This week you and your kids are going to hear a lot about “World AIDS Day,” observed on December 1.

But most of the official coverage will avoid key facts about AIDS. It’s particularly troubling when our children miss the most important news about AIDS, and how this epidemic could be effectively fought.

We know how to do this. It’s just that the secular gatekeepers of information are much more interested in acceptance of homosexuality and promiscuous “safe sex” ideas.

Do we really want to reduce the suffering of millions of people? Or do we just want to pose for the cameras? We now have famous preachers like the sadly compromised Rick Warren, who seems to have fallen in love with non-Christian “christians.” ….

How sad that Scripture must now be kept in the closet, while deviant sin comes out.

Every parent, therefore, in order to counter the PC school lessons, the false church teachings, and the contrived compassion of youth media like MTV and others, needs to share a few simple facts with any student in their household under the age of 18:

1. The major cause of HIV and AIDS in the U.S. has been and remains male homosexual behavior. The next largest transmission category is intravenous drug use, followed by high-risk heterosexual contact. This last group consists of people who have had sex with anyone who falls into the first two groups. If we eliminated homosexual male sex and intravenous drug use, HIV would be reduced by at least three fourths in this country. Both are unnecessary, chosen behaviors. Schools need to make sure this point is absolutely clear in the minds of every student in health education. Click HERE for CDC statistics.

2. Homosexual sex is absolutely forbidden in the strongest terms in the Bible. The only type of marriage endorsed is the union of one man and one woman. Here are the relevant passages:

• Genesis, chapters 18 and 19 (chapter 18 is helpful for a broader context)
• Leviticus 18: 22 and 20: 13
• Deuteronomy 23: 17
• 1 Kings 15:12
• Matthew 19:3-9
• Romans 1: 18-32
• 1 Corinthians 6:9-11
• 1 Thessalonians 4: 3-8
• 2 Peter 2 (whole chapter)
• Jude 7-8
• Revelation 22:15

Pastors and churches who say accepting “gays and lesbians” is part of “loving your neighbor” or that one can be a proud open homosexual and still be Christian, have seriously distorted the teachings of Christianity. This is deliberate rebellion against God’s word and His created order of male/female genders and marriage. It cannot be emphasized enough that this is an affront to God, and that anyone — I don’t care how famous — who is teaching this, is broadcasting his/her rebellion. Can such a person be a genuine believer, while spreading false teachings and encouraging rebellion
in others?

And then, to lead people into a behavior that may infect them for life with an often fatal disease — it’s heartless, not compassionate.

3. In Africa, one of the leading causes of AIDS is high risk heterosexual sex. Several countries, Uganda and Kenya, have seen considerable success in reducing HIV by teaching their youth to practice abstinence until marriage. Uganda’s program reduced HIV rates from 15 % to under 7%. However, many of the global AIDS programs are highly critical of Uganda’s success. Why?

This is a good question. Why are the U.N. and other AIDS programs not following the Uganda model? The reason goes to the heart of many global philosophies that are blatantly anti-Christian. One pillar of international AIDS efforts is that non-married sexual practices, including homosexuality, must be accepted, and made somehow “safer” using condoms. Not only has this method failed to reduce AIDS, it’s totally an affront to Christians, and no Christian, especially no pastor, should sign on to such programs.

Attacking AIDS through wide distribution of condoms is a complete failure. Do we want to keep promoting sex, or do we want to save lives? Or do some influential people have financial ties to the condom and contraceptivemanufacturers? Is this an example of corruption and big business at work in exploiting poor Third World people?

These are great questions to ask in a classroom setting. Do a report on Uganda, and make sure you get all the facts by consulting sources other than the U.N. and its agencies.

4. If homosexual sex is a leading cause of HIV in the U.S., doesn’t it make sense to teach people to not engage in these acts? Perhaps “gay” social establishments should close until the HIV rates are severely reduced. And no students should be encouraged to enter homosexuality through “gay” clubs or tolerance lessons.

