Alright, I’ll admit, perhaps the title is a bit misleading but it was catchy enough to get your attention. Now that I have it, I suppose it’s time to do something incredibly intellectual and profoundly moving with it. So in this entry, I hope to look at the etymology of the word sodomy through its groundings in the Biblical story of the City of Sodom, and its influences on contemporary perspectives of “natural” sex and American Sodomy Laws. It is through this analysis that I hope to bring you to the tantalizing climax that laws regarding anal sex, oral sex, and sex in general, with two consenting people, are not grounded in an ideal “natural law”, rather a generalized Judeo-Christian perspective on sex. All of this will be done in the hopes of pulling the fear of that many have of anal sex as “unnatural” into the realm of “just another sex position” for both men and women, straight or gay, and everyone in between to choose to enjoy, if they choose.
To begin, sodomy, in its broadest sense can be defined as an act of sexual intercourse involving anal or oral sex. Etymologically, the word traces itself from biblical story of the citizens of ancient Sodom and Gomorrah, whose so-called deviant and unnatural sexual acts incurred the wrath of God. The excerpt below from the New Testament, of the Epistle of Jude, considers the “immoral” sexual aspects of Sodom:
‘…just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire’ (v. 7, English Standard Version).
So what exactly are “immoral” and “unnatural” sexual acts that God is apparently punishing entire cities for? Did the Biblical story of Sodom and Gomorrah really establish homosexuality as a sin because of its aspect of anal intercourse as “unnatural”? The nature surrounding this Biblical story is still out to debate today. The major two views on interpretation of the text are divided as follows:
- Historically, its been interpreted that the sins of Sodom was the homoerotic act of sodomy. Many point to this Biblical story as justification that homosexuality as an identity is “unnatural” and “sinful” through the eyes of Judeo-Christianity.
- Others argue that the sins of Sodom had more to do with inhospitality than sexual transgressions or differing sexual identities against God. Biblical scholars such as Jimmy Creech further explain, “People of biblical times did not understand sexual orientation, there is nothing in the bible and nothing in the scripture to condemn loving same gender relationships.”
Although today, for the most part, legal interpretations of sodomy are still considered sexually deviant in nature because of the persistence in social thought regarding the first interpretation. The influence of social Judeo-Christian thought has been so great that many argue for sodomy laws claiming that it goes against “nature” and is “that most detestable sin.”
Thereby, sex under this working definition is supposed to be between a man and a woman, and must only be acts leading to procreation. But where does that leave the elderly, the infertile, or those on birth control that engage in sexual activity? Where does that leave women? As biological time clocks that are available for procreative sex only? What about those who may engage in “procreative sex,” but enjoy heating things up beforehand with “unnatural” sexual acts, such as oral sex? Is what Bill and Monica did, in our Nation’s very White House considered “unnatural” sodomy?
Notice that there is also a cultural perspective of what is considered “natural”. For many, biology is oversimplified alongside the human body, and the “natural” tends to mean procreative sexual activity between male and female organs. Although I would argue that the concept of “nature,” as ironic as it may sound, isn’t necessarily based on some uniform concept underlining all of creation; rather thoughts of “nature” and the “natural” really fall under differing aspects of cultural relativism. What one culture may find “natural” or “normal” doesn’t necessarily hold true for another. One may argue science points to the “natural,” yet what about those cultures where science holds no grounding or meaning?
Overall, as a nation, it’s time to consider that sodomy laws now in place in some states are still fundamentally grounded a debatable interpretation of the Biblical story of Sodom and it’s considered “unnatural” based on Judeo-Christianity’s perspective of the natural. For Americans to consider this, that a law is based on a certain theology, undermines the very concept of democratic freedom. We are not a nation of one religion, hence why should we continue to regulate private sexual activities and positions between consenting people under an umbrella of one religion’s perspective?
No comments:
Post a Comment