Homosexual Behavior Is Immoral

The Apostle Paul is arguably the most influential thinker in Christian thought. Even though much of Paul's thoughts are misinterpreted by Christendom, I admit his thoughts on homosexual behavior are fairly straightforward, as, according to Paul, homosexuality is a violation of divinely established gender roles and was a form and result of idolatrous behavior, an indication God had given up idolaters to their passions. In a significant way, I agree with Paul regarding homosexuality. I do consider the majority of homosexual behavior to be a result, not of love and commitment, but of lustful behavior, in opposition to the ideals of Christian love. It is not this set of homosexual behavior I will focus on. For Paul, it is no wonder he considered it a deviant lifestyle, since it was associated with defiance of the natural order and associated with idolatry; the two thoughts are easily connected. Any Jew would be easily persuaded to join Paul in his condemnations, since it was the prevailing and, at the time, obvious Jewish opinion. Romans 1:22-27 is a synthesis between two ideas: the homosexual connections to idolatry and violations of the natural order are clearly evident, which in turn offers insight to Paul's thoughts on the topic in other writings. In modern times, homosexuality is understood very differently. The connections to idolatry are absent, but what of violations of the natural order, that God set down? Leaving aside the fact Paul and Jesus disagreed about the union between men and women, the ancient interpretations of human nature and sex fail to account for the range of sexual and romantic behaviors observed and studied by scientific analyses. Homosexuals are fully capable of providing a loving, supportive and romantic environment relationship to each other in committed unions, including even a healthy environment for raising adopted children; an idea both foreign and without precedent in Paul's understanding of the natural order, which defined how society should function. Further, homosexuals in such unions are capable of giving complete and full honor to Christ and his Gospel and caring for other Christians both emotionally and physically. This would be yet another impossibility for Paul. The fact these instances are not only possible, but prevalent, in gay, strongly Christian communities across the Western world is an impossible event given what Paul understood. Considering such unions as evil which provide benefits, including intimacy, love, romance and mutual support to two committed individuals, but are also Christ-centered seems contrary to and ignores science and Christian understandings of love. Paul's thoughts on the matter, while applicable during his culture and time, are without empirical support against modern understandings of homosexual behavior. Paul's writings were indeed motivated out of a selfless concern for proper ethics, but applying his principles today would leave many of God's children without the hope for a satisfying, romantic union. As commonly understood in Christianity, a person may be gay and Christian but cannot act on homosexual urges, even in a committed relationship, though God has evidently not blessed this person with the gift of singleness or celibacy. Such a person is doomed to a lifetime without the fundamental partnership afforded to straight people; it's cruel. That is unacceptable given the grace and mercy inherent in Christ, and there is no evidence that either secular or religiously informed therapy, including prayer, can provide treatment for homosexual attraction. This requires the Christian to reflect on the ethic the Holy Spirit instills in all God's children, love. Is it loving to condemn unions that produce both social and spiritual good works on the basis of Paul's words, which would have considered the existence of such an impossibility? Obviously not. It is precisely the opposite. There is no room in the Church for such ideas. Psychological associations and gay, Christian communities all point to what should be impossible according to Paul: goodness in homosexual unions. The alternative to love leaves us with a cruel punishment for majority of gay Christians: solitude and lack of fulfillment in another person in an intimate, romantic union. This is inexcusable. Would our wise God consider this acceptable? No, God is neither rigid nor cruel. He is benevolent and would not condemn any of his children to a life without romantic fulfillment for an attribute they are incapable of changing, and that God apparently does not change, even after much earnest prayer. Christ's love is an omnipresent guide. If ever there is a violation of such love, God is not found there. If there is such love, then God is found there. God is a living God, who understands our weaknesses, so if his children suffer needlessly because of the ignorant opinions of some, then God is not pleased.