Bette Davis' magnificently delivered line in Dark Voyage is powerful because it is universal, this need to be loved. It is the desire which pervades all mens' hearts, no matter our age and no matter our status. And it is this need for which we, as Gays and Lesbians, continue to fight for our equal right to love and be loved by whom our hearts choose.
It's a lovely fallacy propagated by dangerous, religious right-wing extremists to declare that everyone chooses to be Gay or Lesbian.
I suppose there may be a few iconoclasts whom toy with the idea of making sexuality a choice in order to shock their parents or peers, perhaps a tactic of some few rebellious youth; but in the end it is the heart which wins out for nearly all of us. The heart rarely chooses the individual person it loves, nor the gender of it's desire, I assure you. Rather, the heart simply and suddenly understands it is in love, and the gender of it's object of ardor is an ingrained biological predetermination, so very far from any sort of ideological selection.
I ask my heterosexual friends when they decided to be in love with their opposite sex partner and forego involvement with someone of their own gender. Not one has told me they ever made a choice, rather their biological preference simply was and is. Even those whom admit to a deep love of a member of their own sex find it does not translate, with rare exception, to a desire for any sexual expression of those feelings. Rather, most have told me that for them such an physical expression would harm their deeply valued platonic love.
As a Gay man I can no more imagine making physical love to a woman that I can imagine sexual intercourse with a tree. (And, yes, I'm a tree hugger, too!) But, my ardor of and for the noble long lived old growth sequoia stops far short of coitus and a marriage proposal - despite what anti-gay bigots would have you believe of me and my Gay brothers and sisters! Nor does my deep fondness for my Chartreux in anyway construe that I shall be proposing nuptials to either Bouvier or Athenais - despite my regard for their intellects being far superior to that of Mr. Huckabee and David Duke or the likes of certain men of the cloth - whether they're residing at Vatican City or the compound of the Phelps' Clan!
The Old Testament, the source of these mens 'truth' for my supposed 'abomination' of lying with a man, and which seems to robustly condemn me, also decries eating shellfish and laboring upon the Sabbath. Yet, I, along with the majority of the world, see the ludicrous nature of these latter prohibitions. Why, then, do so many so-called Christians cling to the former precept without question and with such passionate jubilation that their abhoration of same sex relationships seems to be supported Bibically? Well, certainly a number of these sectarian zealots are enamored, and what more, needful, of this Old Testament passage. This archaic dogmatic morsel, individually selected from amongst numerous prohibitions, (like an eye for an eye which promulgated violence) must no longer be given validity, for it allows radical bigots to override, as if with Divine authority, the actual present Word of God in the New Testament! God our Father's Word, brought to us by Christ, His Son, to specifically replace the Old Testament and its fallacies has the specific purpose of disallowing violence and hatred as legitimate - yet in the agenda of right-wing extemists it still allows wrongful justification for their deep abiding hatred of those of us whom they cannot accept or tolerate. They feel excused, and excused by God Himself, to pursue their self-indulgent crusade against our loving relationships.
This is an adopted prejudice ignorant both of Jesus Christ's message that the old laws are concluded and discharged, as well as dangerous to our spiritual life. Likewise, they revel in the harmful conceit of being illiterate of the scholarship of both theologians and historians (such as John Boswell, whose work Christianity, Homosexuality and Christian Tolerance, gives ample examples of the early Church not only tolerating but indeed blessing same sex unions); whose work provides a broad and complex range of early Classical documentation that same sex relationships were a normal part of Roman, Greek and early Christian societies. Not until 325 AD when the Nicene, or First Vatican Council - established at the forefront of the Dark Ages - when lost, or perhaps deliberately hidden from the broader world, were great accumulations of knowledge: of science, theology, astronomy, physics, philosophy, art and literature, medicine, and even plumbing - were our same sex unions uniformly found to be dangerous. Why? At least in part one must swiftly and deliberately promulgate the desperate need of the Faithful to produce offspring raised in the new religion. A decisive ploy to gain political and economic dominion as the educated old order collapsed and new generations, deprived of the choices of knowledge, were indoctrinated in the new universal, or catholic, 'truthes'.
Yes, those same sex relationships were vastly different than those we accept today regarding couples of the same gender; yet, what is too often overlooked is that marriage in general was equally far different for heterosexuals in our early civilization. Love was never the basis of such contracts between men and women, rather economics and idealogues were the deciding factor for unions. Marriages were based almost exclusively upon the financial and social benefits of these contracts. If a couple were exceedingly blessed, perhaps a certain love and mutual respect were garnered by the pair over time. More often, it was to those of the time justifiably a matter of the acquisition of wealth and political alliance, (and certainly faith, too, became political) all to further the extended families foothold in a fragile world of treacherous partisan intrigue and literal cut-throat domination.
This state of marriage remained the norm well into the beginning of the twentieth century, until at last, the idea of happiness in marriage slowly overcame the need to combine family names and fortunes to protect and build empty wealth and power. Yes, it surely still happens - it makes for marvelous drama in film and gossip rags; but overall Western couples now realize that what makes life genuinely wealthy is a loving union between two persons. Two lovers whom become each others primary helpmates and mutual source of joy, their solace and strength, both spiritually, emotionally and physically.
