Aha! Lo! One of the joys of the calendar this year is that we can celebrate Doris Day Day in Eastertide.
Singalong now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evqSKridlQU
Ms Day is 89 years young today and deserves our many congratulations.
Aha! Lo! One of the joys of the calendar this year is that we can celebrate Doris Day Day in Eastertide.
Singalong now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evqSKridlQU
Ms Day is 89 years young today and deserves our many congratulations.
I think you miss the point of the book Kelvin. It’s meant to be a guide to listening to *all* sides of the debate, not just those you agree with. That’s what makes the last section so good, because it forces us to deal realistically not just with the genuine evidence on the causality of homosexuality, but also the fact that some people *do* see remarkable change in their sexual orientation (and that others don’t).
We were not called by the last Lambeth Conference to listen to all sides in the debate.
Ruth Gledhill has posted a PDF of the whole thing, for those interested:
http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/files/Final.pdf
I’ve now read the ‘scientific’ section – thanks for the link ryan – and I thought it was mixed. I thought Glynn Harrison made a serious attempt at dispassion. I think it is a fair point that any person must decide their own priorities, and the final argument must be between theologies, not sciences. I was not so impressed by David de Pomerai – though one could hardly quarrel with his conclusion that we simply do not know exactly what makes one person homosexual and the next heterosexual. However his whole argument was bedevilled by assumptions that, e.g. homosexual men will be more effeminate than straight ones. Anecdotal evidence instantly produces examples where it is the straight male siblings who are drama queens and run from spiders, while gay ones take it all in their stride.
It must be accepted that both gay and straight people live with voluntary or enforced celibacy with no ill effects – and that some people can change their sexual orientation and live happily with the change. What I found truly heart rending were the desperate attempts and the high cost to those who actually did succeed in changing orientation – however much Harrison denies the skin colour analogy, it reminded me painfully of those endless jars of skin lightener which encrust Sri Lankan chemists, where beauty is measured in skin tone. Because whether or not genetic, orientation is not a simple free choice. But I suppose the answer would be: ‘And what is?’
The final point, though, is always the same. Is Christianity a religion of an authoritative book, or an authoritative Person?
Spent an hour this afternoon watching the apples pray.
It is the second anniversary of my blog. Nearly 600 postings posted and who would have believed that the temporary design would have lasted this long?Want to catch up? Highlights from the past year include the following:The SexretaryCamel of the YearThe curious inicident of the mouse in the night timeVirtue captures my heartTen Liturgical CommandmentsThat…
Someone once told me that I shouldn’t read Jung until after the age of 35. At the time, this made me rather cross, but now somehow I can see what he meant. I have been reading a bit of Jung and a bit of Jungian stuff recently and it all does see rather different now.…
“Just put this cream on her eye twice a day for five days….” What fun to have a vet with such an extraordinarily well developed sense of humour. I bet he lies awake chuckling at night at the instructions he has given people during the day.
Leave a Reply