AN YE HARM NONE... by Rel Davis -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- After a march in Washington by gay Americans seeking equal rights with other Americans, several papers -- and a national newsmagazine -- featured one photo of two male demonstrators engaged in an amorous kiss. The response from many people I talked with was surprisingly negative: "disgusting!" -- "shocking!" -- "indecent!" They acted much like a Victorian tea society after seeing their first two- piece bathing suit. It took me a while to figure out why. I figure it this way: If you show *me* a photograph of a man and woman kissing, I will most likely have a positive emotional response. I can relate to the photo. It triggers memories that are meaningful to me as an individual. I assume that if you showed a gay male a photograph of two men kissing, he would also have a positive emotional response -- being able to relate to that image experientially. But if you show me a photo of two men kissing I have no emotional response whatsoever. I simply can't relate to it at the emotional level. What I do react to, though, is the photo's ideological (rather than emotional) statement. The photograph is expressing a political position. The nature of my response will be determined by my political position. Since I have no problems with an ideology of freedom, and I take seriously the concepts of freedom on which this nation was founded, I find it quite natural that two men (or two women) ought to have the freedom to kiss each other. For me, then, the photograph was simply a nice ideological statement of freedom. I can say "Right on!" and move on to other important things in life such as dinner. But why were so many people turned off by a photo that to me was simply an exercise in the American right to be free? Why were there so many negative responses to that photograph? Two reasons, probably. First, many people are not comfortable with an ideology of freedom (for anyone other than themselves!) And second, many people can relate to positive feelings behind same-sex kissing -- and it scares them. In this Land of the Free we have more than our share of hypocrisy. A lot more people talk about freedom than are prepared to live freedom, and that's hypocrisy, for a hypocrite is someone who believes one way and acts another way. A lot of people say "I believe in freedom, but..." "...But I don't want them Cubans living next door." "...But I don't want a Jew in my country club." "...But don't make me work in the same room as a Black." If you aren't truly comfortable with an ideology of freedom, then any photograph which illustrates freedom will be uncomfortable to you. And to see two gay men feeling free enough to kiss in public would be discomfiting for anyone who doesn't truly believe in freedom for people who are that different. The second reason I think a lot of people get upset seeing such a photograph is that these people relate to the photo emotionally -- and are blocking those positive feelings. I'm not saying these are "repressed homosexuals" necessarily, though many so-called "gay bashers" tend to be repressing strong gay feelings themselves. What I am saying is that many, many people have strong positive feelings toward members of the same sex, and, given the anti-gay, anti-freedom bias of much of our population, they must constantly deny these feelings to themselves. Look at a typical sports weekend: millions of tough, macho guys spending hour after hour in one another's company, and trying hard to deny they really care about each other. If you can't get up enough nerve to tell your best friend you like him, you'll probably get upset when you see two men saying "I love you" with a kiss. Regrettably, this national tendency both to deny feelings and to deny freedom to "strange" or different classes of people, is being promoted by many in the religious right. I think it is a callous excuse by unscrupulous bigots to have another way to raise large sums of money. Television ministers like the Rev. Dr. Kennedy in Fort Lauderdale are always in need of new fund-raisers. What better way than to follow Adolph Hitler's example and harness the anxieties and hatreds and prejudices of the masses. One religion you won't find opposing gay rights is the neo-pagan movement. We are a religion based on freedom coupled with responsibility. The principle rede (or "advice") of modern witchcraft is this: "An ye harm none, do what ye will." Every action we do must be judged by the simple consideration: Will this action harm any other person or thing? If it will cause harm to another, then we cannot do it. If it will cause no harm to another person, we are free to do it. Absolute freedom with absolute responsibility. One of the problems with our present society is that we want freedom for ourselves but we are not willing to accept responsibility for our actions. We want something for nothing. The "me" generation, the "new selfishness," the "greed is good" business motto are all debilitating results of this nation's love affair with freedom without responsibility. Witches love freedom and we love to grant freedom to others, but we realize that every action we take has an effect on other human beings and on the earth around us. A business polluting the atmosphere or cheating customers does immeasurable harm. Two gay men acting lovingly toward one another, on the other hand, will harm no living creature. As long as you harm none, "do what ye will." Blessed Be!