Uncouth PerspectivesNot on the rug, man.

Over the weekend I attended a Gay Pride festival to show my support for the cause.  A friend attended and posted some pictures on Facebook, tagging me (I have no problem with this).  Another friend, who is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints sent me the following message in response to the pictures:

Hi Isaac.
Your photos with involvement at the kiss-in / Pride popped up on my page. I looked at the home page and the comment of its purpose, to which I responded with an email to [someone I don't know].  Please feel free to address it if you feel so inclined.

Your friend always,

[redacted]

—-

Hello [someone I don't know],
I would be grateful for some genuine and sincere dialog on this issue for which you support. Being LDS, and standing firm for what I believe (not in the name of hate or discrimination but quite the opposite), I have become the recipient of much hatred.

I honestly cannot understand certain terms that have been generated over the years in the promotion of same sex relations. One of those terms was used in your facebook description of the event.

You said, or endorsed:
“This event isn’t just for those who have a partner to kiss! No matter what your orientation or your relationship status, join us to hug, hold hands, and demonstrate the right to love that we all believe in and fight for every day.”

When was the term “sexual orientation” first coined? Who was the first person responsible for combining these words together and where is it documented? I try to see things correctly in the light of truth, and when I see these words combined, I honestly see (and allow me to explain why) an oxymoron. Perhaps if you could tell me, or give me an example of what sexual disorientation would be, I could better understand the intended meaning of sexual orientation. Could you do that for me?

Here is why I see the term “sexual orientation” as an oxymoron. The word “sex” or “sexual” would not exist if there were not the two genders, male and female. To suggest that one gender is orientated back to itself, then, would negate the word sex, because the counter gender is omitted.

I do not deny or negate the reality of same sex attraction, and certainly do not discriminate those who are so attracted. I do, however, wish to better understand it. When I see conflicting terms used to describe it, I only see persons who themselves do not understand it. If there really is such thing as “sexual orientation” then there must exist “sexual disorientation.” That is why I would like to know what you would consider a “disorientation,” as related to human sexuality.

Respectfully, and with love,

[redacted]

I have a lot of love and respect for the person who sent me the message, so I felt it was really important to address it.  I also have a lot of passion about the subject, so I felt it was important to address it.  Also, I don’t know why he sent an email to a person he doesn’t really know.. and why he forwarded it to me instead of just asking me the same things.

Being honest, most of what he wrote above is just a semantics game.  And I just can’t do that.  I want to share with you my response.  It’s not as cohesive or well written as I would like, but I think I’ve started to make my argument.  I’m not sharing this because I’m proud of the way I’ve made my statement, but because: a) I said it and need to stand by it and b)  I want to flush my statements out better.  In my letter, I strive to separate the political issue from the moral issue.  I feel strongly about both, but I think they are separate and distinct.  Also, in this case, when the LDS prophet says it is wrong, there’s no room for conversation and I don’t really enjoy non-dialogue that just makes people angry and doesn’t actually strive to solve the problems.

One more comment before the response:  I hate, hate, hate that I cannot seem to escape using “they,” “them” language.  At some point it can’t be avoided, but I do believe this can/may still create divides that don’t really exist or that shouldn’t exist in what we are all striving for.

I try to keep things political in nature off of my feeds because, in general, I want my voice heard in the ballot box or in areas where political discourse is requested/encouraged.  It becomes hard when I do things I wish to share that cross those lines.  I wanted to share what I was doing and I do believe in the cause enough to be vocal about it.  I am not, however, trying to make it into a battle with my friends.

I appreciate your wish for dialogue as I wish for it as well.  The backlash against the individuals for their support of Prop 8 is very sad to me.  People are taking it personal and trying to make it personal back–I don’t agree with this.  This is an emotional issue and so many people are not thinking, acting, or being mature about it.

On one hand, I can understand it.  There are people who are being told, from a social/political point of view that they are not equal.  On this level, this is an issue of rights as a free person and as a citizen in a country which has paved the way for liberty and justice for all.  Except, in this case, as they see it, it is not for all.

There is also the issue of being told, morally, that you are wrong.  I’d really like to leave this issue alone for now.  We both understand that the church and Prophets have been very clear on this point and I don’t have any interest in arguing for or against that.  But I do ask that you think about what affect this has on a person.

On the other hand, nothing is an excuse for being malicious or showing hatred.  There is already too much hatred and fear in the world, we don’t need any more of it.  Those who attack Prop 8 supports simply because they supported or because they don’t understand are undermining their own cause.

My position is not even necessarily about encouraging behavior someone believes to be socially unacceptable and morally untenable.  This is about understanding and I will say that I often find people to be lacking true, honest understanding.  Not care, not concern, not love, not goodness of heart–I am not suggesting this.  But the ability to listen and understand that a person is going through something which often they do not even comprehend–whether this is “nature,” selfish hedonism, or Satan’s temptations.

One of the large reasons the homosexual lifestyle is flamboyant and promiscuous is because family, friends, and community struggle or actively resist having acceptance (as a person) and understanding.  Individuals repress and resist their desires and end up exploding in frustration and anger.  When a person is told that the sexual contact they desire is dirty and wrong, they’ll take that and run with it.  Or they’ll just make a scene because they know it makes people uncomfortable, which is how they feel all the time.

And this isn’t just homosexuals.  So many sexual ills in our world are rooted not only in individuals and the judgments in life they make, but the way society frowns, represses, and doesn’t accept people.  I watched a documentary last night on two evangelical pastors who work to help people with pornography addiction and how much they are rejected from their own community simply because don’t want to talk about this, even if it’s from a point of trying to help and make a difference.  If we can’t even talk about it, how can we ever solve the problem?

You say that there are terms you do not understand and I say that is not the place to start the conversation.  It’s important and the conversations needs to happen.  But I think it is xenophobic and narrow thinking to reject the unknown simply because it is unknown.  If it is “us” and “them,” then there will always be a battle to fight.  The rhetoric which is used regarding homosexuals is the same rhetoric used for slaves and blacks.  This language is divisive and dehumanizing.  We need to start by accepting that we’re all in the mad world together and maybe we have more in common than we might realize.

I’m not trying to make moral case for homosexuality.  My position here is mainly a political one–I believe we, as a nation, are being hypocritical to say that man is free and liberty trumps all and then deny two consenting adults the right to express love.  Just as we do not deny people the right to drink alcohol, drink coffee, or work on Sunday.  There are potential problems and abuse with all of these things, but the best way to deal with those problems is through education and through community.  When we listen, we will be heard.  Our country is founded on the idea that man, when given the freedom to do so, will achieve great things–innocent until proven guilty–free to choose religion–free to choose love.  Even if we don’t always agree.

I have two places I work out.  One is for the University I work for–a big, nice gym built for all of the students.  Lots of machines, lots of space, and, often, lots of people–but it never feels small and rarely feels crowded.  I also have a very small workout room at my apartment complex, which consists of two treadmills, and elliptical, two stationary bikes, three weight machines that cover the basic spectrum of muscles, and a set of dumbbells.  The room is smaller than my living room and kitchen–cozy.  I use the workout room in my complex often because it’s super convenient and it’s rarely used, especially at the times I go.  Rare, but not unheard of.

Working out is often a very personal thing.  Trust me, I understand this.  Getting myself to a place where I can workout on a regular basis has been a very long, uphill battle.  Not only was I incredibly socially awkward in middle and high school, but I (gladly, at the time) was able to get out of taking P.E.  I have cocked ankles and “pes planus” (flat feet).  At the time it made a lot of sense–I could have seriously hurt myself.  Knowing what I know now, though, and spending a lot of time doing things like hiking, running, playing racquetball, and foot hockey, I realize what a disservice not getting to do P.E. was.  Who knows, maybe not doing it then allowed me to do it now?

Whatever good or bad decision it was, one consequence is I never learned how to work out.  This is not just an issue about discipline, but even knowing how to lift weights, run right, hydrate, all of those things.  When I first started working with upper body weights, I hurt myself easy and often because my back and shoulder muscles had zero support–and not just core, but a lot of the muscles were just never used in things like marathon reading.

So when I say working out is a personal thing, I mean for many it takes incredible concentration.  Ironically, though, it took having people to go with to motivate me.  I know it is this way for others, but for me it had to do a lot with things like not knowing or understanding even how gyms or locker rooms worked out.  My last experiences in early public school with working out before I stopped doing P.E. were humiliating because I was so clumsy and so weak that I could hardly participate in events… and young boys are hardly understanding.

Thankfully, all of that is in the past and I’m much more fit and I’ve found a real passion for getting physical.  Which allows me to be observant as I work out now.  I have noticed that people behave differently at the two facilities.  Maybe because at the big gym there are a lot of students, but it is clearly more social there.  But even I’m this way when I go with my friends to work out.  Is it the space?  Is it the setting?  People are still focused, but it just feels more loose.

The rare time I run into someone in my complex, there always seems to be some kind of tension.  Maybe there is some sort of small workout etiquette I am just not aware of.  Maybe a lot of people who like the workout room like it because it is private–I can totally get that.  I just find it weird that two people can be in a room and hardly even say hello.  But I guess that is how it goes.  So many people don’t even say hello to their neighbors–funny how the closer the dwellings are, the less likely it seems people try to form community.  Especially in a pseudo-urban “young working professional” type place like where I live.

Really, though, I find the gym to be a nice tool.  It helps me get in shape and get the workout I need, but I try to spend my time doing other physical things as much as I can, especially if they are social.  If you can get community + fitness together, that’s an even bigger win to me.

Community. It is a pretty powerful word–a pretty powerful idea. I have to admit that it is also somewhat foreign to me. I am ever in contact with the idea because of my study of religion–in fact, one of the “not-definitions” of religion is community. But, when it comes down to it, I do not feel like I have much community.

I have some good friends who are very important to me and who I definitely do not spend enough time with. When I talk about community, I do not talk about individual friendships or groups of friends and associates. I am talking about being a part of something bigger than oneself–about having a network of people to invest in, to lean on, and to support. I’ve tried to find groups who share passions that I do: atheists, hockey fans/players, readers, etc… While I’ve met good people and even found groups to be a part of, I’ve never felt like I belong.

Some of that I attribute to my childhood. Until I got into the middle of my freshman year of high school, I moved every year or two–three times I moved states. Each time, I had to give up everything I knew–everyone I knew–and start over. I look at pride with being able to be self-sufficient and to find the strength I need to get through in myself, but I often wonder what it would be like to feel part of something bigger.

The other side of the coin, though, is that community often includes necessary exclusion–by definition, there are outsiders. Sometimes this is nominal and sometimes it is highly marginalizing. I have joked about this before, but I really do feel marginalized sometimes. A big issue is religion–not believing in God (and the lack of belief being important to me) makes me quite a pariah–and not being militant about it makes me feel distant from many, if not most, atheists.

There is something about atheism which breeds militancy. Someone very important to me recently said, on an unrelated but similar topic, “I don’t want to spend my life on the defensive.” I think that feeling plays into it–what better defense than an offense? I know I went through a period of militancy, but I just felt empty and hollow–I don’t hate religion, I don’t hate people who believe in God. I do hate ignorant group-think. I do hate blind thinking and perception. I do hate intolerance. But none of these are unique to religion or adherents.

Intolerance is something which can come along with community, especially community with boundaries of righteousness. And the greatest irony is that the stronger the walls that a community builds, the more they are at risk from isolating themselves from society, which in turns causes inward focus on the community, which in turn builds stronger walls…

One of the areas of religion I have studied is cults and one of the characteristics which people first identity as “cultish” is strong isolation. Give up your family, your friends, your past–they are tainted, we have the answer. That sort of stuff. But people are too heavy handed with their use of the word cult. It is, important I think, to understand how any strong community risks breeding this sentiment, especially from outsiders. The challenge is finding a way to balance community and interaction with the greater society.

I know I want to feel a part of a greater community–like I belong. But the honest truth is that I will never, ever give up my ability or interest in judging a person on his/her individual merit for a sense of belonging. I would rather be entirely alone and honest with myself and my relationships with others. I will never be a part of something which draws lines and says “you are in or you are out.” Those of you who know me or have been reading my writing for long enough know that among the top of my frustrations is either/or ideas. If my options are “all or nothing” then there is a serious problem with my options.

I’ve often said that I am firm believer in the individual or communal religious experience. I do not think I’ve made strong efforts to qualify what that means. One of the defining aspects of an institutional religion is the codification of practices into laws, rituals, acceptable practices, etc. For me, this is one of the great turns offs of organized religion. When you try to codify an ideal or the divine or whatever, it often fails to translate. Laws can become burdensome, legalistic (hard to understand), or, even worse, serve as the antithesis of their spirit.

But I have to wonder–is there something acceptably human in the failure of the attempt to codify the divine ideal? Take the line of thinking: Humans are fallible (let’s assume some kind of personal, divine intention for this), God reveals truth to humans, humans attempt to interpret that truth, the interpretation becomes codified laws, those laws are not perfect–that seems to make some sense to me. Unless of course you choose to believe that divine inspiration is divinely perfect, and then you’re just screwed in explaining how things go wrong and why that is okay.

And how does individual interpretation of revelation factor in? Does the institution have divine inspiration and therefore represent the full and actual culmination of God’s will and desire? If the church is seem something as man made, and therefore fallible, I find my level of acceptance for problems in law and practice much higher. But, again, if the codified laws are divinely inspired, no way. Can the individual decide for him or herself what is right and wrong? How does human fallibility play a role in that interpretation?

Besides the fact that I believe the codified laws found in organized religion can simply be wrong, I also believe that at some point the religion becomes more about the worship of the law than about any kind of relationship with divinity. That, to me, is an ultimate tragedy. I find beauty, wonder, and grace in the world around me. If I were theistic, I would probably try to find divinity in the world, in my relationships with people, in life here and now. I’m sure it is a generalization and highly biased, but I feel like there is so much stagnation when the doctrine of law becomes more important than the doctrine of spirit.