It cannot be too difficult, then, to extrapolate that these most basic human needs are just as vital for same sex couples as for opposite. It is more than understandable that for most of us foraging through life without the immediate love and support of one other person is the greatest loss one can imagine. Whom, then, is benefited by denying this most basic need to be loved and to love, and further to refute our ability to legally protect this love in all ways afforded by law?
It is not the State. It is already being shown that the legal commitment in civil marriage by same sex couples carries the exact same benefits for society that opposite sex marriage does - it stabilizes individuals and enables them to produce economically, benefitting the community financially as a whole; as well as developing responsibility towards community well being through social involvement and the giving of time and expertise to those whom are less fortunate. And, as marriage reflects God's love for each of us, oursame sex unions provides a spiritual platform for growth and well being.
The churches, Christian, Muslim, Buddist and all, still have in their minds a legitimate need to control whom we love, and for much the same reason. They still desire to propagate their religious beliefs in order to find some authority of what the majority believe - and still they wish to swell the ranks with children whom believe. Unfortunately, it seems to me it is less and less about the child receiving grace and the knowledge of his or her parents' God, but about controlling the thought of we, the masses; as if some new Holy War, a new Crusade, must be fought with the sword -- or rather high powered automatic weapons and nuclear bombs. Or passenger planes.
How Christ - and Allah - must abhor this way of thinking! Surely it is through His own avocation of loving each other, even our enemies (for it's usually easy to love those whom agree with us); of helping one another, even upon the Sabbath (because loving human beings is far more honorable to God than maintaining a ritual in His honor); of turning away from revenge, even if our own cheek is then exposed; not out of fear but because you witness that God is within even the man whom injures you.
Is it the family, then, that is injured by same sex marriage? This is certainly the cry of many of those whom are rooted in their opposition to our civil recognition. Yet, this too, is proven not to be the case. I know of not one family which has been harmed by my marriage to my spouse, Mark. In fact, Mark's marriages with previous female partners failed long before I knew him. They all failed in part because Mark lived a pretense in these marriages - they were ordained not so much out of love but as a shield against societal disapproval of his same sex attraction. Yet, his same sex attraction continued, and ultimately caused the demise, at least in part, of these marriages. Would it have not been better for all concerned if Mark had had an option to openly be Gay? What if the rejection of same sex unions been repudiated as ludicrous and deeply damaging prior to these commitments falsely based on sexual sameness? Much pain for all could have ben avoided.
Likewise, would my own inability to settle with one man, to end a futile search for intimacy in so many varied sexual encounters, have ended far sooner had I been given the hope, far earlier, that I too, might have known the promise of a loving and lasting marriage to a person of my own sex? It is this distinct societal disapproval of my attraction to my own sex, an attraction inborn and unchosen, which led so often to my despair of finding peace and acceptance by my peers and society. What if, instead of a secret half-life, I'd dared bring out of the closet my God given genetic attraction for those of my own sex, and fully lived this truth, refusing to fear others disapproval and reprisals?
Ah, there's no tarot card reading which can answer my question, no old woman with a crystal ball - only the precedence of experience, as recorded by others, of how being true to one's own self is the path to peace. It is God whom I thank, and my dear Mark, for the proof that living openly now as I have been created is the constant of my happiness. No, it is not easy to live openly, exposed to being hated, it is not heart warming to be despised, even by some few misguided souls. Yet, how much better it is to endure all the inevitable backlash and hostility, revulsion, animosity and disgust I do so often encounter in weak, hate-filled men, knowing that I am loved and supported by at least one man, my husband, Mark. It is a most basic human need to be loved and to love in return.
And, it is this Truth that eventually shall exonerate me of all inadequate doctrine deployed against my love of Mark. I know in God's eye, I am already living His Truth, to the best of my ability. Do not misunderstand me, I'm not without failure! I am still very much a human being, flawed and a sinner; but in this one choice of loving myself for the Gay man I am, the Gay man whom God created and whom He loves, I have chosen wisely. I will not hide my light beneath a bushel basket, nor bury my talents beneath the ground. I choose to live openly, in love with my dear spouse, for all to witness. It is, after all, my calling. God has gifted me with this sexuality, and it is a precious gift. I know He calls me to show that His gift does not devalue me, nor Mark; or the thousands of Gay and Lesbian family members we hold in our hearts. Rather, it is Christ's challenge both to me and to Mark, as well as to His many faithful believers, to open our minds and hearts to each Gay and Lesbian person whom comes into our lives, to see each of us as a blessing, a peer and an equal before God and before our civil law.
This, then, is a most clear and definite call to all of us men and women of God to ACT to restore and preserve a place at God's table in our churches and temples for all our Gay and Lesbian family. And without a single doubt, it is a call to all of us men and women of a free and Democratic society to ACT to insure the civil equality of each of our Gay and Lesbian fellow citizens before our United States Constitution.
So, if you're along for the ride of the this dark voyage, I'm fiercely recommending that having the stars is NOT enough, we've got to take the moon along, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment