Or put another way, Star Parker: If going near a menstruating woman is okay, why isn't homosexuality?
Anti-gay commentator Star Parker:
It happens that the prohibition on bestiality appears in the Book of Leviticus in the verse directly following the verse prohibiting homosexual behavior.
Understanding [Phil] Robertson is not hard. He is a Christian man who accepts the prohibitions which the Bible calls sin.
Understanding this gay spokesperson is a bigger challenge. He wants us to reject one Biblical prohibition – homosexuality – while accepting the Biblical prohibition on bestiality. Why?
If homosexuality is okay, why isn't bestiality? Surely there are some who like it and would like their behavior legitimized. Why not?
FULL PIECE: One News Now
Interesting, Ms. Parker, considering that this same portion of Leviticus demands the following:
"Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is apart for her uncleanness." Leviticus 18:19
And yet cashiers who sell tampons, much less men who have sex with women at all times of the month, continue to move through our society without scrutiny or scorn. So weird how that happens.
And of course the full text of Leviticus speaks to countless things, from blended garments to Red Lobster, that modern people both embrace and enjoy. It's just that some forms of stone casting have more of a political advantage for certain kinds of commentators.
comments powered by Disqus