Cross-Currents has an interesting article by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein on the movie “Brokeback Mountain.” This has spurred me to once again post my thoughts about it. I first commented on this movie when it was released and I think now would be a good time to re-iterate and expand a bit on my position in light of Sunday night’s upcoming Academy Awards. Everyone is picking that movie to be a runaway winner. To put it the way put it the way Academy Award winning actor Morgan Freeman puts it, this subject is “the flavor of the month”... meaning that the homosexual agenda is the "cause of the moment" in Hollywood. And this movie will help break down barriers. So Hollywood is going to vote for this movie as "Best Picture" solely for political reasons... to forward an agenda.
To many in Hollywood one's sexual proclivities is nobody's business and we should accept people for who they are, not who they love. But is that the right attitude? Are there no absolutes in life? Is morality relative to the times? I think the answer is clearly NO. Morality is not “relative” but an absolute given to us by God. So why did God make these people that way? I don’t know. But consider the following.
Every one has Nisyonos... God given tests to overcome. Being a Homosexual is but one such example. Some people are attracted to bestiality or incestuous relationships. As horrible as these two anomalies are to people with normal desires, they are never the less real and quite strong to people who have them. But why stop there? What about the innate desires of pedophiles? Most of them sincerely believe they are doing nothing wrong and are merely expressing their love of children in a sexually loving way. How far can we take this? There is no end. The BTK killer had sexual urges that could only be satisfied through murdering his victims. Many serial killers have expressed a sexual connection to their murders. How far must we go to accommodate variances in sexual behavior?
One might argue that when there are two consenting adults and there is no physical harm to anyone, then that should be the parameter. Incest should then qualify. Should we legalize it and accept people who have incestuous relationships with their sisters or parents? ...and accept it as the norm? Why not? What about a man and a boy... Why not? If the boy likes it and the man likes it, what’s the harm? What about a man and his dog?
The answer of course is that morality cannot be defined by man. It has to be defined by a Higher Being. Morality is not a rational deduction. It is a religious imperitive. It has to be learned. It is only our creator, God Himself, who can tell us what is moral and what isn't. I defy the Atheist or secular humanist to explain why consenting behavior of any kind is immoral.
The Torah is not about expressing an inner Taavah but about obeying God’s law. For most of us this means controlling ones urges... even denying them in some cases. Why is one type of behavior OK and others not? Only God knows. Society's attitudes about varying types of sexual behavior are probably culturally developed and originate in the Torah. Without the Torah as the guide, I’m sure “Brokeback Mountain” would never have been made. Homosexuality would be as accepted as heterosexuality.