If we are serious about reducing AIDS — if we really care about people more than certain special viewpoints — we will do the right thing. And as Christians, if we really want to be faithful to our Lord, we must reject these corrupt ideas and try where we can to do something that will really
save lives and bring people to know Him.

“Baptist minister” and author Oliver “Buzz” Thomas suggests in the USA Today article linked below that the church will lose its moral authority if it does not admit that homosexuality is innate and acceptable to God.

Dr. Albert Mohler responds in his Nov 27, 2006, radio program entitled “In the World, But Not of the World: Credibility and the Church.”

Click HERE to listen online

The following is excerpted from When Religion Loses Its Credibility, by Oliver “Buzz” Thomas, published Nov 20, 2006, by USA Today:

Galileo was persecuted for revealing what we now know to be the truth regarding Earth’s place in our solar system. Today, the issue is homosexuality, and the persecution is not of one man but of millions. Will Christian leaders once again be on the wrong side of history?

What if Christian leaders are wrong about homosexuality? I suppose, much as a newspaper maintains its credibility by setting the record straight, church leaders would need to do the same:

Correction: Despite what you might have read, heard or been taught throughout your churchgoing life, homosexuality is, in fact, determined at birth and is not to be condemned by God’s followers.

Based on a few recent headlines, we won’t be seeing that admission anytime soon…

Continue reading in USA Today…

Excerpted from Archbishop Warns of Gay Rights Backlash, by Jonathan Petre, published Nov 29, 2006, by Telegraph:

The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Birmingham, the Most Rev Vincent Nichols, has warned the Government of a serious backlash if it attempts to force through a raft of new homosexual rights laws.

Archbishop Nichols said that the proposed regulations, designed to ensure equal treatment for gays, could mean the end of the Church’s co-operation with the Government in providing a range of welfare services.

Church officials also believe that the its seven adoption agencies could be closed if they were required to place children with gay couples in defiance of Vatican guidelines.

Speaking in St Chad’s cathedral in Birmingham, the Archbishop that the Government “must realise is that it is not possible to seek cooperation with us while at the same time trying to impose upon us conditions which contradict our moral values.”

…The Archbishop, who forced the Government into a humiliating climbdown over faith schools early this month, said the process of secular democracy in Britain was not morally neutral but was “engaged in an intense and at times aggressive reshaping of our moral framework”.

…The proposed regulations could also force Christian marriage preparation and guidance agencies to cater for same sex couples and would not allow parishes, retreat houses, conference centres and hostels to refuse bookings from gay and lesbians.Faith schools could be compelled to teach that homosexuality was the moral equivalent of heterosexual marriage.

…Ann Widdecombe, the former Conservative minister, said that the proposals spelled the “end of freedom of conscience in our country”.

“They create a hierarchy of rights and whenever a homosexual right comes up against any other right the homosexual right prevails,” she said, adding that the Government “seems to have no clue that practising a religion means more than going to church”.

Continue reading in Telegraph…

By Peter LaBarbera

Vice is a monster of so frightful mien,
As to be hated but needs to be seen;
Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,
We first endure, then pity, then embrace.
–Alexander Pope, Essay on Man, Epistle ii

So much for the newfound “moderation” of the Democratic Party. Party chief Howard Dean, fresh from an election season smackdown by “gay” activists for affirming that marriage is indeed between a man and a woman, is once again dutifully pushing their immoral agenda. As the Houston Chronicle and ABC News reported, Dean called for more homosexuals to run as Democratic candidates.

Dean told the crowd of homosexual activists: “We need a careful, narrow, targeted agenda to make it clear what the difference between the Democratic Party and Republican Party is before we go into the next election.”

TAKE ACTION – Let the Democratic Party know you feel about Howard Dean’s promotion of homosexual behavior. Click HERE for the Democratic National Committee’s contact page.

Also, call the White House at 202-456-1414 or click HERE to let President Bush know NOW that you oppose pro-homosexual “Hate Crimes,” ENDA (the Employment Nondiscrimination Act), and repealing the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” ban on open homosexuality in the armed forces — the three top items on the “gay” legislative agenda in the Democratic-led Congress.

And call your U.S. Congressman or Senators to oppose these bills at 202-224-3121.

Let’s think about the implications of Dean’s call for “gay” candidates, using the scholarship of Rob Gagnon, the nation’s premiere authority on the Bible and homosexuality. Gagnon correctly affirms that Biblically speaking, homosexuality is as egregious a sexual sin as incest, adultery and pornography. Perhaps if more people knew about just how dangerous homosexual acts are — cutting short the lives of hundreds of thousands of men from “same-sex sexual diseases” (now there’s a concept you won’t see taught in school health classes) — they might have renewed respect for the Bible’s counsel on this issue.

A Breakpoint Commentary by Chuck Colson, published Nov 21, 2006:

Well, it may finally be time to send for the guys with the white coats to wrap me up and cart me off.

It used to be, in the old days, that the biggest decision new parents had to make was the name of their baby. The one thing they didn’t have to decide was the kid’s sex—that decision had been made for them, all they have to do is take a peek. That would be that.

Well, not any more, at least not in New York City.

You see, under a proposed Board of Health rule, “people born in the city would be able to change the documented sex on their birth certificates.” They would need only to provide “affidavits from a doctor and a mental health professional laying out why their patients should be considered members of the opposite sex.” They would also have to promise that “their proposed change would be permanent.”

The proposed rule isn’t aimed at people who have had “sex-change surgery.” They are already permitted to do this. Instead, it’s directed at people who “had lived in their adopted gender for at least two years . . . ”

Read those words carefully: adopted and especially gender, instead of sex. It is a big hint that there’s some major postmodern mischief at work here. “Sex” is what scientists call “binary”: You either have an XX (that is, female) or an XY (that is, male) chromosome.

But if nature can’t be twisted and shaped to suit our ideological predilections, words, especially in the hands of postmodern vandals, can be. If the goal is to separate “anatomy from what it means to be a man or a woman,” then the use of the word gender is a must.

You see, “transgender” activists can get away with saying that gender is just “socially constructed” and more than “the sum of one’s physical parts” because gender is a word that most people don’t regularly use.

Substituting an obscure word, in this case, gender, for the more common one, sex, is intended to confuse and obscure. It’s the kind of verbal tactic George Orwell, in “Politics and the English Language,” compared to a cuttlefish squirting ink to confuse its predators.

Of course, what makes this squirting necessary is the denial of the obvious: “Living as a woman,” whatever that means, no more makes you a woman than hiding a pot of gold makes you a leprechaun.

These verbal parlor games may wow them in the faculty lounge, but nature is unimpressed. They remind me of the hoax perpetrated by physicist Alan Sokal. He submitted a paper to a leading postmodern journal filled with postmodern gibberish like “physical ‘reality’ . . . is at bottom a social and linguistic construct.”

After the paper was published, he revealed the hoax, that it was all gibberish, adding that those who believe that physics really is a “social construct” should test their beliefs from his twenty-first floor window.

Christians should not be shocked at any of this. Romans 1 tells us that God’s truth is made plain in creation, and to deny this truth—in this case, “male and female created He them”—is to exchange the truth for a lie, which Paul illustrates by an example of men lying with men, in other words, rejecting their God-given gender, which is a challenge to God’s created order. Well, today we have renewed that old lie—that we can create ourselves the way we want, and peeking doesn’t make any difference.

(Additional resources are offered on the Breakpoint site.)

Radical homosexual activists hate biblical marriage, because to achieve its benefits and blessings they must first conform to God’s plan for sexuality…

Excerpted from Why Homosexuals Despise Marriage, by Kevin McCullough, published Oct, 2006, by WorldNet Daily:

…With utter contempt for God and for the voters of their state, the New Jersey seven unanimously said that all who live in the confines of its borders must fundamentally agree to the moral premise that what the Bible terms perversion the voters should call healthy.

