Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/290775
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 6 APRIL 2014 21 God's will be done, if and when it suits us they first gauged Jesus' opinion, before appointing themselves as his mouthpieces. Much more pertinently, both sides stopped short of explaining exactly why Jesus' opinion, in this or any other topic, is of any relevance whatsoever to legislation passed by a Parliament representing an entire country – a country that includes plenty of non-Christians, but also a much larger number of Christians who are clearly uncomfortable with having their state legislation dictated by religion. But let's take these two things separately. Jesus, we are told, does not like gay adoptions. But as usual, the man himself does not tell us this. Jesus never uttered a single word on the subject. Never mind gay adoptions, which was an unheard of phenomenon back then. He never uttered a word about homosexuality, either. Not even a fleeting, momentary reference. This makes him almost unique, in a Bible in which every other character has a thing or two to say on the subject. His silence is in fact deafening, when you consider that sizeable parts of the Moses canon of laws is dedicated to recommending gruesome methods of executing gays. But silence is silence; you can infer many things from it, but the one thing you cannot come away with is certainty. I might interpret Jesus' failure to ever utter a word of condemnation of homosexuality as a way of tacitly condoning its existence and acknowledging that all people should be treated equally, regardless of the irrelevance that is sexual orientation. And that shouldn't really surprise anybody, because it happens to perfectly tally with my own view on the same issue. Well, the same applies for the opposing interpretations. Gordon J. Manche may argue that Jesus 'disapproves' of Malta's civil union bill, without supplying a jot of evidence to remotely sustain this argument. All it means is that he – Gordon J. Manche – disapproves of Malta's civil unions bill and, like millions of other people throughout history, he is simply ascribing his own personal beliefs to a Jesus who never actually told us his own views at all. And my, how very convenient: the same Jesus whose opinion seems to suddenly matter so much has also been dead for 2,000 years. He can't confirm or deny any of these random opinions that are continually thrust upon his plate and, by extension, onto ours, too. How easy it is to evoke a dead man's ghost in an argument that affects the living. And how utterly pointless, too. What neither of these arguments takes into consideration is… who cares? Even if it is established beyond doubt that God really does hate faggots – and for this we only have the word of an assortment of male prophets from a predominantly homophobic age, anyway – how is that in any way relevant to the obligations of parliament, in a 21st century country committed to equal rights for all, to legislate justly for all citizens regardless of their religious views? So instead of putting words he never said into Jesus' mouth, how about we pay attention to something he actually did say, and which specifically concerned his own role in earthly matters? It was something about 'God' and 'Caesar'. The River of Love will surely know the exact quote… And just as God constantly shifted sides in the Hundred Years War, he somehow managed to argue both sides in the gay adoptions debate too