More on that “healthy” “gay” lifestyle…the one that our schools are promoting to our children…

Excerpted from Why Are So Many Mid-Life Gay Men Getting HIV?, by Spencer Cox and Bruce Kellerhouse, PhD, published Mar 15, 2007, by the pro-homosexuality Gay City News:

New data released by the city’s department of health show that the highest rates of new HIV infections are among gay men 35 to 49 years old. These findings are alarming and, to some, perplexing.

Why are so many mid-life gay men who were able to avoid HIV infection for so long now taking risks that are exposing them to the disease?

We believe that one common thread runs through most of these men’s life histories – they came out and/or lived during the death-saturated culture of the 1980s and early to mid-1990s.

Mid-life gay men have lived most of their adult lives during the worst of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, experiencing the loss of partners, friends, and people in their community…

By 1988, gay men had already on average lost six lovers, friends, and/or family members…

Many health problems that are now common among gay men are made worse by loneliness and lack of social opportunities…

Furthermore, gay men have high levels of depression and anxiety disorders, another characteristic of people who have survived trauma. Studies estimate that gay men have about twice the levels of depression than are found in Americans generally. Depression is strongly linked to high-risk behavior, including drug use, alcoholism, and risky sex.

The methamphetamine epidemic that has swept through urban gay communities also contributes to high levels of new HIV infections. A recent study from the Los Angeles Gay & Lesbian Center, which offers HIV testing, found that one in three new HIV-positive tests was associated with meth use. About one in 10 gay men in New York City report recent meth use.

In some ways, gay men in mid-life are at the center of a “perfect storm,” in which multiple problems converge to create a very high-risk environment…

Continue reading in Gay City News…

By Sonja Dalton

On The View, during a debate over the 2008 presidential election, the Iraq war, and the Patriot Act, Rosie O’Donnell lashed out at Elisabeth Hasselbeck, calling her “young and wrong.” When Elisabeth, 30, objected to Rosie’s “ageism,” Rosie defended herself by saying (emphasis added):

“I know, but it’s the way that I’m able to be on this live broadcast
and love and support you
in spite of the fact that I disagree so abhorrently
with most of the things you believe,
so it is what I tell myself in order to not get into the RAGE I feel
at at some of the IGNORANT comments,
so that’s what I have to do!”
— Rosie O’Donnell on The View, Feb 28, 2007
(see the clip on ABC’s website: select “Hot Topics, War on Iraq Part 2”)

Two questions:

• If Rosie wants us to demonstrate “tolerance” (which in homosexual activist speak really means “approval of”) toward her, her homosexual “partner,” the exposure of their children to their lesbian lifestyle, and her radical political views, then why can’t she simply listen to Elisabeth Hasselbecks conservative viewpoint without feeling and expressing RAGE?

• What if this discussion had been the other way around? What if Elisabeth Hasselbeck had lashed out at Rosie O’Donnell and said “Sometimes I can barely contain the RAGE I feel at your IGNORANT comments?” Somehow, I suspect Elisabeth would either be issuing a public apology and going to “homophobia” therapy or else watching her media career go up in flames. But neither Barbara Walters or ABC insisted on a public apology from Rosie. Why is okay for Rosie O’Donnell to talk to her co-workers like this?

Her blog poetry makes obvious that Rosie O’Donnell feels badly about her lack of self-control — and that she needs Jesus Christ to heal her heart and transform her life. Keep her in loving prayer.

The deconstruction of the biblical God and biblical sexuality as a philosophical and ideological program is already deeply embedded in our collective unconscious. Some powerful leaders see the future as the brave new global world of sexual and spiritual pluralism, where liberty of self-expression in these areas is the essence of human progress. One could even imagine a society of pagan religious syncretism where bi-sexuality and homosexual androgyny would be the spiritual and social ideal, the sexuality of choice for those in power, while heterosexuality would be tolerated, considered inferior, and strictly controlled — for it has happened before. — Dr. Peter R. Jones

This is a long, but scholarly and informative, article that we encourage you to read in its entirety.

