There’s nothing “gay” about gender-disorientation pathology

There’s nothing “gay” about gender-disorientation pathology
By Mark Alexander · Friday, June 2, 2006

It’s that time of year again, when many unsuspecting American families travel to one of the nation’s favorite family-theme parks only to find themselves at the epicenter of cultural degradation. This week, hordes of extroverted homosexuals congregated in Orlando at Disney’s Pleasure Island for the annual exercise in societal entropy they call “Gay Days at Disney.” Fortunately, the gaudy and lurid displays of sexual deviance at Disney are not typical of the public etiquette maintained by most homosexuals.

Our forefathers understood “gay” to mean “licentious, lacking moral restraints, leading a debauched or dissolute life.” The “Gay ’90s,” for example, was a decade the sagacious Mark Twain dubbed “The Gilded Age” — an era of unmitigated opulence and unrestrained immorality exercised by a subculture of the elite. Now, in the current vernacular of the fashionably PC, “gay” alludes to “homosexual” and therefore evokes the words of that inimitable American philosopher Yogi Berra: “This is like deja vu all over again.”

They may call it “gay,” but it’s not. Indeed, today’s “gay” culture is equally dissolute, and its agenda is anathema to the bedrock institution of our past, present and future — the American family.

Of course, homosexuality is not the most insidious of social trends that undermine the continuity of the traditional family — the essential governing unit and innate building block of natural society. That unfortunate distinction is reserved for those who divorce — particularly men who abandon their responsibility as husbands and fathers.

Concerns about divorce and its consequential degradation of social and moral order are not new. As Founding Father John Adams wrote, “The foundation of national morality must be laid in private families. … How is it possible that Children can have any just Sense of the sacred Obligations of Morality or Religion if, from their earliest Infancy, they learn their Mothers live in habitual Infidelity to their fathers, and their fathers in as constant Infidelity to their Mothers?”

What is new is the vast number of fatherless children in America, kids who have been largely abandoned by their biological fathers, and the incalculable burden that places on them and society. One deleterious outcome associated with some of these broken and dysfunctional families, in addition to the life sentence they serve trying to sort out the rejection issues, is the absence of a healthy sexual identity — particularly in boys who have not been fathered properly. This identity void can result in lifetime pursuit of homosexual approval.

Though divorce, unlike homosexuality, lacks a well funded and well organized advocacy movement attempting to normalize it (divorce lawyers notwithstanding), it isn’t difficult to connect the dots between dysfunctional families and homosexuality.

To understand fully the homosexual subculture and its aggressive social agenda, then, one must gain some rational insight into the pathology of homosexual behavior. Unfortunately, there are few comprehensive treatises on the subject that inspire rational discourse — as opposed to emotive rants.

A few years ago, the most learned debates over the ordination of a homosexual cleric as Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire revealed that not only the Episcopal clergy and laity needed assistance understanding this issue, but the Christian Church as a whole needed clarity. Indeed our whole society needs a better, and in some cases more compassionate, understanding of homosexual pathology.

Consequently, The Patriot has just published The Homosexual Agenda and The Christian Response on line, a comprehensive yet concise review of gender-disorientation pathology. It’s an essay that anyone, inside or outside the Church, making a psychological, theological or social argument concerning homosexuality, should read.

The real value of this landmark report’s substance is not measured in the accolades from conservatives around the world who have reviewed it, but in the unguarded praise it has received from homosexuals (including some activists), who responded that, for the first time, they have been able to comprehend, with the help of this analysis, both the Christian theological and conservative social perspective and objections, without feeling personally attacked.

Every American family is under assault from many quarters, one of the most menacing being the challenge to traditional sexual morality. The Homosexual Agenda and The Christian Response, provides context for understanding sexual deviancy and addresses the familial origins and pathology of such deviance, the political, cultural and social “normalization” agenda of homosexual practitioners, the conflict this agenda has created within the Christian Church, and an appropriate Christian response.

High on the homosexual political agenda list is same-sex marriage. President Bush announced this week his support for a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. While we would support such an amendment, we believe that if the President is going to use what is left of his political capital to mobilize a national movement to amend our Constitution, there are much more important amendments to consider, starting with one mandating [a balanced federal budget| http://PatriotPetitions.US/intro.asp?id=16%5D (just as most states require a balanced state budget).

That debate aside, if you’re interested in healthy marriages and families, the consequences of broken families and the potential implications of a largely unabated homosexual agenda on the next generation of our children, take a few minutes to read The Homosexual Agenda and The Christian Response — regardless of your theological orientation.

Advertisements
Published in: on October 23, 2009 at 2:09 PM  Comments Off on There’s nothing “gay” about gender-disorientation pathology  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Will NBC Be Suprised?

One man stands up and expresses his opinion, and it effects the whole nation. Yes, he is free to do this according to our law, but christians have stood by quietly, for the most part, and allowed it. We know this was not the intention of the founding fathers when they wrote these laws because they emphasied their faith in God, and belief in guidance from Him.  Below is another case of  why christians need to fight such foolishness. It is time we took our nation back to the freedoms the founding fathers intended. There is nothing about the word GOD being on our currency that is dangerous to anyone, or a violation of their rights. Stop the foolishness.

SAN FRANCISCO – An atheist who has spent four years trying to ban the Pledge of Allegiance from being recited in public schools is now challenging the motto printed on U.S. currency because it refers to God.

Michael Newdow seeks to remove “In God We Trust” from U.S. coins and dollar bills, claiming in a federal lawsuit filed Thursday that the motto is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion.

Newdow, a Sacramento doctor and lawyer, used a similar argument when he challenged the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools because it contains the words “under God.”

 He took his pledge fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, which in 2004 said he lacked standing to bring the case because he did not have custody of the daughter he sued on behalf of.

An identical lawsuit later brought by Newdow on behalf of parents with children in three Sacramento-area school districts is pending with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, after a Sacramento federal judge sided with Newdow in September. The judge stayed enforcement of the decision pending appeal, which is expected to reach the Supreme Court.

Congress first authorized a reference to God on a two-cent piece in 1864. The action followed a request by the director of the U.S. Mint, who wrote there should be a “distinct and unequivocal national recognition of the divine sovereignty” on the nation’s coins.

In 1955, the year after Congress inserted the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, Congress required all currency to carry the motto “In God We Trust.”

 

Click to participate

 

“The placement of ‘In God We Trust’ on the coins and currency was clearly done for religious purposes and to have religious effects,” Newdow wrote in the 162-page lawsuit he filed against Congress.

Newdow’s latest lawsuit came five days after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected, without comment, a challenge to an inscription of “In God We Trust” on a North Carolina county government building.

In doing so, the justices upheld the Richmond, Va.-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that “In God We Trust” appears on the nation’s coins and is a national motto.

“In this situation, the reasonable observer must be deemed aware of the patriotic uses, both historical and present, of the phrase ‘In God We Trust,”’ the appeals panel ruled in upholding the inscription’s display.

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Published in: on August 22, 2009 at 12:05 PM  Comments Off on Will NBC Be Suprised?  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,