Standing on the Side of Love
The Rev. Leonetta Bugleisi
Isn’t it lovely to be able to celebrate a day created not just to spread the joy of chocolate but to acknowledge those that need some sweetness in their life due to their compromised health or living conditions. The holiday was created in 1922, Cleveland, Ohio by Herbert Birch Kingston who was a local candy company employee. Kingston sought to bring cheer and some happiness to the lives of those who were often forgotten. With the help of his friends, he began distributing candy and small gifts to children living in orphanages, those stricken with illness or disabilities, shut-ins, and others who were forgotten. What a nice holiday that isn’t just for those in love but for those who want to acknowledge a wider definition of love, agape love that reaches out to community. (wiki pedia)
My previous understanding of Sweetest Day was that it was a holiday for men and women in love to honor each other with a card or a small gift. I also thought the Saunders Candy company started the idea. Isn’t that the way our views of things start? We have a limited idea of what something is, what the original intent was and often our information is not accurate. Fortunate are we to be Unitarian Universalists, willing to reposition our beliefs and our opinions, after we have been given more information to ground our views in rational thought and inclusivity.
I thought today would be a good day to speak about the injustices that gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender (glbt) people are subject to in our country. Although in some social circles and in some religious circles those who define themselves beyond heterosexual do get treated with respect and equality, their right to marry is definitely one of the areas of inequality. Unitarian Universalists are among the many denominations that are t working diligently to help pass laws that will allow GLBT folks to marry and share property and health decisions legally.
Last week as I was driving the 5 hour drive back from Chicago, I tuned into the am stations to hear what Rush Lumbaugh was sharing with the world. I recommend that each of us occasionally listen to Fox news, Glen Beck, and others that are not usually in our radar for obtaining news commentary. The information you obtain will better prepare you for conversations with people who don’t share your same perspective. Rush on that day was giving his reasons why the president and his wife would never have been in the positions they are in without Affirmative Action and that their educational background is weaker than others because of those advantages. But I digress, now back to Standing on the Side of Love.
Standing on the Side of Love is the name of the initiative started with UU’s to encourage awareness of individuals and the legislative body of the United States to respect and allow all individuals who wish to marry that opportunity. It is worth looking up under the uua.org website for review and the possibility of becoming more involved in this important work.
Today I would like to offer you some information that you could use in conversations with those that condemn GLBT people as going against the teachings of the Lord and the Bible. I think it is important for us to be able to have these important discussions by being familiar with the texts that fundamentalist Christians use to defend their stance for hatred, exclusion and injustices directed at GLBT population.
James Nelson was a Presbyterian minister and a professor of mine in seminary. His book: BETWEEN TWO GARDENS: Reflections on Sexuality and the Religious Experience offers an informed perspective on the biblical texts that are often quoted and used as the core resource against GLBT according to the Lord.
~Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19) “though often believed to show God’s condemnation of homosexual activity, cannot fairly be interpreted in this manner. In recent decades, many noted biblical scholars have concluded that the ‘sin of Sodom’ was in fact the general violation of Hebraic standards of social justice, including the violation of the norm of hospitality to the stranger. Even if one grants a primarily sexual focus to the story, the only reasonable conclusion is that here are condemnations of sexual intercourse with divine messengers and of violent gang rape, but not condemnations of other forms of homosexual genital activity or of homosexuality as an orientation.” (p. 114)
~other Old Testament passages: Leviticus 18:23 & 20:13, ‘part of the Holiness Code, reflect an overriding concern for the separateness and purity of God’s chosen people, in contrast to the surrounding tribes with their idolatrous practices, including the use of female and male temple prostitutes. SELECTIVE LITERALISTS today frequently single out these texts, forget (or are unaware of) their historical context, and ignore the numerous other proscriptions in the same code, such as those against eating rare meat,…..and wearing clothing of mixed fabrics.’ (p.115)
However, many of the teachings of the Bible are misused by people who have an intentional agenda to share with the world that will make the world a better place according to their personal beliefs. These beliefs are often based on fear. “The American Family Institute was created to combat anti-family propaganda of the militant homosexuals, radical women libbers and the sex lobby that for so long have been allowed free reign here in Washington.” Senator Gordon Humphrey of New Hampshire 1980 (p. 147). This perspective rooted in spiritualistic dualism and patriarchal dualism is alive and well today, to hear more, I refer you to Fox News and am commentary of Rush Limbaugh again.!
