I meet very few people who believe that they have any real choice in how they respond to sexual attraction -- myself included.

There is a choice that I have made, though, quite intentionally. I refuse to be a person who: (1) feels like I'm "made this way" in terms of being attracted to women in a seemingly involuntary manner, but (2) treats other people like their human sexual responses are all completely planned and totally within their control, and especially (3) when "their choice" is fundamentally different than any "choice" I would have made.

I don't want to be that inconsistent, perhaps even hypocritical. The good news is that guidelines like The Golden Rule (do unto others) and The Great Commandments (love God and neighbor) really should make it easier to love people genuinely -- meaning, love them as they are.

One of the biggest lies you will hear in some churches is that the Bible teaches us to "love the sinner but hate the sin." Not Biblical. Not True, unless you are following the gospel according to Mohandas Gandhi. The Bible says that God behaves that way in a couple of places -- Psalms, in particular -- but we are not gods. Our instructions stop at love your neighbor as you should love yourself.

I think part of this church-based confusion comes from another all-too-easy slogan: WWJD. The best preachers I have known wince a little at that expression because it is only almost right.

  • "What Would Jesus Do" really only matters if you are Jesus.
  • "What Would Jesus Have Me Do" is a much better question if you are a Christian.

I can guarantee that Jesus doesn't want anyone burning up precious resources trying to guess how voluntary or involuntary another person's responses are to sexual stimulus. So, choice seems to be what the issue hinges on for social conservatives, and yet choice really shouldn't dictate how we interact with others.

Inappropriate Conversations
Loading Downloads
Podbean App

Play this podcast on Podbean App