Dr. Albert Mohler: “Gay” Culture and the Riddle of Andrew Sullivan

November 6th, 2006

…The normalization of sin represents

a progressive hardening of the nation’s heart

against the Gospel.

From Gay Culture and the Riddle of Andrew Sullivan, by Dr. Albert Mohler, published Oct 27, 2006:

andrew-sullivan.jpegAndrew Sullivan is a man of ideas. In recent years, Sullivan has emerged as one of the most influential intellectuals in American public life. Furthermore, he has been identified with some of the most controversial issues of our times–a fact that is hardly surprising given his libertarian view of morality, conservative views of politics, Roman Catholic views of Christianity, and the fact that he is a prominent homosexual advocate…

In the October 24, 2005 issue of The New Republic, Sullivan writes about “The End of Gay Culture.” Of course, Sullivan’s perspective on homosexuality and gay culture is deeply rooted in his own homosexuality and his ardent embrace of his own homosexual lifestyle. He is anything but a dispassionate observer…

As he reviews the impact of the HIV crisis, Sullivan points to some patterns that emerged in its aftermath–patterns that would likely be missed by those outside the gay subculture. The emergence of lesbians as leaders of the major gay rights organizations was, Sullivan suggests, largely due to the fact that the gay male leaders were largely dead…

“Gay marriage is not a radical step,” Sullivan insisted…

But, even as Sullivan argued for the acceptance and legalization of same-sex marriage, more radical homosexual theorists were dismissing marriage altogether. As Sullivan explained,

“Marriage of all institutions is to liberationists a form of imprisonment; it reeks of a discourse that has bought and sold property, that has denigrated and subjected women, that has constructed human relationships into a crude and suffocating form. Why on earth should it be supported for homosexuals?”

Sullivan’s 1995 book, and his most recent article, must be read in light of his 1998 testimonial, Love Undetectable: Notes on Friendship, Sex, and Survival. This book was written after Sullivan had been diagnosed as HIV-positive. As he recalled:

“I contracted the disease in full knowledge of how it is transmitted, and without any illusions about how debilitating and terrifying a diagnosis it could be. I have witnessed first-hand a man dying of AIDS; I have seen the ravages of its impact and the harrowing humiliation it meant. I had written about it, volunteered to combat it, and tried to understand it. But I still risked getting it, and the memories of that risk and the ramifications of it for myself, my family, and my friends still forced me into questions I would rather not confront, and have expended a great deal of effort avoiding.”

When a high school friend asked Sullivan how he had contracted the virus, Sullivan informed him that he had no idea which sex partner had been the source of the viral transmission. “How many people did you sleep with, for God’s sake?,” his friend asked. Note Sullivan’s answer carefully:

“Too many, God knows. Too many for meaning and dignity to be given to every one; too many for love to be present at each; too many for sex to be very often more than a temporary but powerful release from debilitating fear and loneliness.”

In other words, the public Andrew Sullivan emerged as a major proponent of responsibility, stability, and self-control, while the private Andrew Sullivan was deeply involved in homosexual promiscuity.

All this broke into public view in 2001, when a homosexual columnist discovered that Sullivan had been posting advertisements for unprotected homosexual sex at internet web sites. The ensuing controversy within the gay community was vitriolic, even as it was revealing.

“The End of Gay Culture” is an eye-opening essay. As an exercise in cultural analysis, it demonstrates genuine insight and an insider’s perspective. More than anything else, Sullivan’s article should awaken thinking Christians to the fact that homosexuality is being normalized in the larger culture. This surely represents a matter of urgent missiological concern, for the normalization of sin represents a progressive hardening of the nation’s heart against the Gospel.

At a more personal level, this article reminds me to pray for Andrew Sullivan. I say this even as I realize that he may be more offended by my prayer than by anything else. In most of his writings, Mr. Sullivan demonstrates a consistent and ardent determination to celebrate homosexuality as central to his own self-discovery and personhood. Yet, he also reveals significant doubts. When he explains that he “never publicly defended promiscuity” nor publicly attacked it because “I felt, and often still feel, unable to live up to the ideals I really hold,” I detect a glimmer of doubt. I have faced Mr. Sullivan in public debate on issues related to homosexuality. I consider him to be among the most gifted, thoughtful, and unpredictable intellectuals on the current scene. More than anything else, I want Mr. Sullivan to find his self-identity and deepest passions in the transforming power of Christ–the power to see all things made new. Without apology, I pray that one day he will see all that he has written in defense of homosexuality, and all that he has known in terms of his homosexual identity, as loss, and to find in Christ the only resolution of our sexuality and the only solution to the problem we all share–the problem of sin.

Andrew Sullivan has been a focus of my prayer since I first learned of his HIV-positive status. I do pray that God will give him strengthened health and the gift of time. After all, our Christian concern should be focused not only on the challenge of homosexuality in the culture, but the challenge of reaching homosexuals with the love of Christ and the truth of the Gospel.

Continue reading at Albert Mohler…

Resources for Tuesday’s Election

November 6th, 2006

From the homepage of Concerned Women for America:

State Referendums
Issues facing voters this election

Strengthening marriage is one of the top priorities for strengthening America. When the radical feminists, the gay lobby, and the Hollywood culture assault the family, they are destroying the foundation of a free society. Democracy cannot long survive if its citizens have not internalized the Judeo-Christian values that make freedom and liberty possible. It is the traditional family that provides the good soil in which these moral values take root.Janice Shaw Crouse

Chad and David Engineer a Baby Who Will Never Know a Mother’s Tender Love

November 5th, 2006

Excerpted from Ready to Be Dads, But They’re Going to Need Help, by Kevin Sack, published Oct 29, 2006, by Los Angeles Times:

Chad Hodge liked #694. She was a 21-year-old college student, 5-feet-5, 135 pounds, with straight brown hair, blue eyes and a narrow nose. She had won 16 awards in high school for academics and music, and scored a 1210 on the SAT. She was outgoing, intelligent, responsible and friendly, or at least she said she was. Chad wanted her to be the mother of his children.

But David Craig, Chad’s partner of seven years, had his heart set on #685. She was a teacher, 23, 5-feet-2, with wavy blond hair and light blue eyes. She wore a size 0. She had been a varsity tennis player in high school, a ballerina and a classical pianist.

For two hours on that day in early 2004, Chad and David sat in a small office at Genetics & IVF Institute, a fertility clinic in northern Virginia, and sifted through the dossiers of prospective egg donors. It felt more like catalog shopping than human reproduction.

The previous fall, they had decided to have a child through a gestational surrogacy arrangement. They would pay one woman to provide her eggs and then, after fertilizing them in vitro with their sperm, pay another woman to carry the resulting embryos to term…

Rather than creating a life in the privacy of a bedroom, Chad and David would plot this conception in law offices, doctors’ suites and Internet chat rooms…

Once Chad and David narrowed their choices to six, they were allowed to view adult photographs. They didn’t want to consider appearance at the exclusion of all else, but they couldn’t deny, in the privacy of that room, that it mattered.

“You can’t ignore it,” David said. “I mean, who wants an ugly child?”

…David…had serious reservations about being a parent. He liked their life as it was, he said, and he wasn’t convinced he was the nurturing kind.

He worried that having two good fathers might, in the end, be just as unfair as having one inadequate one…

“We want the life experience of having kids,” he told Chad, “but are we going to deny them the life experience of having a mother?”

Continue reading at Los Angeles Times…

The Confession (Part II): Radical Proponents of Same-Sex “Marriage” Gaining Power

November 5th, 2006

Be sure to read The Confession (Part I) posted below…

“Many if not most of the major gay and lesbian organizations who have signed on to the fight for same-sex marriage would instantly sign off at any suggestion that they were actually encouraging gay men and lesbians to marry.” – Gabriel Rotello, in his 1997 book on the AIDS crisis, Sexual Ecology

Excerpted from The Confession, Part II, by Stanley Kurtz, published Nov 1, 2006, by National Review:

…Around the time the Beyond Same-Sex Marriage statement was released, a controversy broke out over news that the Boston Globe had told its gay employees to marry their partners or face losing their domestic-partnership benefits…

According to [Globe journalist Zak] Szymanski, “Many national LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender] groups, despite their large investment in securing gay marriage, agree that there is a problem with a society that values marriage over all other family forms.”

For example, Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and a major spokesman in the battle for same-sex marriage, said, “We’re deeply disappointed by the Globe’s decision, and >we do not feel that benefits should flow only from marriage, because a married couple does not reflect the reality of the American family, gay or straight.”

Michelle Granda, of GLAD, which Szymanski calls “the group that is widely credited with winning same-sex marriage in Massachusetts,” said, “We have always believed families are configured in many ways and that marriage is not the answer for all families.”

