Well, Jason,
In reply to my question of what the bible actually teaches on the issue of homosexuality you seen determined to avoid giving us a plain answer. So let's make a further concession to you (though goodness knows you've had enough already). We will not talk of ancient history. We will not even talk of the last 2,000 years of social history. And now (just to help you give us an answer) we will not even talk about what the bible teaches - the bible being, as you may already be aware, the very basis of that morality which says 'Do unto others as you would like others to do unto you' - the Golden Rule.
Now, let me ask you this, 'With your rights and responsibilities do you feel that a child has the right to be brought up in a home free from homosexuality' ? That is, within the context of a family whose heads are a man and a woman ? And that it's in the best interests of society that they are brought up in that context ?
You say the actual term 'homosexuality' was not coined until the 'latter parts of the 19th century'. But this is merely playing with words. The fact is (and the Old Testament is only one place where you can instantly see it), the practices of homosexuality were outlawed as long ago as the 2nd millenium BC. As already said.
You ask what the best interests of children actually are ? Well, in answer to your question, the entire weight of the evidence says that children are ideally raised within the context of a father and mother who are legally responsible for them. Isn't that so ?
But why state what is already very plain ?
Oh, where to begin in the dismantling of all this. First, I would like an actual reference on same sex relations being banned as early as the 2nd millenium bc. The Egyptians, Arabian nomads, Babylonians, and many other cultures of the inhabited 'civilized' world of the time had no laws banning same sex relations. The closest law was Assyrian and mainly dealt with a man of power submitting himself to another man (power and sex at the time went hand in hand). There is an Egyptian tomb, as a matter of fact, that is from this time period that housed two men with wall murals depicting one as feminine in character and in the repose traditionally held by a woman.
I feel, as for parenting, that great care must be taken not to mix one's sexual desires in. Young children especially do not need to be privy to sex in any regard. Older children (especially Teens, and I speak from experience on this) need to see their parents as being stable and confident in life. This includes, also, sexuality. I lived in a heterosexual family. My mother was not the 'prim and proper' mother - I have many hilarious, though scary, stories! Whether the parents are gay or straight really makes no difference, really. My uncle, who happens to be gay, has two grown children. My cousins have tremendous respect for their father. Their mother, on the other hand, is a different story. Where he showed the boys the unconditional love one only receives from a parent, she showed them the exact opposite. For me, thats a real life case study. And not the only one that I've seen first hand - from both heterosexual and homosexual parents. I'd go into another, but... well, I'm sure one story will suffice. The truth is, on this, that again what matters is the appearance of the parents to the children.
As for your roles (man/woman), thats an awful barbaric way to look at upbringing - especially in this age where most parenting occurs outside the home via electronic communication (and in some instances, inside the home as well). Children are exposed throughout upbringing to many instances of masculine and feminine qualities. Whether by television, school, play with friends, etc. In a one hour television viewtime alone, that child will most likely have seen many diverse forms of both qualities (to go even more down by minute, sit through commercials). The idea of a Nuclear family is long gone (pretty much died in the 80's with the rise in 'latch-key' kids). Even in ancient times, you had a very diverse family composition. The Romans were largely headed by men in the household - the idea of dominance was very key to most Roman contacts (marriage was no exception - hence why Nero was ridiculed for marrying a man who was dominant over him). The Egyptians were far more religious than the jews - but yet, had no laws condemning homosexual relations; their households were split between being headed by men and woman (quite different from the male lead). I could go on all day with this. I will state something, however, that should be said. The very reason Judaism is around now has largely to do with topics such as this. From around the codification of the Pentatuch (700 - 500 b.c.e), the Jewish people separated themselves from the norms of the region. Many of the laws in the Bible, are clear representations of this (i.e. prohibition on idolatry, circumsizing of males, purification, laws concerning sexuality, and yes...even the dietary laws). To say that the Jewish people are a fair representation of the historical region is wrong in logic and wrong in fact. It is this very thing that, in fact, has helped in their survival through the last 4000 years of invasions, wars, many holocausts, and dispersions. That the early Christians arose from the Jewish identity and not any other is also a result of these early decisions in the history of the Jewish faith.
To end, I think one last bit of comment on this topic. Many of your views, and those shared by others, on the topic of sexuality, homosexuality, etc., stem from the Victorian ideals (along with the idea of the Nuclear family) of the late 19th century. These beliefs are not necessarily bad..but, in my opinion they don't clearly reflect the full sprectrum of human experience. Humanity comes, and has always come, in many different stripes. From the shy to the chatty cathy. From the austere to the extremely annoying and happy. From the sexual purist to the sexually obsessed. To place a rigid law on the whole of human experience would mean the ending of that which makes us human... that which makes us alive.
But, in the end, history has shown and will continue to show: the strongest will always overpower the weakest. Whether it be sexuality, religion, or the rise and fall of nations. In the end, your dogma wins.
