Public Displays of Affection - Yea or Nay?

[Roh_Chris]

I understand your question and I also understand the context. Organizing such an event to speak out against the moral policing has only alienated the people who had a neutral view to it. The organisers should not have gone to that extent of holding a public kissing event.

Anyway, I am okay with people displaying their PDA in public. But it has to be within a limit. Hugging, kissing, hand holding, etc. are okay. But what must be done behind closed doors must be done behind closed doors.

 

[Tintin]

I'm okay with people hugging, cuddling, holding hands, kissing in public but not a fan of people full-on pashing in public. And obviously a big no to people groping or having sex in a public place. Not cool!

 

[zeroturbulence]

Hmmm. Wondering if people were also comfortable with homosexuals doing the activities that they mentioned being tolerant to.

If by comfortable you mean wanting to gouge your eyes out and throw up, then yes.

 

[Tintin]

I'm talking about man and woman PDA, not man and man or woman and woman.

I'm guilty of being rather affectionate in public, at the departing area of the airport.

 

[Daffy]

lol..yes..Adam and Eve ....not Adam and Steve..

 

[dliz]

Public Display of Affection is frowned upon in other countries. In such countries, it is offensive and rude to publicly show your affection towards the opposite sex. I know we sometimes get carried away with our emotions but we also need to be sensitive towards our surrounding especially in countries that don't allow PDAS. Hugging, holding hands and kissing on the cheeks and forehead is okay but making out sessions and anything that goes beyond should be reserved for private moments. The cardinal rule is that there is a time and place for everything.

 

[wwjd_kilden]

Hmmm. Wondering if people were also comfortable with homosexuals doing the activities that they mentioned being tolerant to.

I think it's cute

 

[Charcoal]

I have no objections to Palm Pilots... other than they are grossly out of date
Other types of PDA I'm OK with, but there comes a point they're gross for different reasons.

I think that when traveling abroad, ESPECIALLY IF TRAVELING FOR MISSION WORK!!!, it is important to observe any cultural norms that are more conservative than your own. Anytime you are representing Jesus the Christ, it is important to not taint the message by engaging in something that will cast a poor light on you as the messenger or on Jesus.

That being said, when are you not supposed to represent your Lord?

Here around town where I call home, I would not engage in something that I would feel shame over if it was brought to my attention that it had been observed by another who knew me. I keep that boundary the same if I am not in my home town. But there comes a point, say if I was to travel back to the rural villages of Mexico where I once did mission work, that I would need to dial things back still more. There we were very culturally sensitive. Modesty was a watch word for both men and women. I imagine that I would again study up on regional culture if I were to be traveling abroad.

Here at "home" (the town/state in which I live) I am comfortable with engaging in a certain level of publicly displaying my affection for my sweetheart. We hold hands. We even hold hands in church. I am comfortable putting my hands on her lower arms, her upper arms, her back (not her backside, nor too near it...I don't care to push the limits). I like putting my arm around her shoulders if we're sitting side by side, but I don't do this in church... too snuggly for the setting.
She and I agreed, BEFORE becoming affectionate, that we would limit our physical relationship to fairly conservative boundaries. We'd been dating a month before our lips met, and even so we're not inclined to kiss that way more than a few short pecks. To me, this is in part so as to not lead ourselves or one another into temptation. We're yet to kiss like that in front of the kids. In part this is because we are letting them warm up slowly to the idea of us dating (although to be honest the kids are pushing for us to get married) and in part because we know we are leading. We are trying to model for our children what a dating relationship should look like, so while we are openly affectionate around them, we are also mindfully conservative.

I wasn't always like this. You're welcome to call it prudishness, or if you knew me back in high school you might call it hypocrisy. I call this...maturity.

My views, in summary: Respect your "audience" and represent Christ. Don't lead yourself or another into temptation. Don't act in public like you are in private, and ...I know I'm being conservative here, and that's OK... don't act like that in private if you're not married.

 

[TaylorTG]

I'm okay with people hugging, cuddling, holding hands, kissing in public but not a fan of people full-on pashing in public. And obviously a big no to people groping or having sex in a public place. Not cool!

Huh? Did you ever see a couple having sex in broad daylight..? o_o

 

[Tintin]

Huh? Did you ever see a couple having sex in broad daylight..? o_o

No, but I've heard stories from people I know. Ick. I would class nightclubs etc. as public places.

 

[Roamer]

If by comfortable you mean wanting to gouge your eyes out and throw up, then yes.

Shouldn't make a difference whether it was PDA between a heterosexual or gay couple. Standards (whatever yours are) should apply the same. Why would PDA done between a man or a man, or a woman and a woman, make us any less comfortable than if the same was done between a man and a woman?

Also no meaning disrespect, but let's stop using the 'Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve' line. Tacky and counterproductive

 

[Tintin]

Shouldn't make a difference whether it was PDA between a heterosexual or gay couple. Standards (whatever yours are) should apply the same. Why would PDA done between a man or a man, or a woman and a woman, make us any less comfortable than if the same was done between a man and a woman?

Also no meaning disrespect, but let's stop using the 'Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve' line. Tacky and counterproductive

Are you for real? PDA by homosexual couples make me (and others) uncomfortable because such relationships aren't godly. You do realise you're on Christian site, don't you? God knows that not everything that feels good, is good for you. That applies to many things: eg. Homosexual relationships, heterosexual sex before marriage/sleeping around/adultery and things like gossip and greed.

 

[JesusChica1991]

Handholding I'm okay with, but people eating each others faces is not acceptable no matter the age, gender, or orientation. At school, people liked to use the "you're just jealous because you're single" line. I've been in relationships and I know that there is this thing called common sense. Eating each other in public is not okay with me...ever.

 

[Roamer]

Are you for real? PDA by homosexual couples make me (and others) uncomfortable because such relationships aren't godly. You do realise you're on Christian site, don't you? God knows that not everything that feels good, is good for you. That applies to many things: eg. Homosexual relationships, heterosexual sex before marriage/sleeping around/adultery and things like gossip and greed.

I do know I'm on a Christian site, but thanks all the same for the friendly reminder

Imagine walking past two couples - strangers - engaging in light PDA, one heterosexual and one gay couple. Why should I feel any more discomfort at seeing the gay couple sharing say, a kiss? For all I know, the heterosexual couple is having pre-marital sex and I should be equally uncomfortable about their ungodly relationship - in fact, statistics tell me that's most certainly the case, given that anywhere between 80-90% of couples have or have had pre-marital sex. Christians included.

I may feel sad that both those couples may not know or are refusing to acknowledge that God loves them and wants them to walk the straight and narrow path. But sadness is quite different to the discomfort I was addressing ie. "wanting to gouge your eyes out and throw up"-upon-seeing-a-gay-couple-kiss kind of discomfort.

If we're honest, that sort of discomfort doesn't stem from a deep concern over the eternal fates of gay couples; rather, it stems from an aversion to something we're not used to seeing. That's why we don't feel like gouging our eyes out when we have dinner out with unmarried friends who are sleeping together and who share a quick kiss; that's why we don't feel like throwing up when we sit next to the no-fault divorced man in church holding hands with another woman he's just married, despite the fact that Jesus says "whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery" (Matt 19:9). We may feel sad, yes; but most of us would not feel the same level of 'discomfort' that a gay couple invites.

Which brings me to the most important point: such immediate and intense discomfort at gay PDAs raises a barrier (intentional or not) against getting to know gay people as first and foremost people in need of strong friendship, love and words of truth spoken in God's good timing and grace. From their perspective, they definitely don't want to associate with people who feel uncomfortable around them (and who often think it's right​ to be uncomfortable), without even getting to know who they are.

My better half (an amazingly beautiful woman who could have explained all of this much more eloquently than I) once said that Jesus often acted in unconditional love and developed relationships first, before speaking to people about their sins. That makes sense to me. Why else would he have been so popular with the most despised sinners of his time?

So in short, yes I am for real. I'm totally for real when it comes to praying that we Christians would work hard on shedding the kind of knee-jerk discomfort that ultimately prevents us from reaching out to gay people and treating them as Jesus would.

 

[zeroturbulence]

Shouldn't make a difference whether it was PDA between a heterosexual or gay couple. Standards (whatever yours are) should apply the same. Why would PDA done between a man or a man, or a woman and a woman, make us any less comfortable than if the same was done between a man and a woman?

Also no meaning disrespect, but let's stop using the 'Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve' line. Tacky and counterproductive

The sight of a man kissing another man makes my stomach turn. I kid you not. I didn't plan it that way, and I don't hate gays. It literally grosses me out, sort of like when you see someone chewing with their mouth open. Maybe its the same as how God sees it (as an abomination).

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination
(Leviticus 20:13 KJV)

 

[ChandlerFan]

This whole discussion does bring up an interesting topic, though. It seems like in our culture, when a certain behavior comes off as crossing the line in some way, the approach seems to be to pursue greater "freedom" (at least for the ones who desire to practice that behavior) by normalizing the behavior. I would argue, though, that there's a reason--something built into us--that is the cause for that uncomfortable feeling when we see someone doing something deviant or abnormal, and the worst solution would be to brush that feeling off and normalize it.

I don't think being uncomfortable or repulsed by a behavior has to inhibit relationship either. I have friends who chew, and that is really gross to me, but it doesn't prevent me from being friends with them. The same can be true of homosexuality as well. And I think for anyone who allows those adverse feelings toward a certain behavior to get in the way of building relationships with people, that's an issue that that person needs to address. Jesus says "Come as you are," but not so you can stay that way. But in order to introduce people to Jesus, we need to embrace them as they are.

 

[Grace-Like-Rain]

This whole discussion does bring up an interesting topic, though. It seems like in our culture, when a certain behavior comes off as crossing the line in some way, the approach seems to be to pursue greater "freedom" (at least for the ones who desire to practice that behavior) by normalizing the behavior. I would argue, though, that there's a reason--something built into us--that is the cause for that uncomfortable feeling when we see someone doing something deviant or abnormal, and the worst solution would be to brush that feeling off and normalize it.

I was forming a response in my mind, prepared to post it, but I see that ChandlerFan has already done so. It IS an interesting topic that may deserve it's own thread for discussion. We do need to be reaching out to homosexuals in love. But when we start viewing their outward homosexual behavior (or any evidence of sinful behavior in anyone - drunkenness, gossip, promiscuity, etc) as normal and "no big deal", then we have lost the very thing that makes us a light in the darkness.

 

[Roamer]

Great discussion, guys. I believe there does need to be a lot more thinking and prayer around how we respond to gay people/behaviour, way beyond whether it's 'wrong or not'.

ChandlerFan, I agree with you. Normalisation ie. "treating it as normal" is not what I was advocating. We must be clear that certain things are wrong in God's eyes. However, I'm not sure if I really want to compare that kind of 'discomfort' to being grossed out by someone chewing with their mouth open. There are potential problems with that:

1) Chewing food with your mouth open is a bad habit. Unless you have some kind of physical disability (and I don't think we'd be grossed out in that case), it's relatively easy to change. But for most gay people, being gay is part of their identity - something they can't change, or even if they wanted to, find extremely hard to change. Expressing affection for a person of the same sex, to them, is a beautiful thing. And many have suffered through abuse or rejection for identifying as gay. Being "grossed out" tends to obscure our view of all that.

2) That's not to say that it's not an abomination. As others have already pointed out, God calls many things abominations. We often forget Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed not only for their homosexual acts, but also for neglecting the poor - a sin God described as "detestable". However, we must ask ourselves why we do not compare many of those other​ things to someone grossly chewing with their mouth open.

For example, I have a lot of friends who are de facto couples, sleeping together without being married. Most of us do. Yet when I see them hold hands or kiss in public, my stomach doesn't turn despite knowing that they have no current intention of relating to each other in a godly relationship. That's not because I think pre-marital sex is okay - it's not. It's partly because it doesn't surprise me anymore; partly because I'm someone who makes mistakes just like them; and partly because I see so much more of their personalities and needs beyond their sexual choices (doesn't it bother people that when we see a gay couple kissing, all we automatically think about is their sexuality and how disgusting it is?)

To me, fighting the urge to be instinctively grossed out by gay PDAs is not the same as 'normalising' homosexuality. It's simply removing a potential barrier that prevents us from sympathising with them. Christians often say "all sins are the same" - and that's true. But judging by the relative lack of stomach-churning at other equally abominable sins, that's not what we're projecting. Our actions speak louder than words.

 

[Grace-Like-Rain]

Great discussion, guys. I believe there does need to be a lot more thinking and prayer around how we respond to gay people/behaviour, way beyond whether it's 'wrong or not'.

ChandlerFan, I agree with you. Normalisation ie. "treating it as normal" is not what I was advocating. We must be clear that certain things are wrong in God's eyes. However, I'm not sure if I really want to compare that kind of 'discomfort' to being grossed out by someone chewing with their mouth open. There are potential problems with that:

1) Chewing food with your mouth open is a bad habit. Unless you have some kind of physical disability (and I don't think we'd be grossed out in that case), it's relatively easy to change. But for most gay people, being gay is part of their identity - something they can't change, or even if they wanted to, find extremely hard to change. Expressing affection for a person of the same sex, to them, is a beautiful thing. And many have suffered through abuse or rejection for identifying as gay. Being "grossed out" tends to obscure our view of all that.

2) That's not to say that it's not an abomination. As others have already pointed out, God calls many things abominations. We often forget Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed not only for their homosexual acts, but also for neglecting the poor - a sin God described as "detestable". However, we must ask ourselves why we do not compare many of those other​ things to someone grossly chewing with their mouth open.

For example, I have a lot of friends who are de facto couples, sleeping together without being married. Most of us do. Yet when I see them hold hands or kiss in public, my stomach doesn't turn despite knowing that they have no current intention of relating to each other in a godly relationship. That's not because I think pre-marital sex is okay - it's not. It's partly because it doesn't surprise me anymore; partly because I'm someone who makes mistakes just like them; and partly because I see so much more of their personalities and needs beyond their sexual choices (doesn't it bother people that when we see a gay couple kissing, all we automatically think about is their sexuality and how disgusting it is?)

To me, fighting the urge to be instinctively grossed out by gay PDAs is not the same as 'normalising' homosexuality. It's simply removing a potential barrier that prevents us from sympathising with them. Christians often say "all sins are the same" - and that's true. But judging by the relative lack of stomach-churning at other equally abominable sins, that's not what we're projecting. Our actions speak louder than words.

I'm trying to relate to what you are saying, Roamer. But in the end, male/female desire, in itself, was designed by God for the purpose of recreation within marriage. It's been manipulated and distorted, but at it's core within the correct circumstances, it is wholesome and good. There's just no way to look at homosexual desire in this light. There's no circumstance where it could be good or right or approved by God. .

So while I understand what you are trying to convey, it just doesn't work to compare these two different forms of desire to one another. They are total opposites. It would be better to compare same-sex desire with same-sex platonic brotherly or sisterly affection. And of course, when I see a "bro hug" or an affectionate embrace between two sisters, it doesn't cause any discomfort.

(I'm not "grossed out" by homosexual PDA. But it does make me sad, just as with any other blatant sin being celebrated in public.)

 

[Roamer]

Grace-Like-Rain, I really appreciate that you even read through all of what I had to say.

I understand why some would find it difficult to compare homosexual desire and heterosexual ('original design') desire. I guess for me, we heterosexuals have already manipulated and distorted godly relationships and marriage to such an extent that to still insist on drawing the 'at least it's still between a man and a woman' moral line between gay relationships and de facto relationships, no-fault divorce remarriage, pre-marital sex etc. just seems at best pedantic, at worst a tad hypocritical.

In any case, I do agree that it's right to be sad at any celebration over sinful behaviour. Thanks for your insight!