Friday, January 22, 2010

Perception, Opinion, and the Gay Agenda

By Douglas V. Gibbs

The gay agenda has used tactics to make it so that if you speak of their agenda, and your words are not completely in perfect agreement with every little thing that they believe, you are a hater, homophobe, bigot, and someone who they must silence.

One commenter on Political Pistachio today, who I have pretty much banned the comments of because of the usual snide nature of his attacks, wrote: "Our movement will bury you, and you can quote me on that."

Another: "We will destroy your movement."

An Email informed me that "I can't wait until people like you are finally silenced for good."

Nature dictates that pairings happen with the intention of the species to reproduce, therefore natural pairings are of the opposite sex. If homosexuality is a natural genetic phenomenon then since gays don't reproduce, the gene would be eventually bred out. All signs point to the fact that homosexual behavior is not natural, normal behavior, and therefore should not be taught as being accepted as normal behavior.

If one is to take a biblical point of view regarding homosexuality, the Bible is clear that it is an abomination for a man to lie with a man as with a woman, or a woman to lie with a woman as with a man (Lev. 18:22, 20:13). It is not just a sin, but an abomination against nature, and because of certain abominations such as homosexuality, a land will vomit out its inhabitants (Lev. 18:25). The apostle Paul called it "shameful," and the result of being given up to "vile passions." (Romans 1:24-27).

The Old Testament tells historical accounts of how those who practiced these behaviors as being removed from the congregation of Israel by execution, though in today's world the price has been paid by Christ on the Cross, and so such drastic measures are not warranted. The New Testament in I Corinthians 6:9-10 states that those who practice homosexuality will not enter the kingdom of God, which reveals that a true conversion in Christ will enable the person to repent from the behavior, and failure to repent may very well be a sign that their acceptance of Christ may not have been true.

The apostle Paul shows homosexuality as being the final order of rebellion against God. When one normally commits sin the person knows the wrongness of what they do, and hides their actions from others with shame. The lie of homosexuality seeks justification, demanding a level of importance higher than worship of the Creator, giving the person up to true evil. The justification within oneself, however, does not satisfy the homosexual's need for justification, so they then turn to society, willing to trample on the rights of anyone that gets in the way in their quest for societal justification for their unclean behavior.

Values become turned upside down, and moral anarchy follows. What follows for the homosexuals is natural consequences for their actions. Romans 1:22-27 says that when men burn with lust for other men, and women burn for women, they will receive in their own bodies the punishment for their actions. These consequences may include, but are not limited to, disease and physical bodily damage from gay sexual activity.

From a biblical standpoint, the rise of homosexuality is a sign that a society is in the final stages of decay.

My perception, or opinion, of the gay agenda, however, be it biblical, or personal, does not make me a "hater," or a homophobe, as some would like to suggest. It means that I see the behavior as an unacceptable one. If my child chose a behavior that I felt was wrong, I wouldn't stop loving them because of the behavior, but I would request that they do not engage in that behavior around me out of consideration.

A friend of mine was telling me recently about his son who, after trying to steal from a drug dealer, also got caught trying to deal the drugs. My friend visits his son when he can in jail, and tells the boy he loves him. His love for his son is not a justification for the son's bad behavior, nor did the father stop loving his son for being an inmate. But, on the same token, my friend has told his son that his actions were stupid, sinful, and unacceptable - and he said those things out of love because he desires that once his son is a free man again, he will turn from his bad behaviors.

If someone I cared about was a kleptomaniac, would I condone their behavior of stealing because I didn't want to upset them? Would stealing suddenly become okay because that person claimed they were born with the predisposition of thievery? By not accepting their actions, would that mean I no longer love that person? If I continued to proclaim that stealing is wrong, would other kleptomaniacs be justified in calling me a bigot against thieves? Should the kleptomaniacs try to physically harm me for disagreeing with their behavior, as gays have done to me in the past? In schools would it be appropriate to teach the children that for some people stealing is a natural behavior? Would I be a religious zealot for proclaiming the Bible says "Thou Shalt Not Steal?"

The answers to those questions are obvious, or at least they should be.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

No comments: