“Gay Marriage”, Christian Americans, and Liberal Intolerance

philrobertsoncartoon9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. – 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV)

A remarkable thing has been happening since last FRiday’s Supreme Court Ruling “legalizing” “Gay Marriage.

Christian Americans, from State Attorney Generals to City Court Clerks, have been refusing to issue Marriage Licenses to homosexual couples.

Their Explanation?

They refuse to violate their Christian Faith, and to go against God.

Were Liberals, including the ones on the Supreme Court, who changed the definition of “marriage”, evidently thought that Christians would sublimate God’s Law for Man’s Law.

Evidently, they overestimated themselves.

I first heard Voddie (pronounced “Voadie”) Baucham speak at a Youth-led Sunday Morning Service at the church I was attending. My step-son, who was in the 9th or 10th grade at the time, had been in a weekend-long youth seminar, which Voddie had led.

He came home from the seminar, all excited, telling me that I had to hear this Black Evangelist, that I would really like him.

He was right.

My step-son went on to not only play football and participate in the Weight Lifting Team at his high school (6’1′, 280), he also sang in the school choir and, most importantly, he was the President of the Fellowship of Christian Students and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. He is now 27 years old, in seminary, and is helping to “plant” a church.

He has made me very proud.

But, I digress…

Voddie was a dynamic speaker, who told the youth of our church that Sunday Morning, that with God “nothing is impossible”.

Today, Voddie is the Pastor of Grace Family Baptist Church in Spring, Texas.

On the website, “desiringGod.org”, I found the following article…

Likely you’ve heard the claim “gay is the new black.” It’s been repeated over and over in recent years to equate the plight of blacks in America during the Civil Rights era with the new plight of homosexuals today.

While there are overlapping similarities between the two movements, sexual orientation and ethnicity are fundamentally different. Ethnicity is innate and unchangeable in a way that “sexual orientation” is not. Even if someone can be “born gay,” the gospel saves sinners and has the power to change evil desires.

Both movements value constituencies, or preferred minority groups, in order to gain power. Therefore, many Americans see themselves as part of a group instead of one whole. Constituencies preserve the “us against them” mentality and further divide America. This mentality has crept into the church and works against gospel unity.

In this four-minute video, Voddie Baucham explains the similarities between the Civil Rights and so-called Gay Rights Movement, while highlighting the significant differences between ethnicity and sexual orientation. The following is a lightly edited transcript…

“What is the difference between the Civil Rights Movement and the so-called Gay Rights Movement of today? Not a whole lot. Unfortunately, I think there are some things that we accepted philosophically in the Civil Rights Movement that were not based in biblical truth. And those things are being applied in the Gay Rights Movement the exact same way and now we are calling them out.

For example, the idea of seeing people as constituencies and seeing rights as rights for constituencies of people is prominent in both movements. This continued division based on our constituencies and so-called communities is problematic. We’ve embraced a hyphenated understanding of ourselves as opposed to a view that sees us as one people.

The homosexual community is latching onto some of those very concepts. These concepts, by the way, are rooted and grounded in cultural Marxism. That was the goal of Gramscian Marxism. Divide people up into constituencies, and then the way you gain power is by making promises and representing particular constituencies. Now you never give them what you promise, but by creating this idea of constituencies and being the one who is the representative of the constituencies, you gain power and you keep your power to the degree that things don’t get better for your constituency. If things get better for your constituency, you lose your power.

So even when gains are made, you have to downplay those and go looking for other things that are problems. That is the way you keep your power.

The homosexual community has latched onto that approach and has identified itself as a constituency deserving of our attention and pity. They did so intentionally using the AIDS crisis. The direct result is they now have achieved a one-to-one correlation that we are finding it very hard to move away from.

So are there differences between ethnicity and so-called sexual orientation? Absolutely there are. Ethnicity is innate and unchangeable. So-called sexual orientation is not innate and is changeable. We know this. First Corinthians 6 is two-thousand-year-old evidence that people can stop being gay. So we know that it is neither innate, nor is it unchangeable. There are huge differences between the two. However, if all you are doing is using the language of the culture and the idea of people as constituencies, then you end up right where we are, and it is hard to stop that train.”

BOOM.

I believe the position that America finds itself in, with an all-out push to minimize the voice of Christian Americans in our nation, is a result of a lack of moral guidance from generations before. The Bible tells us to lead children in the ways in which they should go. As humans, we are fallen creatures, who often do not do the right thing. Being good parents is one of those things which God requires of us.

Now, I’m not saying that homosexuality is the result of failed parenting. As most of you are aware, homosexuality can have several causes. In college, when I took the class, “The Sociology of Deviant Behavior”, back in the late seventies, the professors at that time theorized that homosexuality was caused by any number of social and psychological causes. Whether it be a dominant mother, an effeminate father, or some sort of deep shock to the system when the individual is young, they theorized that homosexuality could come from a myriad of experiences in each individual’s life.

The only thing that I can say for certain is that it is not a biological predisposition.

Why do I say that?

The reason for my comment, is the fact that scientists have tried to identify a gene or some genetic marker that causes homosexuality. And, as of today , in 2015, they have been stymied in their attempts to find a biological cause for homosexuality.

In recent years. Liberals have pushed homosexuality as normal sexual behavior. They have featured it on television shows, in movies, books, and encouraged mass demonstrations of it, in public, if you will, as the late Professional Wrestler, Dusty Rhodes, used to say.

However, try as they may, using Democrat-heavy push polls and a Liberal-Majority Supreme Court, who decided to “legislate”, instead of being judicious,  the majority of Americans remain against Gay Marriage, as demonstrated in the last few years by popular vote, and the reaction out here in Realityville, to Friday’s Ruling, “legalizing” Gay Marriage.

In confrontations with homosexuals,, concerning their behavior, our opposition to their sexual lifestyle, as Christians, is based on Christian concern and compassion for their very souls.

However, what gets in the way of Christians’ efforts to reach out to homosexuals, is the fact that God gave us all free will.

And yes, if you are homosexual and reading this, it is your right as an American and as a human being to exercise the free will which the Lord gave you, when he made you. However, do not expect him to approve of your sin, or expect me as a Christian American, to give you free license to engage in your sexual sin.

Because, you see, God gave me free will as well, and being American born, I have the Constitutional Right to speak my mind…in the street, behind a pulpit, or in the voting booth.

I don’t hate you. As an acquaintance or if  you area family member, I love you. I will pray for you. I will work with you. I will invite you inside my home. I will be your friend.

However, I will, out of Christian Love, tell you straight to your face that what you are engaging in, is wrong.

The bottom line, from a Christian’s Point-of-View, is the fact that confronting the sinner is not an act of hatred, it’s an act of Christian Concern.

If you are an American Liberal, one of the 23 percent of our population who believe that political ideology, do not attempt to tell me that my ideas about traditional marriage and about what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior, are wrong.

Someone possessing a higher pay grade than you, is Whom I listen to.

And, He left me a guide to make sure that I get it right.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 Responses to ““Gay Marriage”, Christian Americans, and Liberal Intolerance”

  1. Brittius Says:

    Reblogged this on Brittius and commented:
    Well… Gay marriage opened the door of Pandora’s Box for Obama, because with the gay marriage decision, either a Concealed Carry Weapon permit for all 50 states might apply or.., CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY, WITH NO BACKGROUND CHECKS. (Almighty God, at work)

  2. BuckeyeSam Says:

    I enjoyed the column. The precise point that I wish would be made in contrasting the civil-rights movement and the SSM movement is that race involves an innate and unchangeable characteristic while homosexuality involves voluntary conduct. As the column notes, no gay gene has been isolated (and I’ll be interested to know the number of liberals terminating pregnancies once the gay gene can be identified in prenatal tests, but I digress). Even if we assume that there’s some innate wiring that predisposes people to homosexuality, my understanding is that same-sex attraction, in and of itself, is not a sin. That said, acting on that same-sex attraction in a voluntary manner is the conduct to which Christians object. In the equal-protection context, I’ve never understood how the law supposedly equates discrimination based on skin color (abhorrent) and discrimination based on conduct (acceptable). In short, I don’t like what you do (not what you are)–what’s the problem?

  3. backwoods conservative Says:

    Keep them coming, KJ. You’re on a roll.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: