Ah, but the problem, you see, is this: you are assuming a mutually accepted standard for behavior. You are premising your conclusion on the false assumption that we will all agree on what is right and what is wrong.

This is the classic error in any moral debate and is perhaps best typified by the Christian Right who often quote the Bible as the measure of truth for everyone.

Such citation is valid only if the respondent accepts the same measure of truth. This is not always the case.

For instance, the assumption that homosexuality has always been understood in all cultures as both socially and morally perverse is false. Evidence from both ancient and modern social history indicates surprising latitude regarding this issue. Indeed, in a number of cultures not subject to Biblical restraints, there is clear acceptance of homosexuality as a normal component of a healthy society, Rome for one.

The pronouncements of those intent on labeling homosexuality as both personal sin and social perversion based on their own, rather narrow, measure of truth appears somewhat self-righteous and certainly ill-informed.

I would suggest that we consider protecting society from such ignorance before we worry too much over sexual diversity.

As one who does use the Bible as a guide for both personal and social goals, I recognize the value of understanding the scripture I deem sacred in its historical context.

The grave pronouncements against homosexuality found in the Old Testament of the Bible are limited to an archaic collection of social morals that include prohibitions against the eating of pork, certain haircut styles and the horrible sin of wearing a cotton shirt with wool trousers.

In the New Testament, the concern on this issue emanates entirely from the pen of St. Paul, who clearly had trouble understanding the value of any kind of sexual behavior.

All of this to underscore again the importance of acknowledging that there are different points of reference for all of us, and we had best be very careful before we go claiming that a certain behavior is inherently wrong or damned by God just because it doesn’t fit with our own understanding of what is authoritative and what is not.