MY SUBJECT IS THE INAPpropriateness of Peter LaBarbera’s metaphor in which he compared the gay movement to the biblical Goliath and the “average American who is offended by homosexuality” to the biblical David (The Mail,9/3). LaBarbera’s attempt to finesse the relationship between David and Jonathan by drawing a wall of separation between affection and eros only causes more problems for his argument.
The affectional/situational evidence of the text, if anyone ever actually reads the text, is that Goliath was a Philistine and that David found his relationship with Jonathan to “pass the love of women.” Even if one accepts LaBarbera’s distinction between affection and eros, LaBarbera’s metaphor still requires that the average American finds that affection from the same sex surpasses affection from the other sex. If this is true, then it explains the American problem with heterosexual marriage and the never-ending war between the sexes. If it’s false, then LaBarbera’s metaphor is false.
If Benjamin Lindsay (The Mail, 9/24) assumes that everyone is heterosexual until proven otherwise, I’d hate to see him on a jury.