Homosexuality, religion, law

• Author: Alexandra Mirela Popescu I. - Lavinia Olah
• Position: Ph.D. student, University of Craiova, Faculty of law and Administrative Sciences, through the project: POSDRU/88/1.5/S/49516 'Cresterea atractivitatii, calitatii si eficientei studiilor universitare de doctorat prin acordarea de burse doctorale' - Lecturer, Ph.D. Faculty of Law and Administrative Sciences, University of Pitesti
• Pages: 126-129

HOMOSEXUALITY, RELIGION, LAW

Popescu I. Alexandra Mirela

Olah Lavinia 

Abstract

            

appro ved, over time, homosexuals were subject of a lega l treatment r anging from toler ance to tota l repression,

influenced especially by religious morality.

Keywords: sexual freedom, homosexuality, religious morality, right to privacy and p rivate life.

Introduction

Reduced to male-female, legitimated only within mar riage, sexua lity ha s remained long time a highly

sensitive matter for national l aws, consequence of the fact that dominant morality would not accurately r eflect

         e

main goa l being to pr event the exploitation of competing models of sexual behavior

1. This explains why people

of sexual minority, affected by restrictive limits imposed by the sta ts, have chosen to notify supra national courts

of appeal to pr otect their sexual orientation.

1. Short historical view

Seeing the homose xual act as “the only form of sustainable and authentic spiritual eroticism”2, the

ancient Greeks and Ro mans perceived ho mosexuality as a form of „perfect love, the origin of humanity, born of

the arrogance o f people to the gods”3. Therefore, homosexual behavior was not only acce pted but also

encouraged at the time, being accepted as a simple manifestation of sexual freedo m of the person who only this

way could exercise her sexuality. However, we can’t speak of unanimity of views, there were still voices

supporting immoral character of this practice. That is way Aristotle is forced to establish a difference between

homosexuality born as a natural given, a nd homosexuality developed over time, due to habit, only t his one could

be condemned, in his opinion, under morality angle4, perspective that would be reversed in time.

Giving up the tolerant attitude of precursors, Christians would severely stigmatize non procreative

relations and therefore, homosexual practices5. So, i f in antiquity, the argument of nature allowed this form of

sexual union, religious doctrine takes a contrary view, claiming the exclusion from society and their

condemnation of all homosexual individuals through criminal procedures6. There are eloquent, in this regard,

Saint Augustine's Confessions which describes homosexual acts as “infamous crimes and opposed to nature,

which are violating the society by brutal and d isgusting disorder”7. Under these conditions, homosexuality is

been stripped of an y emotional dimension, reduced to carnal perversion and likely to co mpromise the

foundations of the natural development of the whole world.

A change of perspective is found together with sec. XVIII, when homosexuality, while continuing t o be

condemned on moral side, is no longer perceived as a divine sin, but rather as a threat to society order8.

According to Montesquieu, Kant and Voltaire, blaming homosexuality was justified because it was a rea l danger

to social values, but, instead, criminal prosecution was not justified9. This attitude is confirmed by medicine a

few decades later, that’s way homosexuality is included in the list o f mental diseases, emphasizing the character

of this pathological practice. It should be noted that since the XIVth ce ntury, not homosexual act is being

considered, but the homosexual person, seen by medical science as a new topic. Other specialists, such as Freud,

for example, refuse to consider homosexuality a mental malady on the grounds that “the organization of

 Ph.D. student, University of Craiova, Faculty of law and Administrative Sciences, through the project: POSDRU/88/1.5/S/49516 “Creşterea

atractivitii, calitii şi eficienei studiilor universitare de doctorat prin acordarea de burse doctorale”, (e-mail:

popescumirela24@yahoo.com).

 Lecturer, Ph.D. Faculty of Law and Administrative Sciences, University of Pitesti (e-mail: lavinia_olah@yahoo.com).

1 McLaren Angus, Sexualita tea secolului XX. O istorie, Trei Publishing House, Bucharest, 2002, p. 15.

2 Boswell John,    

Ed. Galimard, Paris, 1985, pp. 92-124.

3 Platon, Le banquet, Ed. Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1989, p. 37.

4 Aristotel, Problemes, Section I-IV, trad. Pierre Louis, Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1991, pp. 80-90.

5 Mecary Caroline, La Pradelle Geraud, Les Droits des Homosexuelles. Liberte, egalite, frater nite?, Ed. Press Universitaire de France, Paris,

1997, p. 16.

6 Borrilo D. , Ed, PUF, colecia Que je sais?, Paris, 2000, pp. 37-38.

7 Sf. Augustin, Confessions, trad. Arnauld Anchilly, Manchecourt, Ed. Gallimard, 2003, Cap. VIII, Cartea III, p.104.

8 Rez M. Police et sodomie a P aris a u 18-   The magazine of modern and contemporary history, no. 29,

Paris, 1982, pp. 118-123.

9 Beccaria Cesare, , Ed. Flammarion, Paris, 1991, pp. 158-159.