I would like to say how strongly I agree with Drew Pollom's commentary last week. I think he raises many good points about how badly the LGBT community has been treated and how this needs to be corrected with great care and compassion. All people are valuable and precious in the eyes of God and they need to be respected for the dignity that they possess having been made in the image of God. The true love between any two persons should be deeply respected and appreciated, as it is a dim reflection of the divine love shared in the Trinity.
However, I would like to address his question: "Homosexuality, science tells us, is common among many animals and species, so then why do we declare it unnatural?"
This is a very common question that I raised when I was pro-homosexual and was something I had to resolve before assenting to the teaching authority of the Church. However, the answer to this question lies in a distinction, because the words natural and nature are used in two different senses here.
In the first sense, "natural" means the way things occur in nature, where nature is a place outside the influence of humans. In this sense, yes, homosexuality is natural, because it does occur in nature. Yet, diseases, genetic disorders, chemical imbalances, and so on also occur in nature in this sense. Further, it should be noted that while I cannot speak of all of the species that display homosexual behaviors, but at least for some species there is a link between homosexual behavior and a chemical imbalance.
In the second sense "natural," means how a being functions and this is a being's nature in the Aristotelian sense. In this sense, it can be said that it is part of the nature of a bird to fly, but due to disease or some other disorder a bird in midflight may fall to the ground.
If we then use the neo-Aristotelian ethics used in the Church, we can see that homosexual acts are immoral for two reasons. They are contrary to human nature and thus inhibit a person from flourishing as a human being, because they can do damage to the human person. Further, from a religious standpoint, they are immoral because they are contrary to human nature that God is the author of. These reasons are truly not substantively different, because God desires our flourishing and is the Creator of our nature.
So, if love "does not rejoice in wrongdoings, but rejoices in the truth," as First Corinthians informs us, then we cannot rejoice in homosexual activity. We should rejoice in the love any two people share and in the amazing dignity God has bestowed on every person, all LGBT included, especially through the Incarnation. In this we ought to protect all of our LGBT brothers and sisters from violence and hatred, but we cannot support homosexual acts they may be struggling with. Indeed, "if your brother sins rebuke him," (Luke 17:3) with charity and compassion, and help to reconcile him or her to yourself and God.
Michael Humphreys graduated from
Gonzaga in 2008
is a member of the 
20 comments
Why do you heteros always think that we’re the ones with the problem!? It’s always the gays hurting themselves and needing the help and support of some loving Christian hetero to save him or herself. You say that I’m causing myself pain with my sexuality? This simply isn’t true. I’ve done more pain to myself in the years I spent living a lie than when I’ve come out. Everyday was a walk of shame; not because I was sleeping with anyone, for that couldm’t be further from the truth, but rather because my very existence was something dirty and to be corrected. I heard what my peers and the church had told me. It was wrong for me to think about other men like that, or to desire the touch of that boy in my science class. You do not know this pain because you are free to define the rules of society, hold hands with a member of the other sex freely in public, and love who you wish without guilt. And yet, ignorant of the oppressed, you pass judgement publicly so that those who are not out can know that members of our community will only love and support them so long as they change the essence of their being.
mechanisms of heteronormativity: even if homosexuality is "natural,"
it is in some way flawed and must be corrected. Even if you arn't
agreeing with gay bashing, your logic maintains a structural violence
where your duty as a Christian or a person is to eliminate the
queerness of the homosexual. It’s your very logic that has created a
culture of self-hatred where gay individuals wake up and have to
confront their sexuality with disdain. This is why so many of my
peers are driven to suicide and live in a state of depression; even
the “love” from the right is tainted with such scorn.
I don’t know you personally or your experiences with the gay
community, but you make some pretty totalizing claims. Maybe you
should come to a HERO meeting (Wednesday – 9 PM at UMEC) or the GLBT
resource center – but you seriously need to have a conversation with
someone who is being oppressed by what you’re arguing. I realize that
you may feel like you are doing the right thing or being loving, but
as a heterosexual, you are privileged in that you do not have to wake
up and realize your sexuality is hated by many and that you were born
a sinning abomination.Let’s look at how foolish your arguments are.
"yes, homosexuality is natural, because it does occur in nature. Yet,
diseases, genetic disorders, chemical imbalances, and so on also occur
in nature in this sense"I'd love, love, love to see the scientific proof for that claim.
Without it, you're not really making an argument other than "x and y
both exist in z universe and happen to have some things in common!"
claim. I don’t think that you as an individual are qualified to say
such a correlation exists. Here’s a fact: the American Psychiatric
Association has come out and said that it is both unhealthy and
impossible to change one’s sexual orientation. Even if you’re right
that homosexuality is a result of “chemical imbalance” or something
else, the fact that you would frame it in terms of a disease or
something to overcome maintains a violent framework for approaching
queers and that the only way to truly love them is to demand
assimilation. Since when was love that conditional?
“while I cannot speak of all of the species that display homosexual
behaviors, but at least for some species there is a link between
homosexual behavior and a chemical imbalance.”What qualifies you to be the gatekeeper deciding whose homosexuality
is a result of chemical imbalances and not? And even if that’s true,
doesn’t that means we should love and accept homosexuality, not from
the starting point of a disease or something to be fixed, but rather
glorified because of its creation by God?
I'm not exactly sure where my argument was based on any particular passage of Scripture. The entirety of my argument is based on Aristotle's natural philosophy and ethics. I used Scriptural quotes to respond to Mr. Pollom's use of Scripture. Thank you for the prayers and I will pray for you as well.@ Anonymous Wed Mar 3 2010 20:37
If you believe that I am a liar, I cannot change that, but I will point out that I made no reference to any passage in Leviticus, so I'm not sure why you are condemning me for something I didn't do. Further, I do love unconditionally, as nearly as I can, but to love unconditionally does not mean to accept behavior unconditionally. Indeed, if someone is exhibiting self-destructive behavior and I ignore it, that is horribly unloving. Anonymous Wed Mar 3 2010 20:58
If the Enlightenment thinkers have better argument than I, then offer them, because you have done nothing to disprove my argument. Anonymous Wed Mar 3 2010 21:31
There is a distinction to be made between condemning an act and condemning a person. I do not condemn any person, mostly because it is not my place to do so, but I can objectively say that a particular act is evil. The old maxim still applies: Hate the sin, and love the sinner. Those who perpetrate violence and hatred against LGBTs: Hate the sin and the sinner, and this is what you assume of me, but his is simply not the case.Anonymous Thu Mar 4 2010 01:43
You are making up contradictions that are not there. My intention with this letter was to show the words "nature" and "natural" have been used incorrectly in this discussion. And I believe that I have done that. Further, I wished to say that all people are precious and have dignity, but we are a broken and fallen people.
You are right that love is not about gender, but the act of sex is, and love is eminently possible without any sexual experiences. And yes I say that we ought to protect the LGBT community from violence and hatred, but like any other sinner we should admonish them for their sins with compassion and charity. Finally, God didn't "mess up", we did. Adam and Eve were perfectly good in paradise, and then they fell, and we are dealing with the consequences of the Fall today.
Michael Humpherys
You say that "All people are valuable and precious in the eyes of God and they need to be respected for the dignity that they possess having been made in the image of God," which is true but then you say that being homosexual is unnatural, which once again, is a contradiction. Also if we were created by God and God is perfect, then how did the most perfect thing imagine, mess up and create some one that does unnatural and immoral things because of a chemical balance.
What I am trying to tell you is that I don't think you clearly understand in your own head how you feel about LGBT community.
This letter is absolutely appalling, and I am frankly ashamed that I live in a community that allows this blatant and disgusting discrimination.