What are we Really Saying to Young People?
A response to the debate on Clause 28
and Lowering the Age of Consent: by Martin Hallett


Civil Rights
The issues of gay people and their rights are seldom out of the media, whether it is the campaign to lower the age of consent for homosexual men or the repeal of Clause 28. Christians (especially evangelicals) are usually seen to be campaigning against any change in the law towards a more liberal approach. We are therefore often accused of being anti-gay or against gay people, and sometimes of encouraging ‘queer bashing'. The classic remark a gay or lesbian makes when hearing the Gospel is, "Christians hate gays!" The majority of Christians I have met through TfT are not homophobic and don't hate gays. I have to accept, however, that Christians I meet through TfT are likely to be more open to understanding, otherwise why would I be meeting them? Perhaps there really are a lot of homophobic Christians out there.

Protecting Children
One of the main arguments put forward in both the Age of Consent and Clause 28 debates is the need to protect children from exploitation and possibly a gay lifestyle. One of the assumptions made is that they may not be sure about their sexuality until they are at least eighteen. Is that really true? I can remember being very sure of my sexual desires and feelings when I was fourteen or fifteen. At sixteen I was collecting gay pornography on my way to school, although in those days it was very ‘soft-core'. I was not aware of gay politics and the subject was never discussed at home or school. Despite a few half-hearted attempts I was unaware of any heterosexual feelings. Today I sense it is very different. Young people are confronted with the issue of homosexuality as part of everyday life, just like the racial issue. Most TV soaps, for instance, have a ‘token' gay or lesbian. Many young people are sexually active, in ways I only used to fantasise about at their age. Schoolteachers tell me (often sadly) that many of their fifteen and sixteen year olds are in, or have experienced, a sexual relationship. Some may be rejecting the morality learned from their parents, others copying it. Is what these young people hear Christians say about sex, especially homosexuality, something they connect or identify with? I doubt it, in most cases, unless they really are determined not to be conformed to the pattern of our world. Even if they don't actually say it, many will be tempted to say to Christians, "Come on get a life...!"

Clause 28
It seems to me this was introduced as a reaction to some left wing liberalisation, which aimed to fight discrimination. As with many of these strong left or right wing philosophies, they deny any rights to their opponents. For example, in some of the homosexual political campaigning, the ‘small print' said charitable status and some civil liberties will be denied to any religious group which says homosexuality is wrong. I have been to University meetings which I was told would be stopped if I said anything ‘heterosexist'. I managed to get around that by talking about the prejudice I had experienced from some gay people. This is the real reason why repealing Clause 28 could cause problems for Christians. Clause 28 bans the ‘promotion' of homosexuality, and repealing it therefore implies that it should be ‘promoted'. This ‘slippery slope' could ultimately mean it becomes illegal not to promote homosexuality, or even say as a Christian I believe it to be against the Bible's teaching. In other words it becomes a political discrimination issue, not just a theological one. I guess the word ‘promote' has caused a lot of the problems. It seems some teachers are afraid to even discuss the issue of homosexuality in schools, in case they are accused of ‘promoting' it. On the other hand, if Clause 28 is simply repealed, there may be discrimination against anyone who doesn't wish to promote it. It seems like a ‘no win situation' unless it is replaced with something different and clearer.

Christian Messages
I have been disturbed by the language used by some Christians campaigning against the repeal of Clause 28 and lowering the Age of Consent for male homosexuals. A phrase repeatedly used in both debates is that ‘homosexuality and heterosexuality are not morally equivalent'. In my opinion, unless this statement is qualified or explained, which it is usually not, it is unhelpful, damaging and not biblical. It implies homosexual sin is worse than heterosexual sin. It also suggests homosexuality and therefore homosexuals are unacceptable, whereas heterosexuality and heterosexuals are acceptable. We need to remember that the terms ‘homosexual' and ‘heterosexual' only originate from the Nineteenth Century. People were not labelled with a sexual orientation until then. Although the Bible clearly says God intends sex to be within a ‘one flesh', male and female, marriage relationship, these special relationships are only a minority, within what we define as heterosexuality. The Bible makes no moral distinction between heterosexual sex outside marriage and homosexual sex. Both are called sin. However, when homosexuality is described as not ‘morally equivalent' or ‘equal' to heterosexuality it implies that homosexual sin is less ‘normal' than heterosexual sin. For example, It could imply it's better to make a teenage girl pregnant than for two men or two women to masturbate together. I am sure most Christians would not want to say this, but it is what many seem to be suggesting. The message young and older people with homosexual issues are therefore receiving from many Christians is you are not acceptable, whereas heterosexuals are acceptable. So when many homosexual and heterosexual teenagers relate well together, they are likely to believe Christianity does not relate to their experience of life. Christians will not be taken seriously. Others, who genuinely are homophobic may even be encouraged to ‘queerbash' these ‘unequal' and ‘unacceptable' homosexuals.

Thankfully, some Christian leaders have been more careful in their phraseology. For example, the Bishop of Liverpool, Rt Rev James Jones says that ‘a gay lifestyle is not a moral equivalent to heterosexual marriage'. This is a simple, but more helpful way of saying God only intended sex for marriage. I cannot understand why more Christians cannot express biblical truth in such a way that is less open to misunderstanding, hurt and anger.

Good Sex Education
I believe more Christians should be involved in sex education. We would clearly need to be balanced in our approach and prepared to discuss different moral choices. These would include a Christian perspective, as well as teaching about safe sex. There would be a risk of misunderstanding and criticism, especially from other Christians. If Jesus Christ was prepared to be misunderstood and criticised in his dealings with sexuality issues, so should we. (cf Luke 7:36-50; John 8:3-11).

Martin Hallett,
February 2000