The term ‘selective literalists’ fits the subjective formula that people use when quoting the Bible for moral guidance. They will single out a text, and are either unaware of or they forget the historical context and then ignore other pro-scription in the same code. For instance in the list from Leviticus there are codes again wearing clothing of mixed fabrics, eating rare meat, having marital intercourse during menstruation, etc. The Christian New Testaments references to homosexual acts are interpreted from exploitative relationships of prostitution and the sexual use of boys by adult males. These references where take from acts of brokenness and imbalanced relationships. They were not describing loving acts by same-sex couples for whom ‘mutual homosexual attraction is part of the given of their natures’. (p.115)
And that shift is very important if we are to understand same-sex relationships or any relationships today. Elements of mutual attractions, healthy dynamics of balanced responsibility and goals for creating lives that unfold to enrich families and society both.
When my partner proposed to me he wrote me a song, I responded with a scream and a “uugh”. I had been fortunately been married twice before. Our culture had stamped on my forehead that I was a failure at this permanent type relationship. So I headed for the library and bookstore, a formula that has worked for everything from gardening and planning trips to foreign countries and now the possibility of a 3rd marriage.
One of the spiritual books I found made these statements that apply to all romantic love relationships: “Creating Union: The Pathwork of Relationship by Eva Pierrakos & Judith Saly)'
~if life is a school, relationship is its university
~it is through your relationships, especially through your relationship with your love-partner that you can learn and grow most.
~the history of anyone’s relationships reveals the inner landscape of that person’s being. From such a history one can deduce the person’s beliefs about life, the opposite sex, love and sexuality in general, about marriage (about homosexuality and marriage rights) and so on. If you learn to look at yourself with a somewhat detached, but nevertheless passionately curious interest, and with honesty, you will be surprised at what you discover; it was you who co-created the present status of your relationship, or the lack of it. It did not just happen to you. YOU ARE NOT A VICTIM.
~from a spiritual perspective we magnetically draw people and situations toward us which correspond to your unconscious desires and fears
~when two equals relate, both carry the full responsibility for the relationship. One person cannot carry the burden for the actual difficulty of the other. A spiritually mature person cannot blame someone else for their unhappiness or disharmony. Only those who assume responsibility for finding their OWN inner disturbance and mutual effect will celebrate this type of maturity. IN OTHER WORDS, we may share the responsibility of the relationship created, but are only responsible for our own happiness and evolutionary growth within the relationship.
~all masks must fall, not only those on the surface, but even those deeper down which you may not even have been aware of. Then your love will remain alive. It will never be static; it will never stagnate. You will never have to search elsewhere. There is so much to see and discover in this land of the other soul you have chosen, whom you continue to respect, but in whom you seem to miss the life-spark that once brought you together.
After I read many books I said yes to the marriage proposal. Wouldn’t it be lovely if all people that love could have that right?
And wouldn’t it be wonderful if the second half of the sermon was the only sermon necessary to give today. That is the only sermon we really need to hear: “How to love with empathy, compassion, passion and growth”. We really don’t need lessons on how to perpetuate hate, injustice and judgment. We are Standing on the Side of Love. May more join us as we share our open perspectives and rational applications of heart to the Bible and to those around us that love the Bible and it’s open teachings, when read from a historical perspective.
May love be reclaimed as a realistic action for all. According to Aldous Huxley’s observation:
‘of all the worn, smudged, dog’s-eared words in our vocabulary, ‘love’ is surely the grubbiest, smelliest, slimiest. Bawled from a million pulpits, lasciviously crooned through hundreds of millions of loudspeakers, it has become an outrage to good taste and decent feel, an obscenity which one hesitates to pronounce. And yet, it has to be pronounced, for after all, Love is the last word.’
