Tag Archives: lgbtq

False teachers, Sexuality

Still not “born that way”

3 Comments

The Leftists — including the “Christian” Leftist — are busy trying to discredit and/or ignore this important study about sexuality, but they can lie all the like and it won’t change the truth.  Please be sure to remind them how anti-science they are.  This is only news in the sense that the study is recent.  Many of us have known all along that the “born that way” portion of the LGBTQX agenda was not only self-refuting (uh, wouldn’t that discredit “trans” people who were obviously born with the genetics they are trying to deny?!) but thoroughly false.  But this lie is so valuable to Leftists because it is their ultimate Trojan Horse.  With it they get to sneak in and pervert every element of society, including schools and families.

Via Scientific Take on Sexuality and Gender:

The thought police aren’t going to like this. A major report has come out on sexuality and gender, in which two highly accomplished scientists lay waste to the leftist dogma underlying the current homosexual/transsexual cultural Marxist blitzkrieg. A few highlights from the Executive Summary:

● The understanding of sexual orientation as an innate, biologically fixed property of human beings — the idea that people are “born that way” — is not supported by scientific evidence.

● Longitudinal studies of adolescents suggest that sexual orientation may be quite fluid over the life course for some people, with one study estimating that as many as 80% of male adolescents who report same-sex attractions no longer do so as adults.

● Compared to heterosexuals, non-heterosexuals are about two to three times as likely to have experienced childhood sexual abuse.

● Compared to the general population, non-heterosexual subpopulations are at an elevated risk for a variety of adverse health and mental health outcomes.

● Members of the transgender population are also at higher risk of a variety of mental health problems compared to members of the non-transgender population.

● The hypothesis that gender identity is an innate, fixed property of human beings that is independent of biological sex — that a person might be “a man trapped in a woman’s body” or “a woman trapped in a man’s body” — is not supported by scientific evidence.

● Compared to the general population, adults who have undergone sex-reassignment surgery continue to have a higher risk of experiencing poor mental health outcomes.

● Only a minority of children who experience cross-gender identification will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood.

Every one of those bullets makes a huge statement.  And note how much more often those wrestling with perversions have been abused.  Yet the “loving” Left wants to make things worse for them, telling them that rebelling against God will solve their problems.  Even many secular pro-gay people have conceded this issue.  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.

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

And if most kids with “trans” desire will eventually change their minds, why subject them to hormones and such?  That is child abuse!

Make no mistake: This society is crumbling faster than ever.  The Charlotte school district is trotting out a perverse “Gender Unicorn” to tell little boys that they may not be boys, and more.  If they could take your kids away from you for teaching them what Jesus says about human sexuality* they would.  And they may have that power soon.

Keep sharing the truth in love: Yes, we were all “born that way” as sinners, but there is hope in Jesus — but only in Jesus.  If you can’t agree with that and can’t agree with Jesus on sexuality then Christianity may not be your forte’.  I encourage you to get out now, for the sake of the real Christians.

*Mark 10:6-9 But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.

Bible, Politics, Sexuality

Still not “born that way”

8 Comments

dna2.gifThe “gays were born that way” saying has taken on a life of its own and has an overwhelming impact on public policy and even religion.  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.”

Ms Wilkinson met Ms Kitzinger, also a university professor, through their work at the British Psychological Society. She added: “I’d had a very happy marriage and a very good relationship with men. My husband took it very badly.”

No kidding.

10. I’m surprised at how dismissive pro-gay groups are of all the “trans” people in the LGBTQ alphabet soup.  After all, isn’t their foundational “born that way” argument, as fallacious as it is, a clear indication that the “trans” people are wrong to try and change or to pretend they are something they are not?

11. Pedophiles could make the same argument, and with much more logic behind it (oh, and they are using the same playbook that the gays did, starting with the psychiatric community).  When the pedophile was 10 yrs. old he was attracted to 10 yr. old girls.  It was completely natural, and he was obviously born that way!  So for him to continue to be attracted to 10 yr. old girls can’t be a sin, right?  And those who will make the age of consent argument need to ask themselves if they oppose giving kids condoms in schools, permit Planned Parenthood and others to encourage kids to have sex when they are “ready,” approve the “morning after pill” being sold over the counter to girls of any age, and more.  If these kids are old enough to have decide to have sex then the age of their partner would be irrelevant (I predict that people accused of statutory rape will start to use that defense).

