Stop It, You Homos! Don't Make Me Come In There!
Guy Adams decides to redefine "common sense" for the new millenium:
Logic and common sense has all but disappeared in America in some circles. For example, homosexuality is not "gay." There's nothing 'gay' about it. It is a lifestyle of misery, loneliness and extraordinarily high medical risk. All of nature tells us it is wrong. God is not schizophrenic. If you believe in God, you'd agree that it's impossible to believe that God made a mistake. Otherwise He's imperfect, and at the worst, a liar. How can God call homosexuality an abomination and order us not to engage in it and then turn around and create a small group of people who can do nothing but engage in it? If you're an evolutionist, the continuation of the species doctrine proves that Bruce cannot, and should not, mate with Steve. Consider that over thirty years ago America was able to get two spacecraft, each going approximately 17,000 miles per hour, to dock perfectly in space using technologically male and female engineering, yet we can't seem to see that God did not intend male-to-male docking, so to speak. If it doesn't fit, you must quit.
From what I understand, Mr. Adams, it "fits" just fine (CYMBAL CRASH!). The moral high-ground that Adams takes here is awe-inspiring in its hubris. It's breathtaking, this certainty. What pushes it over the line from "just plain offensive" into "bigoted hilarity" is Adams' seeming-solution to the "problem" of homosexuality: "JUST STOP IT!"
Well, gee, thanks Mr. Adams.
But seriously, folks. What worries me about Guy Adams (and the numerous people Guy Adams represents in terms of general thought), is that they've made up their minds about homosexuality without actually considering whether its "natural" or not. They know that its wrong. And no amount of high-falutin', namby-pamby, liberal hoo-ha is gonna convince them otherwise. To wit:
Make no mistake about it; homosexuality and the homosexual agenda goes against all that is decent and moral. It also goes against all that nature teaches us. When is the last time you saw two male songbirds having sex? How about two male grizzly bears? Get the picture?
Well, no, actually. I mean, I get that you're a bigot, but I don't get "the picture."
I suspect this has something to do with the fact that you're wholly, completely wrong?
From National Geographic:
[A]ctually, some same-sex birds do do it. So do beetles, sheep, fruit bats, dolphins, and orangutans. Zoologists are discovering that homosexual and bisexual activity is not unknown within the animal kingdom.
Roy and Silo, two male chinstrap penguins at New York's Central Park Zoo have been inseparable for six years now. They display classic pair-bonding behavior—entwining of necks, mutual preening, flipper flapping, and the rest. They also have sex, while ignoring potential female mates.
Wild birds exhibit similar behavior. There are male ostriches that only court their own gender, and pairs of male flamingos that mate, build nests, and even raise foster chicks.
According to Mr. Adams, these animals are willfully choosing to go against their hard-wired instincts and defying their Creator all at once.

9 Comments:
Give this a look.
I like what LaHaye has to say in the first paragraph, but he and I run into differences as regards the second paragraph.
Homosexuality is no more sinful in my eyes than heterosexuality - as with any lifestyle, it's a question of how you choose to live it.
But what LaHaye says in his first paragraph pretty much sums up my view of religion. Jesus did not judge - what gives us the right to do so?
"Homosexuality is no more sinful in my eyes than heterosexuality - as with any lifestyle, it's a question of how you choose to live it."
Can you expand on this?
I was surprised that LaHaye was so atypical of a lot of his "followers".
And Jesus did in fact judge, he just tended to judge the religious hypocrits.
Sure.
Anti-gay types are fond of invoking the stereotype of gay man as predator/promiscuous-one-night-stander. That's why, according to these folks, gays are more susceptible to "medical problems." It's also another way in which the "morality" of homosexuality is attacked.
But sexual promiscuity isn't limited to homosexual sex.
I see no moral difference between loving hetero or homosexual sex.
How much of hetero-sex is active procreation vs. recreation? Even in a committed, long-term marriage?
What, exactly, makes homosexuality sinful? Besides the "deviance" of anal sex (something that, again, these critics appear to have no vocal problem with in a heterosexual relationship)?
Yeah I never got the whole homosexual=stalker thing either.
I think I understand from a more conservative Chrisitan perspective as to why homosexuality is a sin. It comes back to God's original design intention. Man and woman were meant to be together physically,emotionally, and spiritually by God's design. Anything else in this worldview is a perversion.
It's interesting that the Bible (that I'm aware of) never comes down on polygamy. The only answer to that is where it says that an Elder "must be blameless, the husband of but one wife". Well that and it was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Eve and Jennifer and Paula (a similar argument that is made by anit homosexuals).
I think I understand from a more conservative Chrisitan perspective as to why homosexuality is a sin. It comes back to God's original design intention. Man and woman were meant to be together physically,emotionally, and spiritually by God's design. Anything else in this worldview is a perversion.
But this worldview is inherently flawed, in my opinion (with no offense meant toward you, I hope you know). If we know that homosexuality exists in nature, and we do, then how can homosexuality be sinful? It's in God's original design.
No offense taken.
In the Christian worldview man wasn't the only thing corrupted by the Fall. All of creation suffers as intimated in Romans 8:21.
"because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God"
So disease, death, suffering, sin, was in fact not in God's original design (with a literal or even figurative reading of the Bible). The logic that homosexuality is in nature so therefore okay is a flawed argument. Consider how many otehr things that exist in nature are not emulated by man, in a perfect world. Animals kill each other with impunity even engagin in canabalism. It is a dog eat dog world, but in human society in it's best form we look out for one another and not just because it suits or betters us personally.
Now I hope that you know that I'm not equating homosexuality with cannabalism (though there's a good joke in there somewhere, or perhaps a bad one). I'm just saying that nature is not necessarilly the model that a Christian needs to look to for what's right and wrong.
That's our first cross-posting, Scott.
Let's discuss this, on our main pages. Topic: your last statement. Specifically:
In the Christian worldview man wasn't the only thing corrupted by the Fall. All of creation suffers as intimated in Romans 8:21.
"because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God"
So disease, death, suffering, sin, was in fact not in God's original design (with a literal or even figurative reading of the Bible). The logic that homosexuality is in nature so therefore okay is a flawed argument. Consider how many otehr things that exist in nature are not emulated by man, in a perfect world. Animals kill each other with impunity even engagin in canabalism. It is a dog eat dog world, but in human society in it's best form we look out for one another and not just because it suits or betters us personally.
And here's the question: Why would God intentionally allow a flawed creation?
I expect other questions and interesting stuff to grow out of that in abundance.
Posting it on my board in 3...2...1...
Post a Comment
<< Home