Drawing lines in the aisle

Sexuality isn’t a matter of plumbing. If it was plumbing, then

same-sex relationships would not be an issue for the church. In the

Genesis account of creation (Chapter 1), we are told that:

1) We are created in God’s image.

2) It took two different creatures to represent God ... one female

and one male. God’s image is reflected in our sexuality. It is only

in the union of these images that we can fully represent the complete

image of God. Women reflect perspectives and emotions that are found

in God, but not in men and vice versa.

3) God is spirit and has no sex, but the characteristics we call

masculine and feminine are found in him (Note: We use the masculine

pronouns and “Father” in following Jesus’ example, not because we

believe God is male). He is glorified in the presentation of him

through our images/sexuality to the world. The image is not merely

internal. Our sexual plumbing is an external picture of internal

reality, meaning your soul has the same sex as your body.

We get into dangerous waters when we try to separate the two

realities, the body and the spirit. Scripture does not support such a

distinction. We are complete beings, body and spirit integrated. In

separating the two, we give people the false impression that the

distinctions are unrelated. The integrity of our creation is

violated. It encourages people to live lives during the week (body)

completely devoid of who they are when they attend their religious

services (spirit). We begin to hear politicians say things like,

“That’s my private life, it has nothing to do with my ability to

lead.”

There is no integrity between soul and body. Again, our Scriptures

do not make those distinctions. The link between the spirit and the

body is not meant to be severed, theologically or physically. The

separation of them is what we call death. When the images are

combined, God gives us a tiny bit of creative power in the ability to

produce another life in his image.

In the end, a monogamous female/male relationship is not promoted

because some ancient prophet decided it was the relationship he most

felt comfortable with, but because the family unit, beginning with

the union of the male and female images of God, is meant to be an

earthly representation of God himself. Look at some of the most

demeaning issues in our society: rape, incest, molestation, divorce,

etc.

Men are raised hearing the lie that they are not man enough. Women

hear the lies that they are not feminine enough. All of these are

spiritual attacks on the image of God as it is represented in the

bodies of humanity. When the family is destroyed, then it has no

power to represent God on Earth.

Same-sex marriage to me is not an issue of rights, it is an issue

of vital theology.

RIC OLSEN

Senior Associate Pastor,

Harbor Trinity Church

Costa Mesa

From an Islamic perspective, homosexual behavior is condemned in

the strongest terms. Such behavior is considered unnatural, immoral

and uncivilized. Sex, within the limits of marriage -- between a man

and woman -- is considered as a blessing, reward and a contribution

to the betterment of society from God.

IMAM MOUSTAFA AL-QAZWINI

Islamic Educational Center

of Orange County

Costa Mesa

Each person is called to realize and express his or her Buddha

nature -- True Self -- whether gay or straight. There is nothing in

the Zen tradition to prohibit or disparage same sex orientation,

sexual activities, relationships or marriages.

In marriage, both partners commit to practice with the joys and

challenges of relationship as a means of growing in compassion and

wisdom, regardless of whether they are of the same or different sex.

As one highly regarded American Zen teacher Robert Aitken puts it,

“The practice of marriage is the lifetime cultivation of intimacy.”

I recall the excellent example provided by my own teacher, then in

her 70s, as she matter-of-factly officiated at a lesbian wedding

perhaps 12 years ago, following the same rites she used in

heterosexual weddings.

The precept of “not misusing sex” applies to all, freeing us from

attachment to self-centered encounters for personal power, and from

harming others. Each person’s practice of meditation guides her or

his behavior in relationships.

In sharp contrast, the Dalai Lama, leader of one lineage of

Tibetan Buddhism, states in his “Core Teachings of Tibetan Buddhism”

that “sexual misconduct” for a man includes a sexual act performed

with another man. He also states that both the mouth and anus are

“unsuitable” body parts for sexual activity, whether male or female.

I find it disappointing that his global promotion of peace and human

rights has not included equal rights and dignity for women and for

gay people.

THE REV. DEBORAH BARRETT

Zen Center of Orange County

Costa Mesa

I believe that same-sex unions can achieve the same level of

fidelity and stability as heterosexual unions -- that is what I am

afraid of!

The institution of marriage in modern society has a dubious record

of constancy and the creating of healthy relationships. I see the

attitudes and behavior of men and women married to one another as the

greater danger to the institution of marriage. Homosexual unions do

not threaten the traditional model of marriage as much as adultery,

serial marriage, desertion, spousal abuse, emotional cruelty and

verbal violence.

My marriage would flourish and be secure no matter how many

same-sex “marriages” were recognized by the various states. Still,

Judaism does not allow that homosexual unions could possibly be

accorded the same level of legitimacy as marriage between a man and a

woman. For Judaism, there simply is no such category as marriage

between two men or two women. Further, there is no “right” to marry.

There is no right to marry more than one partner at a time or to

marry an immediate member of one’s own family.

As a Rabbi, I would not agree to officiate at a “marriage”

ceremony between homosexuals. This is because I would then legitimize

homosexual marriage as much an ideal as heterosexual marriage.

“Marriage” can only refer to the full commitment between a man and a

woman, for if marriage means everything, it will ultimately come to

mean nothing.

In the view of Jewish tradition, homosexual practices are

condemned as morally objectionable. Society must have some formal

expression of approval or disapproval in certain areas of fundamental

moral concern. There is not one classical Jewish source that

justifies same-sex “marriages,” for they are contrary to the letter

and spirit of Jewish belief. A homosexual “marriage” is immaterial

under Jewish law because it cannot, by definition, be classified as a

Jewish marriage.

This conclusion, that same-sex “marriage” is counterfeit, is based

on thousands of years of moral teaching and insight. Where there is a

basic confusion between tolerance of everything and moral judgment,

Judaism clearly stands with traditional morality.

RABBI MARK MILLER

Temple Bat Yahm

Newport Beach

“The Celebration and Blessing of a Marriage” in the Book of Common

Prayer begins, “Dearly beloved: We have come together in the presence

of God to witness and bless the joining together of this man and this

woman in Holy Matrimony.”

Sacramentally, marriage is the union in heart, body and mind of a

man and a woman. Certainly, a woman and a man should come to their

religious institution for “the celebration and blessing” of their

marriage in the presence of God and their family and friends only

after they have made the commitment to live together in a covenantal,

lifelong relationship.

Clearly, persons of the same gender make covenantal commitments in

lifelong relationships as well. Religious institutions are struggling

with whether such relationships between persons for whom marriage has

not been an option can be celebrated and blessed and, if not, why,

and if so, how?

Civil institutions are struggling with the “whys” and “hows” of

offering legal rights/benefits of marriage (inheritance, insurance

and much more) to couples of the same gender. From a religious

perspective, the bottom line is that we are each-and-all beloved

children of God and heirs of God’s dominion in which (in words from

“The Celebration and Blessing of a Marriage”) estrangement is

overcome by unity, guilt is healed by forgiveness and despair is

conquered by joy.

THE VERY REV. CANON

PETER D. HAYNES

St. Michael & All Angels

Episcopal Church

Corona del Mar