Sexuality Is Something Much Bigger Than That
“Being gay and lesbian is who you are inside, not what you do in the bedroom,” Davis said. “Anyone can have gay or straight sex, it’s just an act. Your sexuality is something much bigger than that.” I’m kind of confused by his logic. I thought the sexual act was actually part of sexuality. Anyway, we were not created to be defined by disordered acts or personal desires. It sounds as though Mr. Davis (self proclaimed “gay” Christian) sees the human person as a being who is a by product of personal thoughts and attractions. We are all broken images of God, who have personal crosses to bear. Sexual attractions do not make a person “gay”, “straight”, “lesbian”, bisexuals”, etc…, that is a role assumed by the individual person.
The person created by God is not fully defined by sexuality. Sexuality is human precisely because it belongs to and is for the person; it is not an independent reality, but is related to the person. As Christ said: man was not made for the Sabbath, but the Sabbath for man (cf. Mk 2:27). This can also be applied to the relationship between sexuality and the person: the person was not made for sexuality, but sexuality for the person.
Source Article: Minority Report
EWTN Link: Christian Anthropology and Homosexuality Series
Website of Mr. Davis: http://herndondavis.com/
.jpg)
I don’t see Davis’ logic as problematic at all. You both seem to be struggling to say a similar thing.
Example: a child is raped by a same-sex adult. That does not make the child gay. Doesn’t necessarily mean the perpatrator is gay. A person is not fully defined by his or her sexuality and one’s sexuality is not fully defined by one’s acts.
Comment by Todd — January 26, 2006 @ 1:24 PM
Todd – haven’t seen you around in a while. I hope all has been o.k. with you.
I don’t think they are saying the same thing. Davis mistakes that “gay” for something ontological. He seems to draw a Platonistic dichotomy between the person and the act. An actus humanus does have an ontological effect on the person, for better or worse. We, in a sense, create ourselves into who we are morally, by our acts. One cannot separate oneself from his acts.
I suppose you might be thinking the distinction between person and act that we make in hating the sin but loving the sinner? Hating a person is a desire for their destruction; obviously a sinful orientation. Hating the immoral content of an act, the sin, is recognizing its non-being and desiring the existential non-existence of sinful acts.
You are correct in your example of a child victim, not because acts have no ontological effect on the person, but because the child’s part does not rise to actus humanus; it is not a volitional act but something done to him.
I would perhaps not use the confusing language of “defining sexuality” because this seems to give ontological status to a disorder, which is by definition a privation of being.
What Shelray is saying is that there is no such thing as “gay” understood as ontological, that is an imagined construction of the person who self identifies that way.
Comment by David — January 26, 2006 @ 7:00 PM
Thanks David.
Comment by shelray — January 26, 2006 @ 7:48 PM
“Being [an alcoholic] is who you are inside, not what you do in the [bar],†Davis said. “Anyone can [drink responsibly or not], it’s just an act. Your [alcoholism] is something much bigger than that.â€
Does the above sentence make sense? If not, we have to rethink what Mr. Davis is saying.
Comment by Tony — January 26, 2006 @ 9:24 PM
So, according to the author, being a lesbian or gay is just, what it is? That’s it?! Sexuality is more than sex ? I am not sure if Davis even knows how relative and subjective his state of being is. Â
Comment by Bock in motioon — January 27, 2006 @ 2:13 PM
Sexuality is more than sex — of course. The only context in which I see people reduce sexuality to sex is that of homophobic rhetoric. I mean the locker-room crudity of the phobes who revel in the equation “gay = anal sex”. Homophobia brings a dimness on the mind of just the same quality as that incurred by antisemitism or racism.
Comment by Spirit of Vatican II — February 6, 2006 @ 2:11 AM
Spirit,
Sexuality is a fundamental part of personality in and through which we, as male or female, experience our relatedness to self, others, the world, and God.
My confusing post was to point out that one assumes the role of being “gay”. Isn’t gay a term to define a person who celebrates and practicices the “homosexual” lifestyle?
I think you are inaccurate in your singling out of “homophobes” as being the only ones who are confused about sex and sexuality. Depending on which of the diverse definitions of homophobia you are alluding to, I agree that hate towards people is sinful and can dim the mind and heart. Sin breeds sin, sin brings one a sense of emptiness and sadness. Our will/desire to find happines many times become the master of our intellect.
Thanks for your comment.
Comment by shelray — February 6, 2006 @ 8:50 AM