Homosexuality @ MindSay

I’ve been on vacation and have had the opportunity to catch up on my Oprah. Recently she had a show regarding supposedly straight women “turning gay”. It was actually a follow up on a previous show about a long time married woman who left her husband for a woman, who actually looked a lot like her husband, and was at the time happily ensconced in her first official lesbian relationship. Now a few years later the relationship has ended and the straight, then lesbian is now straight again. Though pining for her past lover. Woman, not man.

That story was very interesting but what really hooked me was the expert. I guess she was an expert in sexuality? I’m not sure, I didn’t catch that part. The expert has a book out and her claim to fame is that sexuality is on a continuum. It ranges from 0 which would be 100% homosexual to 5 which are 100% heterosexual. She claims that we are all on this scale at some point between 0 and 5. That not many people, certainly female people, are truly 100% either way.

Theoretically I can buy this theory 100%. It makes complete sense to me that sexuality would be a range scale. But in reality, I’m not sure that I buy it. And I bring up Oprah’s own heartbroken guest as evidence. This woman married to a man for year’s states she had “messed around” sexually with girls in college. That she was not surprised when she found herself attracted to the woman formerly in her life. She is currently in a relationship again with a man but admits that she would much rather be with this woman. She states that her hetero relationships are nowhere near the intensity of her lesbian relationship and that she felt much more like herself when she was in her lesbian relationship vs. hetero. I think she’s a lesbian. Perhaps not willing to commit, but a lesbian all the same.

The expert states that most women are in the middle of the range. That young women today are more of the attitude that they are open to either and that gender doesn’t determine their partner. I don’t know that I buy this theory. Our media driven culture certainly indulges girl on girl relationships. I believe this current trend is related more to revenue streams than social conscience. Men certainly aren’t socially open to experiment. Are we repressing men? If it were socially acceptable for men to experiment sexually would they? If they were on a continuum, wouldn’t they? I can’t see that happening. But maybe it’s just my Midwestern roots coming back to bite me again.

Is sexuality like many of the gray areas in life?  Aren't we programmed one way or the other?  We can adapt to the in-between but fundamentally don't we have a preference?

I am a very philosophical dog. I suppose that comes from hanging around with my person, Val, who is on a spiritual journey. However, Val and I have very different approaches to the same destination. Every day Val does what he calls God-bathing, which is how he describes contemplation. I, on the other hand, sun-bathe...it requires much less effort. I don't understand why humans have to complicate everything.

Twice a day Val goes to his chapel, chants his sacred word, and disappears into some inner space that provides him comfort. I, quite comfortably and at random times, lay in the sun. "Well, Tali, that's very nice, but what do you do on cloudy days?" you might ask. What a silly question! The sun is always there, whether you can see it or not.

Val developed his belief system by studying the great mystics of all ages and distilling their wisdom. I developed mine by smelling things. What my nose has taught me is that everything and everyone is totally unique. No two people smell the same, nor do any two animals, or plants, or even rocks. So, did all that uniqueness come from something or nothing? The answer is obvious to me.

Then, of course, there is the philosophical debate about being different versus conforming; this is a big issue in our home where one of us is gay and the other straddles that fence. Since each and every part of creation is unique, why shouldn't we respect the uniqueness of others?

Death is another big issue in our home. I was the first to lose a loved one. I gave birth to one little girl puppy we named Amulet. I was blessed to have her for almost a day. I knew from the moment I held her that something was wrong, but it was only a mother's knowing and no one else understood the problem. So I packed a lifetime of loving into that day; and love is the bridge between life and death, and love never dies.

Then Val lost his husband, Peter, in a car accident. Val's grief was no greater than mine, but he has had a harder time finding peace. He longs for the past, where I am content with the love I still have for Amulet. You see, I love her as much now as I did then. And when I sun-bathe I sense her presence in the hidden light.

Now this is not to say I didn't grieve my loss. I didn't eat for a week, and I whimpered in the sun, and howled at the moon. I still long to lick her. But that experience of grief has given me the gift of compassion and now my capacity to love is greater than it once was. And love is the thing that matters most.

Did I mention that I still smell the uniqueness of Amulet and Peter? I never forget a smell...

Read more about me at http://www.redhotnovel.com

*sigh*

Being a Christian does not mean I'm better than you. Ever.

Means I acknowledged that I wasn't good enough.

Being a Christian does not mean I'm against legalizing abortion.

I'm opposed to the concept of abortion, sure. I think most people are.

But I do think that people are going to be irresponsible.

And I do think that women get pregnant even if sex wasn't their choice.

And I think that if abortion isn't legalized somewhere, people who are desperate will find a method that isn't legal.

And I'm pretty sure that if abortion is illegal, you can't have standards set for abortion clinics. I'm very definite about this one - you're working with a particularly sensitive area of someone's anatomy, and there's a lot that can go wrong. This needs to be made safe, or at least, a lot safer, and we can't do that if the entire concept is outlawed.

But, I also think Obama's wrong, and I honestly think that this issue (along with the concept of gay marriage) is one that should be decided at the state level. Not, definitely not at the federal level.