…Here we have a clear indication of the family radicalism that hides beneath the only apparent conservatism of same-sex marriage advocacy groups…

A Striking Development
In late 2005, I published a piece entitled “Here Come the Brides,” about the role of bisexuality in the drive for legalized multiple-partner marriage. It’s notable that the Beyond Same-Sex Marriage manifesto justified its radical platform, in part, by lamenting the short shrift historically given to bisexuals by the broader LGBT movement. Among the signers of the Beyond Same-Sex Marriage manifesto were a number of bisexual activists. In “Here Come the Brides,” I also noted the role of Unitarian polyamory activists, and the potential role of arguments made by Yale law professor Kenji Yoshino in a pro-polyamory movement. Sure enough, the Beyond Same-Sex Marriage manifesto was signed by a number of Unitarian ministers and by professor Yoshino…

A Political Future
…Jonathan Rauch offered some remarkably frank concessions: “I had originally hoped that the [same-sex marriage] debate would not be followed by a polygamy debate, but clearly it has been. Some [same-sex marriage] advocates maintained that there was no significant constituency for polygamy, but that’s proving to be wrong as well.”

…This all means that in a post-gay-marriage world, the political organization of the gay community will shift. For now, “conservative” proponents of same-sex marriage are out in front, supported by a vast array of considerably less conservative activists and lobby groups. Meanwhile, the radicals are marginalized and/or intentionally keeping a low profile. In a post-gay-marriage world, this situation will flip. The radicals will step out in front, supported by largely the same coalition of activists and lobby groups who currently support same-sex marriage. At that point, the conservatives, no longer needed to run interference for the larger movement, will be quietly put out to pasture. By then we shall be well beyond same-sex marriage. Listen carefully to the words of same-sex marriage supporters, and they confess as much themselves.

Continue reading at National Review…

The Confession: Have Same-Sex “Marriage” Advocates Said Too Much?

November 5th, 2006

Excerpted from The Confession, by Stanley Kurtz, published Oct 31, 2006, by National Review:

Suppose a large group of same-sex-marriage activists came together and made the following confession to a group of same-sex-marriage skeptics:

“Look, we’re going to level with you in a way that we haven’t up to now. We all support same-sex marriage, but for many — even most — of us, gay marriage isn’t an end in itself. It’s a way-station on the path to a post-marriage society. We want a wide range of diverse families — even ‘polyamorous’ groupings of three or more partners — to have the same recognition, rights, and benefits as heterosexual married couples. In short, your worst fears are justified. The radical redefinition of marriage you’ve been worried about for so long is exactly what we want…

“And consider the complex families created when three or even four gay men and lesbians combine through, say, artificial insemination, to bear and raise children. We want recognition for these sorts of unconventional families too, even — or especially — if such recognition leads to legalized polyamory. Pretending that certain aspects of the gay community don’t exist only weakens our diverse families. The way we live is the way we live. Up to now, we’ve tried to hide it. But at last we’re ready to own up to reality, and to push for legal recognition for all types of families, even if that expands the definition of marriage until the very idea of marriage itself is stripped of meaning.”

For all practical purposes, this confession has already been offered. A good part of the substance of the above message was conveyed this past July, when hundreds of self-described lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) and allied activists, scholars, educators, writers, artists, lawyers, journalists, and community organizers released a manifesto entitled, Beyond Same-Sex Marriage.” Among other things, that statement called for recognition of “committed, loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner.”

Continue reading at National Review…

GUILTY: Justice for the Family of Mary Stachowicz

November 5th, 2006

Excerpted from Man Guilty in Slaying of Woman, published Nov 3, 2006, by Chicago Tribune:

…It took jurors fewer than three hours to find Nicholas Gutierrez, 23, guilty of the murder and sexual assault of Mary Stachowicz, 51, on Nov. 13, 2002.

“He’s an animal, he should be locked up for the rest of his life,” – Peter Stachowicz, son of the victim

Gutierrez could receive the death penalty.

Run, Don’t Walk, from ECUSA’s Incoming Leader: Homosexuality Not a Choice

November 4th, 2006

Excerpted from ECUSA’s Incoming Leader: Homosexuality Not a Choice, Jesus Not the Only Way, by Jody Brown and Allie Martin, published Nov 2, 2006, by Agape Press:

Where does [Katharine Jefferts-Schori] stand on the issue of homosexuality? The Episcopal Church has been embroiled for years in a debate over the ordination of homosexual clergy and “blessing” ceremonies for same-sex couples. Jefferts-Schori supports both — and in fact, she voted in 2003 to confirm her denomination’s first openly homosexual bishop, V. Gene Robinson. She told AP that she does not believe the Bible condemns “committed” homosexual relationships. God, she says, made some people “gay.”

“Sexual orientation is pretty clearly defined at a very early age, before the age of reason. It’s not a choice,” she said. “In that case, a person of faith would need to say that it’s a piece of how one is created.” Consequently, she says, the Church should offer what she calls “a sacramental container” to help homosexuals find “holy ways of living in relationship.”