——————————

Excerpted from Androgyny: The Pagan Sexual Ideal, by Dr. Peter R. Jones, published Jan 2000 by Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society:

1 Introduction

Like the ancient pagan Sodomites pounding on the door of Lot’s house millennia ago, the modern gay movement is gathering at the doors of our churches, our academies and our once traditionally “Christian” culture, demanding entrance and full recognition. Notable scholar, David A. J. Clines, professor of Old Testament at Sheffield University, for one, appears ready to lay down the welcome mat. He wrote in 1998: “…[though] queer theory has yet to show its face at the SBL [Society of Biblical Literature], gayness is challenging…all that we hold dear. When we begin to redraw the alterity map, the boundaries between same and different…we find ourselves having to think through everything, and not just sexuality, from scratch.” Clines, who not long ago was known for his conservative theological position, illustrates how far acceptance of the gay movement has come in recent years, even among those from strongly biblical backgrounds.

This movement has come a long way fast. It will not go away soon, I believe, because it is so intimately tied to deep changes in modern society, in particular, those associated philosophical Postmodernism. Because in the Postmodern hermeneutic all meaning is socially generated, queer commentary has little methodological difficulty finding a place in the contemporary religious and theological debate. In cooperation with feminist biblical interpretation, which has “destabilized normative heterosexuality” by alleging “sexist” bias, queer readings merely seek to take one more step in the hermeneutics of suspicion and expose the “heterosexist bias” of the Bible and Bible interpreters. Identifying exegesis as an exercise in social power, queer theorists reject the oppressive narrowness of the Bible’s male/female binary vision, and boldly generate textual meaning on the basis of the “inner erotic power” of the gay interpreter. What could be more Postmodern? Employing such a widely accepted methodology, and with “straight” Bible scholars now ready “to redraw the alterity map,” gay theology appears to have a bright future everywhere.

The theoretical progress is mirrored in popular society where resistance to the gay life-style is more and more impugned as anti-democratic and un-American. But the urgency of the situation for Bible-believing scholars is not merely the pressing need for a scholarly ethical response to an unfortunate moral aberration. The contemporary appearance of a homosexual movement says something about the particular times in which we live, granted both that pagan spirituality is enjoying a popular revival, and that throughout the Bible, Sodom and Gomorrah have always served as the symbol for endtime pagan idolatry, ultimate moral disintegration and eschatological divine judgment. The subject, in its spiritual, religious and even eschatological dimensions, needs to be treated and debated among us, not simply as an unfortunate social deviation or ephemeral social fad, but as a cutting-edge component of a rising, all-encompassing, religious world view that is diametrically opposed to the world view of Christian theism.

One fruitful way to approach this pressing issue is to consider the religious roots of homosexuality. The recent radical changes in our society, include, simultaneously, both the liberation of sex and the rediscovery of pagan mystical spirituality. Is such a pairing pure coincidence or is it the result of a necessary organic relationship? Has there always existed an ineluctable connection between pagan religion and pagan sex? For instance, while radical pagan feminists speak of the need of a “change of [religious] consciousness,” such spiritual transformation is always proposed by way of a radical recalibration of our perceptions of sexuality. In other words, sexuality appears central not peripheral to the spiritual quest. This, I believe, will become more and more evident in the homosexual movement, namely, that this particular sexual life style will be the promoter of a particular kind of religion. Thus, while sexual liberation in its popular, successful, government-financed versions, strategically associates itself with “civil rights,” with pro-choice civic values and with politically-correct tolerance, often studiously avoiding any obvious religious dimension, its ultimate legitimization [since all human beings are religious] proceeds from the age-old dogmas of paganism, which, unlike their modern equivalent, never tried to hide behind a thin veil of temple/state separation. If everything is indeed political, as the radicals often proclaim, everything is also spiritual, and thus the spiritual is also sexual. Charles Pickstone, a pagan believer in Anglican orders, affirms this in his recent book The Divinity of Sex: “…sex is the spirituality that reveals the sacramental richness of matter.”

The thesis of this paper is that to understand the contemporary sexual revolution, we need to see the “new sexuality,” [particularly in this paper in its homosexual expression], as an integral expression of age-old religious paganism. In our response, we cannot follow Lot, who would have sacrificed his daughters to placate the aggressors. Nor can we claim personal moral superiority. We must always hear, in the clamor for acceptance and recognition, the cry of divine image-bearers, however marred and broken. However, we must not shrink back from seeking to do justice to the whole Christian, biblical dimension of the problem. In a time of moral confusion and politically correct intimidating “tolerance,” we owe such clarity to our culture, to our sons and daughters, and to God, Creator and Redeemer, for whom all things exist.

The following was written about “male to female” “transgendered” teenagers and predicts a heart-breaking future for the children who are encouraged (as they often are by homosexual activists in our public schools) to pursue gender confusion…

Excerpted from Book Review – Transparent: Love, Family and Living the T With Transgender Teenagers by Cris Beam, by Damian Penny, published Mar 8, 2007, by Blog Critics Magazine:

…Needless to say, they don’t have it easy – largely rejected by their families, the girls (as Beam, and most transgender advocates, would insist on calling them) bounce between group homes, roommates, short-term romantic relationships and — all too often — prostitution, drugs and prison. Some are able to procure female hormones or even cosmetic surgery to feminize their appearance, but others attend “pumping parties” where silicone (often, industrial-grade silicone) is injected into their bodies. One of her young friends, Domineque, ends up in a male prison, and ultimately winds up in a special unit with informers and sexual offenders – partly for her own protection, and partly because no one knows exactly what to do with her.

Beam [the lesbian author] and her girlfriend become especially close to Christina, a former gang member (still sporting her tattoo, which leads to some extremely awkward and dangerous moments) who rollercoasters between meaningful employment and the squalor of prostitution and drugs. She lives off and on with her mother, who remains deeply uncomfortable with what her son (born Eduardo) has done with his life and body.

Continue reading at Blog Critics Magazine…

From ‘Gay’ Group Sponsors Breast-Removal Workshop, published Feb 16, 2002, by WorldNet Daily:

The nation’s largest homosexual lobby group is sponsoring a conference this weekend for “female-to-male” “transgenders” that will include sessions on “chest surgery” for young women who want to have their breasts removed in their quest to become “transmen.”

The Human Rights Campaign has signed on as an official sponsor of the “True Spirit Conference,” which is scheduled to be held at a hotel in the nation’s capital Feb. 15-18. In a TV talk show debate Wednesday, HRC spokesman Wayne Besen said he was “proud” of his group sponsoring the event and defended the “chest surgery” sessions for women seeking to remove their breasts.

Besen made his comments on the Fox News Channel’s debate show “Hannity & Colmes” after being challenged about HRC’s role in the transsexual event by Peter LaBarbera, senior policy analyst for the Culture & Family Institute of Concerned Women for America, who was also a guest on the show.

On the Fox program, LaBarbera asked Besen, “There’s actually a doctor coming from New York who is talking about ‘breast reconstruction’ – chopping off the breasts of these girls because they want to become men. We think that’s dangerous. How can you justify teaching that as normal in the schools?”

Besen replied, “First of all, we’re very proud of supporting this type of conference. As Peter said, there are doctors and medical professionals there to deal with this particular issue. He ought to get educated on it.”

Sadistic sex, polygamy workshops

The True Spirit conference also includes a panel on “How to Do SM [sadomasochism]” and one devoted to “Polyamory,” an activist term for multiple-partner sexual unions (“Polyamory can work, if you do it right, we promise!” says the True Spirit website.) In addition, the program contains sessions devoted to sexual tips for “transgenders.”

Watch this clip (posted at MLive/Jackson City Patriot) of John Nemecek and his wife explaining his experience with “Gender Identity Disorder” — and then read Gary Glenn’s Biblical response below.

From John to Julie
Spring Arbor University prof John Nemecek decides
to be true to his inner woman.

——————————

From Good and Noble Intolerance, by Gary Glenn of AFA Michigan, submitted Mar 7, 2007, to Jackson City Patriot:

In Sunday’s editorial regarding Spring Arbor’s praiseworthy refusal to legitimize and enable the obvious mental and emotional illness of a male college professor who thinks he’s a woman, the Citizen-Patriot commented,

“Individual reactions may incline toward the good and noble, or the critical and intolerant.”

If your first concern is protecting the welfare of teenage college students, the only good and noble reaction is to be firmly critical of the bizarre political agenda embodied by Mr. Nemecek’s demands and immovably intolerant of the threat that harmful agenda poses to young people.

Mr. Nemecek’s DNA is that of a male. Hormone treatment or even surgical self-mutilation will not change that immutable biological fact.

One obviously disturbed individual’s delusions to the contrary, and their effects on him and his family, may warrant our sympathy and prayers, but certainly not our complicity in socially or legally enabling and legitimizing such delusions. If homosexual and transgender political activists have their way, it certainly will not end with Mr. Nemecek’s demand to wear a dress and makeup on campus.

Openly homosexual Congressman Barney Frank, D-Mass., explained why he initially refused, until being attacked by transgender activists himself, to include in his federal “gay rights” legislation the creation of a new federally protected class based on so-called “gender identity”:

“There are workplace situations — communal showers, for example — when the demands of the transgender community fly in the face of conventional norms and therefore would not pass in any Congress,” Frank said. “I’ve talked with transgender activists, and what they want, and what we will be forced to defend, is for people with penises who identify as women to be able to shower with other women.” (Paragraph 102, page 25)

By Sonja Dalton

Lesbian blogger Pam Spaulding published a post on Mar 3, 2007, entitled Intimidation Tactics In the Name of Religion Will Not Stop Change. In it, she accuses Christians of inciting violence against homosexuals — for example,

• Bil Browning, head of Indiana Action Network and Bilerico blogger, claims that, following his coverage of a protest in Indiana over SJR-7, he received threatening phone calls and that the window of his car was smashed.
• 72-year-old Andrew Anthos of Detroit was taunted and viciously beated with a metal pipe, leaving him paralyzed and in a coma for ten days until he finally died. A sketch of the suspect has been released, but no arrests have been made at this point.
• A 19-year-old Hoboken High School student, Andy Rivera, has been charged (and a second person is sought) in the brutal beating of a 21-year-old man, allegedly for wearing pink pants.

Ms. Spaulding, a Duke employee whose blog has been lauded by the university (which has historic ties to the United Methodist church), says:

“This behavior occurs because many fundies actually justify explain violence against gays and lesbians as God’s wrath being visited upon them. It’s about controlling the behavior of people who are different, who may or may not share their worldview, or else, dag nab it, ‘God’ is going to work in his mysterious ways by inspiring someone to take a pipe to beat a 72-year-old gay man to death or beat up a gay man for wearing pink pants, for instance.”

Though none of the perpetrators have claimed to be Christians nor to have acted on God’s behalf (some are not yet identified), Ms. Spaulding blames these heinous crimes on “fundie” (fundamentalist) Christians — and she is not the only activist to make such claims.

On Feb 24, 2007, Matt Foreman, Executive Director of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force (which takes in over $30 million/year), issued the following statement blaming Christians:

“The hatred and loathing that led to the vicious murder of Andrew Anthos only because he was gay is not innate. Instead it is being taught every day by leaders of the so-called Christian right and their political allies. They disguise their bigotry as ‘deeply-held religious beliefs.’ They cloak themselves in ‘family values.’

“For years, Michigan has been subjected to the homophobic rants of Gary Glenn of the American Family Association of Michigan, while so many otherwise good and decent people have been silent. Just two years ago, the state endured an ugly campaign, led by Cardinal Adam Maida, to ‘protect marriage’ by writing anti-gay discrimination into its constitution. Based on that amendment, a three-judge panel of Michigan’s court of appeals voted last month to terminate medical insurance coverage for families of LGBT government workers throughout the state.

“It is appalling hypocrisy for these forces to pretend that their venomous words and organizing have no connection to the plague of hate violence against gay people, including the murder of Mr. Anthos…”

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:

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

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.

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!