On Religion and LGBT+ Rights

Following the publication of my article “Defending LGBT+ Rights in Foreign Policy,” several people approached me to discuss what they considered an oversight on my part, rightly pointing out that I failed to address the role of religious fundamentalism in anti-LGBT policies the world over, including in the recently-enacted laws in Brunei.

Several people have claimed that some religions “in general” are anti-LGBT, while others have asserted that religion is primarily responsible for the oppression of LGBT+ people. And I will not deny that certain fundamentalist interpretations of religious scriptures, rooted in naive literalist readings of texts like the Bible and the Qur’an, have been used to justify oppression. However, I do not believe for one moment that Christianity, Islam, or any other religion for that matter, is fundamentally oppressive. At their best, they are liberators, and have been such in the past—Christianity is, at its heart, a religion of the poor, and Islam is deeply rooted in the equality of all before God.

I don’t really have the requisite background in Islamic theology to speak on the matter, but I will attempt to approach the issue from a Christian perspective. The Bible is indeed inerrant from a Christian perspective and authored by God in that it is the product of the Holy Spirit's movement. But this movement expresses the divinely true in a way that attempts to be accessible. Because this message is communicated through human authors, there will be a degree of ambiguity, though, not falsehood.

This, for instance, was the context in which Genesis has always been interpreted–it conveys theological, not literal, truths in an accessible way. For instance, every respectable theologian prior to the 20th century knew that Genesis's account of creation shouldn't be taken literally. It affirmed the truth that the world came into existence, among others—that there was a fiat lux, a point which has been proven more or less sound in the light of the Big Bang and the work of Fr. LeMaitre. Literal readings are very much a new thing, as evangelical fundamentalism is a largely modern movement.

However, there's another aspect at play. Bible verses simply cannot be read in isolation from the perspective of a believer. If they were, we would have an incredibly contradictory faith, and a lot of tricky passages. Passages that could be, for instance, read simplistically as proof of God's “genocidal” habits. People making this argument often point to Canaan, Egypt and the like. In both cases, God issues a stern warning against belief systems that engage in widespread slavery and human sacrifice, and calls on Jewish people to separate themselves from such practices.

Yet, on a deeper level, it would be impossible to reconcile a “genocidal” God with the God of the New Testament, whose literal message is radical love and forgiveness to the point of death. They need to be read together, with an emphasis on passages that seem to be contradictions. Saint Augustine pointed this out, claiming that seeming contradictions in the Bible are the best calls to explore things deeper—they compel the faithful to search for meaning among an incredibly complex group of texts. And that has led to a growth in theological understanding, particularly in the case of the Plagues. They convey important theological truths about the superior power of God and his alliance with the oppressed.

Now, how does this all tie into sexuality, from both Christian and other perspectives? Well, I should start by noting that regardless of their stances on specific sexual activities, mainstream Christian denominations have shown evolution in their understanding of LGBT+ issues. Rather than discrediting these denominations, this actually proves their durability–Christianity is not squarely a religion of the book, and its followers are tasked with bringing the revelation of Christ to the world in a pertinent and developing way. 

For instance, the Catechism has said that “every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided” and that LGBT individuals must be accepted with “respect, compassion, and sensitivity.” The Church’s bishops have also repeatedly issued guidelines calling for parents and religious communities to acknowledge their children's sexual orientations and continue embracing their children. Most mainstream Catholics continue to reject the notion that homosexuality is a “choice” and that being gay is sinful.

Generalizing this, I would say that in areas where societal views surrounding LGBT+ issues have moved forward, the same can be said of religious views. This applies in both Christian and Islamic nations. And a lot of those views are connected to economic progress, which tends to pave the way to social change.

As humanity comes to refine its moral compass, we are prompted to investigate further how individual passages fit into the larger divine narrative, which propels us into a deeper understanding of the faith. Both Islam and Christianity have points to grapple with. We need to be encouraging that process of theological discovery, rather than condemning “religion” as the source of the problem. Because it isn’t. As with all things, religious belief can be hijacked towards hateful ends. That doesn’t mean we need to surrender its beauty and power­­­­­­­­—rather, we should embrace it and combat bigotry with faith.