Archive for August, 2014


Rising Gay Christian: Bright, Able And Wrong

Saturday, August 16th, 2014

Tryl LukeLuke Tryl is an Oxford-educated young Tory-on-the-move. He was President of the Oxford Union in 2007; stood as a Conservative candidate for Lambeth Council in 2010 , a useful Tory precursor for a subsequent shot at Parliament; wasappointed Head of Education at Stonewall after experience at various policy think-tanks ; and was elected chairman of Dulwich & West Norwood Conservative Association in March this year .

Still only in his late 20s, last month he was appointed Special Adviser to Nicky Morgan, the new Education Secretary. I wish him well personally as he continues his climb up politics’ greasy pole.

But Luke self-identifies as gay and Christian, and in an autobiographical piece for the Faith and Sexuality Project  hepromotes the idea that because Christ never mentioned it directly, “Jesus… never condemned homosexuality.”

This is naïve and simplistic. The same for instance could be said about child brides. And incest. And FGM. And zoophilia. And cannibalism. And animal cruelty. And deforestation. And spitting on other people’s food. And a host of other activities, ills and evils.

Furthermore it’s a self-serving and untrue conclusion that cheapens the radical demands which Jesus lays on all his followers.

Luke has a personal agenda of course but regrettably he is not alone in his views. Soaking wet liberal clergy similarly misrepresentthe issue. And last Christmas the tabloid news site HuffPost mockingly displayed a blank-paged Bible in response to its own headline, “What Jesus says about homosexuality” .

Read here

 

“The legal and cultural battle has only just begun” – a US doctor answers his gay critic

Tuesday, August 5th, 2014

gay handsEvery day, there are multiplied thousands of comments posted on our social media sites, our websites, and in response to new articles, videos, and audio files. In the last week, there were more than 84,700 comments posted to the AskDrBrown Facebook page alone, so please understand that it really is not possible to interact with everyone or even to read most of the comments and post.

Sometimes a colleague will send me a comment or post that got their attention, and as much as I want to respond to it, especially if it’s filled with errors, misconceptions, or false accusations, for the most part, I simply need to let it go, allowing others to respond as they’re able.

But for the benefit of those who have actually challenged or questioned or mocked my position, here’s a response to a typical comment by a gay critic, responding to my recent article, “Gays Are 1 in 10, Not 1 in 4.”

The writer goes by the name AndrewWA, and he begins his lengthy comment by quoting a central point of my article, namely, that while it is wrong to mistreat or bully people, regardless of how small a minority of the population they might be, “you don’t overhaul the legal system to the point of attacking freedoms of speech, conscience, and religion based on the sexual and romantic desires of a tiny percentage of the population, nor do you engage in a massive social experiment, like redefining marriage, because of a statistically tiny group of people.”

Andrew then writes: “Micheal, honey, it is unconstitutional to deny gay couples access to marriage. It is really that simple. Courts all over this country are coming to this conclusion and I am sure you have read their findings. You don’t like their conclusions, but your doctorate is not in constitutional law. Judges even appointed by conservative Republican Presidents have ruled in favor of marriage equality.”

Putting aside the misspelling of my name (it happens all the time) and the “honey” reference, the fact is that there is nothing in the Constitution that states that a man has the “right” to “marry” another man (or a woman a woman), as dissenting justices and other legal scholars have pointed out.

Nowhere did the Constitution, let alone the Founding Fathers, countenance the idea that “marriage” would include the idea of two men or two women coming together, especially since the writers of the Constitution considered homosexual practice to be a “crime against nature.” –

Read here

 

What is Marriage?

Saturday, August 2nd, 2014

Ryan T Anderson explains to students how marriage contributes to the public good, and how gay marriage – rather than extending that good, as many young people think – actually damages it.