Open Hearts — Affirming Pages

A Reflection on the Unreflective Gen. Pace

In the interview directly below this entry, I commented that for many people, religious views are inherited, and not often formed by reflection.  Here’s a case in point.  Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Peter Pace, said yesterday, in testimony before congress, that “We should respect those who want to serve the nation but not through the law of the land, condone activity that, in my upbringing, is counter to God's law."

General Pace, do you still have your baby teeth?  Are you constantly outgrowing your shoes?  Have you learned to tie them yet?  Does your voice occasionally crack?  Have you experienced acne as yet?  Does your mommy still potty train you?  In your upbringing…in your upbringing…, General Pace, when will you grow up and begin to think for yourself, little man in the big boots?  Still playing with guns?  Still taking orders from authority figures?  My God, our armed forces are in the hands of a presumed adult with delayed onset thinking-for-oneself maturity issues.

“God’s law,” to someone who takes the Bible literally (non-thinkers), says that acting on same-sex attraction is a capital offense; that they should be killed.  Unreflective people who are used to taking orders just might execute this one if called upon.  Pun intended. It’s the logical outcome of Voltaire’s horrifying observation that “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” 

I’m wondering how we can show respect to those who want to serve the nation “but not through the law of the land.”  Yes, that’s it; let’s keep gays as second class citizens.  Oh, sure, they are willing to lay their lives on the line for our country, but suggesting that they deserve equal treatment is going too far.  Many of the presidential candidates are willing to lower the drinking age to 18 under the reasoning that if you are willing to serve your country you should legally be served a beer.  To see the relationship of that argument to gays in the military requires reflection.  But, since the Bible says…well, you know what it says…why bother?

An Inconvenient Truth

Today televangelist Juanita Bynum filed for divorce from her husband, “Bishop” Thomas Weeks, who is accused of beating her, saying their marriage has been “irretrievably broken.”  The couple often appeared together promoting their bestselling book, Teach Me How to Love You: The Beginnings.  Theirs is a multimillion dollar ministry, world-wide in scope, offering cures for all of life’s ills through faith in Jesus. This begs the question, Why didn’t that work for them?  Is this another case of “Physician heal thyself?”

As you surely know, divorce is condemned in the Bible.  God says in Malachi, “I hate divorce.”  Jesus was particularly severe in his condemnation of divorce, making remarriage virtually impossible without infidelity.  Nothing is plainer in Scripture than the fact that divorce is condemned.  There is no wiggle room here.  Facts are facts; plain is plain. 

Divorce was once a stigma in society.  If you were divorced, you were not eligible to hold office in your church (if you were allowed in at all), you were considered suspect in polite circles, and likely couldn’t get elected to public office. The red D on your forehead marked you for life. 

This is no longer true in our day.  Divorce is looked upon as an unfortunate turn of events, but no longer as the career killer and social liability it once was.  Not only are our pastors and teachers likely to be divorced (this is Bynum’s second marriage), a Republican politician with two divorces and a third wife is leading his rivals for nomination as his party’s candidate for president.  In fact, recent surveys found that Christian Evangelicals are more likely to be divorced than non-Evangelicals. 

I have a friend who carries with him a card that reads, “And I [Jesus] say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another commits adultery.”  (Matthew 19:9)  He keeps it handy for those occasions when someone trots out a supposedly equally clear Scripture that condemns homosexuals.  The point is this:  we are eager to condemn those we find unacceptable while letting ourselves off the hook.  Divorce? Fine.  Homosexuality?  No way!

Don’t get me wrong; I’m on the side of leniency for divorced people.  Life is complicated and often resistant to hard and fast rules.  Grace is the only cure for those who can’t be perfect, which is all of us.  Even the Gospel writers and the apostle Paul found ways to ameliorate the hard sayings on divorce.  Mark, for instance, adds that women may divorce their husbands, as he was writing to Romans where women had this right.  In Matthew’s audience, Jewish women didn’t have that right.

Normally, I wouldn’t be commenting on this unfortunate turn of events for reverends Bynum and Weeks, were it not for the fact that they insist on naming homosexuality as a main factor in the destruction of the family.  Homosexuality is only a problem in some people’s minds; divorce is a problem in fact.  If Christians (televangelists and others) really wanted to do something about the appalling condition of American families, they would do much better going after the causes of divorce and leave our gay citizen alone.  They are not the problem. It is much easier to name the enemy that is without, than have to deal with the enemy within.  I know this is an inconvenient truth, but at least it has the virtue of being the truth.

Who Speaks for the Mrs. Craigs of Our World?

Amid all the name calling (pervert, hypocrite, etc.) and gay bashing surrounding the story of Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID), the true victim is singularly overlooked: Mrs. Larry Craig.  In a perfect world, there would never have been a Mrs. Craig.  Nor would there be any women who, unexpectedly, find themselves married to gay men (and vice versa).  The hundreds of thousands of lives turned upside down by revelations, public and private, of a losing struggle against one's sexual orientation would, instead, be ancient history. 

One of the most destructive effects of forcing nonheterosexuals into the closet is that they are made to live double lives.  In order to survive, they need to appear to be just like their straight friends and neighbors.  Although the reasons many get married are complicated, often it becomes necessary to avoid suspicion, so they can keep their jobs and positions of respectability.  They love their spouses, but not in a romantically fulfilling way.  Inside, they are eaten up by the estrangement from their true selves.  Over time, many of them can't take this double life any longer and choose to end the marriage, and in too many cases, end their lives. 

Take my friends Theresa and Ron.  After eight years of marriage, Theresa came to Ron in tears, sobbing, "God made me wrong!"  Ron knew instantly what she was about to confess.  Their married life resembled more of brother/sister relationship than husband and wife.  Ron, heartbroken, realized that Theresa needed to be free for either of them to have a chance at a fulfilling relationship.  Now some twenty years later, both have found what they were looking for. 

Many are not as fortunate.  A not so happy ending occurred with David.  He took his life, unable to confront his wife with the burden that took his own life away.    

Of course, some small fraction of gays and lesbians would get married and have children even if there were no social disapproval.  I know several couples with gay spouses who choose to stay married even though both partners are fully aware of the other's orientation.

This perfect world I speak of is not one with no nonheterosexuals.  Rather, it is one in which those whose lives can only be fulfilled with someone of the same sex are encouraged to live out their hopes and dreams.  It is one in which children are allowed to find their own special sexuality and to find it good.  It is one in which no one is persecuted, laughed at, shamed or ridiculed, because of how God made them.  Yes, it is one in which no spouse needs to hear relationship ending words or have to bear the heartache of an unfulfilled partner.  It is a world with no Mrs. Larry Craigs.