Note that I begin by paraphrasing words used by Ken Wilber in another context.
How do liberals and conservatives differ on homosexuality? Ethics and politics are connected to the alleviation of suffering. If you ask a simple question–Why do homosexuals suffer?–you get two very different answers. The conservatives will say, homosexuals suffer because their homosexuality is intrinsically disordered, sinful, and sick; liberals will say, homosexuals suffer because of society’s homophobia, prejudice, and ignorance. Do you see the difference? Conservatives point to inner causes of suffering, blaming the self for moral failures; liberals say gays suffer because of other people.
An integral position on homosexuality begins by including the truth of the liberals and the conservatives, that we must find the causes of suffering for homosexuals in both self and society. When you ask, what’s the truth about the suffering of homosexuals in the inner dimensions, the most obvious truth is that people hold a wide range of different views, from the view that suffering comes from denying homosexual appetites, the notion that suffering comes from rejecting the moral law, the notion that suffering comes from internalized homophobia and lack of full self-acceptance, to the notion that suffering ultimately comes from a false identification of personal identity (including an identity as gay or lesbian) with the Self or Absolute Reality. In short, there is a spectrum of views that tend to correlate with a person’s level of personal, moral, and spiritual development. An integral approach does not deny the relative validity or truth of any of these partial views of suffering, but it does insist that they are partial. A STEAM-based ethics of homosexuality is neither liberal nor conservative, but profoundly concerned with alleviating suffering at all levels and all dimensions of the spiral of development.