Category: Politics and Public Policy

Posted on

Why Are Secular Progressives So Threatened by the Christian's View of Homosexual Behavior? From John Hendryx at Reformation 21

Why Are Secular Progressives So Threatened by the Christian’s View of Homosexual Behavior?

Why do the the secular progressives feel so threatened when homosexual behavior is called a sin by Christians? Is this sin unique among sins? The recent fury by the Hollywood crowd over Kirk Cameron’s honest answer to a journalist’s question got me to thinking about this.

For thousands of years the church has declared many various things as sinful; practices that are in direct rebellion against the Creator. These are acts that God Himself revealed to men as opposing his Lordship. The church has always declared the sinfulness of sex outside the covenant of marriage (before and after marriage), the sinfulness of idol worship, greed, hatred, pride and arrogance, self-righteousness, murder and many more. And the largest proportion of these are directed toward the church’s own sin. You can see this every morning in our prayers and every Sunday (in confessional churches) during the corporate confession of sin where we remind ourselves that we are sinners and do so by then naming specific sins we ourselves are all guilty of … and the very grace in the gospel constantly reminds that we are no better than others (this is such an easy sin for all of us to fall into), and we also remind ourselves that but for the grace and mercy of God in Jesus Christ alone would would have no hope at all. We confess daily that if we based our ability to please God and earn eternal life on our own broken sinful lives, that none of us would make it, since we all justly deserve God’s wrath. Humanity, therefore, needs a Savior because it is in slavery to sin and bent on rebellion against the only one who can deliver us. None of us are immune from sin and our personal sin is not above the sin of the gay person. We are all equally damned without God’s grace.

When we tell others that something they are doing is sinful behavior in the eyes of God it is not because we hate them or think we are better than them. On the contrary, it is a call from other sinners like them to escape their slave-master and flee to Jesus Christ, the one who lived the life we should have lived and, in our place, died the death we justly deserve. None of us are born free. Only Christ can set us free.

Now, the secularist may not agree with that and think it is foolish to believe in God, but it is only spreading the greatest ignorance to imagine that when the Christian says homosexuality is sin that it somehow promotes hatred, bigotry and bullying, all sins that are equally bad, if not worse, than homosexual behavior itself. When we declare these other practices sinful, I noticed that the progressives do not call it hatred. They may laugh and shrug their shoulders but they do not think it is bigotry. So why is it then that this particular sin is singled out? It seems to me that the purpose has more to do with the political rhetoric used when someone wants power, than anything based in reality. If Christians are bullying people because they are gay, then in all likelihood they are not Christians. I think deep down the progressive secularists know that Christians declare God’s law, not out of hatred but of love. We can even see this in popular culture. On Seinfeld, When Elaine’s Christian boyfriend did not warn her about hell, she complained that he did not care about her because if he thought there was a hell, he should at least warn her about it, even though she didn’t personally think there was a hell.

This is not not say that there are not so-called Christians who hate or are bigoted. It is to say that this is not the motive behind the vast majority of those in the true church. We rail against bigotry and hate in ourselves every bit as much, if not more, than we do someone’s perverse sexual behavior. Homosexuality is really not something we think about very often. But if you ask us or if you would have us vote our conscience when the issue comes up then we will. Christians will never, and I repeat NEVER, change their mind about this. God’s law always triumphs over social pressure. Time to be tolerant yourselves and get used to it without calling other people hateful. This reaction is evidence of Christophobia rather than anything resembling what is going on in our minds.. That is merely to spread false reports and may help a political cause but it does not match reality.

Remember it is one thing for individuals to commit a sin and yet know its wrong and feel remorse about it. All men do this and such sin is forgivable. But it is entirely another matter when society begins to call good “evil”, and evil “good”… by calling good “bigotry”. This is the height of mass self-deception.

Psalm 51:5 – ‘Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.’

 
Posted by John on March 9, 2012 11:51 AM
Posted on

Mr Harper, if you do have a "scary, secret agenda," please use it here:

Gilles Duceppe heralded for a lifetime of waste in Parliament

  Mar 7, 2012 – 1:08 PM ET

Gilles Duceppe is the gift that keeps on taking. During 20 years in Ottawa he worked selflessly to destroy the country that made him, to undermine the system that paid him, and to break up the society that gave him the opportunity to enjoy a lifetime of security by complaining endlessly about how unappreciated he was.

Now he has been recognized by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation for a lifetime achievement award at its 14th annual recognition of wasteful government spending.

And well deserved, too, we might say. Competition for wastefulness in Ottawa is fierce, but through all his years as a Member of Parliament, Mr. Duceppe never flagged in his determination to do nothing useful for Canada. First elected to Parliament in 1996, after an unimpressive career as a hospital orderly, communist activist and anti-capitalist, be became leader of the Bloc Quebecois in 1996 and launched his second career as a pointless separatist agitator.

It was a perfect position to be in for someone who had rarely done anything in life except oppose. The separatist cause had just lost its second referendum on independence and was starting down a long road of increased irrelevance. The Bloc had no chance of ever being anything but a minority party in Parliament, and was thus safe from ever having to make decisions or implement policy. It could count on disaffected Quebec voters to regularly return it to Ottawa to continue endlessly demanding more from the rest of the country, measuring its “success” by how many times it had moaned about how Canadians failed to appreciate the province. Later, a system of vote subsidies ensured that it didn’t even have to raise any money to sustain itself — the good people of Canada would provide the funding that allowed it to lay around in Ottawa bellyaching full time.

The high point of Mr. Duceppe’s career was unquestionably the moment when he was invited to join a coalition including Liberal leader Stephane Dion and NDP leader Jack Layton, in hopes of ousting the Conservative government and taking its place. Mr. Duceppe would thus have accomplished the feat of  affiliation with the government of a country he hoped to leave forever, while getting paid to do so. Less successful was his final campaign, in which his party was reduced from 47 seats to four, as Quebecers looked for someone new to do their complaining. Mr. Duceppe lost his own seat, and soon after made an aborted play for the leadership of the Parti Quebecois, which would have achieved the rare feat of earning him two government pensions without ever having done anything useful.

In awarding him the lifetime achievement award, Taxpayers Federation director Gregory Thomas noted:

Mr. Duceppe lost his seat in Parliament, but he’s still collecting $140,765 every year for life from Canadian taxpayers, the gift of a grateful nation for a lifetime of devoted service to trying to break it up. That’s after his Bloc collected $23.5 million from taxpayers and his put the party’s executive director on the Parliamentary payroll.

He noted that, in addition to his MP’s salary, Duceppe put his party’s historian on the taxpayers’ payroll to write a vanity book marking the 20th anniversary of his election to Parliament, and put his party’s executive director on the payroll even though taxpayers were already subsidizing the party.

Other award winners included Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, which spent $284-million program to reduce tobacco farming, but actually doubled the number of farmers, Alberta MLAs for accepting  $1,000 a month to sit on a committee that doesn’t meet, and the City of Montreal for sending snowplows to clear streets when there was no snow.

None can approach the individual accomplishments of Mr. Duceppe, however.

National Post