Gay Is Not the New Black

Voddie Baucham has written a though provoking article (just read some of the more than 300 comments that follow it!) about the current cultural battle over the covenant of marriage. Here is a small excerpt, here is a link to the entire article.

It’s hard to deny that homosexual marriage appears to be a foregone conclusion in America. This is a frightening prospect not only for those of us who understand marriage to be a testimony of the relationship between Christ and his bride, the church, but also for all who value the family and its contribution to the well-being of society and human thriving. And while it’s difficult to watch a coordinated, well-funded, well-connected propaganda strategy undermine thousands of years of human history, it’s especially disconcerting to witness the use of the civil rights struggle as the vehicle for the strategy.

The idea that same-sex “marriage” is the next leg in the civil rights race is ubiquitous. One of the clearest examples of the conflation of homosexual “marriage” and civil rights is Michael Gross’s article in The Advocate, in which he coins the now-popular phrase “Gay is the new black.”1 Gross is not alone in his conflation of the two issues, however. At a 2005 banquet, Julian Bond, former head of the NAACP, said, “Sexual disposition parallels race. I was born this way. I have no choice. I wouldn’t change it if I could. Sexuality is unchangeable.”2

Brookstone and the Homosexual Agenda

Peter Vadala (Photo from MassResistance.com)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brookstone, a store known for innovative gadgets, fired Peter Vadala from his sales position at the Logan Airport branch in Boston, MA.  Fired because Mr. Vadala stood up for his Christian faith and vocalized his disapproval of a homosexual union which a Brookstone female manager made repeated references to in approaching Mr. Vadala during the work day.  And of course as we all know nary a word can be spoken against the sin of homosexuality without all the fury of hell being unleashed to beat the person speaking such non-politically correct words into silence.

This being exactly what Brookstone has done by firing Mr. Vadala.  A company that prides itself on tolerance but this so-called tolerance is only a one-way street.  A one-way street because even though Mr. Vadala was extremely offended by this manager and her relationship, his feelings and religious beliefs (which Brookstone says they defend) are immaterial because homosexuals want über (supreme) rights. 

To read about this case, please see the article at WND here.  You also can check out MassResistance which deals with cases such as these.  Also, I highly encourage readers to contact Brookstone by writing a letter, e-mailing, or calling in order to voice your disappointment with their decision (get your friends and others to do so likewise).  In so doing, please be strong in your beliefs and wording, but take note to reflect Christ and not give the Gentiles an opportunity to blaspheme God.  Also, tell them you will be voting with your dollars and not supporting their store.  Sadly, the voice of mammon is the typically the only voice that corporations give ear to. 

9 out of 10 dogs prefer to be house-trained with Newsweek

newsweek

After all, that seems to be about all that worthless rag seems to be good for lately. Consider their latest cover story–“Our Mutual Joy“, the attempt of one writer (Lisa Miller) to use Scripture to support homosexual marriage. She begins with an argument we have heard so many times from our LDS visitors:

Let’s try for a minute to take the religious conservatives at their word and define marriage as the Bible does. Shall we look to Abraham, the great patriarch, who slept with his servant when he discovered his beloved wife Sarah was infertile? Or to Jacob, who fathered children with four different women (two sisters and their servants)? Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon and the kings of Judah and Israel—all these fathers and heroes were polygamists.

Ho-hum. This argument, when examined in light of Scripture, falls so flat on its face that even Joan Rivers’ plastic surgeon couldn’t fix it. Without going into detail, if you read the FULL accounts of these stories, you find that they paid a steep price for their adultery/polygamy (Abram + Hagar = Ishmael; David’s adultery with Bathsheba led to Absalom’s revolt; Solomon’s polygamy led to the troubles he outlines in Ecclesiastes. I adressed the issue of polygamy here.)

She then goes on to equate the “plight” of homosexuals being “denied the right to marry” with the battle over slavery in the US. I will not even dignify that crass accusation with comment.

Then she comes out with this gem:

To which there are two obvious responses: First, while the Bible and Jesus say many important things about love and family, neither explicitly defines marriage as between one man and one woman.

Uh…yeah…right. She might want to actually read the Bible before she comments on it. Matthew 19:4-6And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who madethem at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” Who has she been having Bible study with? Jack Black? “A MAN shall be joned to his WIFE.” These are both in the SINGULAR. Man. Wife. No plurals. 1st Timothy 3:2, 12A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior…Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Social conservatives point to Adam and Eve as evidence for their one man, one woman argument—in particular, this verse from Genesis: “Therefore shall a man leave his mother and father, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh.” But as Segal says, if you believe that the Bible was written by men and not handed down in its leather bindings by God, then that verse was written by people for whom polygamy was the way of the world.

Continue reading