12. Dr. Richard Isay, who didn’t want homosexuality called an illness, admitted this:

The majority of gay men, unlike heterosexual men who come for treatment, report that their fathers were distant during their childhood and that they lacked any attachment to them. Reports vary from ‘my father was never around, he was too busy with his job,’ to ‘he was victimized by my mother, who was always the boss in the family,’ to that of the abusive, unapproachable father.

13. The most relevant “born that way” trait is that we have sinful natures.  The Good News is that there is a solution: Jesus.

Pro-life

Dilemma of the day: Should it be legal to abort [hypothetically] gay children?

10 Comments

Originally posted on Disqus where it got predictable, mostly pro-abortion responses.

First, a little background: I’ve actually asked the title question for many years, but a commenter on a Disqus Religion thread thought she’d play a “gotcha” and asked me the same thing. She even pre-gloated by assuming I’d try to evade the question:

“What if the baby in the womb was destined (hard-wired) to be gay. (And “not possible” is not a valid argument. Hard-wiring is real, e.g., left-handedness, eye color, etc.) Does that fetus have any worth? If so, why? If not, why not? Simple question. Please check all dancing shoes at the door. ;)”

Guess who was doing the dancing after I quickly and clearly told her I would choose life for the “gay” child? I also pointed out that if her hypothetical came true that most parents – even the pro-LGBTQX kind — would choose abortion, just like they abort the majority of children with Down Syndrome or any other suspected disability.

And yes, of course I oppose all abortions except the extremely rare cases where they save the life of the mother. But I’ll take whatever exceptions I can get because every life counts. The real burden of this question is on the pro-LGBTQX / pro-abortion people (and yes, it is pro-abortion if you want taxpayers to fund them so there can be more).

So this conservative, Bible-believing Christian firmly and unequivocally says: No, of course not! The unborn are human beings from fertilization (scientific fact – check out any of those pesky mainstream embryology textbooks — human embryo ==> human fetus ==> human baby ==> human toddler ==> etc. Same human being at different stages of development) and are deserving of life regardless of their tendencies towards certain sins. We are all sinners in need of a Savior (and thank God for that wonderful Savior!). Anyone who comes to God on his indescribably gracious terms will be loved and forgiven by him. How dare we kill innocent people made in his image, regardless of whether they are in the womb or not?

Interestingly, every conservative, Bible-believing Christian I’ve posed that question to has said the same thing: No, don’t abort them (and I’ll be surprised and disappointed if any have alternate views here). Isn’t that odd for a group that allegedly hates gays?

But it gets better – by which I mean, much worse: Every pro-choice/pro-LGBTQX person I’ve posed the question to has always said they’d favor abortion rights! If you agree with Jesus that homosexual behavior is a sin then the Leftists call you a hater and worse, while they are actively preserving the [hypothetical] right to kill gays up to their first breath*.

So to recap my experience:
– Conservative, Bible-believing Christians say not to kill [hypothetically] gay people regardless of location
– Leftists – including “Christian” Leftists — approve of killing [hypothetically] gay children up to their first breath

I hope the Leftist commenters here prove me wrong and say why they’d oppose abortions for those children. But my guess is that most of them will be smart enough to think 5 seconds into the future and anticipate the next question: If you think it is wrong to kill “gay” children in the womb, why is it OK to kill “straight” children? It is sort of like how the feminists get tied in knots over gender-selection abortions, nearly all of which, in the ultimate misogyny, kill females for the sole reason that they are female. The feminists surely don’t like those abortions but they love the overall concept of abortion more than the lives of countless female victims. And it is like the supposedly pro-black Leftists who conveniently ignore that abortion kills blacks at a rate over three times that of whites — and how that will go higher when they get their dream of full taxpayer-funding for abortions. And yet they’ll say pro-lifers are the racists . . .

OK folks, on to our dilemma of the day: What do you love more, gays or abortion? That is, should it be legal to kill [hypothetically] gay children up to their first breath?

Bonus question for those choosing abortion rights over gay rights: Will it make it harder for you to pretend that conservative, Bible-believing Christians hate gays when you think it should be legal to kill them in the womb but they think it should be illegal? I mean, if killing someone isn’t hateful then what is? Do you still think it is fair to use the petty and fallacious “homophobe” personal attack if you would accept killing gays in the womb while Christians oppose it?

*The “Christian” Left is far more extreme in their pro-abortion agenda than the average pro-choice person, as they agree with Democrats’ platform of unrestricted, taxpayer-funded abortions – even “partial-birth abortion” (aka infanticide). They insist that life begins at the first breath and that Jesus is fine with killing unwanted children until that point. I realize how ridiculous their views sound and how many people must think I’m making a straw-man argument. But that is just because their own words are so clear and extreme: “According to the bible, a fetus is not a living person with a soul until after drawing its first breath.” More here about how to respond, with full, in-context quotes from them.

Politics, Sexuality

Equivocation is equivocation is equivocation . . .

3 Comments

Foolish and hypocritical Leftists are going around saying “Love is love is love is love is love is love” while expressing nothing but hatred towards Christians.

Response: Equivocation is equivocation is equivocation . . .

That is, they are cheating with their definition of “love” and pretending we oppose people loving each other.  Real love is having the long-term best interests of others at heart.  The Left does not offer that.

We don’t care who you love (in the proper sense of the word), we are just telling you that the one true God views homosexual sex as active rebellion against him. Don’t like it? Take it up with him. That’s not hateful to tell you that. And that isn’t what makes some gays kill themselves. The LGBXTQX lobby hates me 24×7 and I sleep well at night.

Oh, and Islam hates Jews, Christians, gays, etc. so much that they will keep trying to kill all of them if they don’t submit.  Or even if they do.

Uncategorized

Move over, Boston Tea Party. Transanity is forcing a North Carolina Toilet Party.

2 Comments

Our pathological liar of a President (“If you like your doctor . . .”) doesn’t have time to fight ISIS.  Or keep illegal aliens out of the country, even though it take the jobs and wages of minorities.  Or to reduce the deficit.  And so on.

But he does have time to force his perverted LGBTQX agenda on everyone in the country, including children.  Via Obama Administration forces transgender bathroom rules on every school in America

It appears Obama’s Education Department is using this decision as a rationale to mandate every school in America to accommodate any child whose gender identity might not sync with their actual gender.

Whether the administration chooses to mandate a bathroom/locker room free-for-all by utilizing Title IX, which was written in 1972, or the 1964 Civil Rights Act (as they did earlier this week in their lawsuit against the state of North Carolina) they’ll be hard pressed to find any contemporaneous notes by congressmen and senators who crafted those historic laws which reveal that they were trying to protect against not just sexual discrimination, but transgender discrimination as well.

Regardless of how this gets worked out in the courts, every parent in America will wake up this morning having to deal with an issue they probably never thought they’d have to face several years ago. Parents now have to decide how they will deal with the reality that their child will not enjoy a basic level of privacy when they use a restroom or locker room when they go to school. Will this bring about a rise in private school attendance? Will it inspire more parents to home school their children?  Will states flirt with the idea of refusing federal education funds?

As Stand to Reason asked, what is your tipping point for taking your kids out of public schools?  What will it take for us to protect them?

What will it take for us not to let the Federal government take our money, siphon off a huge chunk for their corrupt bureaucracy and then hold it hostage unless we give in to their perverted demands?

It is hard to believe that we are talking about bathroom laws, but here we are.  This isn’t just their ideological differences about a tiny subset of the population, this is about them forcing you to say and do things you know are horribly wrong.

This is all brought to you by Leftists, including the “Christian” Left.  And keep in mind that Trump opposed the NC bathroom law.  It is unfortunate that not enough people voted for Ted Cruz, which left us with three perverted Socialists to (not) choose from.

