
in their ‘most secret core and sanctuary’ or conscience,
have decided
that their and their family’s interests
would best be served
by using a modern artificial means of contraception.
Is it not possible
that these women were obeying
their well-informed and well-formed consciences
when they opted to use [condoms or pills]?”
That’s a monumental recommendation from 69 faculty members of a prestigious Filipino Catholic University. It echoes what Fr. Andrew Greeley, a Chicago-based priest sociologist has been saying for years…
This serious thinking is prompted by today’s Inquirer column by Dr. Michael Tan, the UP anthropologist-columnist, who writes on almost anything with great wisdom and insights into human nature -- and how some humans thwart human nature.
I write on sex-positive theology. My topics often have an anthropological angle, and when Dr. Tan writes about them, the terminology sometimes comes out different, but today I am amazed at the bottom line coming out so much alike.
Culture and Health
Mike’s topic today is “Culture and Health.” My interest often turn to culture, tradition, religious beliefs and spiritual health (which cannot be separated from emotional, intellectual physical health).
He says “we hear a lot these days about cultural barriers to good health.” I often write about cultural barriers gay and lesbian people, LGBT people in general, face not only to good health, but to survival.
The “Culture” of Prejudice
Let me digress for a moment to look at what happened when the people of California overcame racial prejudice and voted on November 4th to elect a black man president of the United States, but on the same day the people of California perpetuated prejudice against LGBT people by voting to deny them equal marriage in the state. Now there certainly are some mind-boggling issues involved in that phenomenon.
I have watched panels where it was debated that this is a terrible cultural contradiction as opposed to those who argued that the two are unrelated issues -- racial prejudice and sexual orientation prejudice.
Reproductive Health
The underlying issue of Dr. Tan’s column is the Reproductive Health Bill currently being debated in the House of Representatives. I choose to believe the authors that it has absolutely nothing to do with abortion. That is does have to do with the health of adult human beings.
That bill is being opposed by the same religious entities who oppose recognition of the rights of persons with same-sex attraction to have the mental, emotional, physical, and emotional health of expressing their same-sex love in a manner appropriate for their God-given sexual orientation (which is indeed, a given, not a choice, as one prominent TV commentator said just today). Note: see the “list of donors, including the Roman Catholic Bishops, posted on our SAeFfriends Yahoo Group by our Friend George DiCarlo
Repressive and Oppressive: Moral Slavery
In connection with reproductive health rights, Mike uses the terms repressive and oppressive to refer to certain cultural influences.
In recent years I have been using “moral slavery” to put a label on the oppression that is used to cut off the rights of people in sexual matters. We have been made moral slaves by such cultural (religious) norms as
*“The Bible condemns same-sex love.” FALSE
*“Masturbation is a sin.” WHY? (Thou shalt not commit adultery.)
*“Only heterosexual love and sex is not sin (under the right circumstances).” Why? Adam and Eve were told to increase and multiply.)
*“People with same sex attraction are not allowed any sex, at any time, in any way, in their entire life.” WHY? (Because Adam and Eve were told to increase and multiply and not commit adultery.)
When a couple comes to me for a same-sex wedding, I have a discussion with them, illustrated by a PowerPoint presentation, about the formation of conscience and the role of conscience in combating repression and oppression. I ask them if they think their love is a sin. Very often they ask, “How can love be a sin?” Simple and beautiful answer.
Conscience
I proceed to show them how that simple answer is the product of their good thinking . They have made a decision of conscience and did not even know it.
Conscience is the moral judgment, the decision, which is made after considering the facts, the “evidence,” available to make the decision. For a Christian, conscience is a “Christian Moral Judgment.” So you look at the factors which make it “Christian.” You listen to the church, the Bible, Jesus. You listen to human nature, the real life human situation, the psychological and economic factors involved. Your decision depends on the evidence you find.
“Is Your Love a Sin?” Is it a sin to kill?
Is it a sin to kill” Yes, of course. But somebody always remembers that ‘it depends…” If a one year old child picks up a gun and kills someone, it is not a sin because it depends on the child’s ability to commit sin. If a murderer is about to plunge a knife into your heart or your sister’s heart, or a an innocent victim’s heart, can you pull the trigger and kill that would-be murderer? Yes. It depends, on self-defense, defense of the defenseless, etc. That’s conscience.
Thus, not even killing is black and white, yes or no, “It depends…”
Is it a sin not to use condoms?
Is it as sin to use condoms. Yes, of course, the church says so. But that depends, too. Here’s what Mike Tan says that 69 Ateneo professors have to say,
“We ask our bishops
to respect the one in three (35.6%)
married Filipino women who
in their ‘most secret core and sanctuary’ or conscience,
have decided
that their and their family’s interests
would best be served
by using a modern artificial means of contraception.
Is it not possible
that these women were obeying
their well-informed and well-formed consciences
when they opted to use [condoms or pills]?”
That’s a monumental recommendation from 69 faculty members of a prestigious Filipino Catholic University. It echoes what Fr. Andrew Greeley, a Chicago-based priest sociologist has been saying for years…
Is your love a sin?
So what’s the relevance to our couples who are preparing for the highlight of their life -- their same-sex wedding. First I monitor their conscience. Do they believe their love is a sin or a gift from God?
One staunch Catholic male couple came to me for a nice garden wedding. They told me, “We know it is a sin, but…” I said “But, what?” No amount of teaching on my part could help them “change their conscience.” I told them, “If a person thinks something is a sin, and does it, then it is a sin. I don’t want to be part of your sin. My whole ministry is based on the unconditional love of God and the assurance that God is Love, and God is smiling on our same-sex love. If you think it is a sin, I cannot participate in your ‘sinful’ wedding.” And they left.
I am gratified that most couples nowadays have (perhaps unknowingly) solved their conscience before they come to me. That makes it easy to explain to them that they have formed their conscience, and that that they have a basic human right to do that.
And that is one aspect of culture and health for LGBT people.
So what’s the relevance to our couples who are preparing for the highlight of their life -- their same-sex wedding. First I monitor their conscience. Do they believe their love is a sin or a gift from God?
One staunch Catholic male couple came to me for a nice garden wedding. They told me, “We know it is a sin, but…” I said “But, what?” No amount of teaching on my part could help them “change their conscience.” I told them, “If a person thinks something is a sin, and does it, then it is a sin. I don’t want to be part of your sin. My whole ministry is based on the unconditional love of God and the assurance that God is Love, and God is smiling on our same-sex love. If you think it is a sin, I cannot participate in your ‘sinful’ wedding.” And they left.
I am gratified that most couples nowadays have (perhaps unknowingly) solved their conscience before they come to me. That makes it easy to explain to them that they have formed their conscience, and that that they have a basic human right to do that.
And that is one aspect of culture and health for LGBT people.
Good for the Health
Same-sex sexual health is good for the health.
In conclusion, I will quote and get in synch with a pertinent UN document which Mike quotes, “From within the same cultural matrix, we can extract arguments and strategies for the degradation or ennoblement of our species, for its enslavement or liberation, for the suppression of its productive potential or its enhancement.”
Liberation from moral slavery is good for the HEALTH.
It ennobles and enhances the health of the person.
Then Mike concludes, and we can conclude, along with his wisdom, “More than a simple declaration, that passage should be taken as a challenge to Filipinos and people throughout the world to take culture and health seriously.”
No comments:
Post a Comment