The Observer is a student-run, daily print & online newspaper serving Notre Dame, Saint Mary's & Holy Cross. Learn about us.




Andrew Gray | Thursday, February 4, 2010

 In response to Christopher Damian’s argument (“Orientation and identity,” Feb. 3):

I am a man, just as you are. I should say here that I am also an agnostic/atheist. I believe that what is “physically revealed through our body orientation and hormones” are eons of evolutionary pressure. But, in order to effectively engage the subjects of sexual orientation and discrimination, I will adjust my vantage point and grant that we are created by a God who desires that we should be chaste and who made us with this in mind.
Even still, much else is biologically “revealed.” One of the most important characteristics of humanity, one non-discrimination clause supporters emphasize, is diversity. Those very chemicals and brain structures said to be God’s handiwork are the source of a desire, in many, for sexual union with others of the same sex.
To admit this fact is not to define ourselves based on sexual attraction. As a matter of fact, the addition of sexual orientation to the non-discrimination clause would represent a repudiation of such a definition — the University would be explicitly refusing to allow sexual orientation to define its members. This has the same effect that similar proclamations about race or gender do. Stating that we will not discriminate based on race is not to define ourselves based on the color of our skin, but to refuse to do so. The same respect should be afforded to those who are attracted to the same sex, or both sexes, in a way determined as biologically as skin color. While society often still judges people based on both these characteristics, neither has any affect on the ability of the person in question to “pursue the good, the true and the beautiful.” If chastity is the aim, is this not equally possible for all, regardless of to whom one is attracted?
One goal of Christianity is to make this world as much like the heavenly Kingdom of God as humanly possible. If, in heaven, we will not be gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, or straight, should we not endeavor to see those around us in this way here on earth?
Andrew Gray
Siegfried Hall
Feb. 3