To the editor:

I want to respond to Rick Pellafone, Jr.’s letter of 2/25. Rick clearly put a lot of thought and effort into his response to an earlier missive of mine, and I feel I owe him a considered response.

Rick is correct in part. I did not respond "adequately" to points made in his earlier letter; in part, because I don’t think that it does much good to rehearse and rehash arguments concerning Biblical interpretations that have been advanced, and refuted, many times on this web site over the years. That said, I believe I owe Rick a fuller response.

Rick, I believe that your comparing homosexuals to alcoholics is fundamentally flawed, and does not "advance the ball" in this debate. In my own life, I have known alcoholics, and I have know gay folk living in responsible situations, and in my view the analogy between the two conditions misses the mark and confuses the issues.

With respect to your position that, regardless of what analogy with which we choose to compare homosexuality, the point with which we "must contend," is the "Biblical model of morality presented in the Old Testament," I have two general responses. One, since when have Christians been instructed to comply with the whole of the Old Testament’s model of morality (purity laws included)? Rick, I think we all do (and probably should) fall short of that model. Two, when we consider even the OT’s view of morality, what are we supposed to make of the love story between David and Jonathan, recounted in 1 and 2 Samuel? (more on that later, if you are interested)

Further, your letter also evinces a position that the Bible "goes against" "homosexual intimacy in any form." Of course, the "in any form" caveat has been added by you; and references nothing that comes directly out of Scripture. In fact, we know that the few apparent (and negative) references in Scripture to same-sex acts appear in very particularized contexts: e.g., purity laws (Leviticus), rape (Genesis, viz. the Sodom story), and idolatry (references by Paul, see Romans 1). The willingness at-large to extrapolate from these contexts to a more general ethical prohibition (e.g., your comment "in any form") perhaps reflects a cultural prejudice and not a strict, Biblical interpretation?

I hope this constitutes a more adequate response.

Faithfully yours,