We are getting what we deserve.

trans laws

Transanity truisms:

  • All agree that something is wrong with “trans” people. Normal people say the mind is wrong, Leftists say it is the body.
  • If Bruce Jenner really is a woman, then Karen Carpenter really was fat.
  • Leftist pervert logic: Girls wanting bathrooms with just girls are haters, but boys who only want bathrooms with girls must be accommodated.
Sexuality

One of the many reasons that straight “Christian” Leftists push the LGBTQX agenda . . .

4 Comments

. . . is that it makes them think their heterosexual sins aren’t so bad.

As The Simpsons illustrated here, we all like to have people out there who are worse sinners than us.

Moe: Every bar needs a world class drunk.
Lenny: Someone who makes our alcoholism seem less raging.

After all, because the world thinks that God grades on a curve then as long as some people are worse sinners than you then you must be OK!

The truth, of course, is that while some sins are worse than others, they all separate us from God and deserve eternal punishment.  So the “Christian” Leftists who push the LGBTQX agenda are kidding themselves by thinking it somehow sanitizes their heterosexual sins.  But without Jesus they’ll have the same fate as unrepentant LGBTQX people:

Revelation 21:8 But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.

Yes, I know that “Christian” Leftists deny that passage along with countless others.  It is another sign that they are wolves.  Hopefully they will repent before it is too late, or upon death they’ll realize that affirming LGBTQX sins was just self-serving idolatry on their part.

Romans 1:32 Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

False teachers, Sexuality

“But-but-but Jesus was talking about divorce in Matthew 19!!!”

Leave a comment

False teachers and their deceived flocks reflexively utter the title when you remind them of what Jesus said about men, women and marriage.  Note how Jesus defeats oxymoronic “same-sex marriage,” same-sex parenting, “transgenderism,” polygamy and even Darwinian evolution arguments in this one simple passage. No true follower of him should disagree on any of those topics. Emphasis added for the “Christian” Left wolves who deny the simplest biological and Christian truths:

Matthew 19:4–5 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?”

Jesus is still asking them that question today, and the answer from the “Christian” Left is, “No, we haven’t read that” or “We read that but didn’t like it so we ‘know’ He didn’t really say that” or “but He was talking about divorce!”

Yes, technically, he was responding to the Jews’ abuse of marriage by permitting easy divorce.  But do the “Christian” Leftists use that teaching to fight “no-fault” divorces?  Of course not.  They just use it to dismiss a crystal-clear teaching on gender and real marriage and the ignore the teaching on divorce as they do nearly everything He said.

The Pharisees were pretty rebellious and wicked, but even they didn’t push “same-sex marriage” and gender confusion.  It took the “Christian” Left a couple thousand years — and a lot of help from Satan – to come up with those perversions of God’s created order.

The Pharisees got part of marriage wrong, so Jesus reminded them of God’s ideals for marriage.  So the passage applies to all questions of marriage, not just about divorce.

As always, the Bible couldn’t be more clear. Bible-believing Christians and even two out of the three types of pro-LGBTQX people* (religious or not) can see these truths:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior describe 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, bisexual or “trans” behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions of any kind. There are no exceptions for “committed” relationships.
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to LGBT couples parenting children.

Having said that, I believe that Christians should support and encourage those who are fighting same-sex attraction. And no one needs to grandstand on the issue before getting to the Good News of the cross.

Don’t let the “Christian” Left get away with dismissing such a spectacularly clear passage.

* The three general types of pro-gay theology people:

1. “The Bible says homosexuality is wrong but it isn’t the word of God.” (Obviously non-Christians)
2. “The Bible says it is wrong but God changed his mind and is only telling the theological Left.” (Only about 10 things wrong with that.)
3. “The Bible is the word of God but you are just misunderstanding it” (Uh, no, not really.)

False teachers, Politics, Sexuality

Simple responses to Romans 1 pro-gay theology errors

6 Comments

The entire Bible is very clear that any sex outside of a one man, one woman marriage is a sin*, yet “Christian” Leftists and atheists use all sorts of fallacious sound bites to deceive and distract people.  One of the passages that they work the hardest to dismiss is Romans 1:26-27.

