Activists

Responding to a “Trans” Activist: Unfamiliar With Scriptural Authority? Open a Bible

Saturday, March 3rd, 2007

By Sonja Dalton

A gender confusion activist responds to the firing of a “transgendered” faculty member — a male now living/dressing as a woman — by a private Christian university:

“We are unfamiliar with any scriptural authority
that addresses changing genders.”

danny-baker.gif

— Danny Baker of “transgender” advocate group GenderPAC,
as quoted in US University Fires Transgender Professor,
published Mar 3, 2007, in GayNZ

Dr. Albert Mohler is quoted in Gender Issues at the Heart of Culture War (published Nov 23, 2004, by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood) as saying:

“The issue of gender, in my estimation, is at the very center of the target of our secular age and postmodern world,” Mohler said. “It is also at the very center of the target of where we see theological accommodation is taking us, not only in the body of divinity, but also in the complex of the comprehensive truthfulness of God’s Word. What we are looking at here is an assault upon God’s glory.

So, Danny Baker, we offer you a few examples of Scriptural authority that address “changing genders” and we pray that you will consider them soberly:

So God created man in His own image,
in the image of God He created him;
male and female He created them.

Genesis 1:27

When God created man, He made him in the likeness of God.
He created them male and female and blessed them.
And when they were created, He called them “man.”

Genesis 5:1-2

The Bible describes a strict gender binary — only two sexes, male and female. God did not create a “FTM trans-male” and a “MTF trans-female” or a “genderqueer” or a “two-spirit” person. He created man and woman, and that is what He blessed.

A woman shall not wear a man’s garment,
nor shall a man put on a woman’s cloak,
for whoever does these things is
an abomination to the LORD your God
.

Deuteronomy 22:5

Notice that Scripture says whoever — a completely inclusive term that leaves no room for justifying alternate behavior, even despite confused emotions, discomfort or dissatisfaction, or intense desire. This passage teaches that whoever (i.e., anyone, all, no matter who) cross-dresses, whoever mutilates their natural sexual organs in order to emulate the opposite sex, is an abomination to the LORD your God — not to “trans-phobic, hateful, judgmental Christians,” but to Jehovah God who created them.

After all, Christians are merely repentant sinners, formerly alienated, enemies of God ourselves, so how could we as redeemed sinners rightly look at another sinner as an abomination to us? No, we as Christians look with compassion, we warn of God’s impending final judgment, and we urgently invite all to share in the mercy which we ourselves so desperately need and for which we are so grateful: Come and see how Jesus Christ can transform your mind and your life!

In Honor of GLSEN’s “No Name Calling” Week

Thursday, January 25th, 2007

A quote from GLSEN’s founder and executive director Kevin Jennings — the same GLSEN which designated this week (Jan 22-26, 2007) as No Name Calling Week, an opportunity for homosexual activists to influence your children.

TAKE ACTION — Make your school administrators aware of the origins of No Name Calling Week and of Kevin Jennings’ comments which reveal his character and (in)sincerity about tolerance/diversity…and then demand that GLSEN be refused access to students in your community.

Excerpted from When Silence Would Have Been Golden, by Peter LaBarbera, published April 10, 2006, by Concerned Women for America:

GLSEN’S JENNINGS: !&%#! THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT!
Addressing a church audience on March 20, 2000 in New York City — just days before “Fistgate” — GLSEN Executive Director Kevin Jennings offered a stinging (and quite intolerant) assessment of how to deal with religious conservatives:

Twenty percent of people are hard-core fair-minded [pro-homosexual] people. Twenty percent are hard-core [anti-homosexual] bigots. We need to ignore the hard-core bigots, get more of the hard-core fair-minded people to speak up, and we’ll pull that 60 percent [of people in the middle] … over to our side. That’s really what I think our strategy has to be. We have to quit being afraid of the religious right. We also have to quit — … I’m trying to find a way to say this. I’m trying not to say, ‘[F—] ’em!’ which is what I want to say, because I don’t care what they think! [audience laughter] Drop dead!9

It should be noted that GLSEN and Jennings make heavy use of the words “respect” and “tolerance” in their public rhetoric and in descriptions of their programs.10

Continue reading at CWA…

NEA’s Anti-Bullying Statement Promotes Approval of Homosexuality

Tuesday, January 9th, 2007
nea-diversekids2.jpg

Excerpted from NEA Releases Controversial Statement on Website, published Jan 3, 2006, by Family News in Focus:

A ‘school safety’ link for the National Education Association says “a great public school is a fundamental right of every child, free from intimidation and harassment, and safe for all students, including those who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered.” Linda Harvey with Mission America says the site uncovers an agenda.

