Is Sexual Libertarianism Allowed?

 

I am a Christian. I have moral grounds for several of my positions. Two sexually related topics are often the centerpieces of major contention in America and the West today, with one regarding identity and the other reproduction. I have theological and philosophical reasons for countering these two streams, but I am also don't want to be a jerk about it.

Regarding identity, I do believe that God intended sexuality to be binary. I recognize disparities and nuances between the the poles, but I do not caption this as a spectrum, but a gradation. A gradation always yields to one pole primarily. As for people and their sexual identity dispositions, I think a plethora of reasons, often on the individual basis, could account for variations. I think the most prevalent source is epigenetic, meaning external conditions to the person -- primarily in-utero, but not always -- affect how genes respond later in life. These are bio-chemical and hormonal imbalances that may contribute to sexual identity. In most cases, I think LGBTQ+ people are honest and feel that this is who they are at a deep visceral level. Yet, it does not change my understanding of teleology v. ontology. I do believe that function flows from form, so teleologically, sexuality is binary. Still, I get that people feel strongly because of their hormonal, physiological, and brain differences within developmental parameters. It's a hard thing to discount these things as sub-normative. I never mean to insult or dismiss. It just happens that my philosophical logic comports to the Genesis 1 and 2's creation account of men and women.

The other issue is reproductive rights or namely abortion. As a Christian, it has been the moral standing since the first century Church that abortion is wrong and that life trumps personal agency of a mother. I do allow for matters of viability to be considered should a woman's life be in jeopardy. And I cannot forget about real external struggles and psychological impacts that untimely, economically difficult, and forced (rape induced) pregnancies can have on prospective mothers. 

As with all issues, there are nuances and case specific elements that demand tweaked approaches. And with regard to sexually related ethics, I don't want to force my beliefs on anyone, though I feel strongly in my views. And, I recognize that America is not a theocracy. Liberty is a strange bedfellow to ideology and epistemology, because it means having different views within a market place of ideas. How to preserve one's worldview without adding undue and unlawful pressure on another person's views? That's the question.

I hold to a libertarian approach. As a Christian, I recognize that my view is in opposition to many others. I believe that I am not of this world, though I am in it. I do not have to compromise my views just because others are emerging as more popular. I can rationalize mine just as well as others in open dialogue. I too have free speech to do so. Yet, I feel as if society is pushing to silence my take because it is less popular these days. And I get that the trends feel threatened by social conservatism when it pushes back. I believe the best political stance is to be and let be. I wonder, between two frictive poles, as there are with sexual ethics, can such a libertarian worldview stand? 

I hate civil discord, because I truly love people and I love peace. That ought not mean abandoning my principles. I think that within a liberty-infused society, there's room for us all. 

Peace and blessings.