Being a Christian doesn't mean that I think that a particular candidate is the one who should be in power, simply because he's also a Christian.

The job of our leaders is to be just, to be fair, to keep the promises they've made, to always work for the good of their people.

One of the greatest points of our nation's creation was that it was not designed as a safe haven for Christians and for people who follow the God of the Bible, but instead was intended to be a place of religious freedom. Our Constitutional right is, for every American citizen, to believe what we choose to believe. Our officials have the job of upholding that freedom.

Being a Christian doesn't mean I have a bone to pick with homosexuality.

I am of the rather matter-of-fact opinion that God made some people gay.

I'll acknowledge that it's a minority, but where I went to school, being brunette made me the minority. Choosing numbers as a basis for morality is a mite silly, dontcha think?

I honestly think that if you can't serve God with your orientation, then neither can I with mine.

I do think the Bible's pretty clear on promiscuity, that your sexuality is a gift from God with a purpose in mind, and a few other thoughts on that*. I think that abusing this particular gift is against God's plan, but I don't think it matters what your orientation is.

On a somewhat unrelated note, I don't think my gay friends are at all more promiscuous than my straight friends. I do, however, think they're more vocal, but that might just be the ones I hang out with.

Being a Christian doesn't mean I dislike atheists, pagans, agnostics, muslims, puppies, the Schwann man, zebras, cacti, strawberry push-ups, calamari, or daisies.

If I dislike you, it's because you annoy me. It's got nothing to do with your beliefs. :P

Sorry. Needed the silly note. Seriously, Christ came and changed everything. We're not called to wipe out, attack, or deliberately make life harder for people who don't believe in him. We've got two missions: love, and serve.

We are told to 'make disciples'. Okay, yes. This is true. But, among my friendly (and aggressively friendly) Bible-thumpers, has anyone encountered the phrase, "People will never care how much you know, until they know how much you care?"

Honestly, some of the churches I've encountered seem far more concerned with filling a quota than offering a hand, or even knowing a person. We have the ability to help, what are we doing? We're in a fallen world, and our record has been trashed by people believing more than caring. I don't care if you're not the one who trashed it - if someone else littered in your park, you would still pick it up.

Being a Christian doesn't mean it's my job to run your life.

For the record, my sisters are pretty good about bringing me up on when I'm getting overbearing in their lives. I can get a little hurt and defensive about this at times, but I do appreciate this. I can have the opinion that some particular pursuit is destructive (say, heroin), but at some point I'm pretty sure I remember one of the New Testament writers telling us that it's a bit ridiculous to expect someone who doesn't follow God...to follow God's law.

The analogy I've used would be that if my British friend came over to the States and started getting visibly annoyed with me because I break some of England's laws. Yes, at one point, we were under England - but we declared ourselves separate some time ago. If I elected to move to England and somehow gain citizenship, then it would be appropriate for my Brit friend to be annoyed with me for breaking English law, and call my attention to it.

Being a Christian doesn't mean I'm a vegetarian.

'nuff said.


A number of people, including a bunch of the people I know, have started using the term "Christ-follower" to describe themselves. I like it. It's a reminder of what we're supposed to be, that this particular term has a purpose, beyond going to church or, as BK says, "checking the box". But I think it's also us wanting to get away from what Christians have done in the past. Because we've done some horrible things to people and to humanity. Sometimes trying to convince everyone to follow God. Sometimes trying to use God for our own purposes.

We've done some good things, too. Schools, a fair amount of the early roots of medicine, taking down music so that it could be read again later, all things that the church did.

We don't want you to think that we're lukewarm in our faith, just checking the box. We don't want you to think that we're going to force you to convert the minute you let your guard down. We want you to see the way we live, and see Christ, and understand this is who we follow.

But, oh, we screw up. I know how I want to live, and how I want to carry on my relationships, and I'm still so, so far below the standard I desire, the image I want to project. And so I have to ask your forgiveness.

I seriously considered taking on the name of "Christ-follower". But, for me, that's not right. Because I'm still not ready to give up on saving the name of "Christian". And, yeah, there's been a tremendous wreck through history of what's been done under that name. And, yeah, I recognize that I'm just one person, with a pretty spotty record, lacking a degree in Bible study, missions, theology, or anything else that would indicate I've spent some pretty college credits on learning about this.

So, I'm a Christian.

That means that I believe in Christ. Christian, by definition, "Little Christ." I believe he's the son of God, and to make this paragraph a lot shorter, I believe in the Bible. I do believe that there are parts of the Bible we have today that were not in the originals, or that were difficult to translate from Hebrew to English, but I don't believe that those parts cancel out the great truth of God's love, what he said we were worth, our sin, or what he did for us.

That means that I want God as the first love in my life. First love, greatest leader, and my foundation. Means that I spend time getting to know the Bible because otherwise I think it's very easy to get led off track by well-meaning teachers. Means that my goal is to live a life that makes God look good. I mess up. A lot. I haven't given up yet.

This isn't supposed to be a theological discussion. This is just...I'm tired of what we act like, and what people think we are, and I wish I had a way to fix it all. This is some stuff I've been thinking about for a little while, and it needed to be said. I suppose, to conclude, this is what I believe.