Scriptures in the Bible about homosexual acts being sinful, she says, are misunderstood. “They’re not about what today we see as mature human beings entering into committed relationships with each other on a full and equal basis,” says Jefferts-Schori, who believes such “committed” relationships can be blessed. “The religious community’s job, really, is to help all human beings find healthy and whole and holy ways of living in relationship.”

Run, Don’t Walk
Canon David Anderson is president of the American Anglican Council, a group of conservative clergy and lay people from the Episcopal Church. Anderson says he’s not surprised at the recent comments by Jefferts-Schori, and offers what he sees as the only option for those still in churches aligned with ECUSA.

“I think they need to run, not walk, to the exit and find an orthodox Episcopal church,” suggests Anderson.

According to Anderson, the Episcopal Church cast off biblical beliefs long ago in favor of postmodernism. Jefferts-Schori’s comments, he claims, is merely in harmony with that. “Her remarks with regard to the plurality of ways to God are consistent both with what she has said before and with what the top level of leadership in the Episcopal Church has been saying now for probably a decade,” says Anderson.

Continue reading at Agape Press…

One Family’s Letter to Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott

November 4th, 2006

You, too, can make a difference – and here’s how…

October 26, 2006

Mr. Lee Scott
CEO, Wal-Mart
702 SW 8th Street
Bentonville, AK 72716

Dear Mr. Scott:

My husband and I have written to you before to tell you how very disappointed we are that you have led Wal-Mart into a pro-homosexual stance. Because we know what the medical consequences of homosexual activities are, we are worse than disappointed that you have chosen to tarnish the wonderful family friendly reputation of Wal-Mart in order to chase after the business of a small percentage of the American public.

The medical consequences are clear:

  • The Centers for Disease Control reports (Statistics and Surveillance, Table 11, end of 2004) that 87% of all full-blown AIDS cases are the result of homosexual practices and/or drug use while only 11% have occurred through heterosexual contact.
  • HIV statistics cannot be trusted because as of 2004, only 33 states reported HIV data. Among the 17 states which did not report HIV data are California which has more same-sex couples than any other state in the country (Houston Chronicle, 7.10.06, “Gay-Rights Fight Turns to San Francisco Appeal).
  • Dr. Ruth Jacobs, MD stated in an article in The Washington Times (5.8.05):

“Homosexuals account for less than 3 percent of the population. Yet in 2003 men having sex with men accounted for more than 63 percent of newly reported HIV cases in males. Gay and bisexual men account for 10 percent of all new hepatitis A infections and 15-20 percent of all new hepatitis B infections in the United States…”

  • Dr. Ronald Stall, Ph.D., research chief for of HIV/AIDS prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, has said:

‘Substance abuse is pervasive among gay men and is so intricately intertwined with epidemics of depression, partner abuse and childhood sexual abuse that adequately addressing one issue requires attention to the others as well. … We have at least four epidemics going on among gay men that are associated with each other and making each other worse.’ (Internal Medicine News March 1, 2004 Volume 38:5 ‘Drug Use Pervasive Among Gay Men.’)”

  • When 1,177 HIV-positive men were interviewed about the number of sex partners in a year, these homosexuals admitted they had had from 1 to 500 partners (“The Dangerous Nature of Homosexuality,” J. Michael Sharman, 8.7.06).

You have left us no choice but to boycott Wal-Mart and to tell our friends and acquaintances to do the same. I would encourage you not to ignore those of us families who believe strongly in traditional family values. We have big Internet networks, and the word is spreading all across our country that Wal-Mart has redone its image and is courting business from the homosexual lobby.

You may think that Wal-Mart’s sales have dropped off because of the pressure from labor unions, but what you really need to know is that there are thousands of us out here who have stopped shopping at Wal-Mart because of your pursuit of the homosexual agenda. Some of us may not have said anything but have quietly stopped shopping at Wal-Mart. Others of us are more verbal about our outrage.

In our minds Wal-Mart has lost its clean family image. We used to try to change people’s minds when they would say something derogatory about Wal-Mart. Now we agree with them and shop elsewhere.

Enclosed you will find copies of the receipts showing that our family has spent $835.41 (from 9.7.06 – 10.22.06) at other stores and gas stations. We used to make most of our purchases at Wal-Mart but not any more.

Sincerely,

Mr. and Mrs. Wayne Garner
Hewitt, TX


Support Americans for Truth about Homosexuality

Center For Morality
2783 Martin Rd.
#327
Dublin, OH 43017

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'