But why? What’s the real goal of the activists, the judges and the radicals who seek to subvert a moral worldview?

The answer is simple: No longer satisfied with practicing the unspeakable perverse sexual pleasures that their hearts seek in private bedrooms, they wish to be able to do so in public. They are also suffering from such immense guilt over their sexual behaviors, because they know inherently that the actions they perform are in fact unhealthy, that they will go to any means necessary to try and shut down the voices in their heads that tell them it is wrong.

They wrongfully believe that the guilty voice within them is an echo of a prudish state that seeks to limit their freedoms. They wrongfully believe that the judgment they feel is emanating from “Bible thumpers.” And what they fail to admit is that the voice that condemns them the loudest is never a human voice – but in fact the voice of their own conscience informed by the truth of the God who created them.

There are attributes of marriage that same-sex couples will never achieve.

From Christianity is Counting the Cost and Not Sweating the Small Stuff, by Jan LaRue, published Nov 16, 2006, by Concerned Women for America:

“Episcopal leaders vote to leave,” reads the caption today announcing that “two of Virginia’s most historic Episcopal parishes have voted to split from the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Virginia.” It’s a move that will likely lead to litigation and could cost the congregants of Truro Church in Fairfax (est. 1732) and The Falls Church (est. 1752) millions of dollars in prime real estate. George Washington was a member of the vestry of both churches. [Julia Duin, Washington Times, Nov. 16, 2006, p. 1].

When the Episcopal Church consecrated Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire, an exclamation point was added at the end of the handwriting that had been on the Church wall for many years. Robinson is an open homosexual who left his wife and children for a man.

By the way, if they had consecrated as bishop an unrepentant heterosexual adulterer or unmarried fornicator, the sin would be just as grievous. Sin brings equal opportunity condemnation.

Christianity is all about choices, costs and consequences. The congregants of Truro and The Falls Church reportedly told their leaders that “the theological disconnect between Biblical Christianity and the road the [Episcopal] Church had chosen to walk was so profound, the time had come to separate from the denomination.”

One of the countless characteristics that makes Jesus unique as the greatest leader of all time is that although He came to save all mankind from the condemnation of sin, He never stayed where He wasn’t wanted, and He never kept anyone from leaving. His words had a thinning effect on crowds. “For many are called but few are chosen.” (Matthew 22:14)

In fact, He said that when someone leaves Him, it’s proof that the person isn’t one of His. “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.” (I John 2:19)

Shaking off the dust of an unfriendly town and dodging stones came with Christ’s calling. But He never compromised. Everything He did was consistent with everything He said. He leaves no space between following Him and obeying Him.

“Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20) Christ suffered the agony of the Cross because of His intolerance of sin and love of sinners. We can’t bless and make holy that which God has condemned as sinful.

“But sexual immorality…must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving.” – Ephesians 5:3-4

“Are we sinning yet?” Yes, you are. – Sonja Dalton

Excerpted from Are We Sinning Yet?, published Nov 8, 2006, by Reuters:

The United Church of Canada hopes an ad featuring a can of whipped cream and the question, “How much fun can sex be before it’s a sin?” will fill its pews as Christmas nears…

The C$10.5 million ($9.3 million) campaign targets 30- to 45-year-olds and rotates six images though December issues of Canadian magazines and newspapers as well as Web sites.

One asks, “Does anyone object?” to an image of two plastic toy grooms on a wedding cake…

The United Church of Canada has a declining active membership of about 573,000, although almost 3 million people have some sort of affiliation with the church. Between 1994 and 2004, membership dropped about 20 percent, according to church statistics.

Last month, the church issued a statement defending federal legislation that allows same-sex marriage.

Continue reading at Reuters…