First, read or even memorize this passage.  Also review the entire chapter to note the context: Paul is explaining how the world is upside down in rebellion against God and that deep down people all know it.  Then he gives his “exhibit A” as an example.

Romans 1:26–27 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Pretty clear, eh?  It describes the behavior of gays and lesbians and notes how it is a prime example of rebellion against the created order.  Note that if you keep reading the chapter you’ll see that we all have rebelled in multiple ways, so don’t be smug just because homosexual behavior isn’t a temptation for you.  But the point here is that the passage does clearly state that homosexual behavior is a sin.

Here are some of their objections to Romans 1 and some simple responses.  Note that you can give much more detailed responses, but those usually aren’t necessary.  Just these basics will show people how ill-informed they are on this topic and reveal whether they love the world or whether they love God.  For starters you can ask people when the last time was that they read Romans carefully.

“But Paul didn’t know any better about homosexuality” (and similar responses). This is a big tip-off that you are talking to a non-Christian, if the person saying it is a leader, or a layperson who is “saved and confused” at best.  Paul’s writings are just as much scripture as any of the Gospels.  Those writings are from Paul and the Holy Spirit, and turned out just as God intended.  Paul does not disagree with Jesus.  And those using that argument no proof that Paul wouldn’t have known about homosexual relationships.  In fact, he describes them precisely in the passage.  Also see this refutation of the related “Jesus never said anything about homosexuality” sound bite.

“The passage was about temple prostitutes.”  The passage doesn’t mention temple prostitutes, temples or prostitutes.  And I have seen zero evidence, ever, that lesbian temple prostitutes have ever existed, so the description of lesbian behavior also refutes that.  You don’t need to know Greek to see that simple truth.

“The passage was about pederasty (adult/child) or coercive relationships.”  No, the passage refers to “men” and “women” every time. And note how they “gave up” relationships willingly and “were consumed with passion for one another.” Not a hint of coercion.

“The passage is about people abandoning their natural desires, so the real sin is if a gay behaves in a straight manner or vice verse.”  That is the most laughable objection, but you hear it often.  First, the Greek word is tied to natural functions, not desires. And it notes that they “gave up” natural relations.

And using their logic this key passage applies to exactly no one.  Think about it: Whatever anyone did — gay/straight/bi — they could claim is was their nature, so they hadn’t sinned.  And very few people do things they don’t want to do, so everyone could cite that as proof that they are sinless on this account.

“They were born that way.”  No, they weren’t.  The causes can be complex (abuse, bad relationships, rebellion, or some combination of those), but even if they were born that way then everyone could use that excuse for the laundry list of sins at the end of the chapter.  Good luck with that on judgment day.

I hope you commit those to memory or refer back here when you come across these objections.  They are so simple to refute, and should convict those who use them as to how badly they are  butchering scripture.  You don’t need a degree in theology or Greek to see how clearly and quickly the pro-LGBTQX arguments fail.

If you really love your neighbors you won’t lie and tell them that this behavior is without consequence.  The same goes for other sexual sins, and other sins in general.  Don’t love the world and your popularity more than you love God.

1 Corinthians 6:9–11 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Homosexual behavior is rebellion against God.  Affirming anyone in that behavior or in other sins means that you have joined them in the rebellion.

Romans 1:32 Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

More stuff!

The main categories of pro-gay theology and why they are all false and un-biblical.

Responding to Pro-Gay Theology

Responding to same-sex marriage arguments

*The Bible couldn’t be more clear. Bible-believing Christians and even two out of the three types of pro-gay people** (religious or not) can see these truths:

– 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior describe 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 of any kind. There are no exceptions for “committed” relationships.
– 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to LGBT couples parenting children.

Having said that, I believe that Christians should support and encourage those who are fighting same-sex attraction. And no one needs to grandstand on the issue before getting to the Good News of the cross.  Here’s an example.

** The three general types of pro-gay theology people:

1. “The Bible says homosexuality is wrong but it isn’t the word of God.” (Obviously non-Christians)
2. “The Bible says it is wrong but God changed his mind and is only telling the theological Left.” (Only about 10 things wrong with that.)
3. “The Bible is the word of God but you are just misunderstanding it” (Uh, no, not really.)

Sexuality

The newest enemy of the LGBTQX movement: The American College of Pediatrics

5 Comments

Via Reason 195: Because The Institution Harms Your Childrens | 365 Reasons To Homeschool

So here we have a story from the American College Of Pediatrics that will send elites and their minions scurrying for safe places. Evidently this organization doesn’t realized that it’s sinning against elitism to publish such heretical studies.Gender Ideology Harms ChildrenThe article is a list of common sense statements based on what, in a more sane time, was obvious. It also delves into the dangers of diabolical social/medical experimentation on children who exhibit what adults interpret as “gender confusion”.Here are few of its points:

1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of health – not genetic markers of a disorder.

3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking.

4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous.

6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.

8. Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse.

How long will it be until the full weight of the Gaystapo comes down on these professional doctors and bludgeons them into lying?  Hopefully that will never happen, but it wouldn’t be without precedent.

I’ve been blogging over 10 years and everything I predicted about the spread of the LGBTQX agenda has been right — expect the trans thing. I naively thought that parents would have enough guts to say, “OK, you bullied me into pretending that ‘same-sex marriage’ was a real thing, and I was too wimpy to protest you teaching pro-gay evils to my kids. But enough is enough! There is no way you are going to tell my 5 yr. old boy that he might not “really” be a boy or to let grown men be in the bathroom with my daughter.”

But here we are with this over-the-top wickedness – aided and abetted by the “Christian” Left.

By definition, something is wrong with transgender people.  While some may think that is mean, Captain Obvious says it couldn’t be more factual.  If something weren’t wrong, then why would they want to undergo a radical surgery to change themselves? The question is whether the body is wrong or whether the mind is wrong.  I suggest working on the mind part, which would be much less expensive and destructive.

If an anorexic person insisted she was overweight even though every medical fact indicated otherwise, would it be hateful to tell her she wasn’t fat? Would it be loving to encourage her desire to lose more weight?  It is the same thing with trans people.  Encouraging their delusion isn’t loving.  In other words, if the winner of the 1976 Men’s Olympic Decathlon was “really” a female, then Karen Carpenter was fat.

I thank God that those at the American College of Pediatrics had the guts to speak the truth.  Hopefully others will be inspired not to bow to the transanity movement.

Bible, Sexuality

It is 2016 and the “Christian” Left is still using the fallacious “Jesus never said anything about LGBTQX” line

7 Comments

The argument that “Jesus didn’t say anything about homosexual behavior so it must be OK” is so fallacious on so many levels and debunked so regularly that you’d think the “Christian” Left would have some semblance of dignity and stop using it.  But here we are.  I continue to see it regularly on blogs.  Those who use it are either wildly ignorant of the refutations, presumably because they live in a deadly “Christian” Left cocoon, or they know it is false but use it anyway.  They serve the Father of Lies, after all.  The saying is used to rationalize abortion as well.

Here’s an overview of how to respond, though I encourage you to read it all.  Feel free to copy or link all you like.

  • Arguing from silence is a logical fallacy
  • Jesus is God, so He inspired all scripture — not just the “red letters” (the direct quotes of Jesus in the New Testament)
  • He supported the Old Testament 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.)
  • Abortion and homosexual behavior simply weren’t hot topics for 1st century Jews
  • He did mention Sodom and Gomorrah

For self-proclaimed Christians to (mis)quote the red letters and to commit the logical fallacy of arguing from silence is negligent and foolish.  They are distorting the Bible and hurting the church and its witness.

—–

cross3.jpgLifeSite News reported that Dr. Bob Edgar, former general secretary of the National Council of Churches, said “Jesus never said one word about homosexuality, never said one word about civil marriage or abortion.” He said this to CBS News at a gathering of liberal Christian leaders in Washington.

Sadly, this is a common sound bite from people who should know better. Their reasoning goes like this:

  • Whatever Jesus did not specifically condemn in the Bible is morally permissible or unimportant.
  • In the Bible, Jesus did not specifically condemn abortion or homosexual behavior.
  • Therefore, abortion and homosexual behavior are morally permissible or unimportant.

There are many problems with this reasoning.

1. As you may have noticed, their logic goes off track in the first bullet.  Direct quotes of Jesus also didn’t specifically mention gay-bashing, slavery, drunk driving, child sacrifice, and many other sins, but they are still sins.  They are arguing from silence, and that is a logical fallacy.

Some insist that since Jesus didn’t specifically condemn oxymoronic “same sex marriages” that they must be permissible.  Jesus also never talked about square circles, partly because they don’t exist either.

2. Jesus is God (and anyone such as Edgar should know that), so He authored all the moral laws in the Bible – including the crystal-clear ones against homosexual behavior and murder. And He created the institution of marriage and desribed what parents should do, of which 100% of the verses refer to the ideal as a one man/one woman union.

3. Many of the “red letters” (direct quotes of Jesus) referred to the “black letters” (the rest of the Bible).  Jesus noted in Matthew 5:17-19 that He supported all the law.

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

4. He may not have specifically mentioned abortion and homosexual behavior because they weren’t hot topics for his primarily Jewish audience.  Homosexuals were a tiny minority then just as they are now (less than 3% of the U.S. population) and the Jews had strict laws against such behavior.  Regarding abortion, Jews actually saw children as a blessing and not a curse, so they had no desire to destroy them.  I am not aware of any Jewish movements at the time advancing these behaviors as not being sinful.  Under no circumstances were these issues dividing the followers as they are today.

Having said that, Jesus was not silent on oxymoronic “same sex marriage.” He clearly stated what marriage was in Mark 10:6-9 and elsewhere, to the exclusion of other scenarios:

But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.

He describes exactly what the plan was, and doesn’t even hint at other possibilities. He didn’t say you couldn’t marry animals either, but I don’t see anyone saying bestiality must be acceptable because He didn’t specifically prohibit it.  So there was no silence.

Regarding abortion, He reiterated that we shouldn’t murder and noted that the real meaning of the command was deeper than the physical act.

Think about this: It took almost 2,000 years and a several decades long perverted sexual revolution that repeatedly denies and mocks the Biblical worldview of human sexuality plus a massive, well funded pro-gay public relations campaign to convince some liberals that oxymoronic “same sex marriages” should have government recognition and that abortion should be legal.  Yet liberal theologians think that it is something Jesus should have addressed in more detail back then?  Even the pagan Hippocratic oath had prohibitions against abortions until just recently.

Most people would concede that U.S.-style slavery was a moral evil, but since it is now illegal you won’t hear about it as a campaign issue in the presidential election.  But does that mean it isn’t important?  Does that mean the candidates wouldn’t address it if large parts of the population were seeking to legalize it?  Of course not.

Simply put, they were non-issues for the Jews.

5. If these liberal theologians are so keen on the direct quotes of Jesus and assume that they trump the rest of the Bible, why don’t they take them all as seriously as they do their pet verses or arguments from silence?

Jesus claimed to be the only way to salvation, but they not only ignore that but they teach the opposite.  He claimed to be God, but they tend to ignore that.  He spoke with a physically resurrected body but they often deny that.  He said his primary purpose was to save lost sinners and He taught about Hell a lot.  When was the last time you heard them preach on that truth?  And so on.

6. Those who use these arguments from silence don’t apply them to the rest of their pet topics.  Jesus said nothing about universal health care, for example.  Jesus advocated caring for the poor, but he never brought government into it (apparently Jesus’ alleged silence only counts when it comes to abortion and homosexuality.  Jesus also never said not to stone gays.  Of course, those who know the Bible realize that was a law just for the Israelites, but if you want to use the argument from silence rationale, you’d have to support that for this culture.

—

So to summarize: Arguing from silence is a logical fallacy, Jesus 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.), abortion and homosexual behavior simply weren’t hot topics for 1st century Jews, and He did mention Sodom and Gomorrah.  Oh, and Jesus never said anything about the “sin” of criticizing homosexual behavior, so it must be OK!

For leaders like this to (mis)quote the red letters and to commit the logical fallacy of arguing from silence is negligent and foolish.  They are distorting the Bible and hurting the church and its witness.

Hat tip: RealChoice blog