“If anyone ever had a doubt before that there is a deliberate and well-funded and highly influential gay agenda in schools, then this should convince them that there is indeed that going on.”

She says the NEA is essentially saying in order to have safe schools we need to approve of homosexuality.

“That’s their recommendation, and it’s a false one; it’s a misleading one and one that is very likely to endanger millions of students.”

Finn Laursen with the Christian Educators Association agrees with the anti-bullying message, but says the NEA is treading into unsafe waters with its pro-gay, safe-school message.

“As parents and educators we ought to say, ‘No, we won’t tolerate harassment or bullying. But we shouldn’t be promoting something to our children that we know has major medical, psychological implications and as a Christian, we believe is sin.”

Laursen says the NEA can promote safe schools without promoting a political agenda.

Homosexual “Marriage” Will Divest the Institution of Its “Sexist Trappings”

Wednesday, January 3rd, 2007

“[E]nlarging the concept to embrace same-sex couples
would necessarily transform it into something new….

Extending the right to marry to gay people
— that is, abolishing the traditional gender requirements of marriage —
can be one of the means, perhaps the principal one,
through which the institution divests itself
of the sexist trappings of the past.”

stoddard.jpg

— Homosexual activist Tom Stoddard of Lambda Legal

quoted in Roberta Achtenberg, et al,
Approaching 2000: Meeting the Challenges to San Francisco’s Families
,
The Final Report of the Mayor’s Task Force on Family Policy,
City and County of San Francisco, published June 13, 1990 (page 1)

(cited by Robert Knight at Talking Points on Marriage)

Homosexual “Marriage” Will “Wholly Transform” the Family

Thursday, December 28th, 2006

“It is also a chance
to wholly transform the definition of family
in American culture.

It is the final tool with which to dismantle all sodomy statutes,
get education about homosexuality and AIDS into public schools,
and, in short, usher in a sea change in how society views and treats us.”

signorile.jpg

— Michelangelo Signorile in I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do,
published May 1996 by OUT magazine (page 30)
(cited by Robert Knight at Talking Points on Marriage)

Homosexual Activists’ Goal: “Radical Reordering” of Societal Reality

Thursday, December 28th, 2006

“Being queer is more than setting up house,
sleeping with a person of the same gender,
and seeking state approval for doing so…

“Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family,
and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society…

“As a lesbian, I am fundamentally different from non-lesbian women…

“In arguing for the right to legal marriage,
lesbians and gay men would be forced to claim
that we are just like heterosexual couples,
have the same goals and purposes,
and vow to structure our lives similarly…

“We must keep our eyes on the goals
of providing true alternatives to marriage and
of radically reordering society’s view of reality.”

paula.jpg

— Lesbian activist Paula Ettelbrick
in her essay Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?,
Lesbians, Gay Men and the Law (pages 401-405),
edited by William Rubenstein,
published in 1993 by The New Press (New York)
(cited by Robert Knight at Talking Points on Marriage)

Why We Need ‘Americans For Truth’

Thursday, December 28th, 2006

We trust that you have enjoyed a blessed Christmas this year. We know that your year-end giving opportunities are plentiful, but please consider a tax-deductible gift to Americans For Truth (AFTAH) to assist us in our mission of helping Americans confront the homosexual and transsexual lobbies — which are serious about converting the next generation to their harmful agenda.

Click HERE to give safely online or mail your check to: Americans For Truth, P.O. Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567. Or click HERE to become a regular monthly “Truth Team” giver.

To appreciate why AFTAH’s work is so important, consider how one radical gender activist responded to our heart-warming article last week about an EX-transgender young man.

Recall the wonderful story we shared about an Illinois high school student “John” who overcame adolescent “transgender” confusion after becoming a born-again Christian. In response, two websites – one “gay” and one “lesbian” — published a reply from a terribly confused man who goes by the name Autumn Sandeen (pictured below).

autumn-sandeen.jpg

Transvestite Autumn Sandeen, as interviewed by the pro-homosexuality
newspaper, San Francisco Bay Times (July 6, 2006):

“My penis doesn’t bother me as a body part…[but] as a sexual organ I’m very uncomfortable with it.
I’m going to be an op, I’m a pre-op I guess, but at the same time
I’m not really sweating how long it takes me to get there.
But at the same time love is out of the question for me.
Well, not out of the question but I feel uncomfortable with relationship stuff.
I’ve literally only had one partner in my entire life and I’m just not interested in sex.
If I could have a relationship with someone that was just as intimate
as a sexual relationship—but without sex—I would love that.”

