The Gay Apocalypse
Hello, and thanks for joining me.
Just for funsies, I brought my crystal ball. Thought we might rub this thing up and gaze into the future. Be forewarned, something big is on the horizon! (I peeked!)
It will have some dancing in celebration, others mourning in prayer for what must surely be the end of time, and the talk shows will have a field day.
This event will likely occur at some point this summer when the Supreme Court of the United States will rule on questions surrounding the legalization of gay marriage.
One of the questions they are expected to address is whether states can limit “marriage” to the traditional definition of being only the union of a man and a woman.
I think I see the outcome and some of you are not going to be happy.
If the legalization of gay marriage troubles you, stay with me. I once felt just as you do now, and I have come to help you cope with….
THE GAY APOCALYPSE!
Bonus: bacon is involved.
For this writing, allow me to use the word “gay” in a broad, general sense to refer to all same-sex relationships. I seek only to simplify.
Being raised a Southern Baptist served as the backdrop for the way I long felt about homosexuality.
Now, you know we Christians, especially those of us in the genteel South, we love everybody, even them gay people; we just don’t agree with their ‘lifestyle choice’ (words we’ll address shortly).
I must admit that for many years, I had a hard time getting comfortable with it being OK to be gay. While I reject any accusations of homophobia, I do have to confess to being insensitive with some of the things I have said on the radio. I could always hide behind words like, “I’m just kiddin’!”
By the way, gay people have a terrific sense of humor about themselves if it’s humor delivered with love and understanding. I’ve learned that.
So what has changed me?
Through the years, I’ve had several gay co-workers that I got along with very well, personally and professionally. We became… friends. Yes, I have gay friends!
Gee, I hope they don’t try to convert me. (I promise a good story on that before we finish.)
Having gay friends allowed me to ask some very honest questions about their sexuality, as if it was any of my business. In one such conversation with a lesbian co-worker about whether people can or do choose to be gay, she asked, “Why in the world would anyone choose to be ridiculed for being who they are?”
Those words stuck.
I am close friends with a lesbian couple, both of whom will tell you they were never anything other than gay. (It’s apparently a common question from a straight dude: ‘were you always gay?’)
One of them remembers being at a wedding at the age of 5 and wishing she could walk down the isle with the bride. At that age, it’s not a sexual urge, it’s an innate feeling. So, born this way? That is certainly her truth.
To that end, it’s important for heterosexuals to understand that being gay is as natural to gay people as being heterosexual is for straight people. It is simply what you are. Or who you are.
But now comes the hard part, especially for many Christians. How do we reconcile accepting homosexuality with what the Bible has to say about it?
As Christians, we are basically taught our prejudice against gays. There are, after all, scriptural references on these matters and those scriptures say homosexuality is wrong.
When you see Christian opposition to gay marriage, a popular stance involves Leviticus 18:22. Of homosexuality, that verse says, “It is an abomination.” (KJV). With that, opposing voices will declare that ‘it’s in the Bible,’ and the discussion is over, period.
Keep reading.
Two chapters later, Leviticus 20, it is written that not only is it an abomination, but the participants in homosexual activity should be killed.
So how does a Christian justify simple condemnation when there is specific biblical instruction for more action? If Lev. 18:22 is our armor of righteousness against homosexuality, why isn’t Lev. 20:13 the sword we use against it?
My guess is that killing people doesn’t sit well with most of us, even if it is scriptural.
Leviticus is in fact a book of much instruction. We are told not to cheat, not to lie. (Good.) We are told not to wear clothing made from two kinds of material. (Really? Hm.) We are told that the promiscuous daughter of a priest should be burned with fire. (That seems a bit unnecessary.) It tells us adulterers should be killed. (It’s happens but is not generally acceptable practice.) We are told that a woman on her period is “unclean”. (Now that’s just downright old fashioned!)
Fact of the matter is, that fourth book of the bible is full of instructions that most Christians find – even if not admitting it – outdated.
Leviticus contains instruction about what animals we are to sacrifice and how the blood of these animals is to be handled by the priests. It tells us that rabbits are not fit to eat.
It also says pigs are unclean for consumption, an idea that many people reject but others hold as being the reason they will not consume pork.
And that leads us to these questions:
What portions of the bible can we reject as no longer relevant for our world today while holding other verses up as God’s absolute law?
Further, on whose authority are those decisions made?*
It may just be me, but I’m having trouble with demands that God’s law must be obeyed as it relates to homosexuality but not as it relates to eating a pork chop.
So is it okay to change the laws (rules)? I think it is. I think our understanding of all things is an evolutionary process. Science teaches us things evolve; things change.
Medicine evolves. Mechanics evolve. Then why can’t our thinking, our understanding, evolve?
If we can make ourselves understand that the Bible didn’t drop onto Moses doorstep one day, fully written; if we will accept that much of the Bible is the written words of ancient stories and traditions passed through generations, often orally; if we can embrace the knowledge we have that the Bible has undergone many revisions, additions, omissions, rewrites and changes in translation through the years, then yes, I believe the Bible can still be used as an underpinning to the Christian faith without demanding that certain words must be taken as the absolute law of God while we completely reject others as no longer applicable.
It’s a fact that the contents of the Bible has historically been largely affected and directed by the man or men that were in charge at any given time over the many centuries it took for this great work came together as we now know it. Most were likely heterosexual. The vast majority of society has always been – still is – heterosexual. Heterosexuals often have a hard time understanding homosexuality.
Especially in an earlier time when those men of authority had absolute power, anything that felt uncomfortable or weird to them could simply be outlawed.
Better yet, let’s make it not only against the law, let’s make it against God’s law.
And so it shall be written.
There was a time in this country not so long ago that the black man couldn’t vote. Even more recently, women were denied that right. Some “rogue judge” would then make some “ill-informed” decisions that everyone should be treated equally, and the whole world went straight to hell!
It’s about to happen again. The Supreme Court is going to once again rule that treating one group of people differently than another group of people is discrimination, and another wall will come down. At least, that is what I think will happen.
In America, we seem to have a tradition of dealing death blows to discrimination, even if it takes a long time to get to the knockout punch.
I also believe that we will one day look back on our past treatment of gays much as we do now on the past treatment of black people and women. And we’ll shake our heads in disbelief that we allowed ourselves to treat certain people differently, especially in the 21st century.
By the way, for the most part, your kids are already doing this.
In sharing some long-ago Sunday School conversations about gays with my lesbian friend, I recalled during my teenage years one of our teachers, a truly lovely, older Southern lady putting it like this:
“I don’t really have any problem with gay people as long as they don’t try to convert me.” My friend laughed, then responded with, “That’s a shame. I’ll bet The Lesbian League had just upped their quota of converting 80-year old straight women that week.”
Amen.
*These are loose variations of questions posed by Dr. John Shelby Spong, a retired bishop of the Episcopal Church, in his book, “Living in Sin?: A Bishop Rethinks Human Sexuality” (Harper Collins. 1990)
The Con Man Cometh
“Grandmothers”, she said without missing a beat. “They’re kind and receptive.”
Aha. So they want to get to my mom.
It’s those same qualities that make grandmothers targets for scam artists, and it’s for that reason I try very hard to be protective of my mom. Even when she suspects something might be amiss, her kind nature makes her want to trust that everything is good.
If I hear of a scam going around, I usually will send Mom an email. “Remember, your bank is never going to call you to confirm your social security number.” Or whatever the scam of the day making the news might be.
But now, it was my turn to be warned by my mom. She has forwarded an email that showed up in her neighborhood listserv, and it’s a classic!!
The email warns of a gentleman goi
ng door-to-door selling small bottles of wine that are in a “woozie”, defined as a wine koozie. The sender of this email had been suspicious enough to enquire as to why the wine bottle was so small.
“It’s a port wine”, the seller said. He went on to explain that port wine is a dessert wine and is typically sold in smaller bottles. The neighbor knew that part was right, so she ponied up for a bottle.
Once inside her house, she discovered that she had paid $27.50 for a Bud Light, so she sent out the scam alert. Included in the alert was the man’s name. However, her email goes on to say, it was only after googled the name she realized who Gordon Shumway was. And if you don’t know the name, it’s because you didn’t watch the TV show that carried his nickname as it’s title: ALF.
Cover Me In Chocolate and Call Me a Fudgesicle
Let me spare you the long set-up. On a recent getaway to Mexico, we did a couples chocolate massage. I don’t know why. We were on vacation, and it seemed like it could be fun.
Perfect setting, perfect day, perfect partner. Everything perfect! Until it happened.
Besides, it had the word “aphrodisiac” in the name. Who can resist “The Warm Chocolate Melt Aphrodisiac Rubdown For Couples?”
AKA: If this don’t work, you must be dead.
For what they were charging, I thought Willy Wonka might make a personal appearance. Always wanted to meet him.
“Does this come with a guarantee?” I asked.
It didn’t. But I’m a guy whose body shape is roughly thirty years past its prime. If making me a walking chocolate bar makes me yummy, let’s rock.
Here’s the way it works. You take off all your clothes, get slathered in chocolate, get in the shower – together – wash it off, get slathered in chocolate again, get in the shower again, wash it off again, then get in a hot tub. In the hot tub, you eat chocolate-covered strawberries and drink champagne.
We’re all in for this.
With naked bodies on separate tables (not really how I imagined the couples chocolate massage would start) the rubdowns begin.
It’s kind of fun. The first part is called a chocolate scrub, so the chocolate has a grit of some sort. They tell you it’s sea salt, but we’re at the beach, and sand is much more plentiful. Just sayin’.
The smell of chocolate permeates the room, and who doesn’t love that? Hey, and the towels you lay on and that cover you are chocolate colored. Whee!
It’s pretty standard stuff: lay facedown, and they smear the legs, arms, back and butt in chocolate. Flip over and repeat for the tummy, chest and face. Then, it’s off to the shower.
Rubdown part two is where it all falls apart.
It’s good in the beginning. Warm chocolate syrup is being massaged onto your body. Maybe it’s a chocolate oil. Regardless, it has been heated and it feels really nice. But if you’ve had a massage, you know that when the masseuse finishes one part of the body, that part is covered with a towel or sheet.
In this case, the towel is placed over a portion of your body that is coated in chocolate syrup. Syrup that is starting to cool down and soak in, heavy and sticky on the towel.
By the time your entire back side is covered, you don’t want to turn over because she’s going to lift that gooey towel off your back, hold it up while you flip over, then lay that thing down on the only part of your body that is clean, and oh god, she just did it!
Now, she will lift up each portion of that chocolate-drenched towel, ladle on more chocolate, rub it in, then put that towel back over it.
No mas! I want to quit. I want my money back. On second thought, keep the money, just let me out!
It gets worse.
You know how a massage ends on your head? They massage your neck, your face, your ears, and finally, your scalp? Yeah, it’s all done with chocolate.
She is massaging my scalp with chocolate syrup.
Maybe it wouldn’t be so bad if I didn’t have this now-cool 40-pound chocolate-soaked towel laying on me like a nasty wet blanket on a naked baby.
Finally, the masseuse whispers in my ear the sweetest words I have ever heard: “You can now go to the shower.”
I meet my wife there and we’re both putting a happy face on the experience. We say things like, “that was interesting” and “well, we’ve done that.”
The shower is probably where the aphrodisiac part is supposed to kick in. There is a lot of touching each other. After all, there’s chocolate in places you cannot reach and certainly cannot see.
A half-hour of shower-sharing and finally free of the chocolate that had covered our entire torsos, we head to the hot tub. It is filled with bubbles, and there are flower petals all around. As promised, chocolate-covered strawberries and champagne await. Mood music is playing.
It is scalding. Way too hot to sit in. We can’t find the controls and there’s certainly no one around to ask. This is, after all, our alone time.
We sit on the edge of the tub with only our legs in, clink our glasses together and knock back the champagne like it was tequila. Then, it’s off to the locker rooms to get dressed.
Time to find some real tequila and forget this ever happened.
Mommy Dearest
Wait. Yes, it is her real name. Sorry, lady, but when you post it on social media, you’re fair game.
Jenny’s 4-year old son has decided to change her moniker from ‘Mommy’ to ‘Mom’.
Ever the voice of reason, I try to counsel that this is just the natural progression for a child. Frankly, though, I don’t ever remember calling my own mom anything but ‘Mom’.
I recall a discussion with a fellow co-worker a while back (she’s also a mom) whose son still referred to her as Mommy even though the boy was turning seven. She didn’t mind at all as her biggest fear was that she would one day be called ‘Mama’.
My admonishment was stern.
“Lady, you live in the South. Mother is Mama. Mommy is Mama. Mom is Mama. One day, you’re gonna have grandkids and they’re going to call you Grandmama. Or Grannymama. Or Big Mama. Get over it, and get used to it.”
She wasn’t buying it. Today, as the kid hits 10-years old, she’s still ‘Mommy’. That’s creepy. It’s also the stuff that school-ground whuppin’s are made of. “Hey, boy, I got a little somethin’ for you. Then you can go runnin’ home and let your mommy kiss it and make it all better!”
I keep waiting to read about ‘Mommy’ in the newspaper. Something involving wire coat hangers.
Still, I’ve heard this discussion enough through the years to know that this change of name is meaningful. Indeed, several of Jenny’s friends agree that the event is traumatic.
Jenny has another child that is eight. He calls her ‘Mom’, but he’s eight, and to her, that’s the difference. One kid is old enough, the other is not. She’s a bit of a control freak, too, so there’s that issue.
Jenny has decided to deal with this new development by calling her youngest son by half his own name. He’s not Davis, anymore, he’s Dave because isn’t retaliation what all moms are supposed to do?
I sort of doubt Dave cares. He’s a second-born. I’m a second-born, and I wouldn’t care. We’re fun, funny, independent, and care-free.
And we’re smarta**es.
Lessons in Wine Snobbery
Why yes, I think I do. But I would never have come up with that on my own. Therefore, I will sometimes read tasting notes for a wine I have recently enjoyed. “I like this wine, but why?”
The 'Opposite' Family: Role Playing
Shopping With Grumpy Cat
Palmetto Bluff: Living Large and Beyond My Means
Grits and the People That Eat Them
Doing Disney, Part 1
The Alcohol Prescription
I'm a Cowboy
Real Man Food!
Doing Disney, Part 2
50 Shades of Gray(ing)
Eatin' Bugs: Life with an Entomologist
spider webs are a no-no,
so the spider must go-go.
They don’t always die, though;
sometimes they just get relo’d
(That’s ‘relocated’. To the outdoors. Sorry, I got caught up in the moment.)
The Wedding: An Affair to Remember
Retirement? What Retirement?
Marketing 4 Dummies
Doggin' It (Dog People)
The dog was not on a leash, immediately ran into the house, ran around all available legs, human and otherwise, hopped unto laps on the sofa, and generally, made itself at home.
“How cute”, thinks the dog’s owner.
“What the ****”, thinks anyone with any manners.
Was the dog invited? It wasn’t. Did you ask if you could bring your dog? You didn’t. In fact, had you asked, the host didn’t want the dog in the house, period. At what point in your development did you assume that because you love your dog, everyone else will, too?
I blame the world wide web.
Here’s what you’ve posted on social media in the last couple of days:
- your dog lying on the floor
- your dog lying on the couch
- your dog in the yard
- your dog in your lap
- your dog “smiling” (No, it’s not. Sorry.)
I have a friend that posts a picture of her dog every time she goes to the lake. She uses the hashtag #lakedog. And it’s always exciting stuff. “He’s tired!” (sleeping). Then here he is on a boat, a float, sleeping again, awake with tongue hanging out, standing, chewing a toy.
“Honey, do you think she knows it’s graduation night”, I asked in my best condescending voice.
“Come on. She’s worked so hard. She deserves to graduate.”, says (former) friend.
As I am putting this article together, an acquaintance from Texas has posted a picture of his dog asleep on the bed. Did he take that photo because it’s cute? He would say, “yes”.
I will tell you the truth: the dog is lying on its back and everything it has is exposed for all the world to see. That’s really why the picture was taken. I can’t really tell, but I’m guessing his dog is a pointer.
I can’t take it! Look at that picture of your dog you just posted. Who do you think is interested, people?
Oh, it might make your mom grin, seeing what her ‘granddog’ is up to, but the rest of us are just seeing a dog lying on the floor. Get a real life! Including not referring to that dog as your granddog, grandma!
I’ve concluded, though, that I don’t hate dogs. I hate their owners!!
I’m running out of exclamation points. And friends, I suspect. I’m OK with that. My pretend friends don’t have dogs.