Posted by
Jason Cunningham on Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:19:40 PM
The furor over the passage of Prop 8 having abated somewhat, Scott Boardman of Monrovia feels that there just aren't enough pro-homosexual rallies taking place anymore, and he plans to do something about it. Fine; go ahead and exercise your right to waste your time -- for only in America are we affluent enough to be able to put serious effort into legitimizing perversion.
And speaking of rights, one of Boardman's supporters, the Rev. (and I use that term loosely) Susan Russell of All-Saints Episcopal Church, said recently: "The United States is founded on values of freedom of religion and from religion." Actually, "reverend," "freedom from religion" is nothing but a fanciful idea dreamed up by atheists and the ACLU (the Anti-Christian-Liberties Union). Like "separation of church and state," it's a phrase found nowhere in our nation's founding documents. Besides that, no one can be free from religion; even if you don't subscribe to an "organized" religion, you subscribe to whatever unorganized hodge-podge you decide upon throughout the course of your life. In other words, you believe something, and whatever it is you believe, that is your religion.
Russell goes on to say: "All-Saints is part of a national group that believes God's laws include everyone and that the United States Constitution provides protection for everyone." Well, duh. Of course the Constitution applies equally to everyone -- that is, it guarantees everyone's civil (a.k.a. political) rights -- the right to vote, to petition government, to peacably assemble, etc. But since marriage has nothing to do with any of these things, it can't be considered a civil (political) right. (Ditto with abortion.)
And it's funny that Russell speaks of God's laws applying to everyone, because she glaringly fails to encourage obedience to one of His fundamental teachings: that He designed marriage as a particular thing, to the exclusion of all other things, as a way of demonstrating to us the differences and similarities between Himself and humans, and His desire (despite our differences) for intimacy with us. Russell, I'm sure, bases her position, at least in part, on the twisted, homosexual-friendly definition of "equality," wherein any two consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want (then why not three, or 10?), and according to which there are no differences between males and females (then why do so many lesbians come off as being men, and so many homosexual men come off as being women?). At any rate, true equality doesn't mean equal results; it means having equal protection of our basic civil (political) rights, and we all have that (last I checked, homosexuals weren't being denied the right to vote, weren't being segregated and weren't being knocked over with firehoses). Beyond these "off-limits" items, society is ours (meaning everyone's) to shape as we will; you can disagree with any of the decisions, but a decision not in your favor doesn't mean that your basic rights have been violated.
Homosexuals and their advocates need to understand that sexual practices comprise a difference case than skin color: Even if sexuality (like skin color) is an inherent genetic characteristic, it is nonetheless (unlike skin color) a question of morality, and for many of us, the practice of homosexuality constitutes a perversion, a deviation from what God intended. For us, therefore, it's not a question of accepting someone who is different in a benign way; instead, you're asking us to agree with and approve of a behavior that we find immoral.