...They go into woods into bean fields they go
Deep into their known right hands. Dreaming of me,
They groan they wait they suffer
Themselves, they marry, they raise their kind.
Sin is in action, not in temptation or attraction. I feel this is a very important distinction. This is true for every single person. You don’t get to choose your circumstances, but you do get to choose what you do with them.
But I think this guy is a fucking idiot. I couldn't put my finger on it, but something really bothered me about him. And I think Dan got most of it. But there's something about him and his stupid situation and his stupid essay that's really hurting my brain.
Saying that every incidence of lust is basically dead in you and that you have adequate sexytimes for the baby making is different from sublimating your gay desires. The former, ok fine not a "sin". The latter? Well, I admit to reading quite a lot of Kant right now, but if being gay is "wrong" how is this okie dokie with the Mormons? It's the funhouse mirror reflection of meaning to do something bad, and accidentally doing something right. That's not morally praiseworthy.
Josh Weed has robbed his wife. She will never know passion - the powerful feeling of being desired by her partner. Someone aching to physically be with her. Someone to dream of kissing her, worshipping her skin, lusting after her. Say what you will, but to me, this is an essential part of the human experience. Some of the most profoundly exciting, intoxicating and memorable experiences we have are these deep erotic feelings, and she gets....a guy who fucks her because that is his religious duty.
He's a Marriage and Family Therapist with a private practice in Auburn, WA (Come and see him if you would like counseling -- seriously!)
I specialize in helping individuals and couples combat addiction (both chemical and sexual/pornographic), LGBT issues, ADHD/ADD, depression, OCD, anxiety, and post traumatic stress disorder resulting from abusive situations.
The_Weed @Rich Juzwiak 3 days ago REPLY
I guess I can say three things: 1. I want people to feel loved and accepted. 2. I have what I consider to be legitimate fears that when marriage equality is finalized (and I think the times indicate that it is only a matter of time until that happens), there will then be religious persecution when religious institutions want to opt out of providing same-sex marriages because of their doctrines. Because this nation was founded, in part, by those seeking religious freedom, that seems rather foreboding to me. But I'm no political scientist and wouldn't claim to be. 3. Ultimately I suspect the solution would be some kind differentiation between marriage as a religious rite and civil unions as a binding legality, for everybody and not just gay people. I don't know if clean lines could be drawn though. I think we kind of messed things up in the beginning by having religious marriage and legal union so intertwined. I think that everyone should have the advantage of civil unions. I think that marriage as a religious rite should be governed by religions themselves.
Ultimately, I just want a scenario where nobody feels discriminated against. It's a complex issue. I don't know what the solution is.