PENALOSA, James Ryan S.

Religion
61- D AB Political Science - III

Gender Equality & Homosexuality

I just hated when someone think that what they do is right just in the name of morality. Before we ask the
question: What is Morality? We must first ask the question Does Morality Exist. Know a day’s idiotic Americans
with their superficial view of life go against homosexuality just because they think that it is moral, but don't you
Leviticus
ever think 18:22
that discriminating someone for something that is so complex and historically unfounded worth the
effort. One must
Webb places ask themselves,
this strong without denial,against
prohibition if they ever received any
homosexual actsmessages from context
within the god or involving
of the in
certain prohibitions
situations that Proved toitthem
preceding morality exist.
and following it, in One thing formanner:
the following sure that no matter how much a person prays
or meditates him or she would never meet god. So, I'd say, live your life based on justice and equality and not
Incest ( Lev 18:6-18 heterosexual intercourse
on such abstract idea that may never be founded. A person who lives might found him or herself to be special in
Menstruation (Lev 18:19) heterosexual intercourse
certain ways, but let us never forget that many others have gone through events that are sadder than us, not to
Adultery (Lev 18:20) heterosexual intercourse
live our---------------
live based on mysticism.
sacrifice of children to Molech (Lev 18:21)
Homosexuality has been a source of constant conflict among many organizations of today’s society. Perhaps the
---------------
most prominent
homosexualitydisputes of 18:22)
(Lev this issue exist within the disagreement
nonheterosexual intercourseof same sex relationships from the views of
society,bestiality
homosexuals, the Christian nonheterosexual
(Lev 18:23) church, and scientist’s biological theories. Society’s view is that homosexuals
intercourse
influence others; therefore, it is a chosen lifestyle. Most homosexuals believe they were born with a homosexual
The Leviticus 18:22 prohibition is often argued to be irrelevant to present circumstances because
gene and they did not choose this lifestyle for themselves. The Christian church teaches that “homosexuality” is
of its proximity to the child sacrifice prohibition. This links it to pagan cult worship. It does not
not God’s
apply design for people,
to committed but believes
same-sex there areWhile
relationships. ways not
of changing.
untenable,Several
Webb scientific
sees a moretheories show no
plausible
observations of a homosexual gene, but believe there could be certain happenings in one’s
explanation for the arrangement of the prohibitions. The law is dealing first with improper life that could change
one’s sex subconsciously.
heterosexual behavior (18-20) which includes the birthing of children and sacrifice to Molech. The
last two round out the prohibitions by precluding all nonheterosexual behavior. Webb believes
thisone
passage 1
Asked by of myisfavorite
about appropriate
theologian, sexual boundaries.
W. J.Webb regarding the issue of gender equality & homosexuality,
“When Deuteronomy
Christians discuss
22:5 the issue of gender equality, often someone will ask, ‘Doesn’t acceptance of
egalitarianism logically lead to acceptance of homosexuality?’”
This passage is a prohibition against cross-dressing. Webb observes that while gender
According to him, many patriarchalists fear a blurring of gender distinctions and acceptance of a homosexual
distinctions in clothing change over time and across culture, this passage indicates that gender
lifestyle. Webb argues that the hermeneutic does not led in this direction. He lists six biblical and theological
distinctions are to be made. Webb also writes:
reasons why this is so.
Allow meMany Old to
to share Testament
you Webb’sscholars reagard this
article regarding text
gender as a prohibition
equality against
& homosexuality not only
in biblical transvestite
context. Below is his
activity
article which can(dressing and at
also be found acting like the opposite sex) but also the primary forum in which it is
the website:
expressed, homosexuality.
http://krusekronicle.typepad.com/kruse_kronicle/2006/11/dbe_chapter_23_.html.
Romans 1:18-32
Webb writes:
The Core Value of Gender Boundaries
Some homosexuality advocates attempt to define unnatural as something against one’s sexual
Webb notes that:
orientation and to reduce Paul’s concerns about homosexuality to strictly idolatry-related or lust-
There have problems.
related These
been recent attempts,
attempts however,
to reduce thehave
issuenot to been
a lackconvincing
of lifelongand seem to
covenant reflect a
relationships
radical misunderstanding of the discourse of Romans 1:18-32.
(thus making covenant homosexuality acceptable today), but this is not the fundamental problem
