Homosexuality is not a creational
intent. Therefore, it's a sin against God. Procreation is a function of
male-female union. Two men or women cannot procreate naturally; human bodies
are not created for same sex procreation. When creational (original) intent is
violated, the violation is against God. Hypothesis such as Darwinian evolution
also implies that gay marriages are an aberration. There are no survival
chances in a gay marriage (procreation doesn’t exist). Thus, ‘survival of the
fittest’ dogma remains unexplained and same sex union under the Darwinian
theory remains an aberration.
There are some miracles God will not
perform; creating children through gay marriages is one such. Miracles would
never violate God’s original intent (e.g. a tree will never give birth to
humans). But God will allow HIS creatures to dig their own grave (sin) through
the employment of their freewill. Unless science sinfully intervenes through same
sex procreation (employment of freewill); same sex marriages cannot produce
children.
A person with same sex persuasion is NOT
born a homosexual. There is no conclusive finding on ‘gay gene.’1
Homosexuality isn’t genetic. However, “the
gay community hopes that some genetic predisposition will be found by the
researchers working on the Human Genome Project,” writes Scott Rae.2
Nurture (from childhood into adolescence) is the cause for homosexuality than
creation.
Pro-gay groups are actively lobbying for
government’s endorsement of same sex marriages. Many governments around the
world have endorsed same sex marriages. Is there a downside to this? On the
surface, a government endorsement seems commendable, but are there destructive
ramifications?
Politics is the realm of policy
decisions. One method of influencing a policy decision is to enter the realm of
decision making process. If one wants to eliminate a person or a past decision
in a church, he would strive to enter the policy making body– the governing
board, council, committee etc. Once he enters that entity, he is at par with
the most powerful to activate his holy or unholy agendas. This then is the
first step for the homosexual marriage – to enter into a realm of power to gain
significance at par with the presently powerful traditional marriage.
Once homosexual marriages gain that powerful
equality and associated benefits, it will force traditional marriage out of
existence. If pro gay groups succeed in getting the governments to approve same
sex marriages, homosexual marriages will deem itself equal or a viable
alternate to a traditional marriage. In the future, homosexual marriages could
even eliminate traditional marriages to become the primary norm for marriage. Additionally,
trans-sexuality3 (male in a female body and vice versa), pansexuality4
(sex with whomever), and object sexuality (love with an object) could then become
the norm. In the process, traditional marriage between man and a woman will be
destroyed rather irreparably. Stop for a moment and think about the
ramifications to our descendants.
In general, adults think of getting
married to a member of the opposite sex. When homosexuality, trans-sexuality,
pansexuality, and object sexuality gain government endorsement, a young mind
will be legally exposed to an immense spectrum of evil and unnatural or ungodly
covenants. A young mind, in the future, would think it is reasonable to love,
marry and have sex with whomever, whatever and whenever. Can you comprehend
this beastly situation? A young man in the future will think that marrying another
man or an animal or an Eiffel tower is perfectly legitimate. This is one
significant consequence of a government endorsement of homosexual marriage. Let
me offer you another example. Today, incest is considered a sin, but when
pansexuality becomes normative in the future, incest will not be considered a
sin.
When gay marriages are endorsed and
promoted by the government, all who oppose gay marriages will be deemed violators
and penalized appropriately. The Bible and any other religious books that
deride gay marriages will be deemed as hate-books, and could even be
prohibited. Pastors and teachers who proclaim monogamy and advocate heterosexual
marriages will be considered haters and law breakers, and run the risk of
spending a vast portion of their life in courts or in prison. Teaching against
sin will be an act against the law of the land. Battle against depravity will
be rewarded with punitive actions. Consider this as another significant
ramification if homosexual marriages were to be promoted by the government. (This
isn’t a conjured or a fictitious thought. In 2011, CISCO and Bank of America
fired the award winning author and an advocate for traditional marriage, Frank
Turek, from conducting leadership and teambuilding seminars.5 Turek
was fired when a homosexual manager at CISCO lodged a complaint against him.
The surprise was that the manager was not directly insulted or discriminated for
his homosexuality by Turek. If this was the situation in 2011, please let your
imagination wander to ponder over our future.)
What happens to children raised by gay
parents? A precursory comment to this question is that these children are only
raised by these parents; these children cannot be born to gay parents. While we
are on this topic, we observe that science can be utterly duplicitous. Or shall
I say that scientists can be duplicitous (just as any other men). In other
words, science can be manipulated to yield results that the scientist or his
funding agency requires. Researchers are funded and researches conducted to
yield favorable results for gay parenting. But a close observation of these
asymmetrical researches exposes a grave manipulation of the research methodology
and components to obtain favorable results. If you are interested, do read this
article where Prof. Dean Byrd, a clinical professor with the University of Utah
School of Medicine, debunks a research done by Gartrell and Bos for The
National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study (NLLFS) and published by American
Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).6
It is scientific and also common sense
that a child needs both the father and mother for a well rounded and holistic
growth. Mothers and fathers as individuals are diverse, so they bring
distinctive values into a family. The love of a mother and father are distinct
and needed for the child. Take the instance of breast feeding. Breast feeding
proves a mother’s love for the child and science proves that breast feeding is
imperative for a child’s wellness (e.g. resistance to diseases).7A
father, on the other hand, expresses his love to the child in other ways.
Although science has affirmed the necessity of mother and a father in parenting,
it now contradictorily strives to prove that same sex parenting is as effective
as conventional parenting. Thus, science strives to nullify the importance of a
father and a mother in the life of a child. Same sex parenting will never be an
adequate substitute to a child, let alone replace the presence of either a
father or a mother. Same sex parenting is yet another significant ramification
of same sex marriages. (For a more comprehensive treatment of the benefits of a
traditional marriage, please read Frank Turek’s essays.8)
God allows sin in this world for a brief
period of time, but HE doesn’t promote sin. Frank Turek states that governments/societies
have three options to deal with any behavior; it can prohibit, permit or
promote, and Turek emphasizes that gay marriages should not be promoted, but
permitted.9
How should the church respond to same
sex marriages? First, it should teach the truth to its members. Second, it
should protect itself against doctrinal corruption, much unlike the Metropolitan
Community Church and other rogue denominations, which hold homosexuality and
Christianity together. Third, the church should permit homosexuality. In other
words, the church should never condemn or drive away a person or a couple in a
gay relationship. Christ came to this world for the sake of sinners (cf. Mark
2: 17; Luke 5: 32), if that be the case, why should the church drive sinners
away from her presence? The church should lovingly and graciously communicate
the truth of the gospel to the errant person or couple. Christianity is all
about transformation of hearts. Fourth, Churches should not perform gay
marriages. Performing gay marriages is equivalent to promoting homosexual
marriages, which is against the tenet of Christianity. Fifth and finally, the
church should be dogmatic and courageous even amidst trials and tribulations.
Church’s loyalty is only to Christ and not to the world. If the world
promulgates an ordinance endorsing homosexual marriages, the local church should
continue to teach the truth of the gospel courageously to her flock.
Educating children is more a prerogative
of a parent than the church, so parents should talk these matters with
children. Let us not misguide ourselves in thinking that government endorsements
of same sex marriages happen only in the West, and that it will not happen in
East. It is a fact that homosexuality is a prevalent practice in the East. Drift
of thought and practice occurs between East and the West, so it’s only a matter
of time before East reels under the turbulence of this evil.
Homosexuality is an aberration and a
sin. Multitudes have been delivered from homosexuality and are leading normal
lives now. All things are possible with God (Matthew 19: 26), so deliverance
from homosexuality is certainly possible. God will deliver those who honestly
and earnestly seek HIM. Amen.
References:
1 The three studies in the early 1990’s
which were hailed by the media as providing evidence for a “gay gene” (or at
least for an innate and biological cause for homosexuality) have long since
been discredited by the failure of any other researchers to be able to
replicate those early results.
In fact, the
American Psychological Association itself has actually moved away from
asserting certainty about the origins of homosexuality, declaring in their most
recent statement on this question that: “There is no consensus among scientists
about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual,
gay, or lesbian orientation. . . . Many think that nature and nurture both play
complex roles.” (http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2013/09/why-science-doesnt-support-orientation-change-bans)
2 Scott B. Rae, Moral Choices: An
Introduction to Ethics, 3rd Ed, p281, 2009.
3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transsexualism
4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pansexuality
5 http://townhall.com/columnists/mikeadams/2011/06/16/the_cisco_kid/page/full
6 http://narth.com/docs/makesclaims.html
7 http://www.nrdc.org/breastmilk/benefits.asp
8 http://townhall.com/columnists/frankturek/2013/02/28/the-case-against-equality-n1521881/page/full
9 http://townhall.com/columnists/frankturek/2013/03/01/the-case-against-equality-part-2-n1523048/page/full
No comments:
Post a Comment