This essay explores how religion oppresses homosexuality.

I will argue that

religion, specifically, Christianity, reinforces heteronormativity through cultural norms,

religious beliefs, and moral social order. The following sub-issues, 1) religion views

homosexuality as immoral and unnatural, 2) religion reproduces moral social orders of

restraints against homosexuals from gaining freedom of same sex marriage.

Throughout history, society has viewed sexuality through the means of religious

beliefs; even till this day, there are still many disputes in religious beliefs that

differentiate between what is the righteous self and the sinful other. In this case, a vast

majority of religions believe in the constant notion that heterosexuality should be the only

sexuality that exists, while homosexuality should be prohibited. In the bible, Romans

1:26-28 states, “Men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own

persons the due penalty of their error” (Slick n.d). Thus, individuals who closely follow

and believe in the bible continue to support and reinforce heteronormativity; since little

tolerance are given for those who disagree with them.

Homosexuality receives immense negative judgment administered by God

Himself upon those who support it and commit it. Those who are judged by God this way

also endorse it and condemn others who don't commend of their behaviour (Wiesner-

Hanks 2000). Within religious beliefs, it is viewed that homosexuality challenges God’s

intended order, when he made Adam and Eve, a man and a woman, to achieve his

command of filling and subduing earth. Furthermore, homosexuality demoralizes the

basic family role of husband and wife, which is what God ordained for the means of

1
procreation. Consequently, these goals cannot be fulfilled through homosexuality, and

many religious individuals believe that supporting homosexuality is dangerous to the

sustainability and growth of a society.  

As stated earlier, many social attributes are shaped by religious beliefs, in turn

this helps build structure and boundary within the moral social order of a society. The

term social order, refers to a particular system of linked social structures, institutions,

relations, customs, values and practices, which conserve, enforce, and maintain certain

patterns of behaving (Lawrence K, 1944). If suppressed or used wrongly, it can destroy

that very order and in turn, affect society negatively. In this case, the acceptance and

legalizing same sex marriage is seen as a threat to the system of moral social order to

religious individuals.

Throughout history, religious groups were considered the conquerors of all the

lands, and with religion came firm set beliefs (Wiesner-Hanks 2000). Religious' fixed

views on these beliefs are central for their followers, because sharing these same personal

beliefs reinforces their faith in their religion. With religious identification comes set

principles, which followers have to abide by. For instance in the Christian community,

which is one of the largest religions in the world, homosexuality is seen as a sin by the

laws set forth in the bible. Thus, those who partake in this religion strongly reinforce

heterosexuality, through the means of practice, and active prohibiting of many

homosexual acts through the law and political system. In this case, since heterosexuality

is the normative, marriage and legal rights were never a problem, until the concept of

2
same sex marriage was introduced. It is well known that there has always been

homosexuals in the ministry, but today their presence is more open, more honestly

acknowledged, and also more challenged. American social, civic, and religious

institutions have had to struggle with new issues of civil rights, public policy, and

especially with religious conscience.

Since values and attitudes are often intensely formed by religious commitments,

the churches have had to examine strictly and prayerfully what Christian approaches

toward what gays and lesbians are and what they should be. Of course, Christians are

rigorously against the idea of same sex marriage, henceforth they continue to fight for

what they believe in, and strive effortlessly to stop it from becoming legal. John Gamble

and Deborah Vess explored the issues of sexual boundaries for clerical persons, focusing

on violations of ministerial norms and specifying the history of celibacy as an ideal

within the church. Vess reveals that celibacy did not become an enforced norm within the

Catholic Church until the eleventh century. (Robertson, 2006, p.386). This means that

there were no limitations to one's sexuality prior to the eleventh century, until religion

became a big part of the society, and through their beliefs they sought out to set things

straight. They did so through the means of social order, to reduce the undesirable errors

that were seen as sinful, and in this case, to reduce any homosexual acts, as it was seen as

an abomination to God. Many separate religious currents merged together to sustain the

pressure for the liberalization of sexual boundaries, and to reinforce heteronormativity.

3
 Society is constantly evolving and developing different perspectives of matters

and issues. Sexuality has been shaped in many ways throughout history; from the early

evolvement of humans, sexuality was not categorized and it was simply seen as a part of

a human’s sexual desire. When religion became more dominant in the society, and

genders were being acknowledged as two very different individuals; sexuality also

became categorized into two distinct types, heterosexuality and homosexuality. From

early on and up to present day, religious individuals still do not approve of homosexuality

as it is seen as a sin, and an abomination to God. The difference, however, is that various

religious individuals believe that an individual’s homosexual orientation should not be

viewed as a sin, rather it is the act of an homosexual deed is to be considered a sin.

Despite these changes in society’s perspective of homosexuality, religious individuals

believe that God is the only and sovereign judge for sin. Homosexuality is considered a

sin by His order; it is not to be decided by the public opinion or to be deceived of clergy.

Evolving societies do not dictate God’s standards, nor would it convince true religious

individuals. The bible is the source for what God declares as holy and righteous or sinful

and abomination. Hebrews 13:8 states that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever;

he does not “go with the flow” (All About God 2002). No matter how much society

changes and evolves, a true Christian would follow their beliefs and follow through with

God’s intended design, and to not let society convince them that homosexuality should be

accepted.  

It is evident that in today’s mainstream media and society, homosexuality has

been gaining positive attention and acceptance through non-religious individuals. Strict

4
religious individuals strongly oppose of this acceptance, because they think that it would

lead to a destructive society (Adamczyk, Pitt 2009). God’s design on earth had many

intentions and the key aim was to ensure the perpetuity of the human race. In order to

serve this purpose, humans were gifted with sexual desires, to push for procreation. The

sole drive of sexual desire was created as a means to entice men to deliver the seed into

the woman in a condition where she can cultivate it. Thus, God created these two sexes,

because they both compliment each other, which allows for the human race to fulfill

progeny. Therefore, if the man refuses to marry, fails to plant their seed, it ultimately

destroys it, and reduces to waste the mechanism designed by god for this purpose. By

serving and fulfilling God’s intention he designed on earth, the sexual desire also serves

his design in heaven (Mernissi 2005). Those who do not fulfill these commandments that

God has intended would not be accepted in heaven. The religious belief behind God’s

intention is that humans are created and placed on earth to not only live life, but to also

reproduce, in order to populate more species through the means of procreation.

Procreation is only possible through heterosexual couples, and that is why heterosexuals

are considered to be moral, and the only one that needs to exist.

As mentioned earlier, religion is one of the primary reasons for reinforcing

heterosexuality into being the normative. Heterosexuality was easily accepted as being

the normative and that there is no need to put connotations before the terms of

relationships, marriage, and sex. There is something genuinely wrong with the idea of

how one is frowned upon and needs to distinguish themselves from the rest of the group

by simply adding the term homo in front of relationship, marriage, and sex; into

5
homosexual relationships, same sex marriage, and gay or lesbian sex. This reproduces the

conveyance of homosexuality as negative and must be contained within their own

minority group. Heterosexuals do not need to explain themselves for their sexual

orientation, since it is viewed as normal, and acceptable. In hopes of ceasing the

existence of homosexual individuals, religious individuals continue to discourage them,

and hoping that creating heterosexuals as the norm would encourage the minority group

to reconsider their orientation.

Christians believe the acceptance of homosexuality would ruin society; nature and

God were said to authorize a practice vital to the good of society, thus, they are

determined to help fix what is believed to be wrong. Christians should not be viewed as

religious individuals that despise non-religious individuals that don’t share the same

beliefs. In fact, majority of Christians in today’s society, do not hate sinful beings, rather

it is that they care for them. Many conservative Christians believe that church should not

condone a homosexual lifestyle; rather they should work actively to help homosexual

individuals to find a new life in Christ and to change their sexual orientation (Harvard

University, n.d). There are different groups that exist, one being Christian Exodus

movement, in which they are designed to assist gays and lesbians in their transformation.

They believe that if they can change their sexual orientation in time, then they prevent

them from going to hell before it is too late. Earth is God’s delightful gift to humans, but

it is limited in time, so Christians uses this limited time as a powerful motivation to incite

men to try and attain the perfect and eternal delight, and therefore, urges men to adore

6
God so they can too also reach heaven (Mernissi 2005).

In a way, it appears that Christians are taking the role of God; they are not

demanded by God himself to fix what is believed to be wrong, but yet they go out of their

way into trying to change individual’s sexual orientation. The idea that Christians believe

they can change their sexual orientation, and it is not what God intended, or that

individuals are choosing to rebel against God, reproduces the notion of

heteronormativity. Furthermore, not only does it reproduce and praise heteronormativity,

but it also reproduce the conservative mind of Christianity, believing that homosexuality

is a disease and the only solution is through treatment. Christianity and other religions

fail to see that an individual’s sexual orientation is something that one is born with, rather

than a choice, and it is especially not for the purpose of rebelling against God. If

homosexuality is so frowned upon, then it shouldn’t be seen as if they desire to be

homosexual, because no individual would want to be placed into a minority group that is

shunned by many other individuals in the same society.

As one can see, Christianity and other religions do not support the idea of

homosexuals, and any acts that are associated with sexuality that is outside of the norm of

heterosexuality. They try to persuade homosexuals into being something that they are not,

to change their sexual orientation to one that is normal, and acceptable. This idea of

forcing homosexuals to become heterosexual, reproduces the concept of

heteronormativity, which ultimately leads to an endless discrimination against

homosexuals as a minority group. They continuously view this minority group as

immoral and unnatural, and would do anything to cease the existence of homosexuals, in

7
order to fulfill God’s design on earth.

In conclusion, religious beliefs, values, and cultural norms towards sexuality, do

not promote and accept anything other than heterosexuality, which is highly encouraged

by God himself, and praised by those who follow God. To assist in God’s design on

earth, Christians actively promote against same sex marriage, and treat homosexuals as a

disease to be cured. All of these factors do not help homosexuals find light in God; it only

continues to reinforce heteronormativity.

8
References:

Adamczyk Amy, Pitt Cassady. (2009). Shaping attitudes about homosexuality: The role
of Religion and Cultural Context. 38(2): 338-351

All About God. (2002). Is Homosexuality a Sin. Retrieved on November 10, 2015 from
http://www.allaboutgod.com/is-homosexuality-a-sin.htm

Harvard University. (n.d). Homosexuality. The Pluralism Project. Retrieved on

November 12, 2015 from
http://www.pluralism.org/religion/christianity/issues/homosexuality

Katz Jonathan. (1995). Invention of Heterosexuality. Chicago, United States: University

of Chicago.

Lawrence K. Frank. (1944) What is Social Order: A review of General Semantics.

ProQuest. Retrieved on November 11, 2015 from
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/docview/1290104477?
accountid=13631

Olson R. Laura, Cadge Wendy, Harrison T. James. (2006). Religion and Public
Opinion about Same-Sex Marriage. Social Science Quarterly. 87(2): pp 340-
360.

Robertson C. K. (2006). Religion and Sexuality: Passionate Debates. The Journal of

Psychology and Christianity. 26(1): pp. 385

Slick Matt. (n.d). Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. Carm. Retrieved on
November 12, 2015 from https://carm.org/romans-1-26-27-homosexuality

Steele, Tracey L. (Ed.). Mernissi Fatima. (2005). The Muslim Concept of Active Female
Sexuality. Sex, Self and Society: The Social Context of Sexuality. Belmont, CA:
Thomson/Wadsworth Publishing. Pp 241-250.

Whitehead L. Andrew, Bake O. Joseph. (2012). Homosexuality, Religion, and

Science: Moral Authority and the Persistence of Negative Attitudes.
Sociological Inquiry. 82(4): pp 487- 509.

Wiesner-Hanks Merry. (2000). Christianity and Sexuality in the Early Modern World.
New York, United States: Routledge.