withHehomosexuality for the pagans
writes that in 1:18-20, biblical have
authors. Rather,
knowledge fromthecreation
biblicalof concern
what the regarding
world is to same-sex
be like.
sexuality
Versesis 21-23
that Scripture proclaims
talk of turning awaythat
fromin the
creating
Creator humankind
to worshipincreation.
God’s own image,24-27,
In verses god created
Paul
themidentifies
“male andhomosexual acts as
female” (Gen the most
1:27). vivid example
In Genesis of this rejection
2 this is reinforced of God.
in terms In verses
of God’s 28-32,
having made
menPaul
andrebukes
womenthisforrejection of God
each other. Godanddid
then adds
not makea listmen
of other sins that
for men, norcome from
did he rejecting
make women God.for
This (402-403)
women. is not about homosexual temple prostitution. Webb also notes that the specific inclusion of
lesbian acts shows a broad proscription of same-sex acts.
Webb turns his attention three biblical passages.
Webb rejects the idea that these passages are dealing with lack of covenant between same-sex
partners. “The deepest issue for he biblical authors is a breaking of sexual boundaries that
violates obvious components of male-and-female creation design.”
Direction of Redemptive Movement
Webb points out that unlike the slavery and women’s issue discussed in the previous essay, the
treatment of homosexual behavior is a trajectory toward greater restriction and prohibition of
1 William J. Webb
theses received
sexual acts.his Ph.D. from Dallas Theological Seminary. He is an ordained minister with the
Fellowship of Evangelical Baptists in Canada and currently serves as professor of New Testament at Heritage
Seminary (Cambridge, Ontario). His writings include Returning Home: New Covenant and Second Exodus as the
Context for 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1l; Slaves Women and Homosexuals; and several articles in journals. Bill, his wife,
Marilyn, and their three children live in Waterloo, Ontario.
The Vice/Virtue Lists and the Penal Codes
Webb points to the use the word arsenokoites of penal codes given in 1 Cor 6:9-10 and 1 Tim 1:9-10.
The word literally means “a male who goes to bed [has sexual intercourse] with males” and in all
likelihood was derived intentionally by the apostle from the Septuagint translation of Leviticus 18:22 and
20:13.
He goes on to note a distinction between the issue and the issue of women:
Women serving in leadership roles is simply narrated (Judg 4-5; 2 Kings 22:11-20), and in one case it is
forbidden (1 Tim 2:12), but it certainly never receives this sort of death-penalty or vice-list censure. (409)
The Lack of Canonical Variance
While there seems to be variance about the treatment of slaves and women the is no canonical variance
concerning homosexual acts.
Different Purpose Statements
…These subordination texts [slaves and women] are purpose-driven by a passion to make one’s behavior
attractive to society. On the other hand, the purpose statements related to the homosexuality
prohibitions reveal a concern to make one’s behavior distinct from the broader social setting (Lev 18:3; 1
Cor 6:9-10; see also Lev 18:24-30; 20-22-24).
With the texts pertaining to slaves and women, one may retain the purpose meaning by rethinking the
actual behavior in the modern context; with the homosexuality texts, one may retain the purpose
meaning only by staying with the same behavior.
The counter-cultural nature of the homosexual prohibitions increases the likelihood that they raise
transcultural concerns.
Different Pragmatic Clues
Webb identifies three pragmatic issues against homosexual behavior. He elaborates on them in footnote
20:
(1) Sexual-intercourse design: the creative architecture of male and female sexuality with its part-and-
counterpart configuration argues against same-sex relationship. Two males or two females can function
sexually; they can produce sexual arousal and climax, but not in a way that utilizes the natural,
complementary design of body parts.
(2) Reproductive design: the mutually completing contribution of male-and-female chromosomes, the egg
and sperm, and so on argues against gay and lesbian relationships.
(3) Nuturing design: the physical design of female breasts, their function of nuturing and comforting
infants, and the benefits of breast milk for a strengthened immune system argue for heterosexual
relationships (and against homosexual relationships) in which the mother can breastfeed her children.
(412)
Webb adds a fourth reason in the text, which is the benefit children receive from the complementary role
modeling of male and female parents.
Concluding Remarks
Webb notes that some of the strongest research and argumentation for hetero-sexual only relationships
comes from egalitarian leaders. The idea that egalitarianism logically leads to normalizing homosexual
behavior is erroneous. The answer to his opening question is no.