Tag Archives: Gay Lesbian and Bisexual

Still not “born that way”

dna2.gifThe “gays were born that way” saying has taken on a life of its own and has an overwhelming impact on public policy.  Is it true?  If it is true, does it matter?  Some thoughts . . .

1. I’m highly skeptical of “proof” that it is genetic (either a “gay gene” or genetic predispositions), as these studies have all been proven to be false in the past.  There is no study showing that it is, and many showing that it isn’t.

2. Even if it is genetic, that doesn’t change the morality of the behavior.  You don’t get an “ought” from and “is.”  Gay-bashing is a sin, but on LGBTQX logic those people could claim they were “born that way.”

3. If it is genetic, the number of gays will be dramatically reduced in a generation or so.  Heterosexual parents will be quick to abort their children with predispositions to be gay.  And the Liberals won’t do much to stop them, because they typically love abortion rights more than gay rights.  Any time I pose that hypothetical situation to pro-abortion/pro-LGBTQ people, they always choose abortions over gays.  They haven’t changed their views even for gender selection abortions (which virtually all involve the killing of females for the sole reason that they are female), so they probably won’t change them for gays, either.

I think that would be a bad thing, of course, as I’m against abortions except to save the life of the mother, regardless of whether the baby has a predisposition to be gay.

4. I’ve seen lots of evidence that many people are gay because of sexual abuse and/or relationship issues.  I agree that anecdotes don’t make a full case, but I’m talking about a lot of anecdotes from people who come across hundreds or even thousands of gays.  I’ve read of many counselors who said that virtually all of their gay patients had been abused or had serious relationship issues.  And here’s a quote from gay activist / journalist Tammy Bruce from The Death of Right and Wrong:

Almost without exception, the gay men I know (and that’s too many to count) have a story of some kind of sexual trauma or abuse in their childhood – molestation by a parent or an authority figure, or seduction as an adolescent at the hands of an adult.  The gay community must face the truth and see the sexual molestation of an adolescent for the abuse it is, instead of the “coming-of-age” experience many regard it as being.  Until then, the Gay Elite will continue to promote a culture of alcohol and drug abuse, sexual promiscuity, and suicide by AIDS.

She wasn’t trying to dispel the “born that way” notion, but I thought her comment was compelling.

And nearly all the lesbians I know were abused by their fathers or husbands.  It is tragic that their “solution” just makes things worse.

5. It doesn’t have to be one traumatic event.  It could be the complete dynamics of a relationship in place from birth that would make someone think they were “always that way.”

6. Gays who choose that lifestyle would be predisposed to say they were born that way.  Otherwise, the whole “civil rights” demands would have even less reasoning behind them.  Just watch what happens when famous people claim they changed to be gay or lesbian.  The LGBTQX lobby goes into attack mode.

7. How many times do you see a newborn and say, “Now there’s a gay baby!”  Be sure not to unfairly stereotype youths as gay just because they have non-traditional characteristics.  How about nurturing and encouraging them for who they are and what interests they have?

8. Why are some people so eager to insist on the genetic link?  Seems kinda homophobic to me, as if they think the lifestyle would make an undesirable choice.

And don’t just say, “They are picked on, so who would want that lifestyle?”  That reasoning wouldn’t apply to people with true genetic differences that have made people a source of disapproval in the past.

Also, gay approval is at an all time high – “pride” parades, recognition as employee network groups at many businesses, civil unions & marriages – even apostate church weddings, almost universally favorable media treatment, etc.

9. Here’s one lady who doesn’t claim she was “born that way.”  She says feminism led her to lesbianism (go figure!).

Ms Wilkinson, Professor of Feminist and Health Studies at Loughborough University, said: “I was never unsure about my sexuality throughout my teens or 20s. I was a happy heterosexual and had no doubts. Then I changed, through political activity and feminism, spending time with women’s organisations. It opened my mind to the possibility of a lesbian identity.”

Irreconcilable beliefs

contradiction.jpg

A favorite updated for your reading pleasure.

Some folks hold views that are not only wrong but irreconcilable as well.  The only consistent theme is that they are all in direct opposition to the Word of God.

Consider how some groups simultaneously try to hold two or more of these views:

  • Men and women aren’t different.
  • “Gender fluidity” means boys and girls as young as elementary school are told they can choose what gender they are.  Even though there isn’t a difference.  And their perceived gender can change.
  • Homosexuals and bisexuals are “born that way” and can’t be changed.
  • If you declare that you are now gay, then that means you were always gay.  But if you were gay and now declare yourself straight then you are still gay.
  • It is mandatory that homosexuals be able to marry someone of the same sex.  A gay guy can’t just marry a female with more masculine characteristics, or a biological female who thinks she is really a man.
  • Sperm banks for Lesbians are important, because it is important for the women to experience pregnancy and have their own child.  But having a father around – or even knowing who he is – is completely irrelevant to the child.
  • Homosexual orientation is driven by “nature,” so it is moral.
  • Homosexual parenthood obviously defies “nature,” but it is moral as well.
  • It is irrelevant whether your parents are M/F, M/M, F/F, or even a set of two.
  • HIV/AIDS is not a gay disease, and you are homophobic if you suggest it is.
  • If you don’t support more funding for HIV/AIDS you are homophobic.
  • Homosexual behavior is OK because we observe it in the animal kingdom, even though animals do all sorts of things that we’d never apply that logic to (e.g., the female praying mantis eating the male after mating, dogs humping everything in sight — including your leg or your coffee table, etc.).

Consider the net result of the typical gay adoption argument: Having a same-sex partner is paramount, but the sex of the parents is irrelevant.  How can that be?

I am saying that public policies should not encourage gay parenting and definitely shouldn’t force adoption agencies to provide children to gay couples.  Exceptions can make bad rules.  I am also saying that it is ridiculous to consider phrases such as traditional family to be offensive.

Once again, the culture is putting the desires of adults over the needs of children.  It is the same lie that was foundational to the easy divorce and abortion movements: Adults are vulnerable, children are not.

Lies.  Big, big lies.

Is opposing “same-sex marriage” like opposing interracial marriage?

Not at all.  It is remarkably simple to refute the argument in the title by accurately noting that skin color is morally neutral while sexual behavior is not.

But there is another interesting argument that goes even further, and it highlights how the pro-same-sex marriage crowd is actually the one similar to the racists who opposed interracial marriage.

Here’s why: The Left is (successfully) lobbying for coercive government force to change the meaning of marriage. The racists changed it to mean “only same-race couples” instead of just a union of one man and one woman, and the Left is now using it to change it to mean, “not just the union of a man and a woman.”

Marriage is what God defined it to be.  It describes a thing — a union of a man and a woman.  The term didn’t pre-date the institution, such that we get to define it any way we like.

If anyone is behaving like those that opposed interracial marriage it is the Left.  They are the ones abusing the original and obvious definition.

Quick responses to a new Facebook meme

I saw this on Facebook and thought I’d share some quick responses to it. It is a train wreck of bad reasoning made worse because they are trying to use religious arguments.

This fails on so many levels. The first about Jesus ignores that He is God and is in agreement with 100% of scripture. As noted in What Jesus didn’t say – Arguing from silence is a logical fallacy, Jesus is God and part of the Trinity that inspired all scripture, He supported the Old Testament law to the last letter, the “red letters” weren’t silent on these topics in the sense that they reiterated what marriage and murder were, He emphasized many other important issues that these liberal theologians completely ignore (Hell, his divinity, his exclusivity, etc.), He was equally “silent” on issues that these folks treat as having the utmost importance (capital punishment, war, welfare, universal health care, etc.), He didn’t specifically mention child abuse and other obvious sins though that wouldn’t justify them, and abortion and homosexual behavior simply weren’t hot topics for 1st century Jews. And Jesus never said anything about the “sin” of criticizing homosexual behavior, so it must be OK!

The NT part is wrong as well. Romans 1 could not be more clear: It references lesbian and gay relationships that were not associated with prostitution or pederasty. Being “committed” to a sinful relationship doesn’t sanitize it.

You don’t even need the Bible to refute this case. For the government to get involved in relationships there has to be an important reason. They have been involved in real marriages because by nature and design children are created by those units and they are the only relationships that can provide a mother and a father to children. Countless studies show this as the ideal, so the government has good reasons to encourage their stability.

Please note that I didn’t say that they must produce children, only that children are always produced by one man and one woman. And again, only those relationships can provide a mother and a father.

The Bible does show that God’s ideal for marriage is one man and one woman, and Jesus reiterated that.

The world is not over-populated, and even if it was that has nothing to do with the morality of homosexual behavior.

The shrimp / shellfish argument is full of holes but is appealing to many because so few bother to study the passages. I address five serious problems with it in flaws of the shellfish argument.

And gay sex is “icky.” We should not be afraid to use that argument. The rate HIV and Syphilis is over 40 times higher for gay men. If it wasn’t politically incorrect to criticize the behavior you’d hear those stats all the time. And the rectum is still not a sex organ. There is a reason people spend so much on toilet paper. Most people like to avoid getting feces on themselves.

Don’t miss the section where they tell you that if you disagree with them that you are judgmental, and judging is bad! Except when they do it! Hypocrites.

Also see:

 

Biology, not bigotry, and removing barriers to evangelism

I’ll support unrestricted, taxpayer-funded abortions as soon as you convince me that the unborn aren’t human beings and I’ll support government recognition of “same-sex marriage” as soon as you prove that these couples can provide a mother and a father to a child.

In both cases it is biology, not bigotry, so don’t let people silence you on these crucial topics.

You don’t have to convert people to your point of view on marriage or abortion before sharing the Gospel or pointing them to the Bible.  But for many people these are barriers to even considering Christianity.  Just having a few replies — literally just a minute or so — is often all it takes.  You can simply say, “Yes, the Bible does say it is a sin but even if it didn’t we are still separated from God by our many other sins . . .” and then point them to the cross and to God’s word (same thing for the abortion issue).  Here’s a real-life example of how to do that.

If people are hostile to it, then hold your pearls.  But don’t give up before you try.

Roundup

—–

Sadly, pro-choicers think it is a good thing that we’ve reduced the cases of Down Syndrome outside the womb by killing 90% of those who have it when they are inside the womb.  And yet they think pro-lifers are the extremists.

—–

For you Reformed folks, please consider switching from TULIP to BACON.  Tulips are beautiful but bacon is tastier and more manly-sounding.

—–

Good, simple flowchart in responding to same-sex marriage arguments (click the link to embiggen and get the jpeg):

Marriage-Flow-Final-2.png (1024×563)

—–

Mainstreaming Bisexuality: ‘Captain Bisexual’ Marches in Chicago Pride Parade as Young Children Watch — the title says it all.

—–

Aussie Communists: ‘Strike blows’ against the Church and capitalism with same-sex ‘marriage’ — Hey, kudos to them for being honest about their agenda.  At least they didn’t peddle the lies about it being for “love,” which countless unthinking people reflexively repeat (as if not changing the definition of a timeless word would prevent people from loving each other).

Brought to you by fake Christians: “Mainstreaming Bisexuality: ‘Captain Bisexual’ Marches in Chicago Pride Parade as Young Children Watch”

Via Mainstreaming Bisexuality: ‘Captain Bisexual’ Marches in Chicago Pride Parade as Young Children Watch » Americans for Truth — this kind of thing wouldn’t happen if Christian denominations purged their rolls of false teachers like Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie.  He “proudly” takes his own daughters to gay pride parades where things like this deliberately happen.  Sadly, the apostate UCC and other denominations not only don’t object to these parades but they march in them.

Studies find male bisexuals conduits of HIV to heterosexual women

By Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH Exclusive

“MSMW [men who have sex with men and women] may serve as a conduit for HIV transmission between MSM [men who have sex with men] and heterosexuals.”

“Consistent with previous studies, compared with MSW [men who have sex with women], MSMW reported significantly higher numbers of sex partners and were significantly more likely to engage in anal intercourse with their female partners.” – Journal of Urban Health, July 2009, “Behaviorally Bisexual Men and their Risk Behaviors with Men and Women”

CHICAGO–Talk about marketing perversion and unhealthy behavior to kids: take a look at these photos of “Captain Bisexual” marching in Sunday’s Chicago homosexual “pride” parade. He is the ostensibly child-friendly face of a group called Bisexual Queer Alliance Chicago. Click on the photos to enlarge them and notice the youth in the background. Even though it appeared that organizers had dialed down the more raunchy floats compared to past “Chicago Pride” parades (I’ve observed three or four Chicago parades), there were still some X-rated contingents and spectacles like this that were utterly inappropriate for children. And yet, as you can see, many children looked on from the sidelines.

 

It isn’t just about love and hate, but about truth and lies and right and wrong

The Left reflexively plays the hate card when dealing with LGBTQ issues.  Sadly, too many  Bible-believing people fall prey to the trick and it silences them.  But it isn’t just about love and hate, but about truth and lies and right and wrong.

Consider these four possibilities:

1. You believe homosexual behavior is a sin and you share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.
2. You believe homosexual behavior is a sin and you do not share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.
3. You believe homosexual behavior is a not a sin and you share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.
4. You believe homosexual behavior is not a sin and you do not share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.

Before you can talk of love and hate, you’d need to understand right and wrong — or at least the perception of it by those in question.

Options 1 and 3 would be be acting in love (defined in the sense of having people’s long-term best interests at heart and not in the worldly sense of pampering people). Options 2 and 4 would be acting out of hate, or at least selfishness or indifference.

So it if you think homosexual behavior is a sin and don’t speak the truth, then you are acting hatefully — even if you were wrong in assessing the Bible (which you wouldn’t be).

The Bible couldn’t be more clear.  Even non-Christians and two out of the three types of pro-gay theologians can see these truths:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

So even in some bizarre hypothetical where the Bible actually supported homosexual behavior and Leviticus, Romans, all the verses on parenting and marriage, etc. stated the opposite of what they do, it wouldn’t be hateful to describe LGBTQ behavior as sinful. It would only be hate if someone “knew” the Bible said homosexual behavior was acceptable and taught otherwise.

In the same way, it is loving to remove false teachers from the church when they are advancing falsehoods with pro-gay theology.  It is a virtue to protect people.

And it would be un-loving to reject people just because they struggle with a sin that isn’t a temptation for you.  If people recognize that homosexual behavior is a sin and aren’t teaching the opposite, they should be welcomed in church. You should be willing to pray for them and be friends with them.

The hate card assumes motives and judges the hearts of others.  In some cases it is probably accurate to define people as haters, such as with Democrat Fred Phelps and his “church.”  But it is a cheap trick to use it against everyone you disagree with — and especially right after all your other arguments have been exposed as faulty.

The real haters are those that know what the Bible really says yet value their own popularity over the physical, emotional and spiritual health of others. They would rather be politically correct than tell you the truth. That’s love of self, not love of others.

The truth sounds like hate to those that hate the truth.

Also see Responding to Pro-Gay Theology.

Do you wonder how many studies aren’t published because they didn’t give the “right” answers?

Or, the “Left” answers, to be more specific.  See the video at James O’ Keefe Investigation: Rutgers Education Professor in Pay-for-Play | MRCTV to see how a Rutgers education professor agrees not to make a deal until the research shows what he wants it to be.

We know how wildly biased media and education can be, but I’ve never given much thought to how many things the Left can hide in academia.  Think of the studies that allegedly show how well kids turn out in gay/lesbian households.  But what makes you think they wouldn’t hide a study that showed otherwise?

For example:

However, a new in-depth review of 59 studies on gay parenting has concluded that such “strong assertions” about gay parenting are “not empirically warranted.”

Most of the 59 gay-parenting studies involve children of high-income white lesbian mothers or tended to use very small samples; studied children but not teens; and either had no comparison families or compared lesbian-led homes with single-mother-led homes, wrote Louisiana State University family science professor Loren Marks.

These and other weaknesses cannot support broad statements that there are “no significant differences” between being raised in same-sex versus mother-father homes, wrote Mr. Marks, whose analysis was included in the Oct. 15 briefs filed by the House of Representatives in its defense of DOMA in Pedersen v. Office of Personnel Management.

Evidence against the “you won’t be affected by ‘same-sex marriage'” lie

One of the pro-LGBTQ arguments swallowed by too many people in the center — and especially by those claiming the name of Christ — is that oxymoronic “same-sex marriage” (SSM) won’t impact them.  That is a lie.  Via Evidence of homofascism | Reason To Stand, where you can see many of the things already carried out by the Gaystap / GayGB.  View the link to see the entire list.  And note that these things have happened while most states have voted against SSM.  It will only get worse.  Religious freedoms will inevitably erode further, because they will make real Christians enemies of the state.

As part of my answer I mentioned the oppression of natural marriage proponents by homosexuals and was subsequently asked to provide evidence to substantiate my claim.

Here is my answer.

The issue is how, in the quest for normalization/affirmation, “gay rights” will result in oppressive laws/regimes like the Human/Homosexual Rights Commission of Canada.

Redefining marriage will certainly affect how everyone thinks about marriage and statistical data shows that in countries where marriage has been redefined to mean nothing more than two people posessing strong feelings for one another, the number of people who get married and stay married are dismal at best.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/660zypwj.asp

Of course the redefinition of marriage is not the only cause behind the decline of the institution of marriage, it was already sick as evidenced by the prominance of sexual promiscuity and high divorce rates. But redefining marriage in an attempt to divorce it from its biological moorings is like adding a new sickness on already diseased animal.

As for the oppression that forced normalization/acceptance of homosexuality brings, I submit the following list as examples of what is becoming known as “homo-fascism”, a term I find quite apt and not the least bit ironic.

Please note as well that these are actual cases that have already happened, this is not a “slippery slope” hypothetical scenario. The politically corerect ship of homosexual persecution has already sailed.

Couple faces legal action for refusing to rent a room to a homosexual couple http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1259646/Gay-couple-turned-away-guest-house-owner-let-share-bed.html

Couple lose ability to provide foster care for refusing to affirm homosexuality http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/feb/28/christian-couple-lose-care-case Bonus: The courts official ruling is that their religious beliefs are trumped by gay rights (the right not to be offended?) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1361469/Christian-beliefs-DO-lose-gay-rights-Judges-ruling-devout-foster-couple-lose-case.html

Prop 8 supporters harassed http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/prop._8_supporters_suffer_harassment_assaults_from_homosexual_activists/

Counseling student prevented from graduating and ordered to receive mandatory sensitivity training http://emhardegree.hubpages.com/hub/Christian-Counseling-Student-Sues-School-for-Forcing-Gay-Sensitivity-Training

Schoolboy suspended merely for disagreeing with homosexuality (Cant have this sort of bullying going on now can we?) http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/09/22/texas-school-punishes-boy-for-opposing-homosexuality/

Paypal refuses to process donations to groups that don’t affirm homosexuality http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/paypal-launches-investigation-of-pro-family-groups-following-homosexual-com/