The World of Religions No. 58 – March/April 2013 –
It will undoubtedly seem strange to some of our readers that, following the heated parliamentary debate in France on same-sex marriage, we are devoting a large part of this report to how religions view homosexuality. Certainly, we address the essential elements of this debate, which also touches on the question of parentage, in the second part of the report, with the contrasting viewpoints of the Chief Rabbi of France, Gilles Bernheim, the philosophers Olivier Abel and Thibaud Collin, the psychoanalyst and ethnologist Geneviève Delaisi de Parseval, and the sociologist Danièle Hervieu-Léger. But it seems to me that an important question has been largely overlooked until now: what do religions think about homosexuality, and how have they treated homosexuals for centuries? This question was sidestepped by most religious leaders themselves, who immediately placed the debate in the realm of anthropology and psychoanalysis, rather than theology or religious law. The reasons for this become clearer when one examines more closely how homosexuality is vehemently criticized in most sacred texts and how homosexuals are still treated in many parts of the world in the name of religion. For while homosexuality was largely tolerated in antiquity, it is presented as a major perversion in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim scriptures. “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, their deed is an abomination; they shall surely be put to death, and their blood shall be upon them,” it is written in Leviticus (Lev 20:13). The Mishnah says nothing different, and the Church Fathers had no words harsh enough for this practice, which, in the words of Thomas Aquinas, "offends God," since, in his eyes, it violates the very order of nature willed by the Almighty. Under the reigns of the devoutly Christian emperors Theodosius and Justinian, homosexuals were liable to death, suspected of conspiring with the devil and held responsible for natural disasters and epidemics. The Quran, in some thirty verses, condemns this "unnatural" and "outrageous" act, and Sharia law still condemns homosexual men today to punishments that vary from country to country, ranging from imprisonment to hanging, including one hundred lashes. Asian religions are generally more tolerant of homosexuality, but it is condemned by the Vinaya, the monastic code of Buddhist communities, and by certain branches of Hinduism. Even though the positions of Jewish and Christian institutions have softened considerably in recent decades, homosexuality is still considered a crime or offense in about a hundred countries and remains a leading cause of suicide among young people (in France, one in three homosexuals under the age of 20 has attempted suicide due to social rejection). It is this violent discrimination, fueled for millennia by religious arguments, that we also wanted to highlight.
The complex and essential debate remains, not only on marriage, but even more so on the family (since the real issue is not the equality of civil rights between same-sex and heterosexual couples, but rather that of parentage and bioethical questions). This debate goes beyond the demands of same-sex couples, as it concerns adoption, medically assisted reproduction, and surrogacy, which can affect heterosexual couples just as much. The government wisely postponed it until the autumn, seeking the opinion of the National Ethics Committee. These are indeed crucial questions that cannot be avoided or resolved with such simplistic arguments as "this is disrupting our societies"—which, in fact, are already disrupted—or, conversely, "it's the inevitable march of the world": every change must be evaluated in light of what is good for humanity and society.