In his response to AFTAH, Mr. Sandeen rejects wrote of his own frequent “conversions”:

“I’ve gone from fundamentalist Christian
to agnostic
to non-fundamentalist Christian,
while also in my life going from identifying as a boy,
to identifying a transsexual teen,
to identifying as a cross-dressing teen,
to identifying as an ex-transvestite,
to realizing I needed to explore my gender with a professional therapist,
to now identifying and living as a transgender/transsexual-identified woman.”

Yet he concludes by denying that change (overcoming homosexuality or gender confusion) is possible.

You don’t need an academic degree to see the irony of this man — and he is still a man — being troubled at our report of a young man overcoming the pull of “transgender” deviance in his life. We live in a world in which “the experts,” often with impressive sounding credentials, dismiss healthy change yet put their stamp of approval on homosexual and gender-confused identities like that above. Science has been politicized and is being used to guide young people into harmful and unnatural behaviors.

To most Americans, religious or not, leaving homosexuality or gender confusion behind is a good thing. To homosexual and gender-bending activists, any ex-“gay” testimony threatens their central propaganda myth that some people are intrinsically (born) “gay,” bisexual or “transgender.” Some homosexual activists like Wayne Besen and the fellows at “Ex-Gay Watch” have dedicated themselves to discrediting ex-“gay” change by hyping the cases of people who have returned back to homosexual behavior. (Yes, change is difficult, but why focus exclusively on failed attempts? Imagine if someone tried to “prove” that overcoming drug addiction was impossible by popularizing only those cases of addicts who tried to go clean but fell back into their drug-abusing lifestyle.)

As you read on, give thanks that high school student “John” was transformed by Jesus Christ (rather than by modern secular psychiatrists) and will not have to suffer the severe emotional confusion and deep loneliness inherent to “transgender” delusion. “John” is truly free now — to experience gratitude for his body, to fall in love with a woman, to enjoy sex in marriage, to accept the natural blessing of children and grandchildren, to worship and serve his God, to know joy.

Please support groups like Americans For Truth that cut through the fog of the homosexual lobby’s lies and tell young people, especially, that nobody has to be “gay.” Homosexuality and gender confusion are not permanent, predestined “identities” — as evinced by the thousands of men and women who have overcome homosexuality and related deviancies in their lives.

Also offer up a prayer for Mr. Sandeen’s genuine ‘trans’-formation as well, for, as the Christmas story teaches, nothing is impossible with God. (Click HERE for a great ex-“gay” resource.) It’s certainly not too late for Mr. Sandeen to experience the only “conversion” that counts. God bless. — Peter LaBarbera

———————————

The following commentary was carried on two homosexual activist blogs, Ex-Gay Watch and Pam’s House Blend, in response to our story on a high school student who overcame gender confusion through Jesus Christ:

Statements of Conversion: Student ‘Trans’-formed by Christ

Here on the Ex-Gay Watch I know I frequently point out logical fallacies in logical (or perhaps better said illogical) arguments, and my peers here do the same thing. My peers and I have noted ex-gay and ex-gay affirming organizations — such as NARTH and Exodus International — often use Statements Of Conversion to make their points, vice referencing statistically sound research or widely recognized subject matter experts.

Read the rest of this article »

Goal of Homosexual “Marriage”: To “Radically Alter an Archaic Institution”

Thursday, December 21st, 2006

“A middle ground might be to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits
and then, once granted,
redefine the institution of marriage completely,
to demand the right to marry
not as a way of adhering to society’s moral codes
but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution.”

signorile.jpg

— Homosexual Michelangelo Signorile, Bridal Wave,
published December/January 1994 by OUT Magazine (page 161)
(cited by Robert Knight at Talking Points on Marriage)


Support Americans for Truth about Homosexuality

Americans For Truth
P.O. Box 340743
Columbus, OH 43234

Peter's Lifesite News Articles'

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Peter's Lifesite News Articles'


Americans for Truth Radio Hour

Americans for Truth Academy

Peter's Lifesite News Articles'