X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: QuickMail/SMTP interface.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 21 Aug 1992 13:21:42 EDT
From:         Leo W <Leo_W@QM.CIRCA.UFL.EDU>
Subject:      Re>Homosexuality
X-To:         Christia <christia@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>

Since others have complained about the length of this thread, I am replying for
the last time (again?!).

First, you must understand that I am not a whiz with words.  Carl and I are on
the same side on this issue.  I think our misunderstanding is my fault, since I
am using the term "homosexuality" in a broader sense than Carl, and I have not
made that clear.

Carl and I agree that erotic same-sex love is a sin that destroys its servants.
 We agree that it doesn't even make biological sense.  Erotic same-sex love is
what folks usually mean when they speak of homosexuality, and I believe this is
how Carl has been using the term.

I have been using the term in a broader sense, including non-erotic same-sex
love, since this is the basis of the normal psycho-sexual development of a
growing child.  The good and normal same-sex love relationship is a
parent-child relationship.  It is not erotic or perverted or sinful.  It is
vital to that child's healthy psycho-sexual development.  In this sense and
this sense only can same-sex love be understood as good and normal.

The reason I've used the term more broadly than normal is to make us who read
CHRISTIA to think again about our childhood past, about the same-sex love
source we were attached to or detached ourselves from.  This is why I mentioned
by normal 10 years old son.

The adult homosexual is still a child with strong same-sex love needs that were
unfulfilled during childhood from the legitimate same-sex love source whom that
child chose to no longer receive love from.  The major difference is this
psycho-sexual child has an adult body now flowing with adult hormones, and
often winds up in the sin and trap of erotic same-sex love.

Dr. Mobley's model helped me to fit together the pieces of my own life, and it
helped me see how important it is to spend time with my son and show him my
love and affection.  I want him to grow up better than I did, with a truly
loving and just father.

To make sure we understand each other, let me address specific statements of
Carl's in his most recent post:

Carl wrote: "I will try to help them understand
   themselves and why they do certain things and work with them to change it.
   But I absolutely refuse to make someone feel comfortable in their sin.
   Why is it so hard for people to understand this concept?"

I understand and agree with Carl totally.  Dr. Mobley agrees with Carl totally
also.

Carl wrote: "The "reasons" and "needs" may be legitimate
   but this does not legitimize homosexuality, or any sin."

The root of the problem here is the broad sense I was using the term
homosexuality (referring to the whole), versus the popular and narrow sense
Carl was using the term (only referring to the erotic).  I had thought the
unusually broad way I used the term was implied in my posts, but obviously I
failed by not clearly defining my unpopular use of the term.

Carl wrote: "I never claimed to know what "most psychologists" write about
homosexuality."

I was referring to another participant's post in a related thread, who
attempted to defend the homosexual erotic lifestyle against Dr. Mobley's view
of it, by claiming to know what "most psychologists" think about that
lifestyle.  Dr. Mobley's book, "Psychogenesis," cites a number of studies by a
number of psychologists.

Carl wrote: "And I wonder how much a book by Dr. Dobson would differ than the
book you cite?"

I own several of Dr. Dobson's books and my wife and I have read and enjoyed
them.  Dr. Mobley is also a Christian psychologist, but one who specializes in
treating adult homosexuality.  Rather than stoning them to death as adulterers,
she has studied them and treated them for many years, just as Dr. Dobson has
done with disfunctional families and married people.  I enjoy reading Christian
psychologists because they want to help me and my family walk worthy of our
calling in Christ Jesus.  Often they have insights and wisdom that can help us
in our contemporary culture.  I am thankful that these folks exist and that
they are willing to take the heat for their unpopular views and continue to
help and minister to us.

Carl wrote: "All psychology theories are
   only someone's model, idea, or belief.  Doesn't make it right though."

True, but the happy testimonies of Christian adult ex-homosexuals should not be
ignored.  Perhaps her model is not complete and has flaws, but it has been used
and continues to be used in Christian ministries that reach out to and change
the lives of adult homosexuals.  Since her model is the basis for successful
ministry, I recommend all Christians read her books before throwing their
stones at adult homosexuals (and no, I'm not implying Carl was throwing stones,
I'm just making a general statement).

Yours in Christ Jesus,
Leo
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU