Q&A: “The Merciful One exempts one under duress” in relation to sexual orientation
“The Merciful One exempts one under duress” in relation to sexual orientation
Question
Can a person who engages in same-sex relations be exempted on the grounds of “the Merciful One exempts one under duress”?
Let me elaborate—and really this is several questions:
1. If a person has a same-sex orientation, and lack of sexual fulfillment would cause him to fall into severe depression to the point of possible suicide, is there room to permit it on the basis of possible danger to life?
2. If there is no concern about suicide, but there is a reasonable chance that this causes him very severe depression to the point of inability to function, is that considered duress?
3. If it is indeed possible to exempt same-sex relations in cases of possible danger to life / duress, who is authorized to determine whether there is a concern about depression / suicide due to lack of sexual fulfillment? (Presumably this should be a psychologist or psychiatrist. But if I understood you correctly from things you wrote in the past, your trust in psychology is very limited.)
Answer
The first argument for duress is simply that he cannot hold out. Why bring in all these other coercive circumstances?
Concern about psychological harm is similar to physical harm, and loss of sanity is similar to death. I wrote about this in one of the recent columns (530). But forbidden sexual relations are not permitted even in a situation of possible death, so I do not understand the question.
Danger to life and duress are two different things. A person under duress is someone who cannot avoid committing the transgression.
There are also other types of duress. But none of them overlap with danger to life.
Therefore the question that should be asked is about a person who cannot avoid male same-sex intercourse. And even here it would probably be only an exemption after the fact, not permission to commit a transgression.