Rational Answers To Homosexual Propaganda

 

211 WHITCOMB ROAD

POST OFFICE BOX 10357

SWANZEY, NEW HAMPSHIRE 03446

 

When dealing with this issue we must understand that it is an emotional one. People who practice homosexual behavior see it as their "right" to be as they say; "who they were born to be".

Conservatives see it as a behavior that should not be given special rights or encouraged in any way. In this debate there is some very interesting arguments (I said interesting, not logical). Let's examine the homosexual arguments;

Argument One - Homosexuals contend that they are born homosexual and therefore should be given the same consideration as heterosexuals.

This position is a ruse. First there is no conclusive evidence that people are born homosexual, however for the sake of this discussion let's say that is true.

The argument then would be that every person who is born with any attraction, disposition, or behavioral desire must have those attractions, dispositions, and behaviors accepted by society.

Is it automatic that any propensity that a person has should be celebrated? Modern medical science tells us that many people are born with a propensity toward alcoholism. What if a person who is an alcoholic was to say that due to the fact that they were "born" with a propensity to become addicted to alcohol, they should have the same "rights to drive" as one who is not drunk?

Should we run up to them, give them a fifth of scotch, and have a party? I am simply making a point about what propensities people may be born with and whether it makes sense to simply argue that how people are born automatically means the given propensity must be supported (I am not making any comparison between alcoholism and homosexuality).

In fact, there are many criminals who have testified that they have always been violent. Are we to believe that since they were "born that way" we should embrace the "violent community." It is illogical to automatically assume that just because a person may be born with a certain leaning that society should embrace it.

The Bible teaches that we are all born with certain sinful leanings. They are called iniquity. That's why Jesus paid the price for our sin, and came to free us from sin's power.

You may be saying that the things I mentioned are hurtful and therefore they should not be used in comparison to homosexuality. Many would say that homosexuality is hurtful to no one. Well the facts speak volumes to the contrary.

Physically, the practices of homosexuals have been shown to drastically increase the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. That is why they are referred to as a "high risk group" by every government and medical study and organization. It should also be clear to all people of common sense that society is hurt when children are indoctrinated with their propaganda.

Argument Two - Homosexuals say that this is a civil rights issue and therefore it is like discrimination against a race or ethnic group.

This is a stretch to say the least. Let's talk about what a race or ethnic group is. A race or ethnic group is made up of a large group of people who have married over a long period of time. Through procreation certain genetic traits develop. This is due to dominant genes.

As a group of people they live together in a society, the society develops an ethos that is specific to that group. Without reproduction you have neither a race nor ethnic group. It is quite literally impossible to compare homosexuals to a race since by definition homosexuals do not reproduce.

If we for discussion's sake took 1000 heterosexual men and women from various places and put them on an island with no outside contact, and came back 500 years later, they would be an ethnic group with certain physical genetic characteristics.

If however we took 1000 homosexuals and placed them on an island with no outside contact, and came back 500 years later, not only would there not be an ethnic group, there would be no one alive since again they by definition do not reproduce.

The idea that this is a civil rights issue based of homosexuals being some sort of minority group akin to a race defies logic. Reproduction is necessary for there to be a race.

Argument Three - Homosexuals say that all they are asking for is equal protection under the law concerning the right to marry since all people should have the right to marry whoever they choose and be equally protected under the law..

This is another interesting twist. Since marriage is defined as a man and woman and has been for all of human history, it is a bit absurd to say that this is an equal protection issue. The same argument could be made for any combination of marriage.

Using their logic, it would be a lack of equal protection under the law to forbid brother and sister, a bisexual with a man and woman, a group of 100 people, fathers and daughters, and any other combination from getting married.

If the only criteria is that all people should have an equal right to marry whoever they want, then you could not forbid any combination or number. They would say that they are not advocating such things. I remind you that I am simply looking at their illogical arguments.

Argument Five - Homosexuals say that it is no one's business and does not affect anyone else if society allows for homosexual marriage.

All one has to do is see the political correctness that is forcing its way into society to understand how absurd this claim is. The fact is that a radical change in society like this forces public institutions to accept this behavior.

Public schools will have to accept it as matter of law and Christians who's children are in public schools will be indoctrinated in pro homosexual propaganda. Those who hold any view contrary to the propaganda will be ostracized and called bigots.

Their religious convictions will be attacked and their parents will be spoken of in the same terms as racists.

Argument six - Homosexuals say that Jesus never said anything about homosexuality so therefore he was not against it.

The reasoning on this one escapes anyone who has the ability to think. Are we to believe that Jesus was in favor of everything he did not speak about?

Jesus never said it was wrong to marry your dog. Does that mean He is in favor of that? Jesus never said anything about a man beating his wife and locking her in the closet. Does that mean He is in favor of that? Where in the logic? Here is the fact, Jesus did mention marriage clearly in the following passage;

Mark 10:6 - 9 "But from the beginning of creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh; so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder."

Jesus makes it abundantly clear here in the context of teaching on God's will for marriage that God created from the beginning male and female for marriage. To use the Scripture to come to any other conclusion is simply twisting it for their own agenda.

The real agenda here is to force all of society to accept homosexuality. Once you begin to hold behavior in the same sense that you hold race, you are headed down a slope of no return in which every abhorrent behavior must be accepted.

I have compassion for all people who struggle with all types of sin. We are all in need of the Savior because as the Scripture says; Romans 3:23 "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God."

No one can save himself. Homosexual sin is like any other behavior problem. The person should be treated with compassion, and at the same time the truth should be told. Here is the truth;

Romans 1:24 -27 "Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lust of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the created thing rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up to vile affections: for ever their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which is meet."

These are the main arguments that are used to further the homosexual agenda. As you can see, they are illogical. I hope this article helps you to articulate the absurdity of the pro homosexual marriage arguments. It is imperative that we confront these false positions with the truth.                                       U