Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Does Supporting Traditional Marriage Make You an Intolerant Hater and Bigot?

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Disagreement does not make you a hater.

Hate and bigotry do exist. They are real things, and they are wrong. This is why the gay agenda uses these words when they confront those that disagree with their belief system in regards to sexual lifestyle.

Our culture rewards tolerance and understanding, which are good things.

However, what is happening is charges of hatred, bigotry, and intolerance are being used in order to promote and express hatred and intolerance.

The social issues are highly charged, and they are because those that support the non-moral angle of these issues have learned to shut down any opposition by simply accusing them of being a hater, a bigot, or intolerant. How can someone argue against it? The accusations quickly shut down rational discussion, stifles disagreement, and sends the opposition away not knowing how they should have responded.

Disagreement, however, does not mean hatred, bigotry, or intolerance. I believe adultery is a sin no different than homosexuality. They are both sexual immoralities. I disagree with someone when they commit adultery, but I don't hate them for it. I believe the person should not partake in such a sinful act, but I don't believe that because they committed adultery they are going straight to Hell. If they are a person of faith, their actions will weigh heavy upon them, and repentance will probably eventually come. If they are not a believer in Christ, they may not see severity of their sinful behavior.

The difference is an adulterer, even if they don't recognize the severity of their actions, know that their actions are wrong. They don't try to convince others that adultery is a perfectly acceptable behavior, and in an attempt to justify the behavior, they don't try to argue they were born that way. And even if the person was born with a predisposition to be unfaithful to their spouse, they have the choice not to commit adultery. In that way, their adulterous behavior is a choice.

In using such an example, the gay agenda supporter will point out that there is a big difference between adultery and homosexuality. An adulterer is directly harming their spouse with their actions. Homosexuality hurts nobody.

Really?

The gay revolution is the driving force behind the most serious avoidable health problems of our time.

Homosexuality was the vessel that rapidly spread AIDS throughout our society. The incidence of HIV in men who have sex with men is 44 times that of heterosexual men, and 40 times greater than women. Homosexual men are 46 times more likely than heterosexual men to contract syphilis. Bi-Sexuals, who are a part of the homosexual agenda, then transmit these diseases into the heterosexual population, where it eventually impacts directly and indirectly all members of society. There is now over 1.2 million people infected with HIV in the United States, causing a definite strain on an already embattled health care industry.

Children raised by gay parents are more likely to suffer from a whole host of social problems, while battling with their own sexual identity, and battling with additions to pornography, sexual promiscuity, substance abuse, and various psychiatric disorders.

The problem is, the advocacy of the gay agenda has infiltrated the American Psychiatric Association, and through their false science and studies, demand that science and taxpayers take care of them.

Through the argument that any opposition is practicing hate, bigotry, and intolerance, the gay agenda has been working to force society to accept their lifestyle, urges more youth to participate in the behavior, and they have created expensive problems requiring massive funding to clean up the mess.

Interestingly, the same gay community that ridiculed marriage now demands it. But the problem is, the homosexual lifestyle promotes promiscuity, and in fact was founded on sexual promiscuity.

Homosexuals have taken a queue from the liberal left democrats. Emotions can be used to manipulate people into believing that the gay agenda is just another civil rights movement. Hatred is rooted in emotion. Hatred is anger carried to an extreme. That is what the gays want people to believe. You are angry they are gay, therefore, you hate them, and therefore out of your angry hatred you want to deny them their constitutional civil rights.

Disagreement with their lifestyle, and believing that marriage should be defined, as it has traditionally been, as between a man and a woman, does not make me angry, and I do not hate them for disagreeing with me.

The accusation of anger and hatred is a convenient way of shutting down discussion, frightening you away from the subject, and then putting you into a mindset that to make up for it you have to bend over backwards to make it up to them.

Reconciliation.

The accusation of bigotry goes even deeper. It takes root in the sin of slavery. If you are a bigot, you are practicing discrimination. The gay agenda will tell you that your bigotry is an unjust discrimination that is not properly grounded in truth. The blanket accusation once again stirs emotions, making it a very effective way of shutting down the debate, and sending the opposition away with their tails between their legs.

And if you are discriminatory, then you must be intolerant as well.

The supporters of the gay agenda use these terms as absolutes. Discrimination and intolerance is always bad, therefore you must be a bad person for not being accepting of their lifestyle.

As an individual I am entitled to have discriminate tastes. I love Mexican food, but I can't stand chocolate. Am I a hater for being intolerant of chocolate? Does that make me some kind of chocolate bigot? And why would I discriminate in such a way, picking Mexican Food over other foods? What kind of bigot am I?

I tolerate people who like chocolate. I don't tolerate people who fly planes into buildings in the name of a false prophet. I tolerate Mexican restaurants and the people who love them, but I don't tolerate idiots who use a tool like a gun for violent reasons against innocent people.

Some things ought to be tolerated, and some things shouldn't be.

I am not real tolerant of people who want to force my church, and my society, to change the definition of marriage. I am not real tolerant of people who want to force the school system to teach homosexuality to my children and grandchildren as an acceptable and normal sexual behavior. I am not real tolerant of people who act out their homosexual desires in public in order to force the issue upon the public. I am not real tolerant of people, after Proposition 8 passed in California defining marriage as between a man and a woman, pounding on the hood of my car with their fists as I left church the following Sunday. I am not real tolerant of federal courts unconstitutionally overruling the vote of Californians, and calling sexual behavior a constitutional right.

These items I refuse to tolerate does not make me a hater, a bigot, or intolerant of the individuals. It just means that I disagree with their belief system.

Interestingly, these are the same people trying to push God out of the public square, because they don't want a belief system they don't believe in forcing itself upon them by being seen in the public eye.

2 comments:

prying1 said...

Re: "Interestingly, these are the same people trying to push God out of the public square, because they don't want a belief system they don't believe in forcing itself upon them by being seen in the public eye." - Even if they did succeed in pushing God out of the public square that would only be on the material level. They would still have guilt and shame no matter how far away they 'think' God is.

They need to be taught that God is only one step away no matter where they are standing, no matter what sins they have committed. That any man (or woman) turn toward Him he is there, waiting, full of grace and mercy, desiring to shower it upon them.

Good point re: using terms as absolutes that are not absolutes. Amazing thing is that when you explain this to them, most, Not all, will double down and continue the accusations.

Brett said...

What of the churches that are accepting of gays? I'm willing to come to an agreement that I won't ask your pastor to perform a LGBT wedding, on the condition that you don't prevent me from performing a ceremony for a devoted couple in love.