Claims have been made against the Wilkinsons that they are homophobic, although these claims are made without a real understanding of what being homophobic actually is. According to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, 'Homophobia' is: an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexuals.
As Bible-believing Christians, the Wilkinsons are supported by the Word of God in refusing to accept homosexuality. It is one of the tenets of their faith, and, as such, cannot therefore be deemed to be extreme and irrational. Standing firm to their belief does not make them homophobic, although it may suit those with a vested interest to claim that it does.
I can understand that the decision not to allow Michael Black and his partner, John Morgan, the opportunity to share a room at the Guest house would have been distressful for them. However, had they made it clear when the room was booked that it was required for two men sharing, then the situation could have been dealt with over the phone. Some irritation would have been felt, but it would not have caused distress. After all, the stand taken by the Wilkinsons is not an isolated incident, for it would be a stand taken by any practising Christians who refused to compromise their belief. Given the same situation I would have made the same decision myself.
The 2006 Equality Act made it illegal to discriminate on the grounds of a persons sexual orientation, although the Act itself is discriminatory in that it is supportive of homosexual and lesbian couples whilst discriminating against incestuous relationships, paedophiles and those whose orientation leads them towards bestiality. Note that I am most definitely not suggesting that each of these orientations is equal. In the eyes of the Law the last three are most definitely not permissible, yet they each, nevertheless, are relevant to the argument on sexual orientation. In the eyes of God, according to Holy Scripture, they are all considered wrong.
The argument therefore, is not to be based upon claims of homophobia but on the rights of individuals to practise what they believe in. So, just as Mr Black and Mr Morgan have every right to live as they wish and practise what they believe in, so the Wilkinsons have the same right.
I recently debated with a friend on homosexuality, after an article saying the Bible could be construed to support it, using petty arguments such as the relationship between Jonathan and David, which has been perverted by homosexual supporters. I got the Bible out, showed him verses relating to Jonathan and David, and he (a literature student himself) agreed that the Bible was clearly not supporting homosexuality (I also showed him Rom 1:26 (I think it is?) and Lev 18:22). He agreed from what I had shown him that the Bible clearly condemns homosexuality.
ReplyDeleteHe then asked me if the Bible was homophobic.
I told him that a phobia requires an adverse gut reaction (as you have defined). I pointed out that the Bible does not take this stance, and rather that the Bible takes a moral standing that homosexuality is wrong (in the same way that incest and beastiality are seen as morally wrong in today's society... for now). Furthermore, I put it to him (and this has since been my argument against it) that the term 'homophobe' is one that the accuser uses from a liberalist viewpoint - to propose that every action is permissable, and we have no moral right to oppose it. It requires a liberal moral viewpoint to have any standing. Therefore, there are two different reasons to be against homosexuality; morally and 'phobically.' It's time people recognised this.