Newsgroups: bit.listserv.allmusic
Date:         Fri, 6 Nov 1992 12:04:18 EST
From:         Scott Hammer <SCOTH@WMVM1.CC.WM.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Idiocy incarnate

On Fri, 6 Nov 1992 07:23:40 CST Leonard Watkins said:
>On Thu, 5 Nov 1992 17:10:32 EST <RTURNBUL@TOROVM1.VNET.IBM.COM> said:
>>
>>> "Homos are shun in the bible and the
>>>        church"
>>
>>Maybe in yours and Jerry Falwell's church, but not by any person with some
>>intelligence and human decency (two things you obviously do not have).
>
>I hate to say this , but Daron is right on this one if you'd like the chapter
>and verse i'll supply it. I don't want to sound like i'm Gay bashing, but from
>
This is getting fairly far afield from music, but I feel strongly about this,
so:

I make no claims to being a Biblical Scholar; after all I am a UU.  But even
though I don't have a canonical list of references to homosexuality in the
bible, I do know that Christian gay bashers (now _there's_ an oxymoron) have
typically used a passage from Leviticus to justify their tirades against
homosexuality.  I assume that this is the strongest condemnation of homo-
sexuality in the bible, because, if there was a stronger one, I imagine these
folks would find it and use it.

Now, this condemnation is strong and unequivocal, make no mistake about it.
What's interesting is what else is contained in the book of Leviticus.  Have
you ever wondered why Orthodox Jews don't eat pork?  Because it says not to
in Leviticus.  Did you ever want to know why Hassidic Jews don't shave or
cut their hair?  Right, Leviticus, again.  In fact, the whole book is a
laundry list of social customs, norms, and mores.  Granted, most of these
pre- and proscriptions made sense for an essentially tribal people living
in the Negev desert 3,000 years ago.  Pork is very prone to spoiling, and
has to be cooked very thoroughly to eliminate all contamination -- best not
to eat it at all.  If there is a lack of water for washing, and if milk
and meat residues, when mixed, grow toxic bacteria, better have separate
untensils for milk and meat.  If you're a relatively small tribe, living
in a hostile environment, homosexuality may prevent enough procreation to
threaten the survival of the tribe -- better prohibit it.  But society
changes, and practices that threatened group survival a couple thousand
years ago may not make much difference one way or the other today.

What's funny is that, when Anita Bryant (remember her?) went on her gay-
bashing crusade, which she, too, justified on the basis of Leviticus,
some fifteen years ago, a reporter pointed all of this out to her.  The
reporter then asked her if her husband shaved and cut his hair.  "Of
course," Ms. Bryant replied.  The reporter asked her how she explained
this, given that it was also prohibited in Leviticus.  "Times change,"
she said.

But all of this is really beside the point.  What gives you, Daron, or you,
LW, the right to assume that we all share the same religious beliefs as
you.  We aren't even all Christians on this list.  There are several people
on the list who are Jewish, I'm a UU, and for all I know, there are Buddhists,
Moslems, Hindus, etc. here, too.

I would be lax if I didn't also point out that the Protestant denominations
which try to prescribe beliefs for everyone are an anomaly.  Protestantism
_started_ in large part as a reaction against Holy Mother Church saying that
priests were the only ones who could communicate with God, and were required to
intercede for the masses.  _True_ Baptists, as opposed to the flocks of Jerry
Falwell, Pat Robertson, et. al., have _always_ had as a tenet the priesthood
of the believers -- the right of each individual to decide what Scripture
means and what God's plan for him/her is -- this is why one hears Baptists
talk of their personal relationship with Jesus Christ: it isn't just a color-
ful phrase, its what they really believe.

So, Daron, LW, and anyone else of this theological bent, I really don't care
what you believe.  I would, however, be grateful if you would quit claiming
that you have the right to apply _your_ interpretation of Scripture to _me_,
or to anyone else.

-Scott "Indignant Unitarian" Hammer
 College of William and Mary
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU