Sexuality and Reality

 The U.S. Supreme Court has opened arguments on California’s Proposition 8, the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits same-sex marriage. Proposition 8, as we remember, was heavily backed by the Mormon Church. Religious institutions have been at the core of the opposition to gay marriage. But what's really the subject here?

Homosexuality is not normal, some may say. But what does “normal” actually mean? It really was never intended to mean “right” or “correct.” It means “common.” And homosexuality is less common than heterosexuality, no question – but that’s all you can say about it.

I would submit that there is no basis for throwing around the word “normal” when you talk about human sexuality, when there are entire websites and magazines devoted to FEET, to offer just one example. Did not Dr. Kinsey establish a long time ago that there are almost as many strokes as there are folks?

Sexuality is by no means a static target. People can have one kind of persuasion at one age and a different kind as they grow up. Or not! What governs sexuality – genes? Experience? Does it matter, as long as consenting adults are involved?

Can homosexuality be “cured”? If you’re trying to tell me that those who practice this therapy are experts in brain wiring, which is what is required, I would beg to differ.

If a certain percentage of non-human mammals, supposedly governed strictly by instinct, practice homosexuality, then what is “natural”?

Is a loving homosexual relationship that lasts for decades any less valid than a heterosexual marriage that lasts for six months?

There would seem to be too many easy answers for moralists to too many big questions.

The Need to Stay Awake

You’ll hear a lot and see plenty of footage today about the 10^th anniversary of the start of the Iraq war. I have no profundities to add. We did get rid of the not-so-nice guy that was running the country and helped establish a more-or-less stable democracy there -- some days more, others less.

Then we have to ask ourselves whether it was worth it. We may not like the answers we get, but the fact is, most of us slept through this war and are only waking up because the Afghan war is slowly ending. Thousands of American lives were lost. Most of the service members returning home have been damaged in some way.

While we may know someone, or know someone who knows someone, in a family that has been directly impacted by these conflicts, the blows were softened to the point where most of us felt almost no impact. No sacrifices were demanded of us. There was no rationing of rubber, paper or gasoline. We weren’t asked to buy bonds to pay for these wars. There was no draft, and many who served had to do it three or four times. Many weren’t young people – they were professionals, often from the ranks of public safety, who were doing the fighting.

During World War II, government did its best to keep us awake. It’s very cynical to say that in these modern conflicts, government almost prefers that we sleep, except maybe at holidays like Memorial Day or the Fourth of July, or the opening ceremonies of the Super Bowl. As we wake up, it’s just like we’ve been in a hotel, and the management is shoving the bill under the door.

There will always be “good” wars and “bad” wars, necessary and unnecessary ones; they may even be fought with machines or devices instead of people. All the more reason we need to be awake – because there are always those who would prefer that we stay in bed.

But that bill will still be arriving in the morning.

Catholicism and Me

I am a long-since-lapsed Catholic, but having been raised in this faith, the election of a new pope remains a story that catches my attention. The white smoke/black smoke thing is no less dramatic now than it was when I first heard CBS correspondent Winston Burdett, in his incomparable style, intoning, “Habemus papam!” My earliest pope, BTW, was Pius XII.

Why did I lapse? Many reasons, but a common thread that runs through many organized religions is that they get too complicated. I recognize the need for the Ten Commandments, but it usually doesn’t stop there. Catholicism added all kinds of stuff about meatless Fridays, venial and mortal sins, confession, penance, etc. I actually sort of miss the Latin Mass, believe it or not, and preferred just going to the service and leaving without having to turn around and greet others in neighboring pews, but that’s a side issue.

The meatless business was kind of annoying. We used to have one of those calendars with fish on it. On Fridays and certain days in Lent, as I recall, the fish was colored blue, and that meant no meat at all that day. If the fish was an outline only, that meant you could only have meat at the “principal meal” of the day.

Once we were invited to a barbecue put on by a non-Catholic family, on a Friday, of course. They served me steak, and I ate it -- probably the best I’d ever had. I was terribly guilty about this, and felt the need to mention it in confession on Saturday. The kindly priest said, “In this case, you didn’t really sin; it would have been rude, as a guest, to refuse the main thing they were serving you.”

“But Father,” I replied in deepest shame, “I had seconds!”

I was often terrified as a child to take an airline trip if I hadn’t been to confession. If something should happen to the aircraft in flight and I was not in a “state of grace,” the only solution was to make a “perfect act of contrition” while the plane was going down. I despaired of ever having the presence of mind to be able to do that, so my knuckles were white on the smoothest of flights.

Don’t even get me started on what the Church put in children’s heads regarding sexuality, especially males. Impure thoughts, self-abuse, etc., some of you may know the drill. Of course, we’ve learned in recent years that many of the priests were not too adept at practicing what was preached in this area.

The election of Pope Francis I could mean a significant shift in the way the Church does business. His humility and experience working with the poor have been praised. Many of the faithful also hope that he will do something about financial corruption and increase transparency, as well as deal more forcefully with the child-abuse issues. And, of course, he is the first non-European pope.

But he isn’t expected to do a lot of reforming in basic church doctrine. The “thou shalt nots” that sent me on such guilt trips as a child are expected to largely remain, so I don’t think I’ll be un-lapsing anytime soon.

Something to Watch Over Me

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul’s 13-hour filibuster, largely concerned with the use of government drones to kill noncombatant Americans on American soil, may seem like a far-out hypothetical. The White House says the President doesn’t have the authority to use drones that way. But that doesn’t put the discussion of drones to bed at all. This may be the first eruption of lava in the coming volcanic debate over drones, which we think are being used only as a convenient means of getting rid of faraway bad guys. Wrong!

The fact is, drones are already being used right here for law enforcement surveillance purposes. More than a dozen states are said to be trying to pass legislation restricting police use of drones. I would not like to be a legislator or an attorney trying to sort out the legal issues involved. What’s the difference between a drone flying over your head and a helicopter? What’s the difference between a drone flying overhead and the street cameras used in many communities today?

Some argue that drones can have really beneficial uses for public safety – looking at a brush fire to see where it’s advancing, which can be a dangerous pursuit for a human being in an aircraft. Or, as I’ve read on the Internet, drones can be used for very benign reasons, for example, to inspect sensitive environmental areas from the air and the changes occurring in them.

What’s really scary, though, is that private citizens are going to get widespread access to these things, if they don’t have it already. You think you can sunbathe nude in your backyard because you have a high fence around your property? Think again. And suppose someone just wants to follow you around for whatever reason? Are these going to be standard tools for paparazzi? BTW, I'm sure it would be fun for a private pilot, trying to dodge all this new aeronautical junk.

One of my earlier posts here was titled “The Privacy Horse Has Left the Barn.” Well, he’s getting farther and farther away from the barn as time passes, and I’m not sure I like where he’s headed.

Don’t be surprised if you hear the sound of bleep hitting the fan over all this, and very soon.

The OOOOOnly Way to Fly?

Next month, new regulations from the Transportation Security Administration go into effect, allowing those of you who insist on traveling with such things as Swiss Army knives, hockey sticks, golf clubs, ski poles, lacrosse sticks and baseball bats to take them on an airplane with you. The changes have sparked something of an uproar from flight attendants, who are worried about being exposed to dangerous implements.

Before 9/11, people used to travel with unbelievable amounts of junk, which made it difficult to find a place to mash your carry-on bag in the overhead compartments. In spite of all this, I don’t recall there being regular knife fights or batting practice on airliners, so exactly what the difference would be  now, I don’t know. Are airline passengers angrier and more aggressive? I could actually understand that, inasmuch as we will still not be able to take water bottles on board and will still have to take our shoes off in security. Have all these rules kept us safe? Have they made us feel safer? Perhaps they did at the beginning; now, I’m not so sure. The whole experience is demeaning, but we put up with it because flying gets us there faster, unless it snows, gets foggy, there’s a computer glitch, an airport security breach or some other issue. As for aggressive passengers, if they stopped serving alcohol in coach, would that calm folks down, or make them worse?

A friend of mine is moving to a new state, and has decided to travel there by RV with her three cats. She figures she can’t take the cats to most hotels. Inasmuch as she has the time for the trip, she may have the right idea. Though I wouldn’t relish the idea of traveling and sleeping in a confined space with three cats (or even one, for that matter), these RVs have refrigerators, microwaves, beds, toilets, even showers. None of the humiliation associated with an airport, or even the inconvenience of packing and unpacking bags and checking into hotels of various cleanliness levels. You don’t even have to be subject to restaurant food in strange towns not in the Michelin guide. I just hope I never get stuck behind her vehicle while traveling through a scenic national park, or I might start behaving like one of these aggressive airline passengers.

When I traveled to Israel by air many years ago, the El Al security people were tough. They didn’t rely on all these rote motions and machines. The trained agents looked you right in the eye and asked you a bunch of questions, carefully gauging your reactions. If anyone was going to catch a terrorist, it was going to be them.

Maybe we’d all feel better if the TSA were able to tell us how many terrorist incidents they’ve actually stopped, thanks to all the pain involved in boarding an airplane. Oh well, there are lot worse forms of transportation.

Do we have a vote for cruise ships?