Ok, so I've been lax about getting my MetroPulse columns posted here. I have my reasons but upon reflection, they do not appear to be excuses. I shall endeavor to do better.
As is my custom, what you get here is the original column as submitted. There are some small changes made by the editors which you can view by clicking on the link. Due to some personnel changes at the MP and the resultant confusion, my column is on the same page as another editorial so, you will have to scroll down to get to it. Because of this, if you are forwarding it to those you think might enjoy it, I suggest linking to this blog or, cutting a pasting the whole thing. Thank you for your attribution.
Ok, lets say that you are sitting at a steakhouse. The waiter tells and shows you how fresh and marbled and great looking the porterhouse and the New York strip are. You agree, and you go ahead and pick the porterhouse although, if you were served the strip by accident, you could happily eat it. Or, perhaps you are at a auto dealership ready to purchase a new car. There are several cars in your favorite two colors with only minor differences in options included and price. You end up choosing one but, if that one had already been promised to another customer, you could take one of the others and still feel like you got what you wanted.
Those two situations are examples of choice. When two or more things all have significant and/or approximately equal appeal to you but, you take one of them, either arbitrarily or due to relatively minor differences, that is a choice.
Alright, let's go back to the steakhouse. This time they bring out a beautiful porterhouse and a freshly roadkilled possum. Do you see the difference? Only someone who was truly fond of possum AND beef would see it as a choice. There is at least the chance that someone that fond of possum, would not care for the beef at all. You are wondering where I'm heading with all this by now I'm sure. Read on good people, read on.
It was completely baffling to me why some people thought that other people were “choosing” homosexuality. Then, I had a universal moment of clarity. Apparently, most people are bisexual. This is an argument that I have heard for years from admitted bisexuals but, I must say that I never thought that bisexuals and baptists would be on the same side of this issue. For there to be real choice though, there have to be items or issues of nearly equal appeal. So it would appear that if you believe that sexuality is a choice, it is because for you, it is. It is because both sexes are near equal in their appeal to you, and you are simply assuming that everyone else is like you are. The situation appears to be that though both sexes appeal equally to you, the church wants you to choose the opposite sex. As in the example above, unless there is definite attraction both ways, there is no choice.
I am an apparent anomaly. I've liked females from my earliest memories. It is clear to me that heterosexuality chose ME rather than the other way around. I wonder what that does for me from a church/heaven standpoint? Clearly, there is no virtue in my heterosexuality since I didn't make the choice. On the other hand, it really would not be fair to punish me because of the way I was born. Hey, I had no choice in it, this is just how I am. I suppose there aren't that many of us “natural” heterosexuals. Maybe we should start a club or support group or something. I mean, why are we different? (Not that there's anything wrong with us.)
But, what if all the Bapists weren't Bi? Could it be that like me, they're in a situation where many or most of them can claim no virtue in their sexuality 'cause it is just the way they were born? Naw, that would make them irrational. It would mean that they were persecuting people for things they had no control over. I'm not missing an option am I? It seems to me that either other people are like you or, they are different. Which is it?
If I apply the logic of choice or I suppose, more accurately, if I practice the psychological trick of transference, I believe that since I did not have a choice in my sexuality, the most likely situation for others is that they also had no choice. I have to either think that way or I must actually believe that I am an anomaly. I must actually believe that most people I meet, find either sex just as attractive but, perhaps due to social pressures, have chosen to be with their gender opposites. One thing I think is important to note is that this isn't like choosing a china pattern or an automobile color. Those choices you make one time and you are done. No, sexual choice would be something that you would have to do every day. Possibly multiple times in a day. It could, I suppose, explain why some folk out themselves as Gay after decades of hetero behavior, sometimes including having children. One day, they just make a different choice.
It is a common thing for people to assign to others, attributes and/or qualities that they find in themselves. So the next time you hear some faux Christian talking about someone choosing their sexuality, understand that most likely they are simply seeing in others the same thing they went through. That person talking has probably chosen heterosexuality, so far. What they will choose the next time? Who knows?
EDIT: I really expected to get slammed by pissed off respondents to this column but so far, only those with something positive to say have bothered. The majority of them have made their comments in person. Sometimes, it's almost like I don't know everything.