Featured Post

The Oldest Books in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible

As anyone with even a cursory familiarity with the Judeo-Christian Bible knows, that book is composed of a collection of writings which were...

Saturday, November 1, 2014

God and the Gay Agenda

In an article entitled "Government and the Gay Agenda" appearing in the current issue of the United Church of God's Good News magazine, Tom Robinson decries the growing acceptance/tolerance of homosexuality within the United States and Britain. He opens the article by reminding us that "sin is sin." He then proceeds to catalog a long list of examples of just how depraved the two societies have become within the last couple of years (Gay pride parades, stories that portray Gay people in a positive light by the Good Morning America and Today television programs, an openly Gay professional football player - Michael Sam, court decisions ruling against people and businesses who discriminate against Gay people, U.S. Department of Justice measures promulgated to promote a culture of tolerance toward Gay people within the department, U.S. State Department's decision to allow its embassy in Tel Aviv to fly a Gay Pride flag next to the American flag to honor that city's celebration of LGBT Pride Week and British Prime Minister Cameron's insistence that the legalization of Gay marriage within the United Kingdom was a positive development that should be exported to the rest of the world).

Robinson pines for the days when all of this abominable behavior was not a part of the public discourse and openly celebrated on Main Street. He asks, "Does anyone care how God views this?"

Well, yes, Mr. Robinson, I care about how God views all of this; but "He" hasn't shared his opinion with me about the Good Morning America story or David Cameron's comments. You are quite correct to point out that sin is sin. However, as long as we are being intellectually profound, I would also like to point out that hate is hate and intolerance is intolerance!

It seems to me that the entirety of the Law (which you would say defines sin) is based on the principle of LOVE. I also think that you would agree that the Ten Commandments are supposed to represent the most fundamental expression of that principle for humans. Indeed, Christ further summarized the Ten as being an expression of love toward God and our fellow man. In other words, does the behavior in question harm, hurt or disrespect God or our neighbor in any way? I think that we can all readily see how that principle could be applied to things like rape, incest, pedophilia, bestiality and prostitution. Nevertheless, I think that you would have a hard time demonstrating how a sexual relationship between two consenting adults who are following the inclinations of their own nature could/would violate this principle. If we are going to use the Ten Commandments as our guide, it seems to me that the fundamental principle vis-à-vis sex is fidelity. And if that's correct, how could you be against a formal commitment between two individuals to be faithful to each other?

Mr. Robinson concludes his article by warning his readers that "No society that has seen widespread acceptance of homosexual activity has endured for long." He points to the example of ancient Israel (I was under the impression that their national sin was idolatry), the Greeks and the Romans. I have to admit that I was a bit chagrined by the historical revisionism that Mr. Robinson practiced in this article. To even hint that the widespread acceptance of homosexuality by the Greeks and Romans was one of the primary factors in contributing to their decline and downfall is preposterous!

Alexander the Great conquered most of the world known to him and his associates and then promptly died. Most historians attribute the disintegration of his empire to the fact that he did not have the time to consolidate his gains or institute an effective system to administer his far-flung and diverse realms, and that he failed to designate a successor to carry on his work. As a consequence, his generals divided up his empire and quickly began to fight among themselves.

As for the Roman Empire, most historians agree that Rome overextended itself - that the territory it controlled was once again too far-flung and diverse to be effectively administered by a central government given the limits of transportation and communication in that day and age. Many historians have also pointed out that the Barbarian invasions of the empire did not help the situation, and that government corruption and political instability severely hampered efforts to face these challenges. Others have pointed out the growing disparity between rich and poor within the empire (that may be one we'd like to take a look at in assessing our own future). Finally, some historians have had the audacity to suggest that the rise of Christianity itself made a significant contribution to the decline and fall of the Roman Empire (by undermining respect for the emperor and the state). So I don't think that we can say that homosexuality played any significant role in the decline of any of these states.

Based on all of the available evidence (Scripture, reason and the world around us), I would have to say that God is probably on the side of love and tolerance. Indeed, although "He" hasn't shared "His" opinion on the matter with me, I can't imagine "Him" taking any other view of the subject! Can you?


  1. No, I really can't!

  2. Excellent response. (Roy)

  3. I enjoy your writings. Excellent response. (Roy)